|
Pain of Mind, check out http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/ for the enrollment section. It has enrollment data for all California schools back to the 93-94 school year
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 04:14 |
|
|
Fremont is also home to the nation's highest population of Afghani people. http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Fremont-s-Little-Kabul-eyes-election-with-hope-3289383.php http://www.city-journal.org/html/afghans-fremont-13329.html
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:Pain of Mind, check out http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/ for the enrollment section. It has enrollment data for all California schools back to the 93-94 school year Does not quite go back far enough to catch me in elementary school, but I was surprised how close I guessed for a few years younger than me. 64% white, 23% Asian, 5% African American, 9% Hispanic Looking at the largest range possible, % white went from 68% for Seniors in 1993-1994, to 5% for kids currently in elementary school. Also, the population of my elementary school has increased 4x from 1993 to now. I guess people are really trying to cram into the school district since the cities population has not changed that significantly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 04:36
|
|
You are receiving this broadcast as a dream...We are transmitting from the year one nine... nine nine ...You are receiving this broadcast in order t
|
Small Frozen Thing posted:This. This was the entire origin of the conversation, and why we were ragging on Family Values, because he was claiming this. No actually, what got me riled up and posting was that I hate the trivialization of phrases like 'white flight'. Minorities in communities around the state/country that have actually for real been decimated by white flight would take one look at Fremont and go sign me the gently caress up. And when you trivialize terms like that, low information people will (understandably) react by saying if that's the worst of it I guess racism isn't a problem anymore. It's almost like people want victimhood cred, but when everyone gets to be a victim then people that are actually suffering get overlooked.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 04:40
|
|
|
Spazzle posted:Rah, your head is so far up your rear end that you spent 2 paragraphs ranting, then proposing literally the same solution I did. Indeed, I often wonder what magical solution is on offer when "activists" protest turning an empty warehouse and old Burger King into new houses*. Should we try to strangle the one industry keeping the American Dream alive so we can drag software engineers down the path of American textile workers? Should we enact some nationalist/racist policies to keep THOSE PEOPLE (YOU KNOW THE ONES I MEAN) from being able to own property? What is the end game here? * Monster in the Mission. The protest was led by some people who run a housing nonprofit. They want the city to magic up a couple hundred billion to pay them to build housing projects for the poor, even though we all know that is a complete impossibility even if it were a genius idea. Out here in sunset opinion is divided. The NIMBY half are protesting the city's affordable housing density bonus along the N and L corridors because it might block their view and/or make parking worse.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 04:52
|
|
|
Spazzle posted:Rah, your head is so far up your rear end that you spent 2 paragraphs ranting, then proposing literally the same solution I did. So who are the people who made up the supposedly pretend problem of gentrification, according to you? Spazzle posted:Besides providing more housing, what other way would you use to prevent people from being allowed to move into places they want to be in? Housing is the main way. Restrictions on how far you can go when it comes to price gouging people with insane rents would be nice too, because i believe housing is a right, and shouldn't be completely subject to the free market. Making money is fine, but loving poor and middle class people over by increasing their rent 500% overnight, because you know there are some ultra rich people who wouldn't mind paying such an insane rent? Nah, that's hosed up. Especially considering that in an area like SF/the Bay Area, it means that a lot of people will have to move completely out of the region in order to afford a new home. No i don't think people should rent based on people's race.  Economic groups? Yeah, to an extent, like public housing for example. Especially if there's a huge loving housing crisis where certain economic groups are getting pushed out. Rah! fucked around with this message at 05:05 on Jul 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 04:55
|
|
|
Family Values posted:No actually, what got me riled up and posting was that I hate the trivialization of phrases like 'white flight'. Minorities in communities around the state/country that have actually for real been decimated by white flight would take one look at Fremont and go sign me the gently caress up. And when you trivialize terms like that, low information people will (understandably) react by saying if that's the worst of it I guess racism isn't a problem anymore. That is the lamest loving excuse. I suppose next you'll tell me I shouldn't worry about misogynistic laws here in the states, because there's FGM and child brides elsewhere in the world and gosh we wouldn't want to trivialize the term "misogyny" now would we.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
