The Urbanist Cult

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is utterly depressing to watch “not just bikes”…-an urban planning YouTube channel made by a Canadian who moved to Amsterdam.

It’s highly detailed and there is no reason why dc cant be more like this…

https://youtu.be/F4kmDxcfR48

There needs to be a complete re-thinking in how the city is planned.

Utrecht, Amsterdam, delft, den Haag have amazing QoL and urban design.

There was nothing depressing about watching that video. It's a standard suburban lament from someone who doesn't like the suburban lifestyle that other people prefer. Good for him there is choice and he found a place he likes.

It’s also very funny to me that they always mention Amsterdam but never Rotterdam.

Given the ties of the political consultant firm that works closely with the DC Smart Growth industry, surprised that Palm Beach, Kiev and Moscow aren't mentioned also.

This is literally the dumbest argument I've seen on DCUM, which is saying quite a lot. Yup, everyone who believes in building more density and smart growth is a Trumpist Russian bot, you totally nailed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is utterly depressing to watch “not just bikes”…-an urban planning YouTube channel made by a Canadian who moved to Amsterdam.

It’s highly detailed and there is no reason why dc cant be more like this…

https://youtu.be/F4kmDxcfR48

There needs to be a complete re-thinking in how the city is planned.

Utrecht, Amsterdam, delft, den Haag have amazing QoL and urban design.

There was nothing depressing about watching that video. It's a standard suburban lament from someone who doesn't like the suburban lifestyle that other people prefer. Good for him there is choice and he found a place he likes.

It’s also very funny to me that they always mention Amsterdam but never Rotterdam.

Given the ties of the political consultant firm that works closely with the DC Smart Growth industry, surprised that Palm Beach, Kiev and Moscow aren't mentioned also.

This is literally the dumbest argument I've seen on DCUM, which is saying quite a lot. Yup, everyone who believes in building more density and smart growth is a Trumpist Russian bot, you totally nailed it.

DP. Literally again? Do you ever get tired of being so literal?

I don’t see where PP said people who support more density and smart growth are Trumpist Russian bots, but when you’re aligned with the people who were responsible for one of the most inequitable tax plans in modern American history, you should start to question whether your policy suggestions will remediate inequity or exacerbate it. From what I’ve observed, the Trump people appear to be smarter than the urbanist people because the Trump people at least know who benefits when developers get tax breaks and other subsidies from governments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is utterly depressing to watch “not just bikes”…-an urban planning YouTube channel made by a Canadian who moved to Amsterdam.

It’s highly detailed and there is no reason why dc cant be more like this…

https://youtu.be/F4kmDxcfR48

There needs to be a complete re-thinking in how the city is planned.

Utrecht, Amsterdam, delft, den Haag have amazing QoL and urban design.

There was nothing depressing about watching that video. It's a standard suburban lament from someone who doesn't like the suburban lifestyle that other people prefer. Good for him there is choice and he found a place he likes.

It’s also very funny to me that they always mention Amsterdam but never Rotterdam.

Given the ties of the political consultant firm that works closely with the DC Smart Growth industry, surprised that Palm Beach, Kiev and Moscow aren't mentioned also.

This is literally the dumbest argument I've seen on DCUM, which is saying quite a lot. Yup, everyone who believes in building more density and smart growth is a Trumpist Russian bot, you totally nailed it.

DP. Literally again? Do you ever get tired of being so literal?

I don’t see where PP said people who support more density and smart growth are Trumpist Russian bots, but when you’re aligned with the people who were responsible for one of the most inequitable tax plans in modern American history, you should start to question whether your policy suggestions will remediate inequity or exacerbate it. From what I’ve observed, the Trump people appear to be smarter than the urbanist people because the Trump people at least know who benefits when developers get tax breaks and other subsidies from governments.

Sharing similar opinions with a guy whose company did business with the Trump administration is unequivocally not even on the same planet as being "aligned with the people who were responsible for one of the most inequitable tax plans in modern American history." Full stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is utterly depressing to watch “not just bikes”…-an urban planning YouTube channel made by a Canadian who moved to Amsterdam.

It’s highly detailed and there is no reason why dc cant be more like this…

https://youtu.be/F4kmDxcfR48

There needs to be a complete re-thinking in how the city is planned.

Utrecht, Amsterdam, delft, den Haag have amazing QoL and urban design.

There was nothing depressing about watching that video. It's a standard suburban lament from someone who doesn't like the suburban lifestyle that other people prefer. Good for him there is choice and he found a place he likes.

It’s also very funny to me that they always mention Amsterdam but never Rotterdam.

Given the ties of the political consultant firm that works closely with the DC Smart Growth industry, surprised that Palm Beach, Kiev and Moscow aren't mentioned also.

This is literally the dumbest argument I've seen on DCUM, which is saying quite a lot. Yup, everyone who believes in building more density and smart growth is a Trumpist Russian bot, you totally nailed it.

DP. Literally again? Do you ever get tired of being so literal?

