Suburbanites: What Would it Take to Entice You to Consider Urban Living? (Pittsburgh: schools, voucher)

[Sideblinded]

Originally Posted by jay5835

Read more closely. I didn't say I would resent paying someone. I would resent having to pay someone. I'd be angry at me, not at the lawn guy(s).

My solution is just not to have a lawn. I wouldn't stiff anyone. And where you get "bad tipper" out of it, I could not say.

My bad. I drew the conclusion if you resented "having" to pay someone to do your lawn you may resent "having" to pay or tip for a meal because you have a kitchen. You never had a lawn. I was trying to communicate something we all have in common with the kitchen reference.

You never "have" to pay someone to do your lawn unless you are physically incapable of doing it.

[gg]

Originally Posted by ML North

There is empirical indication that concentrated poverty is a dangerous, repressive, and backwards arrangement (Brian has written at greater length about this many times). Consider the areas of concentrated poverty in Pittsburgh, and think about how it correlates with violent crime. Having seen these trends develop over the last half-century, why would it be logical to simply repeat this course of action by doing everything possible to remove poor people from developing neighborhoods, stripping the kids that most need access to good leadership and guidance from teachers, and introducing violent crime into currently safe areas by relocating a centralized concentration of poverty? Relocating and concentrating poverty is not an "answer" and it would not "work" on a net basis whatsoever. It would simply move the crime, drug problems, low educational attainment, and other ills that we associate with bad neighborhoods away from more mainstream society where it wouldn't be dealt with by any substantive means.

In the real estate world, land is viewed at "highest and best use". Brian looks at things in a different light than myself. He is no doubt more into socialism and prefers to see more equality, by shoveling money to people on crack. I think his style will be prevalent in my lifetime in the US because the gap of the rich to the poor is so huge and the people that are poor have much greater numbers. At some point there will be a shift towards socialism due to that widening gap. Obama is far from that idea if you can wade through all the hyped up fox news and the like reports on him and actually listen to him, but I digress. Anyway, I like to move in a direction of progression and learn from past mistakes, but lets get back on topic. East Liberty is a hot button for the, "aww the poor people there, lets give them more and more", types whereas I look at that area as, they had their chance and then some. Look how they treated that area and look what happened to East Hills Shopping Center. That land needs to be used in a capitalistic way in this timeline of the US. Highest and best use applies to better the city of Pittsburgh. Collateral damage is a byproduct. East Liberty's move up will have a negative effect on Penn Hills and Sharpsburg, but it will enhance the city. Prime property is prime property and the US was build on capitalism, not socialism, so far. East Liberty actually is some of the best land in all of Pittsburgh. Amazingly flat and has beautiful parks and housing stock. The downtown has more potential than most anywhere in Pittsburgh. It needs to change from a slum to a very high end area, because that is its best use at this time. There are plenty of areas of mixed income. Lawrenceville is a perfect example and it is a huge area. Bloomfield is another. Oakland is another. Shadyside isn't. Highland Park is another. TONS OF MIXED INCOME AREAS! East Liberty is prime. It should go the way of highest and best use. I am not sure it will, but IMHO it should.

Now the topic of, "what it takes for people to consider urban living". Get rid of that slum in East Liberty and that whole region will really gain momentum. That is one way to entice people. People in the burbs are afraid of East Liberty. They don't want to live amongst the drug dealers and people littering and giving up on life. People don't want that and that is why they move out. White flight is real and still is in place. What will it take to get people back? I think I stated reality, not fantasy land.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

Brian looks at things in a different light than myself. He is no doubt more into socialism and prefers to see more equality, by shoveling money to people on crack.

You are correct that I view things differently, so much so that you have no ability to describe my views accurately.

Oh, and remember when you were crying to the mods about violating the terms of service by getting personal? Good times.

[gg]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

You are correct that I view things differently, so much so that you have no ability to describe my views accurately.

Oh, and remember when you were crying to the mods about violating the terms of service by getting personal? Good times.

It isn't personal. You want more shift of money from those that have it to those that are in section 8 situations. Throwing money at the problem. It isn't personal at all. It is a view of city life and regions within the city.

I enjoy many of your posts. I agree with you on several issues. We just view some things differently.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

It isn't personal.

