"Get a Shave, a Haircut, and Grow Up": Hipsters Criticized (2015, rental market)

[pgm123]

Originally Posted by KStreetQB

Because "gentrification/bike lanes/change/et al = hipsters". It has become a ubiquitous term on this forum.

But that's not who the author is referring to. He's including hipsters, but he's also talking about young professionals and other people who work in non-retail, non-industrial industries. (In DC, lawyers would be an obvious example).

Originally Posted by jokerstars

California has the highest tax rates in the entire country and the state is falling apart. DC already has very high tax rates on income, especially compared to VA. You realize that people do adjust their behaviour according to tax policy, right?

The last thing the middle class in DC needs is more taxes. Freaking statists, I swear. If you think the reason DC schools suck is because they don't get enough money (DC spends one of the highest $$ per capita on education), you need a headcheck.

Didn't California just balance its budget finally? It's still in poor fiscal shape because of all the debt, but it's no longer in the "falling apart" stage.

Anyway, there's no correlation between money spent and quality of education. However, there's a strong correlation between the quality of teachers and the quality of education. The argument for spending money more on schools would be with either (a) higher salaries or (b) better school conditions, you attract better teachers. People do respond to economic incentives.

[KStreetQB]

Originally Posted by pgm123

But that's not who the author is referring to. He's including hipsters, but he's also talking about young professionals and other people who work in non-retail, non-industrial industries. (In DC, lawyers would be an obvious example).

You don't have to tell me. I'm criticizing the overuse of the term by people on this forum.

[jokerstars]

(a) higher salaries or (b) better school conditions, you attract better teachers.

And you know, fire ****ty ones. If the unions would let us.

[Bluefly]

Originally Posted by coldbliss

Really? So since the year 2000, when the city was starting to be transformed by the creative class, have we seen a significant increase in spending for DC's poor families? Have we seen a notable increase in local funding for housing subsidies? Have we seen much in the way of new public housing developments in The District? Have we seen greater spending on public schools in less affluent Wards?

I think you're just out of the loop on this. A quick search shows:
Education spending
1995 - $700 million
2000 - $1 billion
2008 - $2.3 billion
2012 - $2.5 billion

Welfare spending
1995 - $800 million
2000 - $500 million
2008 - $1.6 billion
2012 - $1.9 billion

Even if you adjust for inflation, that's still a significant increase in spending.

Also:
1997: federal takeover of DC budget
2012: $417 million DC budget surplus

Public housing and welfare programs that were previously stripped of funding have been reinvigorated and Mayor Gray just unveiled a plan to save and create 10,000 units, all because of businesses and individuals wanting to work and live in the city.

DC's made major investments aggressively rebuilding schools in many of the poorest neighborhoods over the past 10 years and still going today. Check out how cool the legendary Ballou H.S. is gonna look when they're done (that's in Ward 8):

The New Ballou Schematic Design Video.mp4 - YouTube

Those embarrassing library kiosks and depressing cinderblock neighborhood libraries have been rebuilt in rapid succession using state-of-the-art modern architecture in many of the poorest neighborhoods that has won design awards. This is the new library in Anacostia:


Recreation centers have been built (check out Deanwood's $31 million - I think - state-of-the-art rec center with a beautiful pool, slides, synthetic turf field, and senior center):


Not to mention creating Capital Bikeshare that provides a very inexpensive mode of transportation for people on limited budgets.

Did it ever occur to you that the DC government is earmarking more budget items to attract and to maintain a lifestyle for the professional creative class? Who has the straw to stir the drink?

I don't think that's a secret. Mayor Gray has said he wants to attract 250,000 more residents and is going to great lengths to attract business and establish a tech industry here (look at his plans for St. Elizabeth's and Microsoft). More residents and businesses mean more tax revenue to fulfill your goal.

I agree with you that DC leadership will have failed if it becomes an Arlington-esque playground for professionals alone, but Gray seems to be doing a good job of fostering new investment and residents while making sure to use the bounty to invest in lower income and middle class communities, but there's only so much any government can do besides let developers fill demand for high-end new development so older stock can remain affordable.