Rah! posted:Housing is the main way. Restrictions on how far you can go when it comes to price gouging people with insane rents would be nice too, because i believe housing is a right, and shouldn't be completely subject to the free market. Making money is fine, but loving poor and middle class people over by increasing their rent 500% overnight, because you know there are some ultra rich people who wouldn't mind paying such an insane rent? Nah, that's hosed up. Especially considering that in an area like SF/the Bay Area, it means that a lot of people will have to move completely out of the region in order to afford a new home. There's a problem with this idea, though. You have to also do at least one of the following: -put caps on the prices of homes for sale -place restrictions on owner occupation of sold housing, such that some units cannot be owner occupied (or otherwise taken off the market, even after being sold) -government-built housing Because if you tell me, as a building owner, that I cannot charge the market price to rent it, why wouldn't I just turn around and sell my building for the market price? The answer has to be something like, because anyone who buys it will also have to rent it for below market price, or because I'm literally not allowed to sell it, or because the government actually owns the home and won't sell it for any price. If you don't do any of the above, the effect of artificially capping rents is effectively to see rental units leave the rental market, sometimes permanently. The correct way to cap rents is to build more units. I'm not arguing against protections for renters, mind you. Landlords have to be held accountable for providing safe, up-to-code units, not harassing their tenants, following reasonable eviction rules that prevent the abuse of poor people, and so forth. But I think there's better solutions. Aside from building more housing, just off the top of my head, perhaps you can tax rental property as a percentage of the rent charged, and use the money to help support lower-income renters: say, by providing legal assistance to people under threat of unfair evictions, or perhaps just by, you know, building more housing. What you really don't want to do is act directly counter to the goal of increasing the number of units on the market by artificially reducing the incentive for owners to rent their properties, and investors to buy or build properties and rent them out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:There's a problem with this idea, though. You have to also do at least one of the following: Agreed that it's not something that could work within the current system without anything else changing too. I'm just saying that in a more ideal world It would be nice for all of us who aren't landlords or rich, if stronger protections for renters existed in an environment where housing is way too scarce and expensive. And I agree that building way more housing is the real answer. We need to build so much though...like hundreds of thousands of new units throughout the Bay Area. And that's not happening anytime soon unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
Small Frozen Thing posted:That is the lamest loving excuse. I suppose next you'll tell me I shouldn't worry about misogynistic laws here in the states, because there's FGM and child brides elsewhere in the world and gosh we wouldn't want to trivialize the term "misogyny" now would we. Nah, I think he has a point. Overuse of a term, especially by applying it where it doesn't belong, trivializes it and also muddies the conversation. See words and terms like: terrorism, rape, radical, troll, etc. All of those terms are less effective than they should be, or have become less useful, due to overuse and misuse and frequent application in a casual context. The term "white flight" has been used mostly in the context of studying or documenting or discussing severe declines of cities and neighborhoods where mass exodus of white people was directly correlated with increases in poverty, crime, unemployment, and (especially) neglect and injustice on the part of the government. Those things aren't a problem in Fremont. And if you really want to discuss the changing demographics of Fremont, you can - including pointing out how the population of white people has been declining in recent decades - without trying to leverage a loaded term in order to make it seem like the thing you're describing is a big deal or that as a Fremont resident you're somehow a victim. I bet if the point being made was simply phrased in that way, nobody would have even bothered commenting on it. Why comment on a non-issue? There is no actual problem with white people becoming a smaller minority in Fremont - only by referring to it as "white flight" does the discussion even happen. To go back to your point - it's not a good analogy because even if there's child brides and FGM elsewhere in the world, misogynistic laws here in the US are still an actual problem. That's something worthy of fighting. By criticizing and fighting against misogyny, we can move our society to become a more just one. If you could somehow get more white people to move to Fremont by some means that wasn't grossly wrong, what good would you be accomplishing? What problem would you be solving?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
