Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Curbed)   Will America's cities always be about white people excluding black people? Or do we have a moment?   (curbed.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Urban planning, Urban design, White people, Urban planner, Black people, Urban studies and planning, Black neighborhoods, Race  
•       •       •

1146 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Jul 2020 at 12:15 AM (14 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



56 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-07-17 12:17:06 AM  
i.imgflip.comView Full Size
 
2020-07-17 12:19:55 AM  
"Gentrification farks over non-white communities."

Yeah, we know.
 
2020-07-17 12:20:25 AM  
No, it's going to be the rich excluding the poors.
 
2020-07-17 12:21:49 AM  
So long as "certain" white people associate black people with "my property value will decrease!!", they will seek to exclude black people from their neighborhoods.
 
2020-07-17 12:23:19 AM  
hot thought journalism comes up with some seriously stupid shiat

"Is there a chance the flaming bag of shiat on your doorstep will become a fresh hot pizza?"

hell no motherfarker america is dead and grab your fork and knife cause you're gonna clean your plate of this shiat sandwich

eat my ass
 
2020-07-17 12:27:33 AM  
Opponents: Stop your developments and capital improvements making my neighborhood more desirable and safer to live in! As a result my taxes or rent is going up and I cannot afford to live in this area any longer. I didn't give I shiat about it before and was trying to leave it, but now it is a decent place to live and I want to stay.

Developers: Ok. Sure. We will leave you alone and invest in other parts of town.

Opponents: That's racist! You should improve my part of town for free, and when you improve it, we should have sole proprietorship and direction of the improvements so as to not lose the "urban identity" of this lovely corner of the Earth nobody wants to live in and would actively escape it if they had the means.
 
2020-07-17 12:29:52 AM  
I submit urban Detroit and urban Cleveland as exhibits A and B for this being complete and utter bullshiate.

You want to stop the investment in urban cities pack up and head to the suburbs? Fine. Let's take a look at how that's working.

Oh. Oh, no. That isn't good.
 
2020-07-17 12:30:56 AM  

the money is in the banana stand: Opponents: Stop your developments and capital improvements making my neighborhood more desirable and safer to live in! As a result my taxes or rent is going up and I cannot afford to live in this area any longer. I didn't give I shiat about it before and was trying to leave it, but now it is a decent place to live and I want to stay.

Developers: Ok. Sure. We will leave you alone and invest in other parts of town.

Opponents: That's racist! You should improve my part of town for free, and when you improve it, we should have sole proprietorship and direction of the improvements so as to not lose the "urban identity" of this lovely corner of the Earth nobody wants to live in and would actively escape it if they had the means.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-07-17 12:34:23 AM  
There are Black people that Black people don't want to live around.
 
2020-07-17 12:40:25 AM  

HempHead: No, it's going to be the rich excluding the poors.


If it was JUST that, at least we'd be getting somewhere
 
2020-07-17 12:41:34 AM  
Mass transit is necessary infrastructure, especially for poor people.  It is almost objectively an improvement in conditions.

Rent issues and slumlord profiteering is a separate issue that needs to be addressed directly as an issue.  Randomly blaming literally everything but landlords for unethical/illegal landlord behavior like this is both extremely stupid, and most likely intentional, malicious propaganda intentionally designed to (among other things) fark over black people in exactly the fashion being complained about in TFA.

Writing an article on this subject without placing the blame on the landlords and advocating regulations on the landlords, e.g. rent control, affordable housing quotas, or even outright shifting the housing industry from the private to the public or nonprofit sector, is irresponsible to the point that it borders on and perhaps crosses the line into intentional obfuscation.  And I say that because, historically, propaganda campaigns by red-liners to attribute the problems they created by red-lining to efforts to fix those problems by association have been like the #1 first go-to tool of racists to ruin living conditions for black people.