I don’t see where PP said people who support more density and smart growth are Trumpist Russian bots, but when you’re aligned with the people who were responsible for one of the most inequitable tax plans in modern American history, you should start to question whether your policy suggestions will remediate inequity or exacerbate it. From what I’ve observed, the Trump people appear to be smarter than the urbanist people because the Trump people at least know who benefits when developers get tax breaks and other subsidies from governments.

There was one thing I liked in the Trump tax plan, which was that it capped the mortgage interest deduction and deduction for state/local taxes for wealthy people like me who don't need subsidies from the federal government to own expensive houses. I realize that wasn't the reason it was in there, but the net effect of that was to marginally make that portion of the tax code fairer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is utterly depressing to watch “not just bikes”…-an urban planning YouTube channel made by a Canadian who moved to Amsterdam.

It’s highly detailed and there is no reason why dc cant be more like this…

https://youtu.be/F4kmDxcfR48

There needs to be a complete re-thinking in how the city is planned.

Utrecht, Amsterdam, delft, den Haag have amazing QoL and urban design.

There was nothing depressing about watching that video. It's a standard suburban lament from someone who doesn't like the suburban lifestyle that other people prefer. Good for him there is choice and he found a place he likes.

It’s also very funny to me that they always mention Amsterdam but never Rotterdam.

Given the ties of the political consultant firm that works closely with the DC Smart Growth industry, surprised that Palm Beach, Kiev and Moscow aren't mentioned also.

This is literally the dumbest argument I've seen on DCUM, which is saying quite a lot. Yup, everyone who believes in building more density and smart growth is a Trumpist Russian bot, you totally nailed it.

DP. Literally again? Do you ever get tired of being so literal?

I don’t see where PP said people who support more density and smart growth are Trumpist Russian bots, but when you’re aligned with the people who were responsible for one of the most inequitable tax plans in modern American history, you should start to question whether your policy suggestions will remediate inequity or exacerbate it. From what I’ve observed, the Trump people appear to be smarter than the urbanist people because the Trump people at least know who benefits when developers get tax breaks and other subsidies from governments.

Sharing similar opinions with a guy whose company did business with the Trump administration is unequivocally not even on the same planet as being "aligned with the people who were responsible for one of the most inequitable tax plans in modern American history." Full stop.

Keep telling yourself that. Just don’t look up the definition of supply-side economics and compare to what urbanists want. And definitely don’t look up trickle-down policies’ effects on equity. If you avoid both of those things, you can continue to pretend you’re working on affordable housing instead of getting government handouts for rich people.

[Anonymous]

I was waiting for a piece like this, given the changing objectives of the more progressive urbanists. And here it is. Thanks GGWash for being so, so predictable these days.

"But, upzoning isn’t right for Langley Park"

https://ggwash.org/view/82739/why-upzoning-in-gentrifying-neighborhoods-like-langley-park-isnt-always-a-good-idea

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was waiting for a piece like this, given the changing objectives of the more progressive urbanists. And here it is. Thanks GGWash for being so, so predictable these days.

"But, upzoning isn’t right for Langley Park"

https://ggwash.org/view/82739/why-upzoning-in-gentrifying-neighborhoods-like-langley-park-isnt-always-a-good-idea

I applaud them for beginning to realize their approach doesn't work. A lot of us realized that before they tried it because we weren't drunk when we took economics 101.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was waiting for a piece like this, given the changing objectives of the more progressive urbanists. And here it is. Thanks GGWash for being so, so predictable these days.

"But, upzoning isn’t right for Langley Park"

https://ggwash.org/view/82739/why-upzoning-in-gentrifying-neighborhoods-like-langley-park-isnt-always-a-good-idea

The comments on that post, from the same 8 people who comment on every post there, are truly appalling and show GGWash's true colors. They're all basically :we need to upzpne these poor.people thr hell out of Langley Park." Just gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was waiting for a piece like this, given the changing objectives of the more progressive urbanists. And here it is. Thanks GGWash for being so, so predictable these days.

"But, upzoning isn’t right for Langley Park"

https://ggwash.org/view/82739/why-upzoning-in-gentrifying-neighborhoods-like-langley-park-isnt-always-a-good-idea

The comments on that post, from the same 8 people who comment on every post there, are truly appalling and show GGWash's true colors. They're all basically :we need to upzpne these poor.people thr hell out of Langley Park." Just gross.

It's got to be confusing and stressful when the echo chamber disagrees with them for the first time, because they were definitely right about everything, for sure! How is this possible!?!

[Anonymous]

GGWash leader Alex Baca seems to think an anti-semite running for DC mayor is a good thing? What a progressive stance.

https://twitter.com/alexbaca/status/1448476232585199622?t=ArtlO_nXnNnHlQ70TuSd6w&s=09

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:GGWash leader Alex Baca seems to think an anti-semite running for DC mayor is a good thing? What a progressive stance.

https://twitter.com/alexbaca/status/1448476232585199622?t=ArtlO_nXnNnHlQ70TuSd6w&s=09

Because they’re in the tank for pro-developer Bowser this is where that leads GGW. Pretty funny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was waiting for a piece like this, given the changing objectives of the more progressive urbanists. And here it is. Thanks GGWash for being so, so predictable these days.

