This site is closed to new comments and posts.

Notice: This site uses cookies to function.
If you are not comfortable with cookies then please don't browse this website.

Why has gentrification skipped Washington? - Page 2 — Brooklynian

Why has gentrification skipped Washington?

2»

Comments

  • arrgh wrote: did i miss something? gentrification = displacement of people. if you are rooting for gentrification you are rooting for the destruction of communities, homelessness, and poverty.

    development can take place without gentrification. not to mention there is and has been for many years thriving businesses on washington. this isn't to say there isn't room for improvement, but you don't need to fuck over a community to develop an area (good way to do this - build as much affordable housing as condos and bullshit).

    it may pain some that they have to walk a few blocks to buy their "vintage" 75 dollar sweater that was bought by the pound in the mid west.
    so what you are saying is people are just waiting for the weather to be right and then they will come out and put a coat of paint on everything? People from the hood will build some apt's and bars they are just looking for a hammer and a saw.? Building something new and clean is not fucking anybody. Putting up shops that employee people is not screwing anybody. If you read these posts you will find people like to go out and have drink with friends and actually drink from a glass that somebody else washes rather than a paper bag. This area is improving because new people have higher expectations, every apt/apt building in this area was new at one time . Every empty lot used removes garbage and makes a place for a family to start. Spray paint and litter says I live in the ghetto and so do you. Clean (not always new) says I take pride in my self and surroundings, Empty lots and run down houses are a sign,their repair is also. 75 dollar used sweaters will stay as long as somebody is buying, don't think it will be a big part of the community makeup
  • arrgh wrote: did i miss something? gentrification = displacement of people. if you are rooting for gentrification you are rooting for the destruction of communities, homelessness, and poverty.

    development can take place without gentrification. not to mention there is and has been for many years thriving businesses on washington. this isn't to say there isn't room for improvement, but you don't need to fuck over a community to develop an area (good way to do this - build as much affordable housing as condos and bullshit).

    it may pain some that they have to walk a few blocks to buy their "vintage" 75 dollar sweater that was bought by the pound in the mid west.
    In general, I am not for the destruction of communities, but I am for the destruction of homelessness and poverty. So I guess I am for gentrification.

    Is a $75 brand new sweater better than a $75 vintage sweater? Would you be happier if the store sold only brand new sweaters? I don't think so.

    Anyone who invests in a community (ie - buys a home or opens a store) is a fool if they do not want the neighborhood to improve.

    And it is only your opinion that gentrification f***s over a community.
  • gentrification doesn't destroy homelessness and poverty - it moves it. thats an important distinction. please tell me how you think that gentrification eliminates poverty and homelessness (equally senseless: giuliani tried to resolve these issues by removing water fountains and public bathrooms).

    it is not my opinion, rather undisputed fact that gentrification displaces people and therefore fucks over community. look back in history - when people are displaced they get scattered. folks living in poverty no longer have the networks that are so important for sustainability (a net of kinship and friendship ties that helps you in times of need). this isn't just hard montaryily but also is a blow to ones mental health. displacement of people hurts them, this is simply common sense. especially among folks that are very poor and rely on community and family to survive.

    a really good book that explains some of the effects of displacement: http://www.amazon.com/Plague-Your-Houses-National-Haymarket/dp/1859842534/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258769198&sr=8-1

    i highly recommend it. lots of interesting information about the evolution of poor neighborhoods in nyc.
  • arrgh,

    Read your own first sentence. Or better yet, rewrite it. You said gentrification destroys homelessness and poverty.

    Communities change, so I disagee that the community gets f****d. I agree that people can be hurt in many ways by these changes, but it is not an undisputed fact that the net change is negative.
  • New York City as a whole has arguably gentrified since 2000.

    Where did all those poor people go?

    Surely, many of them are now employed in the expanded private sector and/or better supported by the tax revenue that has come from the expanded private sector.

    ...or is the argument that they all move to out of the city to the Badlands of Philly, Chicago's Southside, or some trailer park?

    pardon me as I speed the conversation up a little.
  • I'm poor and I'm still here. I survived the crack wars of the 80s and the "wild wild west" phase. Only rent stabilization makes it possible for me to live here now on a lower middle class income. I used to be a single mother on welfare. My son's grown up, married, and just bought a house on Long Island, but I'm not going anywhere, sorry, lol.
  • rockhound wrote: I'm poor and I'm still here. I survived the crack wars of the 80s and the "wild wild west" phase. Only rent stabilization makes it possible for me to live here now on a lower middle class income. I used to be a single mother on welfare. My son's grown up, married, and just bought a house on Long Island, but I'm not going anywhere, sorry, lol.
    Well done.

    What do you think of the changes in the neighborhood?
  • I appreciate the fact that I no longer see kids laid out in the street after drug shootouts, and am no longer plagued with death threats from the crack dealers that used to infest my building. Oh yeah, and I don't miss having to worry about my son succumbing to the street culture. Many of his friends did.

    I don't have a cell phone and I don't carry an ipod, so for me the hood is safer than ever. I like being able to take a walk without having to dodge bullets. But you still have idiots like that jackass kid who threw a bottle of grape soda at me near the BBG last summer (it was plastic and the moron missed). Maybe he mistook me for a "newcomer" but it's still Brooklyn and you still get to curse people out in very colourful language if they attack you unprovoked. :D

    /yes I am white
  • whynot_31 wrote:
    Surely, many of them are now employed in the expanded private sector and/or better supported by the tax revenue that has come from the expanded private sector.
    http://www.brooklynian.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=54459
  • modsquad wrote: [quote=whynot_31]
    Surely, many of them are now employed in the expanded private sector and/or better supported by the tax revenue that has come from the expanded private sector.
    http://www.brooklynian.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=54459

    ah, the eternal question: Is a job that sucks better than no job? I don't claim to have the answer.

    ...but suspect that a rising tide lifts just about all boats.
  • too many car repair places to ruin washington ave. other wise it could be a good strip.
Sign In or Register to comment.