"Oh, that public housing project that was put in place to try to mitigate the misery that my bank intentionally and willfully created for the sake of keeping the blacks away from our precious white daughters and our white school system?  Well, it's in an area of poverty, therefore obviously public housing must be the cause of poverty and literally nothing else!  Better defund that housing or abolish it and sell it to the worst slum lords we can find to get rid of it, that'll for sure solve the problem that the project started twenty years into the problems prior existence definitely caused with its magical time machine!  Yup, you can trust me, I'm a legitimate city planner working for a bank, which is the kind of respectable client only an unbiased expert with no ulterior motives giving his honest opinion unaffected by any large sums of money given to him to express a specific opinion as fact would have."
 
2020-07-17 12:47:50 AM  
Cities, sure. But have you looked at the rest of the country?  There's a reason you don't have 600,000 more black people in Colorado, but since they're not there you don't hear as much about why.
 
2020-07-17 12:51:10 AM  

LordJiro: "Gentrification farks over non-white communities."

Yeah, we know.


I hate the use of the term "gentrification" for any and all urban renewal. it's supposed to be used for cases of purposefully farking over people.
 
2020-07-17 12:54:44 AM  

Kazan: LordJiro: "Gentrification farks over non-white communities."

Yeah, we know.

I hate the use of the term "gentrification" for any and all urban renewal. it's supposed to be used for cases of purposefully farking over people.


Except that 'urban renewal' is almost always designed to attract more middle-class white people. Goods (even essential shiat like food) get more expensive, landlords raise rent, non-white communities that have been stuck in cities for generations get priced out, and armchair economists (who are totally not racist) blame the non-white people for any problems that result.
 
2020-07-17 12:59:43 AM  
Did you just assume my gentri?
 
2020-07-17 12:59:48 AM  
Or we could just let these cities do their own thing without any interference at all.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_​C​leveland,_Ohio

beltmag.comView Full Size


i.ytimg.comView Full Size


cleveland.reel-scout.comView Full Size


live.staticflickr.comView Full Size


media1.tenor.comView Full Size
 
2020-07-17 1:01:15 AM  

LordJiro: Kazan: LordJiro: "Gentrification farks over non-white communities."

Yeah, we know.

I hate the use of the term "gentrification" for any and all urban renewal. it's supposed to be used for cases of purposefully farking over people.

Except that 'urban renewal' is almost always designed to attract more middle-class white people. Goods (even essential shiat like food) get more expensive, landlords raise rent, non-white communities that have been stuck in cities for generations get priced out, and armchair economists (who are totally not racist) blame the non-white people for any problems that result.


Urban renewal is a natural consequence of land values increasing as a city's population increases.  It's not a conspiracy against people in general - even if it is occasionally used as such.   The answer here isn't "urban renewal is evil" the answer here is "fixing the problems with racial inequality that result in minorities being disproportionately poor"
 
2020-07-17 1:03:57 AM  

LordJiro: Kazan: LordJiro: "Gentrification farks over non-white communities."

Yeah, we know.

I hate the use of the term "gentrification" for any and all urban renewal. it's supposed to be used for cases of purposefully farking over people.

Except that 'urban renewal' is almost always designed to attract more middle-class white people. Goods (even essential shiat like food) get more expensive, landlords raise rent, non-white communities that have been stuck in cities for generations get priced out, and armchair economists (who are totally not racist) blame the non-white people for any problems that result.


So what would you have people do? Invest in these communities without seeking a return? That is not how development works. The failing isn't on the developers side necessarily (scummy landlords not included), it is on not having affordable housing and subsidizing small businesses to continue to operate despite the increased costs. Government programs and controls should be in place to protect those already living in these areas, and to still allow people without a lot of disposable income to live there.

As a home-owner, I welcome improvements in my area. If the property taxes get too far out of hand and I can no longer afford to live in my home, I know I will make a pretty penny and move elsewhere. Renters don't get that benefit. This would include assumingly most people on the lower end of the economic spectrum. What we do not want to happen is the problem the Bay Area is having.
 
2020-07-17 1:05:13 AM  

the money is in the banana stand: What we do not want to happen is the problem the Bay Area is having.