Rah! posted:Agreed that it's not something that could work within the current system without anything else changing too. I'm just saying that in a more ideal world It would be nice for all of us who aren't landlords or rich, if stronger protections for renters existed in an environment where housing is way too scarce and expensive. Well, I feel like building more housing is a more likely and practical approach. Like, it is more likely to happen anytime soon, than some kind of regional authority instituting caps on rents, an idea which is not only counterproductive on its own, as you and I have agreed, but which also lacks a legal structure to support it, since we do not have an effective regional governing authority capable of doing such a thing. And we are actually building more housing. Not fast enough to catch up to the enormous deficiency - as you said, the demand is high enough that we need at least 200k more units in the bay area, and probably more like 500k to see rents drop to reasonable numbers - but faster than we were 10 years ago. It may be self-limiting. The regional economy cannot sustain itself without unskilled wage earners providing services - stuff like restaurant workers, hotel workers, etc. - and as the people who work those jobs are forced out, we're forced to raise wages, but that may not be enough. At some point the regional economy has to start to falter. I don't think the Bay Area can function as some sort of Monaco-like island for the super-wealthy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 05:41
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Nah, I think he has a point. Overuse of a term, especially by applying it where it doesn't belong, trivializes it and also muddies the conversation. See words and terms like: terrorism, rape, radical, troll, etc. All of those terms are less effective than they should be, or have become less useful, due to overuse and misuse and frequent application in a casual context. First off, I absolutely disagree about rape. Feminists have fought, and are still fighting, to have the term rape properly applied to all the cases where it drat well should, and people have frequently tried to claim we're "trivializing" it by using it the way it should be used. As for the rest, the reason it's an issue is that posters, such as Family Values, after Jerry used the term "white flight", started blaming the lowering number of white people on Fremont being "gentrified" by "rich Asian techies", which is pretty stupid and a little racist, which makes me doubtful of his honest intentions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 05:45
|
|
|
I don't think I was clear. I'm referring to the frequent use of the word rape in a casual context: "I played some counterstrike last night, and man, we got totally raped!" "<local sports team> completely raped <local sports team>", "You spent how much on your phone plan? Oh wow, you got raped!" etc. I am absolutely not suggesting that "it doesn't count as real rape because <insert bullshit misogynist mansplaining here>" is legitimate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 06:12
|
|
|
Rah! posted:I have heard of the Oakland metro opera house, if that's what you mean. But who the hell is talking about that? Craptacular said "metro oakland" as a synonym for "downtown oakland", which is pretty weird, and I'm pretty sure he wasn't referring to the Oakland metro opera house. I grew up in a suburb and have no idea where the borders of Alameda County are drawn. My idea of what constitutes Oakland probably includes bits of Berkeley and possibly other town's border, and I know that people who live in Oakland get defensive of their town so I didn't want to name specific areas as "Oakland" for fear that I may trigger the ire of a local. "Metro Oakland" is just a synonym for "that big dense part of Oakland I travel past on the way to the airport." Basically just admitting that i don't know where the gently caress city lines are drawn but let's just say there's somewhere in there I don't want to live. Leperflesh posted:Personally I think we need to build a shitload more housing, and we need to do it by densification rather than sprawl. Racist white people block densification because it'll change the character of their precious neighborhoods and maybe that will lower their property values and make them live near apartments where you know, the poors live. (poors = minorities, who as we all know are dangerous and make the schools worse with their bad grades, etc.) I actually think sprawl is an easier way to mix in various incomes and people together, as the effects of poverty at the scale of high-density eventually either drive the poor people out or cause the rich people to voluntarily avoid it. Poverty in huge clusters results in streets that smell like piss and other undesirable signs that don't occur when diffused through a whole region, so those high density areas with poors either become ghettos and projects or get gentrified and lose their poors. Basically it's easier to accept the social costs of poverty in a wealthy neighborhood if you've got the one part of a wealthy neighborhood that has a high volume of police calls, than it is to force everyone to live with those consequences. Hell, the best thing is to build luxury premium condo developments that packs the wealthiest people into boxes in the sky, and let the rest of the population have the rest of the city for themselves. Craptacular! fucked around with this message at 13:06 on Jul 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 12:39
|
|
|
Small Frozen Thing posted:As for the rest, the reason it's an issue is that posters, such as Family Values, after Jerry used the term "white flight", started blaming the lowering number of white people on Fremont being "gentrified" by "rich Asian techies", which is pretty stupid and a little racist, which makes me doubtful of his honest intentions. Give some consideration to the idea that the reason it bothers you so much is that it defies your preferred narrative. None of the actual data supports calling it 'white flight'. Looking for racism under every leaf and twig and calling everyone that expresses a differing opinion a racist is nothing more than feel good/holier than thou bullshit. Congrats, you win 10 internet points and I lose 10, you're a winner!
