DC is 60% black!?

[dazzleman]

Most crime in inner-cities tends to be gang related, gang on gang type crime.  A white person doesn't have to worry about getting cut, or beat simply because they are white in a black neighborhood.  Now if they tend to be affiliated with a rival gang, are start using a bunch of racial slurs thats something a bit different, but for the most part in even the most high crime ridden black neighborhoods a white person does not have to worry about getting beat, or cut simply because they are white

As I said earlier, this goes both ways.  There are white neighborhoods where blacks clearly are not safe, either.  This is a fact of life in many urban areas, and I think it serves no purpose to deny it.

I doubt their are many white neighborhoods in which blacks would be blatantly attacked by the residents if they wandered in somehow. They most likely would be harassad by the police however.

There are certain neighborhoods in New York City that it's dangerous for a black person to enter unless they have somebody white with them.  The same is true of Boston.  That's a common thing in white working class neighborhoods of northern cities.

[dazzleman]

Yes, suburban elitists will never understand that most people who live in the cities like it there and don't want to move to the nightmarish pit of hell that is suburbia.

False.  Might be true for the soft hipsters and elite.  My parents grew up in the projects and they despised it.   I know a lot of people who still do and they hate it as well.  City living is only better if you can afford its benefits.

Dude, you have it exactly right.  I know several people who grew up in bad sections of the Bronx, and they absolutely despise it.  Once they get out, they are absolutely determined to NEVER go back.  Most don't even like to visit it, don't want to be reminded of it.  Nobody who really lived in some of those neighborhoods would ever make light of it, or say that anybody in their right mind would actually choose it.  They wouldn't.

[patrick1]

Most crime in inner-cities tends to be gang related, gang on gang type crime.  A white person doesn't have to worry about getting cut, or beat simply because they are white in a black neighborhood.  Now if they tend to be affiliated with a rival gang, are start using a bunch of racial slurs thats something a bit different, but for the most part in even the most high crime ridden black neighborhoods a white person does not have to worry about getting beat, or cut simply because they are white

As I said earlier, this goes both ways.  There are white neighborhoods where blacks clearly are not safe, either.  This is a fact of life in many urban areas, and I think it serves no purpose to deny it.

I doubt their are many white neighborhoods in which blacks would be blatantly attacked by the residents if they wandered in somehow. They most likely would be harassad by the police however.

There are certain neighborhoods in New York City that it's dangerous for a black person to enter unless they have somebody white with them.  The same is true of Boston.  That's a common thing in white working class neighborhoods of northern cities.

What do you think about that Ozone Park/Howard Beach attack the other day?  It seems hate crime laws are a one way street.  Whites are brutally beaten by blacks every day but it doesn't make the cover of the Daily News.  Hate crime laws are a load of bullocks but that is for another thread.

[minionofmidas]

Yes, suburban elitists will never understand that most people who live in the cities like it there and don't want to move to the nightmarish pit of hell that is suburbia.

False.  Might be true for the soft hipsters and elite.  My parents grew up in the projects and they despised it.   I know a lot of people who still do and they hate it as well.  City living is only better if you can afford its benefits.

Dude, you have it exactly right.  I know several people who grew up in bad sections of the Bronx, and they absolutely despise it.  Once they get out, they are absolutely determined to NEVER go back.  Most don't even like to visit it, don't want to be reminded of it.  Nobody who really lived in some of those neighborhoods would ever make light of it, or say that anybody in their right mind would actually choose it.  They wouldn't.

Notice that these are the people who have moved out, not the people still living there.
Just a thought.

[dazzleman]

What do you think about that Ozone Park/Howard Beach attack the other day?  It seems hate crime laws are a one way street.  Whites are brutally beaten by blacks every day but it doesn't make the cover of the Daily News.  Hate crime laws are a load of bullocks but that is for another thread.

Absolutely.  There's a total double standard.  Not to mention that the black who was beaten was in Howard Beach to steal cars.

The black "leaders" are completely unconcerned about crime committed against blacks by blacks, and probably welcome crimes committed by blacks against whites.  But they make a big thing of the 1% of crimes committed by whites against blacks.  This was thug-on-thug violence, and while I don't condone such a vicious attack, I know full well that if the perpetrator had been black and the victim white, it would be perfectly OK with these "civil rights leaders."

[dazzleman]

Yes, suburban elitists will never understand that most people who live in the cities like it there and don't want to move to the nightmarish pit of hell that is suburbia.

