DC is Tempe most gentrified city by % in the USA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious if anti gentrification advocates are homophobes given many of the “gentrifiers” who first live in tend to be gay?

So anti-gentrification advocates aren't upset about the decrease of affordable housing and black businesses disappearing they're just upset about gays.
Gotcha.

so a racist motive is better than a homophobic one?

Concern about the disappearance of affordable housing and the decline of entrepreneurship and business ownership is racist.
Gotcha.

[Anonymous]

I’m confused here . Wasn’t it racism that caused whites to flee? Now the grandkids of those whites are moving back and that’s racist too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused here . Wasn’t it racism that caused whites to flee? Now the grandkids of those whites are moving back and that’s racist too?

The mass exodus of whites from the cities to the suburbs in the '60s was indeed motivated by race, specifically the desegregation of schools and neighborhoods.
White folks wadn't trying to have their kids going to school with them so they fled. White folks wadn't thrilled with the idea of them moving in next door so they fled.
Now the script has flipped as far as the migration is concerned. Whites are fleeing the suburbs and moving into the cities because it's more expensive.
So when you take into consideration the huge contrast in wealth disparity between whites and blacks you may as well say that ain't a damn thing changed cause whites still don't want their kids going to school with them (unless they're pulling in 6-figures) and whites still aren't thrilled about the idea of them living next door (unless they're pulling in 6-figures).
The more things change the more they stay the same I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused here . Wasn’t it racism that caused whites to flee? Now the grandkids of those whites are moving back and that’s racist too?

The mass exodus of whites from the cities to the suburbs in the '60s was indeed motivated by race, specifically the desegregation of schools and neighborhoods.
White folks wadn't trying to have their kids going to school with them so they fled. White folks wadn't thrilled with the idea of them moving in next door so they fled.
Now the script has flipped as far as the migration is concerned. Whites are fleeing the suburbs and moving into the cities because it's more expensive.
So when you take into consideration the huge contrast in wealth disparity between whites and blacks you may as well say that ain't a damn thing changed cause whites still don't want their kids going to school with them (unless they're pulling in 6-figures) and whites still aren't thrilled about the idea of them living next door (unless they're pulling in 6-figures).
The more things change the more they stay the same I guess.

no one wants to be around ghetto people (of all races) including and most importantly middle class+ blacks who want a more positive future for their children

[Anonymous]

Affluent people moving into the city is largely a good thing, it means more tax revenue for the city, it means poor and affluent people are less isolated from each other, in DC and many other places it been accompanied by growth that has been good.

However new people should respect the people who have already lived there, and not have condescending colonial attitudes.

And cities should all enough building of new housing so that all the new residents are not displacing old residents (especially renters, who will not get the benefits of older homeowners selling). Some policies on affordable housing should be implemented so that the city does not resegregate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Affluent people moving into the city is largely a good thing, it means more tax revenue for the city, it means poor and affluent people are less isolated from each other, in DC and many other places it been accompanied by growth that has been good.

However new people should respect the people who have already lived there, and not have condescending colonial attitudes.

And cities should all enough building of new housing so that all the new residents are not displacing old residents (especially renters, who will not get the benefits of older homeowners selling). Some policies on affordable housing should be implemented so that the city does not resegregate.

how are people being displaced ? Dud buildings get knocked down? Dc used to have a population of 800,000 in 1950. Now it has 700,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused here . Wasn’t it racism that caused whites to flee? Now the grandkids of those whites are moving back and that’s racist too?

The mass exodus of whites from the cities to the suburbs in the '60s was indeed motivated by race, specifically the desegregation of schools and neighborhoods.
White folks wadn't trying to have their kids going to school with them so they fled. White folks wadn't thrilled with the idea of them moving in next door so they fled.
Now the script has flipped as far as the migration is concerned. Whites are fleeing the suburbs and moving into the cities because it's more expensive.
So when you take into consideration the huge contrast in wealth disparity between whites and blacks you may as well say that ain't a damn thing changed cause whites still don't want their kids going to school with them (unless they're pulling in 6-figures) and whites still aren't thrilled about the idea of them living next door (unless they're pulling in 6-figures).
The more things change the more they stay the same I guess.

no one wants to be around ghetto people (of all races) including and most importantly middle class+ blacks who want a more positive future for their children

Yeah but ghetto is effectively synonymous with blacks and Latinos. Poor whites aren’t considered ghetto they’re called rural and they too have a subconscious (and sometimes overt) affinity for the age-old tradition of segregation. Rural whites don't want their kids going to school with them and they too aren't thrilled about the idea of them living next door either. Plus rural has a nice nostalgic tone to it, but ghetto has such negative connotations so it’s more fitting for them, right?

[Anonymous]

DC city council just voted to make May 20 “DC Natives Day.”

[Anonymous]

Odd how segregation gets celebrated now . Dr king would be appalled

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Odd how segregation gets celebrated now . Dr king would be appalled

Celebrating native born District residents is not segregation.

[Anonymous]

I think it's weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious if anti gentrification advocates are homophobes given many of the “gentrifiers” who first live in tend to be gay?

So anti-gentrification advocates aren't upset about the decrease of affordable housing and black businesses disappearing they're just upset about gays.
Gotcha.

so a racist motive is better than a homophobic one?

The outrage olympics

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused here . Wasn’t it racism that caused whites to flee? Now the grandkids of those whites are moving back and that’s racist too?

The mass exodus of whites from the cities to the suburbs in the '60s was indeed motivated by race, specifically the desegregation of schools and neighborhoods.
White folks wadn't trying to have their kids going to school with them so they fled. White folks wadn't thrilled with the idea of them moving in next door so they fled.
Now the script has flipped as far as the migration is concerned. Whites are fleeing the suburbs and moving into the cities because it's more expensive.
So when you take into consideration the huge contrast in wealth disparity between whites and blacks you may as well say that ain't a damn thing changed cause whites still don't want their kids going to school with them (unless they're pulling in 6-figures) and whites still aren't thrilled about the idea of them living next door (unless they're pulling in 6-figures).
The more things change the more they stay the same I guess.

Not sure about the 60's, but in the 80's white flight was motivated by a crime rate that was significantly rising in parts of many major cities. Do you think people with money left because things were getting better?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC city council just voted to make May 20 “DC Natives Day.”

You mean for American Indians?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Odd how segregation gets celebrated now . Dr king would be appalled

Celebrating native born District residents is not segregation.

My fair-complexioned, private-school educated kids were born in Washington, DC and have lived here ever since. Somehow I don't think that they are who the DC Council had in mind with designating "DC Natives Day."