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.
I am all for gentrification. Who doesn't want a safer neighborhood?
Apparently the people against gentrification prefer to live in a trashy, Detroit-like city. Anything that decreases my chances of getting hit by a stray bullet is a good thing.. last I checked. I guess the anti-gentrification crowd either has a death wish, are thrill seekers, or are criminals themselves.
The only problem I have with gentrification at the moment is that its not happening fast enough. Anacostia needs to be pulverized and rebuilt with modern commercial and residential buildings. Any area with a metro station should be a low crime area IMO. I'm all for eradicating the crime and the grime in DC and every city. There is no reason a world class city (especially the capital of a world power) should have third-world violence. Its a disgrace.
Apparently the people against gentrification prefer to live in a trashy, Detroit-like city. Anything that decreases my chances of getting hit by a stray bullet is a good thing.. last I checked. I guess the anti-gentrification crowd either has a death wish, are thrill seekers, or are criminals themselves.
From everything I have seen from the anti-gentrification set this is what I can see as well. What they call "culture" is literally the worst kind of urban blight. There is nothing redeeming about it.
When I read this thread, it reads like a bunch of wild animals. The focus is on "trash" but we all know what you really mean. You are forgetting the human element to this. It's about preserving the community and individual integrety. I could never invite elitist types in this thread to dinner. It's like animal-like behavior. You know how many times my brother has been to Columbia Presbyterian in NYC and they ask if he is my brother. These are my old schoolmates. That is community.
I will give you the ultimate example of community. My long time priest was at our home this weekend in jersey. We met him when we first moved in over 20 years ago. He married my brother and his wife and also married my brother's wife's parents and grand parents. He had stories for days over dinner. The same people he married are still around and attend the same church and have businesses around the neighborhoods. He talked about our neighbor, the Gigante family and Vinny "the chin" gigante whos children and grand children are still in the community and have businesses. His grandson dated my sister
When the Koreans started moving in, it was a big issue. Not because of the individuals but because of the texture that the area holds they were worried about changing. But if you notice, how many stories do you read in here that have the human factor. None. It's like robots.
The point you are missing is that those that are being gentrified have their own stories to tell, even if it's saddened with violence and trash. Gentrification will happen but there are many elements that play a part besides the trashy elements.
Many urban neighborhoods are constantly changing. No ethnicity, sexual preference, or other group should ever think they are a permanent majority of a certain area.
Look at Georgetown. Unlike much of DC, it was more black in 1870 than in 1970. In the early 1900s, it became a center of industry and home to many working class whites. To claim that U Street belongs to African-Americans is as ridiculous as saying Wisconsin Avenue belongs to white people.
All gentrification really does at the end of the day is export the city's social problems to somewhere else. Currently those problems in the District are being exported to Prince George's and Charles Counties in Maryland and to a much lesser extent, Montgomery County.
Scattering the poor is what New York always did and they consistently forced the rich further north and vertically into apartments. No one is safe.
Location: Somewhere in a Field of Hopes and Dreams
596 posts, read 627,598 times
Reputation: 683
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriz Brown
If you check the City-Data forum boards for all the cities going through gentrification... you will see a consistent amount of complaining about it.
However, I don't see why or how it is a bad thing. Why should major cities.. which are a place of wealth, activity, business, and modern marvels be places filled with crime and poverty?
People against gentrification seem to prefer cities that are dirty, ugly, crime-ridden, and unrefined. And I don't see any logical reason why America's major cities are better off being dangerous and dirty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DistrictSonic
It's not. The only people who think it is bad rather drag DC back to it's murder capital days..
Idiotic and poor assumption^^
People aren't againsr gentrification because they wish to only see cities full of crime and poverty, there angry because it's the government's response to a long unheard and ignored cry. Why is it that the government only begins to take an interest in a neighborhood by pouring million dollar funding into the infrastructure and local businesses to build the economy when a large demographic of young professionals and whites show interest in the area?
The government, along with the individuals of the community, but largely the government should be showing this interest at all times. Instead the government allows for these communities to fall into economic dispair and crime rather than pour funding and resources--the same resources available to them when the demographic turns white- into that community.
