Amazon is looking for a second HQ. Why not, Pittsburgh? (Harrisburg: rent stabilized apartments, purchase)

[PghYinzer]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

As usual tyovan4 and I---who are probably the only two white working-class males on this sub-forum---are in total agreement.

I sit and shake my head in disbelief as both luxury apartment projects catering to affluent transplants and low-income housing projects catering to poor minorities receive government welfare for political gain purposes, benefiting both affluent and poor renters alike, but what sorts of financial incentives are received by those of us who are too rich for subsidies for the poor and too poor to afford subsidized luxury apartments? Our real wages rise slowly while our cost-of-renting (and cost-of-living in general) is rising much more rapidly, leaving us to feel squeezed here.

This is why I'm so apprehensive on rolling out the welcome mat for more and more tech companies offering numerous high-paying positions that I'm not qualified for. These people will also want to compete for apartments like mine, driving up my rent, while I'm going to emerge the "loser" because their income outpaces mine.

I feel like if I was a 30-year-old African-American male earning $30,000/year and being displaced as a renter I'd garner empathy on this sub-forum whereas because I'm a 30-year-old Caucasian male earning $30,000/year and in danger of being displaced I garner zero empathy because I'm expected to somehow better utilize my white privilege to overcome displacement. Penn Plaza's majority-minority poor renters were championed whereas white renters being displaced are told "suck it up, buttercup". Why the racial double-standard in gentrification where affluent whites feel guilt about displacing poor blacks but take pride in displacing poor whites? Nobody can address that to my satisfaction. Isn't displacement of anyone of a lower socioeconomic status by someone of a higher socioeconomic status deserving of equal levels of empathy?

To be fully honest...you once said that you paid well over $130 a month for a cable bill, while bemoaning that you couldn't pay down debt or save for a down payment. I have found multiple 2 bedroom apartments in Brookline area that are the same price as your one bedroom, allowing you to get a roommate. That would save you hundreds a month, but you want to walk to work. Yes you would need to buy a bus pass, however you can do that through your employer pre-tax. Beyond wanting to walk to work, you said that you didn't want to move until you could afford to buy a house. So my sympathy doesn't fall to someone who would rather watch tv and walk to work than save up to $400+ a month.


When I was your age, I had no cable, no internet, and made 33k a year, so it's not like I haven't struggled before.




FYI for those interested in a Low and Moderate Income mortgage workshop: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/naca-mo...aff=erelexpmlt

[Lost_In_Translation]

Originally Posted by PghYinzer

To be fully honest...you once said that you paid well over $130 a month for a cable bill, while bemoaning that you couldn't pay down debt or save for a down payment. I have found multiple 2 bedroom apartments in Brookline area that are the same price as your one bedroom, allowing you to get a roommate. That would save you hundreds a month, but you want to walk to work. Yes you would need to buy a bus pass, however you can do that through your employer pre-tax. Beyond wanting to walk to work, you said that you didn't want to move until you could afford to buy a house. So my sympathy doesn't fall to someone who would rather watch tv and walk to work than save up to $400+ a month.


When I was your age, I had no cable, no internet, and made 33k a year, so it's not like I haven't struggled before.




FYI for those interested in a Low and Moderate Income mortgage workshop: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/naca-mo...aff=erelexpmlt

There are a lot of things out there nowadays to help separate individuals from their money, temptation and lifestyle make people feel poorer since housing costs aren't depreciating make room.

[gg]

So I just heard on the news that Pittsburgh officials are hoping to see if they make the first cut by years end, so I guess whoever posted a series of cuts to get down to the final two or whatever was correct. I don't think we will have an answer for a very long time and this will drag on and on. Years end just to see if we make the first cut. Ugh. I wonder how many cities will remain after that first round?

[gladhands]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

As usual tyovan4 and I---who are probably the only two white working-class males on this sub-forum---are in total agreement.

I sit and shake my head in disbelief as both luxury apartment projects catering to affluent transplants and low-income housing projects catering to poor minorities receive government welfare for political gain purposes, benefiting both affluent and poor renters alike, but what sorts of financial incentives are received by those of us who are too rich for subsidies for the poor and too poor to afford subsidized luxury apartments? Our real wages rise slowly while our cost-of-renting (and cost-of-living in general) is rising much more rapidly, leaving us to feel squeezed here.

This is why I'm so apprehensive on rolling out the welcome mat for more and more tech companies offering numerous high-paying positions that I'm not qualified for. These people will also want to compete for apartments like mine, driving up my rent, while I'm going to emerge the "loser" because their income outpaces mine.

