|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:72% of the population in Arlington, VA has been living there for more than 30 years. That is higher than the U.S. national average. have you ever been to arlington, va, and seen the projects and those old neighborhoods or what
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 19:54 |
|
|
Phi230 posted:I don't live anywhere near cali so nice try 72% of the population in Arlington, VA has been living there for more than 30 years. That is higher than the U.S. national average. Do you believe that their economic prospects and municipal makeup in 2017 is similar, better, or worse than it was in 1980? The city has gotten less white in the past 30 years. Is your assertion that latino, asian, and african-americans are engaging in vicious colonialism? What do you think the differences are between Arlington, VA ("America's Most Gentrified Municipality in 2011") in 1980 and 2017? What do you think caused these differences and are they positive? Or is the city today functionally identical to its 1980 version? Is the average POC (40% of the population) in Arlington, VA better off now than they were in 1980? Do you believe that Arlington, VA is a better or worse place to live in 2017 compared to 1980?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Well, but we're seeing kind of the same general trend from Democratic centrists even nowadays, aren't we? The reflexive need to apologize for big government, the protests that "We're capitalist," the fixation with means-testing when it comes to the social safety net, etc. It really makes Democratic leaders seem distinctly not-proud of the principles that they're supposed to espouse. I think both of the former are due to conservative messaging with regards to socialism and government not working. The government is a pretty easy target, especially for people unwilling to change or move as circumstances change and want someone to blame that doesn't include themselves. I don't think this is going to surprise anyone, but I'm a big fan of a strong central government and a social capitalist system, but that's because I've seen what happens in the absence of a strong government first hand and as to the latter, because I don't think humanity is capable of maintaining a fully capitalist system at scale.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
thank you for a full reply. there's a lot to unpack here so i can't say my typically lovely posting will be anything less than horrible. in terms of a coalition) i believe that coalition already exists and is looking for a candidate to represent them. i'm talking about the people who supported obama in 2008 and the people who supported bernie. and even to some extent, the people who genuinely believed trump's economic promises and dismissed/ignored his other bullshit. obama disbanded his grassroots network the minute he won because he saw them as "a tiger he couldn't control." what does that mean? those people wanted serious reforms and changes, and that was never obamas intention, despite his early rhetoric. i guarantee you he wasn't afraid of his most ardent supporters trying to pull him to the right. bernie has attracted a large base of die-hards as well and he's not even offering anything that revolutionary. he was a no body and did way better than he should have done. both those people were seen as uncorrupted. obama because he was so new, and bernie because he's been relatively consistent for so long. i genuinely believe that if the dems were to embrace the "radical" elements of those platforms that the coalition would be there. now, before people jump in with "hillary had the most left platform ever," it is also important to make sure the person selling the idea is believable. i believe that hillary's credibility problem, whether it was true or not, severely hampered her ability to sell these proposals. if anything, it hurt her because it served the narrative that she would say anything to get elected, including things that people, once again, rightly or wrongly, assumed were out of her character. the thing that keeps this coalition from grabbing the reins of power is the establishment. for all their great social policies, like combating racism, the people that form this coalition want things that will "damage" the economic prospects of the donor class. therefore, only a minutia of platitudes can be granted and the existing coalition cannot be fully embraced. as for LGBT) it wasn't obama or the dems that made that happen. it was the courts. LGBT rights are not something i can put in the "win" category for the dems because they didn't do very much to advance it beyond a vague "made it more acceptable." but isn't obama on record opposing gay marriage? i know hillary was. regardless, from my memory obama did not in any way champion gay rights and definitely cannot take responsibility for its success. to me it seemed a much more organic and grass roots movement that arose in states and won over the populace through outlets like the media. maybe i'm wrong, but that's how i remember it. perhaps you're saying that his election alone was a tacit endorsement of the idea, but that seems obtuse at best. once again, i may be wrong, but i really remember that obama was not a leading figure championing gay rights. perhaps you mean more that it was congress, but i would say thats more symptomatic of the ideological shifts of their constituents, a charge that may have been embraced by some in congress, but i wouldn't say they spearheaded it. i openly accept that i may be wrong and would love evidence to the contrary. burn the system to the ground) i don't think anyone is saying "literally burn the system to the ground." but openly pointing out the failures of institutions like the justice department (which did make some good strides regarding police and racism under obama, but completely dropped the ball with regards to the Great Recession), the revolving door of the SEC with Wall St, same with the FCC and telecoms, the courts during the Great Recession, the DoD and its relationship with contractors, intelligence agencies and the erosion of the 4th amendment, and others doesn't sound like burning down the system to me. it sounds like creating a new baseline for people to understand those institutions and allows for an opportunity to reform them or, if necessary, reorganize them so as to be less susceptible to corruption. not working with the republicans would be fine, including extraordinary measures, so long as the dems keep up a consistent narrative of exactly why they are doing what they're doing. i agree that fighting over things like the debt ceiling and the budget are probably beyond the pale, even for me, because of how dangerous they can be. but nothing is stopping them from trying to inundate those bills with amendments or openly opposing other legislation. to me, the democrats are just terrified of admitting that they may have been wrong, or that they have to evolve, or just plainly afraid of upsetting their donors. i think that's everything. let me know if i missed anything or you want more