Again, I refer you back to what you originally claimed were personal attacks on you in violation of the terms of service. I am personally fine with the rough and tumble of the Internet, but if you are going to complain about it, you should be prepared to follow the same rules yourself.

You want more shift of money from those that have it to those that are in section 8 situations. Throwing money at the problem. It isn't personal at all. It is a view of city life and regions within the city.

Again, you have no ability to accurately describe my views.

We just view some things differently.

Correct, and you are incapable of describing my views accurately.

[Aqua Teen Carl]

Originally Posted by stburr91

I just don't think you'll ever entice many suburbanites into the city, at least not the current generation.

This.

Suburban living has been a part of American culture for the past few generations and that's not going to change until those generations run their course. As much as hipsters hate it, SUV driving, urban sprawl, and living in shoddily built homes is part of our culture.

As much as "forward thinking" folks want people to converge back into cities, that idea is absurd to a large portion of America.

[progmac]

easy: schools and safety at a middle class income. that is all. it is no great mystery.

[SteelCityRising]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

People in the burbs are afraid of East Liberty.

Sadly, people in the city are afraid of East Liberty, too. We typically answer our phones by saying "Good morning/afternoon. Thank you for calling Edible Arrangements "on Penn Avenue" (not "in East Liberty"). This is ____ speaking. How may I help you today?" When people think of Penn Avenue they may think of Downtown whereas we've had many people have very adverse reactions to learning we're in East Liberty. While delivering once to the City-County Building on Grant Street I was mobbed by people in the lobby who wanted brochures and information. When I told one woman we were in East Liberty she said "Oh, never mind." Perhaps I just have more bravado than most, but I've never felt unsafe in my position, and I deliver to Homewood, the Hill District, East Hills, Wilkinsburg, Garfield, and, yes, East Liberty too. Just because a neighborhood is predominantly African-American doesn't necessarily mean it's inherently dangerous for a middle-class Caucasian to venture into it. Most crime in the city is black-on-black---not white-on-black or black-on-white.

[stburr91]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

Sadly, people in the city are afraid of East Liberty, too. We typically answer our phones by saying "Good morning/afternoon. Thank you for calling Edible Arrangements "on Penn Avenue" (not "in East Liberty"). This is ____ speaking. How may I help you today?" When people think of Penn Avenue they may think of Downtown whereas we've had many people have very adverse reactions to learning we're in East Liberty. While delivering once to the City-County Building on Grant Street I was mobbed by people in the lobby who wanted brochures and information. When I told one woman we were in East Liberty she said "Oh, never mind." Perhaps I just have more bravado than most, but I've never felt unsafe in my position, and I deliver to Homewood, the Hill District, East Hills, Wilkinsburg, Garfield, and, yes, East Liberty too. Just because a neighborhood is predominantly African-American doesn't necessarily mean it's inherently dangerous for a middle-class Caucasian to venture into it. Most crime in the city is black-on-black---not white-on-black or black-on-white.

Crime isn't the only down side to living in a poor black area. As other have mentioned, garbage thrown into the streets, noise pollution in the form of people sitting on porches yelling (often with profanity), load offensive music, and car stereos so load they rattle the windows in your house. Then there's the people smoking marijuana on their porches. These are the kinds of things good decent people don't want in their neighborhood. I've seen all of the above many times, so I'm not just making a stereotypical remark.

As long as there are people that live that way in a neighborhood, it will be very difficult to attract a decent tax base there.

[gg]

Originally Posted by stburr91

Crime isn't the only down side to living in a poor black area. As other have mentioned, garbage thrown into the streets, noise pollution in the form of people sitting on porches yelling (often with profanity), load offensive music, and car stereos so load they rattle the windows in your house. Then there's the people smoking marijuana on their porches. These are the kinds of things good decent people don't want in their neighborhood. I've seen all of the above many times, so I'm not just making a stereotypical remark.

As long as there are people that live that way in a neighborhood, it will be very difficult to attract a decent tax base there.

There will never be a better tax base with that kind of neighborhood. That is obvious. Sometimes neighborhoods can be taken back. If there was no such thing as section 8, the city would get taken back so much faster. Slum lords love that guaranteed check. Take that guarantee away and watch how fast areas will start to go in a good direction. It would make people's heads spin. Oh well, I can dream can't I?