The Bay Area problems are greatly exacerbated by the failed concept of rent control

Rent Control:Left::Climate Change Denial:Right
 
2020-07-17 1:10:33 AM  

the money is in the banana stand: Opponents: Stop your developments and capital improvements making my neighborhood more desirable and safer to live in! As a result my taxes or rent is going up and I cannot afford to live in this area any longer. I didn't give I shiat about it before and was trying to leave it, but now it is a decent place to live and I want to stay.

Developers: Ok. Sure. We will leave you alone and invest in other parts of town.

Opponents: That's racist! You should improve my part of town for free, and when you improve it, we should have sole proprietorship and direction of the improvements so as to not lose the "urban identity" of this lovely corner of the Earth nobody wants to live in and would actively escape it if they had the means.



Is there any side of the racial debate that you don't come down on the side of the completely tone deaf?
 
2020-07-17 1:15:15 AM  

gunther_bumpass: the money is in the banana stand: Opponents: Stop your developments and capital improvements making my neighborhood more desirable and safer to live in! As a result my taxes or rent is going up and I cannot afford to live in this area any longer. I didn't give I shiat about it before and was trying to leave it, but now it is a decent place to live and I want to stay.

Developers: Ok. Sure. We will leave you alone and invest in other parts of town.

Opponents: That's racist! You should improve my part of town for free, and when you improve it, we should have sole proprietorship and direction of the improvements so as to not lose the "urban identity" of this lovely corner of the Earth nobody wants to live in and would actively escape it if they had the means.


Is there any side of the racial debate that you don't come down on the side of the completely tone deaf?


Please explain to me where your disagree with my simplification of how people talk about gentrification. Okay, now go look at my post on my actual view on the issue and how to correct it. My beef is with stupid people using race as a catch-all excuse with absolutely no substance behind their "argument" (tantrum).
 
2020-07-17 1:17:25 AM  

Kazan: the money is in the banana stand: What we do not want to happen is the problem the Bay Area is having.

The Bay Area problems are greatly exacerbated by the failed concept of rent control

Rent Control:Left::Climate Change Denial:Right


California law preventing taxes on property from being reassessed to reflect current value, and there being no penalty for keeping property empty, have a lot more to do with it than rent control does.
 
2020-07-17 1:18:10 AM  
Who knew an article about housing would be the hotbed of Fark racism? 

I thought the trans thread on the Main page would be way worse than this. . .
 
2020-07-17 1:19:27 AM  

Jim_Callahan: Mass transit is necessary infrastructure, especially for poor people.  It is almost objectively an improvement in conditions.

Rent issues and slumlord profiteering is a separate issue that needs to be addressed directly as an issue.  Randomly blaming literally everything but landlords for unethical/illegal landlord behavior like this is both extremely stupid, and most likely intentional, malicious propaganda intentionally designed to (among other things) fark over black people in exactly the fashion being complained about in TFA.



Unfortunately, the real estate industry has been co-opted by parasites. Housing should be a right, not an "always goes up" investment scheme. Real estate agents, flippers, hoarders, lawmakers who make it easy for people to hoard housing, well, they'd be first up against the metaphorical wall if I had any say in things. 

When you have nothing else to offer to society, you get into real estate. 

The fact that the US treats housing as an investment has ruined us. If you want to be a landlord, I think that's fine. A lot of people have no business owning homes. Sadly, they're often the ones who own dozens.
 
2020-07-17 1:20:34 AM  

the money is in the banana stand: gunther_bumpass: the money is in the banana stand: Opponents: Stop your developments and capital improvements making my neighborhood more desirable and safer to live in! As a result my taxes or rent is going up and I cannot afford to live in this area any longer. I didn't give I shiat about it before and was trying to leave it, but now it is a decent place to live and I want to stay.

Developers: Ok. Sure. We will leave you alone and invest in other parts of town.

Opponents: That's racist! You should improve my part of town for free, and when you improve it, we should have sole proprietorship and direction of the improvements so as to not lose the "urban identity" of this lovely corner of the Earth nobody wants to live in and would actively escape it if they had the means.