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
Lol, I'm loving that the thread is bending over backwards to defend a guy who claimed that he was there on the front lines and experienced the horrors of white flight when the white factory workers left Fremont to the Chinese and Indian tech workers. What a poseur. Give me a break.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Lol, I'm loving that the thread is bending over backwards to defend a guy who claimed that he was there on the front lines and experienced the horrors of white flight when the white factory workers left Fremont to the Chinese and Indian tech workers. What a poseur. Give me a break. It's a hard thread man. I spend months at the shitposting gym trying to get swole and just when I think I've got my moment, when I've finally made someone else spend money on me, someone comes in here and without even trying, manages to outshitpost me without even trying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
Can you point me to where he ever said he suffered negative consequences? Because as far as I recall he was just asserting that there was a racial bias component to the demographic changes he saw in his area.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
Tarezax posted:Can you point me to where he ever said he suffered negative consequences? Because as far as I recall he was just asserting that there was a racial bias component to the demographic changes he saw in his area. I never said I suffered any negative consequences but I guess no war but class war lefties will accuse you of playing the victim if they think you're distracting from class revolution 
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I grew up in a suburb and have no idea where the borders of Alameda County are drawn. My idea of what constitutes Oakland probably includes bits of Berkeley and possibly other town's border, and I know that people who live in Oakland get defensive of their town so I didn't want to name specific areas as "Oakland" for fear that I may trigger the ire of a local. Lmao, who the hell drives to the airport? Too afraid of the "locals" to take BART? Hmmm yes, please tell me more about how things REALLY are, (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
<--- LOL whoever gave me this must be ableist 
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:no war but class war Agreed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
honestly thread, on america's birthday, too. Let's take a moment to come together and remember the least lovely, actually ok stuff about this goofball nation cuz we're all boned come November anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 00:04
|
|
|
Real estate and race politics. No wonder this thread completely blows now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
fits my needs posted:Lmao, who the hell drives to the airport? Too afraid of the "locals" to take BART? Hmmm yes, please tell me more about how things REALLY are, I don't even have a drivers license. I'm too poor to afford a car. As I grew up in the north bay, I take a coach bus service anyone can buy their way onto that takes me to my hometown almost any time day or night. BART doesn't service my home plus sometimes I take flights far late at night when I think BART isn't running. If BART went into Sonoma County I would take it. It doesn't. Craptacular! fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Jul 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
Space-Bird posted:honestly thread, on america's birthday, too. Let's take a moment to come together and remember the least lovely, actually ok stuff about this goofball nation cuz we're all boned come November anyway. Might I suggest the good california thread? It's a nice thread to peruse and remember that there's actually good stuff in this state. Also endless debates about which region of California enjoys the superior burrito.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I don't even have a drivers license. I'm too poor to afford a car. No no no, you see, only people who take BART can really know what it's like to live in California. Everyone else are just freeloaders who will never know the love of security of BART.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Yeah, never-ending mile after mile of suburban sprawl extending out into a semi-desert, who could possibly want something else? Mile after mile of gridlocked freeway! Paradise. Everyone wants a two hour commute in order to be happy! You have no idea what you're talking about and even a little basic research would tell you that IE houses don't go for 600k on average. That's why people live out here, silly. It's cheaper. Please don't offer your bad opinions on the IE, you are a smart and knowledgeable guy about a lot of things but you just spew nothing but stupid bilge about it. Literally never saw you say anything even vaguely intelligent about it. Your level of insight is comparable to some hick in Tennessee who talks poo poo about San Francisco based on what he saw on television plus some vague impressions when he visited his cousin there. Nobody needs to hear it. Edit: Also I live in a house built in '61 that used top of the line stuff (the toilet vents are solid copper!) and I can tell you that I would rather have builder-grade crap from the 80s then top-shelf stuff from the 60s. No insulation, single-pane windows, galvanized pipes that rust, buttonboard and plaster/chickenwire, electrical wackness - poo poo is ugly. Old houses have their own problems. Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Jul 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
