Erica wrote:
(PS Not to go all grammar police on you, but I used to make a similar error with a word I'd heard but not seen and wish someone had told me sooner - so, FYI, it's "straits" not "straights.")

ThirdGrove wrote:
Crazy_Chester: I find his quote and analysis really interesting. I want to take a crack at it. If the premise is that new people moved in but no older ones were displaced, then perhaps the problem arises when people in the same economic situation as the older stock of residents attempt to move into previously affordable communities. Potential example, a grandmother lives in Harlem since the 70s, her block has had an influx of new college aged residents. She doesn't feel compelled to move, but her grandson in the same economic straights cannot find the same quality housing as his grandmother near her location.

If that conclusion make sense, gentrification slowly pushes out communities by not allow those communities to replenish themselves.

AmyJCNJ wrote:
I beleive gentrification is a myth because there is a larger economic issue at hand here that is much bigger than all of this. Real estate price inflation is eroding each next generations standard of living and we are living in era of high inflation. It doesn't matter if you live in an urban or suburban area. I grew in CT in an area that in the 70's and 80's was middle class but now had changed so much that only the rich can now afford to buy homes there. I moved to Jersey City many years ago becasue this is what I could afford at that time. If I were moving here today I would not be able to afford to live where I do. Yes renters will be pushed out of so called gentrifying areas but people who buy property are pretty much anchored.

ThirdGrove wrote:
Crazy_Chester: I find his quote and analysis really interesting. I want to take a crack at it. If the premise is that new people moved in but no older ones were displaced, then perhaps the problem arises when people in the same economic situation as the older stock of residents attempt to move into previously affordable communities. Potential example, a grandmother lives in Harlem since the 70s, her block has had an influx of new college aged residents. She doesn't feel compelled to move, but her grandson in the same economic straights cannot find the same quality housing as his grandmother near her location.

If that conclusion make sense, gentrification slowly pushes out communities by not allow those communities to replenish themselves.

crushthedemoniac wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
Quote:

crushthedemoniac wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
The summary of the article was basically urban areas were so gutted by white flight that the neighborhoods hit rock bottom and couldn't support basic services, but once gentrification took hold, population density increased and brought in money that improved available services which was better for everyone. Moreover, people often aren't pushed out of gentrified neighborhoods.

Your talking about gentrified areas out side of NYC right?

"Back in 2003, Lance Freeman, an associate professor of urban planning at Columbia, wanted to find out just how much displacement had occurred in two predominantly black, rapidly gentrifying neighborhoods: Clinton Hill and Harlem (Freeman?s home). But ?much to my surprise,? he wrote in his book There Goes the ?Hood, he didn?t find any causal relationship between gentrification and displacement. More surprising, he found that 'poor residents and those without a college education were actually less likely to move if they resided in gentrifying neighborhoods.' "

Im sorry im in another world, I didnt realize this was from an article. I was just curious because there really arnt any neighborhoods in NYC that are completely undeveloped aside from maybe Hunts Point and maybe Red Hook? Therefore gentrification IS pushing people out. The only situation where gentrification didnt push people out is maybe Long Island City. Its not like Harlem , the LES, Washington Heights or Bushwick (just examples) were underdeveloped at any point in recent history, aside from some burned out shells left from the 70's and 80's.

ianmac47 wrote:
Quote:

crushthedemoniac wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
The summary of the article was basically urban areas were so gutted by white flight that the neighborhoods hit rock bottom and couldn't support basic services, but once gentrification took hold, population density increased and brought in money that improved available services which was better for everyone. Moreover, people often aren't pushed out of gentrified neighborhoods.

Your talking about gentrified areas out side of NYC right?