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:have you ever been to arlington, va, and seen the projects and those old neighborhoods or what I was born there, but I am one of the 28% that doesn't live there anymore. So, yes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Sorry, I'm not an expert on gentrification since it's not as common out here in Real America. Are those our only two choices? I hope this is sarcasm. what the gently caress is Real America they are trying to gentrify Detroit and i am loving pissed. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
montana guy and arlington virgina guy should get together and gently caress and then talk about what makes these localities exceptional
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The city has gotten less white in the past 30 years. Is your assertion that latino, asian, and african-americans are engaging in vicious colonialism? Are you vaguely implying that rich PoCs can't push out poor PoCs with the same kinds of negative effects on poor PoCs? Or are you focusing on Arlington, VA because it's one of the very few examples of PoC gentrification of a neighbourhood (whereas in fact most gentrification in the US is performed by wealthy whites against poor whites/PoCs)? It's interesting, I think I've heard other Libertarians bring up Arlington, VA before... and now I know why. It's a model example that's utterly unrepresentative of the general pattern of gentrification in the US.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:People should be listening to Phi. Those renovated houses aren't being priced closer to the other houses that are there, they're being flipped and pricing out people of color. To piggyback off this, how it works is, is when a "flipped" house gets priced, its usually several hundred k more than it was before, and this raises the property tax on everyone nearby and prices people who have lived there for generations out of their own homes. This is how it works in places like where I live, and notoriously in San Francisco. so not every house even needs to be flipped. Just one on a block is enough to empty out the area and all the other houses will get "flipped" over time or the whole neighborhood just gets lol eminent domained and bulldozed, and the property development that goes up is worth millions but the people whose houses were destroyed were paid "fair market value for the house at the time"
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:Very much so, and it's in part an unpleasant reaction to how off-the-rails the other side has gotten. I certainly don't excuse it though I understand why they thought they should. Sure, but at this point in history, I think it's time for everyone to recognize that the old strategy failed pretty miserably. This poo poo doesn't work anymore. The Democrats have to not only stand for something, they need to show that they're proud of what they stand for, not apologize for it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:To piggyback off this, how it works is, is when a "flipped" house gets priced, its usually several hundred k more than it was before, and this raises the property tax on everyone nearby and prices people who have lived there for generations out of their own homes or out in here the bay area foreign conglomerates will snap up the houses and either jack up the rents for techies or bulldoze them to build condos
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:72% of the population in Arlington, VA has been living there for more than 30 years. That is higher than the U.S. national average. None of this is anywhere near representative of the actual experience of gentrification in the US, in terms of the groups conducting gentrification, the groups affected, and the outcome for the most vulnerable of those groups.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:People should be listening to Phi. Those renovated houses aren't being priced closer to the other houses that are there, they're being flipped and pricing out people of color. A much better fix, IMO, would be to offer economic incentives to rebuild comparable housing in a neighborhood after tearing down dilapidated units. Granted I'm generally in favor of population compaction anyways and anti-sprawl, but I know that's a pipe dream. quote:Wasn't there even a new report about how flippers helped gently caress up the housing bubble? If that's what launched this convo, sorry I missed it. I'm pretty sure I remember reading one recently. A stark contrast to the regressive's favorite victim to blame for the housing bubble. Majorian posted:Sure, but at this point in history, I think it's time for everyone to recognize that the old strategy failed pretty miserably. This poo poo doesn't work anymore. The Democrats have to not only stand for something, they need to show that they're proud of what they stand for, not apologize for it. Gods yes. There needs to be a lot more 'Sticking to your guns' for the Democratic party, and I think that that's one of the things that will also help with their biggest structural problem going forward: The lack of up-and-coming candidates from lower levels. (Can't look at that link where I am right now)
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:or out in here the bay area foreign conglomerates will snap up the houses and either jack up the rents for techies or bulldoze them to build condos Yeah I saw some Zillow posting about a lovely like 1,200 square foot townhome in the bay area that was worth $10 million but looked like poo poo and was tiny
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:Are you vaguely implying that rich PoCs can't push out poor PoCs with the same kinds of negative effects on poor PoCs? Or are you focusing on Arlington, VA because it's one of the very few examples of PoC gentrification of a neighbourhood (whereas in fact most gentrification in the US is performed by wealthy whites against poor whites/PoCs)? The city has a higher percentage of 30+ year residents than the national average. By nearly 20%. I have a feeling that you are not familiar with the actual national figures. Are you possibly just extrapolating anecdotes from areas with rapid growth and poor urban planning (the Bay Area, Sea-Tak, or the Inland portions of NYC) to apply to the whole?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:but the people whose houses were destroyed were paid "fair market value for the house at the time" I thought the problem was that much of the prior population were renters who don't benefit from the value increase (and can't pay the new rents obviously).