Is there any side of the racial debate that you don't come down on the side of the completely tone deaf?

Please explain to me where your disagree with my simplification of how people talk about gentrification. Okay, now go look at my post on my actual view on the issue and how to correct it. My beef is with stupid people using race as a catch-all excuse with absolutely no substance behind their "argument" (tantrum).


You answered your own question. You simplified a complex problem to the point where you could smugly blame it on the poor people. Eat a dick.
 
2020-07-17 1:22:50 AM  

Murkanen: Kazan: the money is in the banana stand: What we do not want to happen is the problem the Bay Area is having.

The Bay Area problems are greatly exacerbated by the failed concept of rent control

Rent Control:Left::Climate Change Denial:Right

California law preventing taxes on property from being reassessed to reflect current value, and there being no penalty for keeping property empty, have a lot more to do with it than rent control does.


I don't believe "A lot more" at all, not based on economic analysis. but "also don't help" - absolutely.
 
2020-07-17 1:24:35 AM  

gunther_bumpass: Jim_Callahan: Mass transit is necessary infrastructure, especially for poor people.  It is almost objectively an improvement in conditions.

Rent issues and slumlord profiteering is a separate issue that needs to be addressed directly as an issue.  Randomly blaming literally everything but landlords for unethical/illegal landlord behavior like this is both extremely stupid, and most likely intentional, malicious propaganda intentionally designed to (among other things) fark over black people in exactly the fashion being complained about in TFA.


Unfortunately, the real estate industry has been co-opted by parasites. Housing should be a right, not an "always goes up" investment scheme. Real estate agents, flippers, hoarders, lawmakers who make it easy for people to hoard housing, well, they'd be first up against the metaphorical wall if I had any say in things. 

When you have nothing else to offer to society, you get into real estate. 

The fact that the US treats housing as an investment has ruined us. If you want to be a landlord, I think that's fine. A lot of people have no business owning homes. Sadly, they're often the ones who own dozens.


Housing should be a right. Where that house is located, the size of it, and the degree of finishes however should not be. Ownership, should not be a right. When it comes to the residential market specifically, stricter controls should be placed on how rental properties are handled. When it comes to apartments, there should always be a mandatory portion dedicated to low-income wage earners. Government subsidized housing should be accessible to public transportation and all the necessary amenities to live, including healthcare, grocery stores (with produce) etc.
 
2020-07-17 1:25:12 AM  
Shiats super cool in the city tonight.
 
2020-07-17 1:26:08 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-07-17 1:28:18 AM  
Always remember that suburbs started out as massively racist and that is blueprinted into the entire concept of suburbs. Welcome to red lining. Gentrification is also massively racist and classist.

Gentrified neighborhood? Rent will spike. Driving the poor out.
 
2020-07-17 1:28:37 AM  

the money is in the banana stand: Housing should be a right. Where that house is located, the size of it, and the degree of finishes however should not be. Ownership, should not be a right. When it comes to the residential market specifically, stricter controls should be placed on how rental properties are handled. When it comes to apartments, there should always be a mandatory portion dedicated to low-income wage earners. Government subsidized housing should be accessible to public transportation and all the necessary amenities to live, including healthcare, grocery stores (with produce) etc.


(note: I'm concurring with you)

See this is my fundamental issue with most of the kvetching about urban renewal - it's not "we're losing our housing" it's "we have to move!".  address the actual issues you listed and suddenly urban renewal isn't a problem anymore.
 
2020-07-17 1:28:48 AM  

gunther_bumpass: the money is in the banana stand: gunther_bumpass: the money is in the banana stand: Opponents: Stop your developments and capital improvements making my neighborhood more desirable and safer to live in! As a result my taxes or rent is going up and I cannot afford to live in this area any longer. I didn't give I shiat about it before and was trying to leave it, but now it is a decent place to live and I want to stay.

Developers: Ok. Sure. We will leave you alone and invest in other parts of town.

Opponents: That's racist! You should improve my part of town for free, and when you improve it, we should have sole proprietorship and direction of the improvements so as to not lose the "urban identity" of this lovely corner of the Earth nobody wants to live in and would actively escape it if they had the means.