False.  Might be true for the soft hipsters and elite.  My parents grew up in the projects and they despised it.   I know a lot of people who still do and they hate it as well.  City living is only better if you can afford its benefits.

Dude, you have it exactly right.  I know several people who grew up in bad sections of the Bronx, and they absolutely despise it.  Once they get out, they are absolutely determined to NEVER go back.  Most don't even like to visit it, don't want to be reminded of it.  Nobody who really lived in some of those neighborhoods would ever make light of it, or say that anybody in their right mind would actually choose it.  They wouldn't.

Notice that these are the people who have moved out, not the people still living there.
Just a thought.

So you think the people still living there like it?  You have no idea what these neighborhoods are really like.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yes, suburban elitists will never understand that most people who live in the cities like it there and don't want to move to the nightmarish pit of hell that is suburbia.

False.  Might be true for the soft hipsters and elite.  My parents grew up in the projects and they despised it.   I know a lot of people who still do and they hate it as well.  City living is only better if you can afford its benefits.

then why have I ever met anyone in Minneapolis who wants to move out to the suburbs, and why does my aunt continue to live there when she makes enough to easily move out?

[Smash255]

What do you think about that Ozone Park/Howard Beach attack the other day?  It seems hate crime laws are a one way street.  Whites are brutally beaten by blacks every day but it doesn't make the cover of the Daily News.  Hate crime laws are a load of bullocks but that is for another thread.

Absolutely.  There's a total double standard.  Not to mention that the black who was beaten was in Howard Beach to steal cars.

The black "leaders" are completely unconcerned about crime committed against blacks by blacks, and probably welcome crimes committed by blacks against whites.  But they make a big thing of the 1% of crimes committed by whites against blacks.  This was thug-on-thug violence, and while I don't condone such a vicious attack, I know full well that if the perpetrator had been black and the victim white, it would be perfectly OK with these "civil rights leaders."

They found out after the attack, that they were there to steal cars.  They weren't at the time of the attack.  Also one of the reasons this is being called a hate  crime is all the racial crap that was thrown around by the attackers when they jumped the guy.  Not to mention one of the guy's involved has a history of attacking people of a different race.  On or shortly after 9/11 he was arrested for shooting paintballs at Shik worsphipers while yelling out racial epithats towards them

[Smash255]

By the way the New York Post is labeling this a bias attack.  The Post is a HARD-CORE Conservative Republican paper

[dazzleman]

They found out after the attack, that they were there to steal cars.  They weren't at the time of the attack.  Also one of the reasons this is being called a hate  crime is all the racial crap that was thrown around by the attackers when they jumped the guy.  Not to mention one of the guy's involved has a history of attacking people of a different race.  On or shortly after 9/11 he was arrested for shooting paintballs at Shik worsphipers while yelling out racial epithats towards them

I do agree it's a bias crime, though I don't think that really makes any difference.

Nobody ever calls it a bias crime when whites are victims of crime by blacks.  That just gets labeled as economic, so I guess it's OK.  And of course, it gets no attention.  Crimes against blacks by other blacks get no attention either.  This type of crime is probably about 1% of all the crimes, but gets all the attention, because it satisfies a wharped, politically correct view of the world that blacks in New York are cowering in fear from their ruthless white oppressors.  That is pretty far from the truth, to say the least.

[??????????]

They found out after the attack, that they were there to steal cars.  They weren't at the time of the attack.  Also one of the reasons this is being called a hate  crime is all the racial crap that was thrown around by the attackers when they jumped the guy.  Not to mention one of the guy's involved has a history of attacking people of a different race.  On or shortly after 9/11 he was arrested for shooting paintballs at Shik worsphipers while yelling out racial epithats towards them

I do agree it's a bias crime, though I don't think that really makes any difference.

Nobody ever calls it a bias crime when whites are victims of crime by blacks.  That just gets labeled as economic, so I guess it's OK.  And of course, it gets no attention.  Crimes against blacks by other blacks get no attention either.  This type of crime is probably about 1% of all the crimes, but gets all the attention, because it satisfies a wharped, politically correct view of the world that blacks in New York are cowering in fear from their ruthless white oppressors.  That is pretty far from the truth, to say the least.

You can't be "racist" against the oppressor race! Don't you know that already?

[dazzleman]

They found out after the attack, that they were there to steal cars.  They weren't at the time of the attack.  Also one of the reasons this is being called a hate  crime is all the racial crap that was thrown around by the attackers when they jumped the guy.  Not to mention one of the guy's involved has a history of attacking people of a different race.  On or shortly after 9/11 he was arrested for shooting paintballs at Shik worsphipers while yelling out racial epithats towards them

I do agree it's a bias crime, though I don't think that really makes any difference.