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:I thought the problem was that much of the prior population were renters who don't benefit from the value increase (and can't pay the new rents obviously). Both of these things happen it even goes into city planning like city planners here intentionally laid brick roads to raise property values to increase rents to price out poor people, but on the other side of town they demolished 100+ w/ eminent domain to build a new soccer stadium, condos, and a police headquarters. The property is worth millions and millions and millions now but the people only got paid maybe tens of thousands or a hundred k for their homes
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:I hope this is sarcasm. what the gently caress is Real America I wouldn't call it trying when billionaires own half of downtown. Also a lol at NYC being the most segregated city, have y'all even seen that 8 Mile line on racial maps? You could see it from space. Car Hater fucked around with this message at 20:08 on Sep 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
Uhh...Steve Mnuchin is talking about a new North Korea sanctions. Sounds like it's specifically hitting businesses that want to and/or do business with North Korea. Times up with China's announcement as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:Uhh...Steve Mnuchin is talking about a new North Korea sanctions. Sounds like it's specifically hitting businesses that want to and/or do business with North Korea. Times up with China's announcement as well. foreign businesses I assume?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
The Groper posted:I wouldn't call it trying when billionaires own half of downtown. Fair enough. My loving boss actually knew one of those guys through networking and talked about how cool and down to earth and normal all these rich motherfuckers were. I wanted to sock him in the loving jaw. Meanwhile he knows that I'm poor af and have holes in the bottom of my car so bad I can see the loving pavement while I'm driving. In other dumb loving news: Koalas March posted:https://twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/910938734715183104
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:Gods yes. There needs to be a lot more 'Sticking to your guns' for the Democratic party, and I think that that's one of the things that will also help with their biggest structural problem going forward: The lack of up-and-coming candidates from lower levels. It's just Blanche Lincoln's incredibly wrong-headed "Kindergarten" ad, which I'm sure you've seen anyway (and winced at, because holy God, what a stupid ad). But it illustrates one of the lessons that I think the Dems need to learn faster moving forward: representing a conservative state or district doesn't always mean they're going to react negatively to economically leftist proposals. Arkansas Democrats overwhelmingly supported including a strong public option in Obamacare, but Lincoln was one of the key people to stick the knife in that proposal. She got absolutely creamed that year. The lesson there is the same one that we're hopefully all learning from downticket races in states like Oklahoma: "conservative/Republican-voting" states and districts aren't necessarily against everything that's left-of-center. When it comes to economic populism, sometimes they're downright receptive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
So what is the solution to gentrification? Because "stop people from moving into an area" is not a valid one for a bunch of obvious reasons.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The city has a higher percentage of 30+ year residents than the national average. By nearly 20%. Gentrification looks pretty much the same everywhere. It's rapid and causes poor people and PoCs to leave: http://www.governing.com/gov-data/census/gentrification-in-cities-governing-report.html quote:Characteristics of Gentrifying Neighborhoods In essence, neighborhoods that gentrify kick out poor PoCs, who then move out to the even poorer neighborhoods in the region. Economic inequality becomes even more tightly concentrated in specific geographic areas. This is true across all parts of the US.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
Majorian posted:It's just Blanche Lincoln's incredibly wrong-headed "Kindergarten" ad, which I'm sure you've seen anyway. But it illustrates one of the lessons that I think the Dems need to learn faster moving forward: representing a conservative state or district doesn't always mean they're going to react negatively to economically leftist proposals. Arkansas Democrats overwhelmingly supported including a strong public option in Obamacare, but Lincoln was one of the key people to stick the knife in that proposal. She got absolutely creamed that year. The lesson there is the same one that we're hopefully all learning from downticket races in states like Oklahoma: "conservative/Republican-voting" states and districts aren't necessarily against everything that's left-of-center. When it comes to economic populism, sometimes they're downright receptive. It's easier to talk to conservatives about socialism than it is centrists or liberals I think it's because centrists and liberals don't acknowledge anything wrong with our system or society
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
Xae posted:So what is the solution to gentrification? Decommodification of housing is the only answer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:None of this is anywhere near representative of the actual experience of gentrification in the US, in terms of the groups conducting gentrification, the groups affected, and the outcome for the most vulnerable of those groups. quote:Gentrification looks pretty much the same everywhere. It's rapid and causes poor people and PoCs to leave: Nah http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1078087404273341 quote:Displacement of lower income families as a result of gentrification has been a major issue for decades. However, research has shown that oftentimes the opposite is true. Low-income families in gentrifying neighborhoods are less likely to be displaced than in non-gentrifying neighborhoods. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Sep 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