Is there any side of the racial debate that you don't come down on the side of the completely tone deaf?

Please explain to me where your disagree with my simplification of how people talk about gentrification. Okay, now go look at my post on my actual view on the issue and how to correct it. My beef is with stupid people using race as a catch-all excuse with absolutely no substance behind their "argument" (tantrum).

You answered your own question. You simplified a complex problem to the point where you could smugly blame it on the poor people. Eat a dick.


Someone is salty. I am not blaming anything on poor people moron. I am saying that people that whine about gentrification are simplifying the issue and making it sound like development is evil and the root cause. It is natural. The problem is not having programs in place to combat the fall-out. That responsibility is not on those investing in making the community a better place to live, it is with incompetent governments and cities not getting their shiat together.
 
2020-07-17 1:33:33 AM  

Kazan: the money is in the banana stand: Housing should be a right. Where that house is located, the size of it, and the degree of finishes however should not be. Ownership, should not be a right. When it comes to the residential market specifically, stricter controls should be placed on how rental properties are handled. When it comes to apartments, there should always be a mandatory portion dedicated to low-income wage earners. Government subsidized housing should be accessible to public transportation and all the necessary amenities to live, including healthcare, grocery stores (with produce) etc.

(note: I'm concurring with you)

See this is my fundamental issue with most of the kvetching about urban renewal - it's not "we're losing our housing" it's "we have to move!".  address the actual issues you listed and suddenly urban renewal isn't a problem anymore.


All of those issues are the responsibility of the government. Federal, State, and Local. The blame needs to be shifted. If you want to talk about solutions, I would be happy to do that. I am just tired about people using the term gentrification like it is a dirty word and blaming "white people".
 
2020-07-17 1:38:02 AM  
Well this thread got really gross and racism-denialist.
 
2020-07-17 1:42:14 AM  

Kazan: LordJiro: Kazan: LordJiro: "Gentrification farks over non-white communities."

Yeah, we know.

I hate the use of the term "gentrification" for any and all urban renewal. it's supposed to be used for cases of purposefully farking over people.

Except that 'urban renewal' is almost always designed to attract more middle-class white people. Goods (even essential shiat like food) get more expensive, landlords raise rent, non-white communities that have been stuck in cities for generations get priced out, and armchair economists (who are totally not racist) blame the non-white people for any problems that result.

Urban renewal is a natural consequence of land values increasing as a city's population increases.  It's not a conspiracy against people in general - even if it is occasionally used as such.   The answer here isn't "urban renewal is evil" the answer here is "fixing the problems with racial inequality that result in minorities being disproportionately poor"


Hey, your post is going to get lost in the churn because it isn't hyperbolic enough but I just wanted to say:

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-07-17 1:54:35 AM  

gunther_bumpass: the money is in the banana stand: gunther_bumpass: the money is in the banana stand: Opponents: Stop your developments and capital improvements making my neighborhood more desirable and safer to live in! As a result my taxes or rent is going up and I cannot afford to live in this area any longer. I didn't give I shiat about it before and was trying to leave it, but now it is a decent place to live and I want to stay.

Developers: Ok. Sure. We will leave you alone and invest in other parts of town.

Opponents: That's racist! You should improve my part of town for free, and when you improve it, we should have sole proprietorship and direction of the improvements so as to not lose the "urban identity" of this lovely corner of the Earth nobody wants to live in and would actively escape it if they had the means.


Is there any side of the racial debate that you don't come down on the side of the completely tone deaf?

Please explain to me where your disagree with my simplification of how people talk about gentrification. Okay, now go look at my post on my actual view on the issue and how to correct it. My beef is with stupid people using race as a catch-all excuse with absolutely no substance behind their "argument" (tantrum).

You answered your own question. You simplified a complex problem to the point where you could smugly blame it on the poor people. Eat a dick.