Nobody ever calls it a bias crime when whites are victims of crime by blacks.  That just gets labeled as economic, so I guess it's OK.  And of course, it gets no attention.  Crimes against blacks by other blacks get no attention either.  This type of crime is probably about 1% of all the crimes, but gets all the attention, because it satisfies a wharped, politically correct view of the world that blacks in New York are cowering in fear from their ruthless white oppressors.  That is pretty far from the truth, to say the least.

You can't be "racist" against the oppressor race! Don't you know that already?

HAHA!  You're so right, States.  What was I thinking?

The only problem with that is that in certain parts of New York City, blacks are the oppressor race.  That is certainly true if one examines the crime statistics.  But all that needs to be excused in the name of racial "harmony," while any crime by a white person against a black one, no matter how infrequent or how small a percentage of the total that these crimes are, must be magnified by at least 1000%.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Some photos of the Bronx...

Here

Some interesting stuff Here as well

To say that public housing has been done badly in the U.S is an understatement of epic proportions...

For comparison this is a photo of what is (IMO) the very worst piece of public housing ever built in the U.K, the Hulme Crescents in Manchester (since demolished).



That there seems to be literally thousands of pubic housing projects in the U.S worse (far, far worse) than that is pretty depressing...

[dazzleman]

Some photos of the Bronx...

Here

Some interesting stuff Here as well

To say that public housing has been done badly in the U.S is an understatement of epic proportions...

For comparison this is a photo of what is (IMO) the very worst piece of public housing ever built in the U.K, the Hulme Crescents in Manchester (since demolished).



That there seems to be literally thousands of pubic housing projects in the U.S worse (far, far worse) than that is pretty depressing...

I agree with you.  The Bronx is a profoundly depressing and disturbing place.  If I had to live there, I think I would slit my throat.

I was once talking to a guy from Atlanta, and I described the Bronx to him.  I described a bad but relatively small section of Atlanta that we had passed through, and said the Bronx is basically block after block after block of what we saw in that bad Atlanta neighborhood.  His answer was "Lord, deliver me."

I made some comments on public housing in the US in another thread, in response to a comment by NickShepDEM criticizing Ronald Reagan because he severely cut the HUD budget.  My point was that this was not a bad thing based upon the type of housing that HUD was actually creating at that time.

Public housing is one of the worst failures of the mid-century liberal philosophy.  There are other outgrowths of that same philosophy, such as busing, that failed just as badly.  They are all intertwined in one big poison ball, and we need to see how they all intersect and have put us on the road to hell.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

...according to the 2000 census.  The 2003 Bureau estimate is 64.5%.  Whites are losing over a point per year.  Its hard to believe, but Memphis was majority-white as recent as 1990.

Memphis is 65% black, and about 65-70% Democrat.

According to Wikipedia Memphis is 61% black

[minionofmidas]

Some photos of the Bronx...

Here

Some interesting stuff Here as well

I dunno, this one reminds me of home.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I dunno, this one reminds me of home.

Yeah, but that's more a case of urban decay that anything else; the *really* bad parts of the Bronx are The Projects

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Public housing is one of the worst failures of the mid-century liberal philosophy.  There are other outgrowths of that same philosophy, such as busing, that failed just as badly.  They are all intertwined in one big poison ball, and we need to see how they all intersect and have put us on the road to hell.

The idea of public housing isn't a bad one IMO; government (local or national) providing decent quality housing for people who can't afford it from private providers.
As an example this is an old photo of a (then) new council estate next to the housing it replaced:



And there's nothing to say that government built housing can't look nice either:



The problems start with bad and/or insane planners (especially when there's a new or newish fad around, like tower blocks) and shoddy construction due to a desire to get them built as fast as possible and at the lowest cost possible.
I'm not sure what drives people to design the sort of **** seen in the Projects in and around New York... sadists perhaps?

[??????????]

English homes always look so much better then ours.

[12th Doctor]

I thought it was more black.

I thought it was around 75-80%. I remember reading that somewhere.

I'd have guessed that as well.  You know we're guilty of stereotyping.  I'm guessing my impression comes from the fact that I'm aware that it's 85+% democrat in elections, and I extrapolate from that.  Bet that's why we were surprised at 60%.  But now that I think about it, I've been to DC many times, most recently in May of this year, and I can remember strolling through many lily-white neighborhoods (e.g., Georgetown).  