Xae posted:So what is the solution to gentrification? Decommodify housing, halt the growth of sprawl and suburbs and build 'affordable' housing in the suburbs to break up the rich, white enclaves but that's just a start, you gotta stop white flight somehow
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
Majumbo posted:Decommodification of housing is the only answer. I'm no economist so I have to ask, how do you do that?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
Majorian posted:It's just Blanche Lincoln's incredibly wrong-headed "Kindergarten" ad, which I'm sure you've seen anyway (and winced at, because holy God, what a stupid ad). But it illustrates one of the lessons that I think the Dems need to learn faster moving forward: representing a conservative state or district doesn't always mean they're going to react negatively to economically leftist proposals. Arkansas Democrats overwhelmingly supported including a strong public option in Obamacare, but Lincoln was one of the key people to stick the knife in that proposal. She got absolutely creamed that year. The lesson there is the same one that we're hopefully all learning from downticket races in states like Oklahoma: "conservative/Republican-voting" states and districts aren't necessarily against everything that's left-of-center. When it comes to economic populism, sometimes they're downright receptive. Don't remember it specifically but I probably would if I saw it. I'm here in Kentucky so we had Democratic politicians refusing to admit that they supported the ACA and the like in 2014. It was so incredibly infuriating because it's not like anyone that vehemently opposed the ACA was going to vote for them anyways if they didn't say yes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
Pakled posted:I'm no economist so I have to ask, how do you do that? introducing house flippers to the national razor
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
Xae posted:So what is the solution to gentrification? create a special gentrification mitigation overlay district which does two things: creates a tax abatement zones which freeze or seriously delay the increase of residential property tax assessment for original owners of property and their descendants past some grandfathered date reduces the permissible height and FAR of new residential development, substantial variances up to double or triple the stated limits can be obtained by contributing heavily to an affordable housing fund and or setting aside some portion of the new development as affordable, rent controlled apartments this isn't perfect but it's easily achievable on the local level through local political agitation Phi230 posted:Decommodify housing, halt the growth of sprawl and suburbs and build 'affordable' housing in the suburbs to break up the rich, white enclaves basically "full communism now" in how much of an impractical pipe dream it is
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
Pakled posted:I'm no economist so I have to ask, how do you do that? Well to start you institute price caps and rent caps but that's like step one
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
Normalizing quality apartments could be beneficial I should think. The standard of living should not be determined by if you feel safe outside or does the sewer/water work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:create a special gentrification mitigation overlay district which does two things: we've had public housing for 70 years. but I guess any solution that isn't neoliberal-jump through hoops bullshit is "pie in the sky" despite evidence or precedent or looking to other country's decommodification of housing as example I guess you love the whole "poor people should pay to take a class just so they qualify for a housing lottery so that they just might get a slot in an affordable apartment or townhome"
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:create a special gentrification mitigation overlay district which does two things: How do you avoid the California issue that resulted from Prop 13 though with that?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:create a special gentrification mitigation overlay district which does two things: California basically already has that with prop 13.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
Xae posted:So what is the solution to gentrification? I don't see how you do anything but apply Band-Aids to mitigate it slightly, until you reduce income inequality by a few orders of magnitude.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:we've had public housing for 70 years. not anymore we dont lol Phi230 posted:but I guess any solution that isn't neoliberal-jump through hoops bullshit is "pie in the sky" despite evidence otherwise sorry your dumb plan is magical bullshit that wont work but that's not my fault so dont get mad at me for pointing it out Taerkar posted:How do you avoid the California issue that resulted from Prop 13 though with that? you don't, because of the way land use is controlled in the us localities are always subject to dumb state laws and intervention Trabisnikof posted:California basically already has that with prop 13. a statewide "no taxes increase, ever" isn't the same as targeting areas for no tax increase the dosage makes the poison brah
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 19:54 |
|
|
Phi230 posted:To piggyback off this, how it works is, is when a "flipped" house gets priced, its usually several hundred k more than it was before, and this raises the property tax on everyone nearby and prices people who have lived there for generations out of their own homes. This is how it works in places like where I live, and notoriously in San Francisco. emminent domain is abused to hell and back
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:19
|
|