"But, upzoning isn’t right for Langley Park"

https://ggwash.org/view/82739/why-upzoning-in-gentrifying-neighborhoods-like-langley-park-isnt-always-a-good-idea

The comments on that post, from the same 8 people who comment on every post there, are truly appalling and show GGWash's true colors. They're all basically :we need to upzpne these poor.people thr hell out of Langley Park." Just gross.

But the piece itself argues exactly the opposite: that upzoning would be a mistake because it risks displacing poor people. So the problem you have is with GG Wash commenters, not with the actual site, maybe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was waiting for a piece like this, given the changing objectives of the more progressive urbanists. And here it is. Thanks GGWash for being so, so predictable these days.

"But, upzoning isn’t right for Langley Park"

https://ggwash.org/view/82739/why-upzoning-in-gentrifying-neighborhoods-like-langley-park-isnt-always-a-good-idea

I applaud them for beginning to realize their approach doesn't work. A lot of us realized that before they tried it because we weren't drunk when we took economics 101.

No. It’s all self interest with these people. When they were Millennial renters it was build more apartments higher and taller and only studios and 1 bedrooms. Now that they are Millennial homeowners, they have a different POV which is also perfectly in tune with their self-interest.

They want industrial land in their own neighborhood where they bought a house replaced by million dollar townhouses which would certainly help their property value while advocating that industrial facilities should be pushed into low income suburbs - which is exactly environmental racism (https://ggwash.org/view/81283/what-exactly-are-we-trying-to-preserve-eckingtons-industrial-land-for-anyway). It’s one of their highest priority issues.

They are against changes to their community institutions that they enjoy and they enjoy while they label others that feel the same as NIMBYs (https://ggwash.org/view/63304/this-community-landmark-will-become-a-chain-store.-why).

So it’s no surprise that they are now circumspect about upzoning affordable suburban neighborhoods with SFHs that are well connnected to transit because that’s where they either just bought a house or are seriously thinking about it. Nothing like good old fashioned land speculation ahead of a government infrastructure project.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was waiting for a piece like this, given the changing objectives of the more progressive urbanists. And here it is. Thanks GGWash for being so, so predictable these days.

"But, upzoning isn’t right for Langley Park"

https://ggwash.org/view/82739/why-upzoning-in-gentrifying-neighborhoods-like-langley-park-isnt-always-a-good-idea

The comments on that post, from the same 8 people who comment on every post there, are truly appalling and show GGWash's true colors. They're all basically :we need to upzpne these poor.people thr hell out of Langley Park." Just gross.

But the piece itself argues exactly the opposite: that upzoning would be a mistake because it risks displacing poor people. So the problem you have is with GG Wash commenters, not with the actual site, maybe.

Are you serious? GGWash has been nothing but hostile to DC housing affordability advocates advocating against gentrification. They even sat on a mayoral task force 12 months ago advocating an end to rent control. That whole organization is a joke. No wonder why Alpert jumped ship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was waiting for a piece like this, given the changing objectives of the more progressive urbanists. And here it is. Thanks GGWash for being so, so predictable these days.

"But, upzoning isn’t right for Langley Park"

https://ggwash.org/view/82739/why-upzoning-in-gentrifying-neighborhoods-like-langley-park-isnt-always-a-good-idea

I applaud them for beginning to realize their approach doesn't work. A lot of us realized that before they tried it because we weren't drunk when we took economics 101.

No. It’s all self interest with these people. When they were Millennial renters it was build more apartments higher and taller and only studios and 1 bedrooms. Now that they are Millennial homeowners, they have a different POV which is also perfectly in tune with their self-interest.

They want industrial land in their own neighborhood where they bought a house replaced by million dollar townhouses which would certainly help their property value while advocating that industrial facilities should be pushed into low income suburbs - which is exactly environmental racism (https://ggwash.org/view/81283/what-exactly-are-we-trying-to-preserve-eckingtons-industrial-land-for-anyway). It’s one of their highest priority issues.

They are against changes to their community institutions that they enjoy and they enjoy while they label others that feel the same as NIMBYs (https://ggwash.org/view/63304/this-community-landmark-will-become-a-chain-store.-why).

So it’s no surprise that they are now circumspect about upzoning affordable suburban neighborhoods with SFHs that are well connnected to transit because that’s where they either just bought a house or are seriously thinking about it. Nothing like good old fashioned land speculation ahead of a government infrastructure project.

Speaking of self interest. This one takes the cake.
https://ggwash.org/view/82773/pit-bull-bans-are-a-housing-issue

It’s quite hilarious watching the urbanist movement devolve into Andy Rooney as these Millennials age.