"Back in 2003, Lance Freeman, an associate professor of urban planning at Columbia, wanted to find out just how much displacement had occurred in two predominantly black, rapidly gentrifying neighborhoods: Clinton Hill and Harlem (Freeman?s home). But ?much to my surprise,? he wrote in his book There Goes the ?Hood, he didn?t find any causal relationship between gentrification and displacement. More surprising, he found that 'poor residents and those without a college education were actually less likely to move if they resided in gentrifying neighborhoods.' "

crushthedemoniac wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
The summary of the article was basically urban areas were so gutted by white flight that the neighborhoods hit rock bottom and couldn't support basic services, but once gentrification took hold, population density increased and brought in money that improved available services which was better for everyone. Moreover, people often aren't pushed out of gentrified neighborhoods.

Your talking about gentrified areas out side of NYC right?

crushthedemoniac wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
The summary of the article was basically urban areas were so gutted by white flight that the neighborhoods hit rock bottom and couldn't support basic services, but once gentrification took hold, population density increased and brought in money that improved available services which was better for everyone. Moreover, people often aren't pushed out of gentrified neighborhoods.

Your talking about gentrified areas out side of NYC right?

ianmac47 wrote:
The summary of the article was basically urban areas were so gutted by white flight that the neighborhoods hit rock bottom and couldn't support basic services, but once gentrification took hold, population density increased and brought in money that improved available services which was better for everyone. Moreover, people often aren't pushed out of gentrified neighborhoods.

Vigilante wrote:
Quote:

nightgownposse wrote:
are there enforced hours for the basketball courts? maybe they should lock it up after a certain hour?
I know that there are rules about having your dog leashed and I sure do see a lot of unleashed dogs in Hamilton park.

Park closes at 10pm. If you see games going on after 10pm call the Police non-emergency number 201-547-5477. I have done so twice this spring and both times they sent out cops to chase them away. If you haven't noticed, the HP basketball court is becoming a "destination" for people from other parts of the city to play late into the night. We'd better nip it in the bud or this summer is gonna be a nightmare.
And Please! There is no law against calling the cops night after night if a problem persists. Get'em out of there and get some sleep. 201-547-5477.

a group of people who make his neighborhood look like crap, plus loud noises early on saturday mornings......what's wrong with complaining about that?

sandstone wrote:
Calling the cops away from things happening at 10:00 p.m. to chase kids off the courts is somehow different from calling them to enforce leash laws?

newtothearea wrote:
Well for me, dogs off leashes when I am trying to go to sleep doesn't bother me at all. Leashes are required for safety reasons. If a dog is meandering 5 feet away from its owner, I don't see why a leash is needed.

elvis wrote:
Hippo Crates! Ha! I miss that little gem!

They should combine the dog run and the basketball courts but not require the owners to pick up the poop. That way, less basketball at night, less poop on the street.

nightgownposse wrote:
are there enforced hours for the basketball courts? maybe they should lock it up after a certain hour?
I know that there are rules about having your dog leashed and I sure do see a lot of unleashed dogs in Hamilton park.

trp3 wrote:
yeah, i mean.....i didn't think GenomeGeneral's post was bad at all.

a group of people who make his neighborhood look like crap, make it look dirty, plus loud noises early on saturday mornings......what's wrong with complaining about that? You people on this forum complain about things far less than that ALL THE TIME. hell, you have entire threads dedicated to them.

If he didn't include "Puerto Ricans", would it have made any difference?

I can't imagine what would have happened if "Puerto Ricans" had been replaced with "Blacks".

The sensitivity on this forum is incredible.

nightgownposse wrote:

Quote:

love it or leave it

Really? Love it or leave it? So you've never complained about anything on this forum? If not, there will be. You live in Jersey City, not an island paradise.

GnomeGeneral wrote:
"seriously trollgeneral! love it or leave it. you should move out to the country and get yourself some cows."

Yah dude I'll be movin to the country and eatin me some peaches as soon as the condo sells. Cept the Puerto Ricans are making my street look less desirable to potential buyers. So if my place don't sell, I'm gettin a pickup truck with a horn that plays Lynyrd Skynyrd and buyin a rifle. Goddamit - eff whole foods - we need us a wallmart!

love it or leave it