Reply to Educate me - why is gentrification bad?

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Educate me - why is gentrification bad?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Gentrification is bad because people need a place to live. Period. [b]This prices them out of housing. [/b]Sure you can stay if you own your home as I do but taxes increase with the inflated home values and when I sell I still need somewhere to live. Yeah. I know. I can move way out or to another region which is fantastic except as an older person, I'd appreciate being near decent medical care and not have to drive far for everything.

And if you rent, you're pushed out with the quickness. Great for you with the high incomes but many hard working people don't have them. [/quote]

That is oversimplified nonsense.  It prices people out of housing [u]in a particular neighborhood[/u], or it prices them out of a particular house/apartment.  In 1994, I wanted to rent in Georgetown, but couldn't afford it, so I rented in Clarendon instead.  In 2004, we wanted to buy in Dupont Circle, but couldn't afford it, so we bought in Columbia Heights instead.   In 2015, we wanted to buy in Spring Valley, but couldn't afford it, so we bought in Bethesda instead.

Is it a bummer?  Sure.  [b]Is it a reason to put significant controls and protections into the real estate market?[/b]  Absolutely not.  [/quote]

The real estate market is already significantly controlled and protected. I can't put up tower blocks next to your SFH, for example. The question is who do the controls and protections work for. And it's not the poor or working class of this area.[/quote]

This statement is such a nothingburger. Who should they work for? Shouldn't they work for everyone? My SFH and poor and working class, with compromise? Isn't that called... society? Some kind of ... balance? Of course right now, that tower block "works for" developers, GGW, and the Mayor $$$$.

Such a nothingburger.[/quote]

NIMBYs refusing to allow anything other than SFH, while fighting tooth and nail against transit projects like the Purple Line and housing development like McMillian Park isn't "compromise," it's reinforcing the status quo that directly benefits them to the detriment of others. We live in a society, yes. But we also live in a city, not anyone's personal fiefdom that they get to preserve in amber.[/quote]

Isnt the whole idea of preserving green space or historical zoning a kind of preserving in amber? Yes, part of urban planning does involve preserving in amber. Btw, who doesnt like amber? Its captivating.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics