Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

I know a number of renters who were forced to move because their buildings were sold out from underneath them and turned into condos.

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.

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.

We should add that government policies and banks redlining also stimulated movement to the suburbs. White folks buying in the suburbs got a lot more support from the banks than black people trying to buy in their neighborhood.

Anonymous wrote:

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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

I think in 2019, the gays are winning! Go Team Gay!

Anonymous wrote:

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 wrote:

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 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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was a really great article. Thanks for sharing!

Lee's Flower Shop is a great community amenity. On the flip side, we must also recognize the increasing land values that accompany gentrification have enriched many middle-class and working-class Washingtonian African-American families. These families are taking the money after sitting on prime real estate for decades. Some have gone into the real estate development business themselves.

I'd like to understand better their role in this, how they've used this new wealth, and their views. No one in the local media have talked with them and I'm guessing they would prefer to keep a low profile in their community.

There are some middle class AAs in DC--in some Ward 4 and 5 neighborhoods and in Hillcrest etc. EOTR--but the majority of AAs who've remained in DC for the past few decades are poor/working class and don't own property.

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

Anonymous wrote:

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."

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.

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