Here's a cool as hell old article about San Berdoo, in case you missed it: http://graphics.latimes.com/san-bernardino/ When I was a kid, my grandparents lived out there. When they moved there, it was thriving. Now it's a husk of its former self. An interesting microcosm of what could befall this great nation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Smythe posted:Here's a cool as hell old article about San Berdoo, in case you missed it: http://graphics.latimes.com/san-bernardino/ ""Wisps of hope are what the city gets by on." Excellent article, thanks for linking it. I grew up in Highland, which was a weird overflow track housing sprawl sandwiched between San Bernardino and Redlands. Needless to say, I spent most of my time in my youth hanging out in the latter than the former. Once I turned 18, I left and have never given a second thought to moving back. San Bernardino was bad in the 90's. I can only imagine what it is like now. I also heard rumor that Breaking Bad was originally to be set in San Bernardino before it got a huge tax break to film in New Mexico. I doubt it is true, but sounds reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
Breaking Bad was mainly set in Riverside but I think officials from Riverside and San Bernardino didn't want the image of a meth cooking show added to their image. Sucks because every scene in that show I can name the perfect IE location for it. Los Pollos Hermanos is obviously Juan Pollo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
Diane Feinstein continues to be the loving worst.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
I've said it before in this thread: I cannot loving wait for Feinstein to die.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 08:12
|
|
|
Kenning posted:I've said it before in this thread: I cannot loving wait for Feinstein to die. Not empty quoting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 08:21
|
|
|
Kenning posted:I've said it before in this thread: I cannot loving wait for Feinstein to die. Can't wait to see what old, corrupt establishment democrat we vote in to replace her! In non-terrible elected official news, found out today that my congresswoman is co-chair of the newly announced Fourth Amendment Caucus, which is pretty cool 
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 08:36
|
|
|
Sydin posted:Can't wait to see what old, corrupt establishment democrat we vote in to replace her! Replace Diane Feinstein with Dennis Feinstein.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
Kenning posted:I've said it before in this thread: I cannot loving wait for Feinstein to die. She's the shittiest thing to happen to this state in a long time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2016 06:16
|
|
|
Sydin posted:Can't wait to see what old, corrupt establishment democrat we vote in to replace her! Smythe posted:Here's a cool as hell old article about San Berdoo, in case you missed it: http://graphics.latimes.com/san-bernardino/ cheese fucked around with this message at 17:17 on Jul 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
cheese posted:I keep telling myself that Kamala Harris probably won't be THAT bad... Don't forget that one of her aides was caught posing as a cop. A masonic cop.  http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-aide-harris-accused-rogue-police-force-20150505-story.html
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 04:14 |
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:Don't forget that one of her aides was caught posing as a cop. A masonic cop.  my parents used to live in Santa Clarita, and I know exactly where his "office" was. There was strip mall that got built in late 2007 just in time for the crash to hit, and it sat almost completely empty for the next ~7-8 years. The only things in there were a Subway, the church, one of those trampoline party places that went out of business in less than a year, and (apparently) a ~Masonic Police Station~Also, that'd only be a few blocks away from an actual CHP Station. Seems pretty dumb imo, but then again the guy did end up getting caught because he strolled into an real station and talked to real cops, so who knows.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 17:38
|
|