There are a few pockets like Georgetown, but when you go North into the city, it's "the projects."  Most people (tourists) dont' go much North than the Grey Hound Bus terminal which is not that far from the rail station.  Beyond that, it's Mayor Marion Berry area.

Pretty much any place North of RFK and east or a few blocks past the Capitol is a slum.

[minionofmidas]

Public housing is one of the worst failures of the mid-century liberal philosophy.  There are other outgrowths of that same philosophy, such as busing, that failed just as badly.  They are all intertwined in one big poison ball, and we need to see how they all intersect and have put us on the road to hell.

The idea of public housing isn't a bad one IMO; government (local or national) providing decent quality housing for people who can't afford it from private providers.
As an example this is an old photo of a (then) new council estate next to the housing it replaced:



And there's nothing to say that government built housing can't look nice either:



The problems start with bad and/or insane planners (especially when there's a new or newish fad around, like tower blocks) and shoddy construction due to a desire to get them built as fast as possible and at the lowest cost possible.
I'm not sure what drives people to design the sort of **** seen in the Projects in and around New York... sadists perhaps?

Racism.

Really. I think that had a role to play.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Racism.

Really. I think that had a role to play.

Probably true up to a point

[dazzleman]

Public housing is one of the worst failures of the mid-century liberal philosophy.  There are other outgrowths of that same philosophy, such as busing, that failed just as badly.  They are all intertwined in one big poison ball, and we need to see how they all intersect and have put us on the road to hell.

The idea of public housing isn't a bad one IMO; government (local or national) providing decent quality housing for people who can't afford it from private providers.
As an example this is an old photo of a (then) new council estate next to the housing it replaced:



And there's nothing to say that government built housing can't look nice either:



The problems start with bad and/or insane planners (especially when there's a new or newish fad around, like tower blocks) and shoddy construction due to a desire to get them built as fast as possible and at the lowest cost possible.
I'm not sure what drives people to design the sort of **** seen in the Projects in and around New York... sadists perhaps?

Racism.

Really. I think that had a role to play.

Maybe.  But public housing originally was built mainly for poor whites.  It was only later that the terms "black" and "public housing" became virtually synonomous, as whites left public housing and were replaced by blacks.

[minionofmidas]

True...(although I was thinking mostly of 70's architecture.) Not to mention that class prejudice can be quite as bad as racial one...really it's one and the same. The fundamental message of privileged group x-ism is "these are not really people like us. We need not care what happens to them."

But I'm not claiming that's the only reason, only that it plays a role in shaping attitudes towards public housing architecture.
God. Architects. Don't get me started on architects. Anyone who values the aesthetic pleasure of a model higher than the opinions of people who'll actually have to live in or work in or, in the cases of skyscrapers, live or work near them is a piece of human buttwipe. (stops ranting)

[dazzleman]

True...(although I was thinking mostly of 70's architecture.) Not to mention that class prejudice can be quite as bad as racial one...really it's one and the same. The fundamental message of privileged group x-ism is "these are not really people like us. We need not care what happens to them."

But I'm not claiming that's the only reason, only that it plays a role in shaping attitudes towards public housing architecture.
God. Architects. Don't get me started on architects. Anyone who values the aesthetic pleasure of a model higher than the opinions of people who'll actually have to live in or work in or, in the cases of skyscrapers, live or work near them is a piece of human buttwipe. (stops ranting)

Much as I hate public housing, I don't really agree that there was malice behind the design of it.  It was really more stupidity than malice in my opinion.

If the motive was malice, it would have been easier to simply do nothing about housing.  We spent billions of dollars on "slum clearance" and built new housing in its place that was supposed to solve the slum problem, but instead created worse slums than existed before. 

But the intentions were good, in my opinion.  Public housing was made dense so that it could accomodate as many needy people as possible.  These nightmarish hellhole projects are actually a good example of runaway idealism, untempered by any type of realistic look at problems.  The thought was that slums were a building/construction problem, and that new buildings that were well-maintained would solve the problem.  This thinking didn't take into account the fact that it was the tenants themselves who were destroying the buildings, shooting out windows, urinating in the elevators, etc.  These projects were also a product of failed urban planning notions that gained popularity starting in the 1930s that failed to take into account the way people really live.

So while I am hostile to public housing, the disaster we created was more a product of unrealistic idealism, and a certain amount of presumptuousness and ignorance, rather than malice toward the poor, in my opinion.  People who really hate the poor don't advocate spending billions of dollars to house them.