I feel like if I was a 30-year-old African-American male earning $30,000/year and being displaced as a renter I'd garner empathy on this sub-forum whereas because I'm a 30-year-old Caucasian male earning $30,000/year and in danger of being displaced I garner zero empathy because I'm expected to somehow better utilize my white privilege to overcome displacement. Penn Plaza's majority-minority poor renters were championed whereas white renters being displaced are told "suck it up, buttercup". Why the racial double-standard in gentrification where affluent whites feel guilt about displacing poor blacks but take pride in displacing poor whites? Nobody can address that to my satisfaction. Isn't displacement of anyone of a lower socioeconomic status by someone of a higher socioeconomic status deserving of equal levels of empathy?

You are a college-educated transplant in a city where you have no familial ties. It is one of the few major cities in this country where one can purchase a home on a 40k/year salary, yet you feel just as entitled to a neighborhood that you chose as those who are being displaced from the only home they’ve ever known. These people’s community... not just neighborhood, but COMMUNITY is being torn apart. When those people are resettled, there’s no guarantee that it will be a safe place.

Your plight is not analogous to theirs, and as such, you are not as sympathetic. You’re acting as if your race is the only differentiating factor, but it isn’t. Your white male martyrdom is off-putting, because we we’ve seen where that particular persecution complex so often leads. You could very easily have a place of your own, in a safe area, yet you feel entitled to some of the most prized neighborhoods in a city of your choosing.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by gg

So I just heard on the news that Pittsburgh officials are hoping to see if they make the first cut by years end, so I guess whoever posted a series of cuts to get down to the final two or whatever was correct. I don't think we will have an answer for a very long time and this will drag on and on. Years end just to see if we make the first cut. Ugh. I wonder how many cities will remain after that first round?

238 cities and regions put in bids, including locations in Canada and Mexico. Unless this was all a PR farce and they had a planned site all along, they're going to have to do multiple rounds.

Most betting markets put Pittsburgh in the top 10, but not the top 5, so we should at least make it to the semifinals.

[Mtl-Cns]

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

Why the racial double-standard in gentrification where affluent whites feel guilt about displacing poor blacks but take pride in displacing poor whites? Nobody can address that to my satisfaction. Isn't displacement of anyone of a lower socioeconomic status by someone of a higher socioeconomic status deserving of equal levels of empathy?

First of all I think you are probably vastly overestimating the incomes of the posters on this board. Not sure of ages on here but some people may be older, which could explain higher income. But I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that people view the problems of gentrification differently by which race it affects. Wouldn't that just depend on which neighborhood is being gentrified? I've very confused.

[SteelCityRising]

Originally Posted by gladhands

You could very easily have a place of your own, in a safe area, yet you feel entitled to some of the most prized neighborhoods in a city of your choosing.

How am I any more or less entitled to live in Polish Hill than minorities are entitled to live in East Liberty or the Hill District as those areas gentrify, too? If the consensus on here seems to be "if your neighborhood becomes trendy, then move so more affluent people can replace you to better the city", then why such empathy for those black renters being displaced in East Liberty and the Hill District with no empathy for white renters being displaced from Lawrenceville, Polish Hill, and Bloomfield? It's a racial double-standard, and I refuse to be silenced for pointing it out. If I'm expected to move to a lesser neighborhood "that I can afford", then so should those being displaced from East Liberty and the Hill District.

[jay5835]

Originally Posted by gladhands

Your white male martyrdom is off-putting, because we we’ve seen where that particular persecution complex so often leads. You could very easily have a place of your own, in a safe area, yet you feel entitled to some of the most prized neighborhoods in a city of your choosing.

To be fair, when SCR moved to Polish Hill, no one considered it one of Pittsburgh's "most prized neighborhoods."

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by jay5835

To be fair, when SCR moved to Polish Hill, no one considered it one of Pittsburgh's "most prized neighborhoods."

I don't think it's that even now. Maybe it's in top third of neighborhoods.

[SteelCityRising]

Originally Posted by Mtl-Cns

First of all I think you are probably vastly overestimating the incomes of the posters on this board. Not sure of ages on here but some people may be older, which could explain higher income. But I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that people view the problems of gentrification differently by which race it affects. Wouldn't that just depend on which neighborhood is being gentrified? I've very confused.

Mayor Peduto stepped in to stop Whole Foods from coming to East Liberty because it would displace lower-income residents of color from East Liberty because those residents couldn't find suitable and affordably-priced housing in their same neighborhood.

Who's stepping in to stop techie transplants from coming into Lawrenceville, Polish Hill, Bloomfield, and other areas and displacing lower-income white residents who also are having difficulty finding suitable and affordably-priced housing in their neighborhoods? (I'll be expecting an answer).

Again, I reiterate:

Rich whites displacing poor blacks = Bad. Can't Let it Happen.
Rich whites displacing poor whites = Get Over It. Move Elsewhere.

This same double-standard of rich and/or postgraduate-educated elitist whites looking down upon poor and/or less educated whites explains why we have Donald Trump in office now and why the Democratic Party is a mess, but I digress.