Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What are the services and investment you speak of? If it's something like new, interesting businesses then that's just capitalism at work rather than the city government stepping in helping white people out.
It isn’t just businesses and capitalists(think even simple businesses like grocery stores, look up food desert), but simple city services from garbage pick up to new curbs to proper community policing, etc.
Why would I want to live in a concrete/brick box, force myself into a bus/subway, drag groceries and 40 pound cat litter boxes on the bus, have no personal outside space?
then again, our current era of gentrification might be termed "white recapture"
Yeah basically, but I think the level of white people moving into these places is exaggerated sometimes. Bushwick, Brooklyn for instance is known as the current hipster capital of NYC, but it's overwhelmingly nonwhite still.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod
It isn’t just businesses and capitalists(think even simple businesses like grocery stores, look up food desert), but simple city services from garbage pick up to new curbs to proper community policing, etc.
I think it's just that there's way less crime now than in the 90s, so it might seem like the policing has gotten better with time. I would also have to imagine the same is true of areas with no white people. Most of the Bronx is not gentrified at all, but the crime is still much lower than in the 90s, meaning less negative police encounters I have to imagine.
Why would I want to live in a concrete/brick box, force myself into a bus/subway, drag groceries and 40 pound cat litter boxes on the bus, have no personal outside space?
Some people prefer living in dense areas with lots of amenities in walking distance.
And let's be real here, some people are much better off not driving.
Yeah basically, but I think the level of white people moving into these places is exaggerated sometimes. Bushwick, Brooklyn for instance is known as the current hipster capital of NYC, but it's overwhelmingly nonwhite still.
I think it's just that there's way less crime now than in the 90s, so it might seem like the policing has gotten better with time. I would also have to imagine the same is true of areas with no white people. Most of the Bronx is not gentrified at all, but the crime is still much lower than in the 90s, meaning less negative police encounters I have to imagine.
Good point about crime and I dare say that more police are more representative of the communities they serve, if not come from the community, as well.
I'm not anti-city, but you won't catch me ever considering one as a place to live. One simple reason, quality of life. To live urban requires more money, and while jobs pay more they don't pay Enough more to equal the same work/life balance that can be rural. My wife and I live on her 3-day a week income alone (and could do less, but the Gov meddled in the health insurance industry, driving up prices by about a factor of 10), giving us a 4-day weekend EVERY weekend. We also own a century old historic home, have about 6-weeks of paid leave per year and don't have to fight traffic or crowds unless we choose to.
The benefits of urban just aren't worth the disadvantages for us. Glad cities are there to visit, but I've lived in them for enough of my life and have no desire to do so again.
Crime is a major hindrance to re-populating many inner cities.
That and when an area recovers, builds back up, and crime drops white people are accused of doing something malicious like "gentrifying" out the black folks! Gentrification is not necessarily a bad thing, I don't understand the hatred for it.
So it's a social lose-lose for middle and upper class whites to move back into depressed areas that are mainly black or otherwise.
If things stay bad, it's white people's fault. If things get better but the jobless drug addicts/dealers can't join the party, it's white people's fault. Damned if you do, damned if you don't, so why bother.
I wish the cities would take everybody back though. They're ruining my rural.
But plenty of white people invest in the inner city anyway and make money from it. Seems odd to me to feel sorry for these people.
You can also ask "why are so many people anti suburbia?" The portrayals of suburbs in the media and the way people talk about them has become very negative in recent decades.
The modern suburban idea that dominated American culture from the 50s through the early 00s was driven by the notion that it combines the best of urban and rural living. Large properties with enough space for gardens, swimming pools, tree houses and so forth. Quiet streets where kids can play outside safely and people can sleep soundly at night. Few neighbors, who you're familiar with and who have similar outlooks, just like in old times in rural communities. But at the same time it's close to amenities and economic opportunity. It's essentially the idea of the old, rich mansion neighborhoods in cities - which you find all over the world - except it's aimed at a mass market. Made possible by cheap, standardized building materials and the large amount of space provided by the North American continent. Plenty of people in other parts of the world had the suburban dream, too, but lack of space and resources made it more elusive.
Of course, the suburban vision did not account for that time in people's lives where playing with your friends on the street is no longer interesting enough and where having your kids play with their friends on the street is not yet a concern. Suburbs were designed for adults and young kids, not teenagers and young adults. As suburbs matured, so did the kids who grew up in the suburbs and the boredom of suburbia felt by a 15 year old became a more pervasive narrative than the happy times of childhood in safe, suburban communities.
At the same time the in-between period of life - i.e. between being a child and thinking about having children - grew for many people from just a few years to a couple of decades or perhaps their entire lives. The teenage complaints about suburbia - you can't walk anywhere interesting, there's no action, no nightlife, it's so vanilla and not edgy - became complaints of 20 and 30 somethings as well. This triggered the 'urban revival' and gentrification. It's no coincidence that artists, the gay community and academics were the pioneers of that as traditional family concerns were always a lot less important in those circles.
I think what we're seeing now is that the kids who grew up in suburbia and then move to the cities take with them many suburban expectations but added on with their dreams of urban living. I don't think it's realistic. I think urbanity has its pros and cons, but it's not for everyone. It's just never going to be idyllic in a massive city. Developers are selling a bit of a mirage at the moment, jumping on the revival train. Suburbia is simply always going to be the more attractive option for many, many people. People who do want families, who do appreciate low density living, who do appreciate tighter social bonds and don't seek direct social contact with people from very different social or ethnic backgrounds (which for all its intrigue also has its risks and problems).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