Here's another way of looking at things. DC government acts in concert with real estate developers, business leaders, landlord property owners and the police department to push the working poor out of The District. The problem of the poor gets dumped onto a neighboring jurisdiction like Prince Georges County. Gang violence, unemployed adults, low-wage workers, high school dropouts, teenage pregnancies: all of that starts flowing eastward across the DC/PG border. I am sure the PG County government officials and local law enforcement really appreciate this forced migration instituted by the DC Mayor's office and the real estate cronies.
So now, we have a situation where the PG County budget is stretched even further because of the social problems associated with the poor. What was once DC's financial burden has now been dumped onto PG County. Thanks Mayor Williams, Mayor Fenty and Mayor Gray!

So what's your solution? Why do you deem it superior that DC's budget be stretched to the breaking point to deal with social problems alone? Just because that's the way it was when you first started paying attention? Poverty was never concentrated there before the 1970s.

The best any government can do is guide or direct a surging population or a declining one. They don't control the markets as much as you seem to think they do.

I, again, come back to the fact that economic innovation and generation is maximized in dense environments and the ills of poverty are exacerbated in those same dense environments, so finding a mix of incomes and lifestyle options is ideal. There's no easy solution but I like the idea of the region sharing the cost of social welfare programs, even if they are not in their jurisdiction, so we can avoid the very problems you describe,

Complete BS response on your part. I never advocated having poor people concentrated in urban cores and completely excluding wealthier citizens from participating in the city's economy. I firmly believe in residential integration regardless of socio-economic class status. The creative class and blue-collar class should help grow a city together. Together!

Perhaps I misinterpreted your endless rants against people with money moving into the city. Where you want them to go is not clear. Perhaps I've misinterpreted your multiple posts on this subject, including the one above.

Just answer this question: Should the middle-class and working class people have the same opportunity to live in communities with close access to public transportation, grocery stores and bicycle lanes as enjoyed by the creative class? It's a simple yes or no answer.

Yes. That's why it's critical to build more public transportation and more bicycle lanes and more healthy grocery stores so that we are not limited to a few choice locations with premium demand and relying on your solution of massive government takeover of the market.

Obviously everybody doesn't deserve to live in Logan Circle. You once said you believe everybody should be able to live wherever they wish, but with limited housing supply and high demand (and your clear objection to developers building supply for higher incomes) I don't know who gets to live in the most in demand locations. A lottery is only going to lead to corruption and tickets being sold by the most financially desperate to the most financially secure for significant money. In the end, the rich will still live where they wish, one way or another.

So living on a bus line with a short trip to a Metro station and vibrant commercial amenities fulfills your goal, even if it's not dead-center of the city.

The working poor are being forced farther away from jobs, farther away from public transportation BECAUSE OF GENTRIFICATION! The greater density, walkable urbanism is too expensive for people with modest incomes. Why is that?

Because we don't have enough public transportation and, frankly, most low-income communities don't want bike lanes (they claim they're for rich people). They elected Gray, in part, because of a preference for automobile use.

And again, do you have proof that cities with an emerging creative class allocate more funding to public and subsidized housing?

I gave you proof above with the numbers for DC.

And you are not the champion of reason, logic or nuanced thought either. You peddle your ideology just like any other schmuk in a taxi cab or drinking bar.

Ah, but I am. When it's simply the truth based on evidence, it's not ideology.

This is my only long post. I've proven my point and am not going around this circle again with you. Be well.

[jokerstars]

^Ownage. Cheers!

[11KAP]

The government is subsidizing the whole scenario.

[coldbliss]

To Bluefly:

I will have to confirm those public education spending numbers. Remember, DC gets a substantial amount of money from the US Department of Education and the city gets millions in private foundation donations. Also, the DC public school system has been cutting teacher positions, curbing salary increases for school professionals, cutting instructional aide positions and closing several public schools.

You gave total spending on welfare but I don't know the numbers are broken down. How much specifically for housing assistance? How much for maintenance of public housing facilities? How many new public housing developments are in the pipeline--if any at all? There were no sources to your budget totals. This will take some research.