I don't think anyone will dispute having a lovely community, with better parks, less crime and more eateries to enjoy, but gentrification has and always be a sign of socioeconomic and racial disparity.
The government cares when new money comes in and couldn't careless when the inhabitanta are poor.
People aren't againsr gentrification because they wish to only see cities full of crime and poverty, there angry because it's the government's response to a long unheard and ignored cry. Why is it that the government only begins to take an interest in a neighborhood by pouring million dollar funding into the infrastructure and local businesses to build the economy when a large demographic of young professionals and whites show interest in the area?
The government, along with the individuals of the community, but largely the government should be showing this interest at all times. Instead the government allows for these communities to fall into economic dispair and crime rather than pour funding and resources--the same resources available to them when the demographic turns white- into that community.
I don't think anyone will dispute having a lovely community, with better parks, less crime and more eateries to enjoy, but gentrification has and always be a sign of socioeconomic and racial disparity.
The government cares when new money comes in and couldn't careless when the inhabitanta are poor.
Maybe it is because the people and the community itself are a problem. Look at your own problems, and examine deeply why there is disinvestment. The community is fundimentally broken. Violent crime, anti-intellectualism, HS drop outs, people having kids they cannot afford, people demanding government pay for their housing, etc. Instead of taking people taking responsibility and reforming, they and their community blame others. No personal responsibility.
Gentrification is the solution because it gets rid of problem communities and replaces them with ideal ones of people and communities (gentrifiers) who actually contribute to society and tax rolls rather than failed communities.
Last edited by DistrictSonic; 08-23-2015 at 09:42 PM..
Location: Somewhere in a Field of Hopes and Dreams
596 posts, read 627,598 times
Reputation: 683
Quote:
Originally Posted by DistrictSonic
Maybe it is because the people and the community itself are a problem. Look at your own problems, and examine deeply why there is disinvestment. The community is fundimentally broken. Violent crime, anti-intellectualism, HS drop outs, people having kids they cannot afford, people demanding government pay for their housing, etc. Instead of taking people taking responsibility and reforming, they and their community blame others. No personal responsibility.
Gentrification is the solution because it gets rid of problem communities and replaces them with ideal ones of people and communities (gentrifiers) who actually contribute to society and tax rolls rather than failed communities.
Ahh such a funny little assumption. Are there plenty of lazy, entitled ding bats out there? Of course. But this entire belief that communities that we speak of do not value or appreciate education is a silly one. A prime example can be the Governor Hogan (MD) rejecting a proposal to build a new state of the art school in Baltimore because he claimed, there was a lack of funding. However in less than a few weeks he's off approving funding for a penitentiary and pension funds.
THIS is often the reason to why there's a lack of education and healthy programming for the youth in the inner city, it has nothing to do with a disinterest from the community and more to do with a lack of interest from the government.
Government housing...haha the demographic on government assistance isn't limited to minorities, in fact whites benefit from this more...but that's beyond the point.
People aren't againsr gentrification because they wish to only see cities full of crime and poverty, there angry because it's the government's response to a long unheard and ignored cry. Why is it that the government only begins to take an interest in a neighborhood by pouring million dollar funding into the infrastructure and local businesses to build the economy when a large demographic of young professionals and whites show interest in the area?
The government, along with the individuals of the community, but largely the government should be showing this interest at all times. Instead the government allows for these communities to fall into economic dispair and crime rather than pour funding and resources--the same resources available to them when the demographic turns white- into that community.
I don't think anyone will dispute having a lovely community, with better parks, less crime and more eateries to enjoy, but gentrification has and always be a sign of socioeconomic and racial disparity.
The government cares when new money comes in and couldn't careless when the inhabitanta are poor.
Its not really about race. Mostly about economics. Your very last sentence is true. The stuff you said before it is only partially true.
The reason "no one cares about the poor" is pretty simple IF you can be honest with yourself about human nature. No one cares about the poor because the poor have the least to offer society. Is this 100% true? No. But this is the perspective most people have.
People care about those who have something to offer them. No one cares about someone who can do nothing for them. And generally.. the poor can do nothing for "them" because the poor can barely help themselves.
So there is your answer.
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.