Nope. Nah. Nada. Zero... that is not the thrust of that comment. Reread the other posts OP made. OP pointed out the actual sources of racial discrimination and socio-economic discrimination while also calling out the fallacies in the author's article.

There is plenty of room to call out lapses in the social contract of this country when it comes to how people who live in urban areas have been negatively affected by opportunistic slum lords and city managers. The author of this article missed that mark.
 
2020-07-17 1:57:25 AM  
Improving an area always helps owners and hurts renters.  That's just a fact of life, and will always be true.  Nicer costs more.  I rented for 13 years, and I've now owned for 1 year, and this is now the first year I've wanted my area to be improved, because instead of increasing my rent, it increases the value of my property.

The problem is racial disparities in home ownership, caused historically by racist laws and perpetuated currently by the wage gap.
 
2020-07-17 2:13:18 AM  
Article:  "Urban renewal isn't a horrible idea, but maybe we should consult some people who aren't white?"

Fark Comments:  "Ohhhh, so you hate urban renewal entirely and think it should never happen?!"
 
2020-07-17 2:14:42 AM  
What I mostly take from this article is that Tea Troutman uses they/them pronouns.
 
2020-07-17 2:29:42 AM  

Peki: Who knew an article about housing would be the hotbed of Fark racism? 

I thought the trans thread on the Main page would be way worse than this. . .


I heard trump promised to make the trans run on time.
 
2020-07-17 2:31:09 AM  

the money is in the banana stand: Kazan: the money is in the banana stand: Housing should be a right. Where that house is located, the size of it, and the degree of finishes however should not be. Ownership, should not be a right. When it comes to the residential market specifically, stricter controls should be placed on how rental properties are handled. When it comes to apartments, there should always be a mandatory portion dedicated to low-income wage earners. Government subsidized housing should be accessible to public transportation and all the necessary amenities to live, including healthcare, grocery stores (with produce) etc.

(note: I'm concurring with you)

See this is my fundamental issue with most of the kvetching about urban renewal - it's not "we're losing our housing" it's "we have to move!".  address the actual issues you listed and suddenly urban renewal isn't a problem anymore.

All of those issues are the responsibility of the government. Federal, State, and Local. The blame needs to be shifted. If you want to talk about solutions, I would be happy to do that. I am just tired about people using the term gentrification like it is a dirty word and blaming "white people".


Won't anyone come to the defense of the wealthy white male homeowner?
 
2020-07-17 2:50:46 AM  

skipping non-voting comment in contest thread: [i.imgflip.com image 600x338]


Wasn't virtue signaling a term that was invented to describe politicians that faked piety in order to get votes ?
 
2020-07-17 4:18:34 AM  

ColdFusion: Article:  "Urban renewal isn't a horrible idea, but maybe we should consult some people who aren't white?"

Fark Comments:  "Ohhhh, so you hate urban renewal entirely and think it should never happen?!"


Actually FTFAAmerican city planning has systemically disenfranchised Black urban residents, even creating an entire lexicon of coded language to marginalize them. From racist covenants that barred Black households from owning property in the early part of the 20th century, to freeways that divided Black neighborhoods in the 1950s and '60s, to "urban renewal" projects that leveled Black communities in the 1970s and '80s - all of these "improvements" were imposed by mostly white planners on Black residents with minimal input from those most affected.

You're far from the the only one jumping in to defend 'urban renewal', just the most succinct. I wasn't trying to pick on you, ColdFusion, because you have the right idea.

But it is as if places where people of color live are somehow dead and need to be 'renewed'. "Renewal" becomes "places suitable for white folks."

But I don't think blaming city planners is the correct approach, until they do things like tear down public schools to put up private ones. Gentrification needs to be properly combated with better wages, safety nets, etc. Nobody wants to live poor.
 
2020-07-17 4:41:02 AM  

I_told_you_so: There are Black people that Black people don't want to live around.


So...Exactly like white people? In that there are white people that white people don't want to live around?

It's almost like black people and white people are all just people. Also, why did you capitalize black?
 