Sadly, you were unable to address the growing inequality problem in DC. You place your faith in the "markets" on lifting up poor people and you note the limitations of government spending initiatives. But this is little comfort to people who don't have the education or skills to succeed in a hi-tech, complex problem-solving work environment. They don't have the money to afford an education and employers don't bother to train employees or offer tuition assistance for lower-level employees. In other words, the working poor are trapped. The markets cannot lift them above water.

And leaving it to the markets does not nothing for middle class families or individuals who are stretched to the limit because of obscene housing costs in The District. They have two choices: put more money on the rent or leave town. This is not a positive thing for a city. More money spent on rent means less for local retail shops and restaurants, which means lower sales taxes for the city. Leaving DC all together is a loss for the city unless they can find a replacement. So far, the District has succeeded in replacing people and has seen a huge net population growth from 2000-2010. Pretty lucky so far. Stay tuned for 2010-2020.

Bottom line: the market economy system has far less benefit for society than you realize.

It's great that you are lauding the efforts of Mayor Gray. But I seem to remember that your gentrification cheerleader cohorts were not thrilled that Fenty was voted out of office. You also realize that Gray won a majority of votes because many poorer and black residents encountered complete neglect from the Williams and Fenty administrations. The DC government was so busy with attracting hi-tech companies and selling the city to prospective professional, upper class homebuyers that they did not notice the worsening conditions of chronic unemployment, high student dropouts, more teens ending up in the court system, poor retail development, attacks on public school teachers and many other problems. The Gray vote was the non-yuppie, non-"creative class" crowd shouting, "Hey, we live in this city too. We matter too".

I will never forget reading comments on blogs and news sites from residents who live in the gentrified neighborhoods of Logan Circle, 14th Street, U Street, NoMa, Mount Pleasant and so on. They sneered and cried about the Gray victory over Fenty and they threatened to leave DC because of the election results. Get the moving truck and head for Montgomery County or across the river to Arlington. I will bet you the ranch today that those folks didn't move anywhere. They remained in DC and I wouldn't be surprised if their neighborhood associations are collaborating with the mayor's office on some projects. Maybe Gray wasn't such a gentrification killer after all. He likes white people. He really, really likes white people. And white people really, really like living in The District.

[jokerstars]

"Sorry not stabbing people raises property taxes."

[Bluefly]

Wrong, Coldbliss. Your goalposts are moving again. Let me fix that for you.

I never said the markets will solve all the problems of inequality. Don't reduce my words to oversimplified strawmen just to avoid admitting epic defeat. I claimed more investment in the city (what you despise as gentrification) provides more resources to support diverse incomes. It's basic math. I also claimed we should share social services across jurisdictions so no one budget is excessively burdened.

You claimed the increased tax revenue and investment within DC had no benefit to spending on public programs that help lower income residents. I proved you wrong. In fact, there have been so many investments made in low income communities because of increased revenue to the city that I had to choose a few to highlight for you. Here's another one - have you seen the new Woodson High School in Ward 7? It's far from anything gentrifying.



Do you really think all these schools, libraries, and rec centers would have been rebuilt in your ideal DC, the 1990s, when you were a young creative class gentrifier? Do you think they would have been able to spend extra money to make the buildings state-of-the-art places where students and other residents can feel proud and inspired to learn?

Mayor Gray is doing exactly what he was elected to do, which is slow down the rapid-fire installation of projects so they are deliberated with more public involvement. If you followed Gray before becoming Mayor, you would know he was never anti development (heck - he was on the economic development committee from the beginning and head of the budget as chairman since 2006). For example, Gray supported streetcars, just not moving them so quickly as to make questionable long-term design and financial decisions. I can't speak for anonymous commentors on random blogs you read, but that makes sense to me.

And, once again, if you ever venture into the city outside of going to work, you will find many "creative class" professional black people gentrifying these neighborhoods and supporting, in very large numbers, new gentrifying businesses. Here's Busboys and Poets:



Just look how many professional black people are gentrifying Anacostia. Where's your rage, coldbliss? These gentry are renovating homes! Opening galleries and restaurants!

Bottom line: your racism and simplified reduction of solutions to "libertarian or communism" prevents you from ever winning an argument against me.

Done.

[pgm123]

Originally Posted by KStreetQB

You don't have to tell me. I'm criticizing the overuse of the term by people on this forum.

I see. I didn't sense the sarcasm in your post.