2020-07-17 4:50:00 AM  
progress will continue. I think it has more to do about the three classes in society than anything else. The lack of people voting in the lower classes is what is keeping things from progressing and why it feels like it's still the 20th century in many aspects. In almost any part of the country there is a class of people who have benefited from this dynamic for far too long. You see it in politics, media, and any job that pays well. There is a structure of gifting and keeping the best opportunities for themselves, friends and family.

Just look at the investing and banking class, one of the top tiers of our society. The reason they stay wealthy and rich is not by being smart or savvy, it's because they simply make all the rules and when it don't work out they get bailed out. They also get to invest in anything they want and have set the ante to participate above minimum wage joes salary. What am I talking about? Sure joe can buy the individual stocks that already exist on the market for a high price, maybe one or two, but he will never get in early at the IPO stage. He will never be the guy telling you he got in for pennies on the dollar. Nope, he will be the guy buying near the top while the early investors dump on him and make money on it going back down and all while that class of people tell the public not to worry.

You want to really know the reason the market is disconnected from reality and the pandemic right now? It's because they have all their wealth parked in the market and it caught them off guard. They are propping it all up by just sitting still and passing time by playing exotic options. A dozen or so firms and investors own a good chunk of every company worth a damn. They own 80% of all the stocks. The public owns the other 20%. They don't care if you sell because they control the entire thing and the companies they hold all their tax free wealth in are always good for another bailout.
 
2020-07-17 4:57:42 AM  

LordJiro: "Gentrification farks over non-white communities."

Yeah, we know.


The thing is, so does living in a shiatty neighborhood. Gentrification typically follows things like putting in parks and better transit and removing pollution.

It's the ultimate "damned if you do" situation. The best solutions to this are systemic, that is to say, reducing inequality and increasing generational wealth, increasing ownership, and so on. They are also the hardest solutions.

Nobody wants to live in a ghetto, but nobody wants to get evicted either. It's a shiatty situation.
 
2020-07-17 5:02:57 AM  

JRoo: I_told_you_so: There are Black people that Black people don't want to live around.

So...Exactly like white people? In that there are white people that white people don't want to live around?

It's almost like black people and white people are all just people. Also, why did you capitalize black?


I grew up in North Long Beach, CA and went to Jordan High School as the son of a Black father and a Jewish mother at a time when this was not particularly well accepted by anyone. You have no idea the hell I went through and I don't answer to you.
 
2020-07-17 5:20:16 AM  

I_told_you_so: JRoo: I_told_you_so: There are Black people that Black people don't want to live around.

So...Exactly like white people? In that there are white people that white people don't want to live around?

It's almost like black people and white people are all just people. Also, why did you capitalize black?

I grew up in North Long Beach, CA and went to Jordan High School as the son of a Black father and a Jewish mother at a time when this was not particularly well accepted by anyone. You have no idea the hell I went through and I don't answer to you.


Fine, don't tell me why you capitalize black. You think you're the only person who's been through hell? Piss off ya self-important, self-righteous twat.
 
2020-07-17 5:32:49 AM  

FarkBucket18: I submit urban Detroit and urban Cleveland as exhibits A and B for this being complete and utter bullshiate.

You want to stop the investment in urban cities pack up and head to the suburbs? Fine. Let's take a look at how that's working.

Oh. Oh, no. That isn't good.


This is exactly what I was thinking.  Whitey packed up and left 50 years ago and people complained.   Whitey comes back in the form of hipster beardos and people complained.   The lesson here is three fold:

1)  The Lord loves a working man
2)  Don't trust whitey
3)  See a doctor and get rid of it
 
2020-07-17 6:21:03 AM  
I support investing in American cities and making them more livable, but I can't sugarcoat it: making a place "nicer" leads to increased rent and displaced poor people. Unless we deal with the structural inequalities that keep black and brown people poorer, making a place "nicer" will continue to mean displacing more black and brown people.

There's also a broader issue beyond America and racism and you find it in cities around the world: unless you have laws or programs in place to actively combat both poverty and market forces in housing, the poor consistently get pushed out to (frankly) unlivable areas outside cities.
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.