NYC approves apartment building with separate entrance for poor people
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:38:56 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  NYC approves apartment building with separate entrance for poor people
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: NYC approves apartment building with separate entrance for poor people  (Read 5485 times)
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: July 22, 2014, 10:40:24 AM »

A bit off topic, but I have a sincere question. In other parts of the country, are gates only for rich people? Here, many neighborhoods are gated, especially apt complexes. Not all by any means, but plenty of these apartments are super ghetto places in scummy neighborhoods. From the tone of this thread, one would think only nice, or even middle class residences were gated.
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: July 22, 2014, 01:43:36 PM »

They own the building at the end of the day.

Someone owned the lunch counters at Woolworths as well.
Yes, they did. And the Civil Rights movement succeeded in tainting Woolworth's in the eyes of history as well.

What about those who were oppressed before we were able to see what the "eyes of history" saw?
What about the victims of crucifixion before crucifixion fell out of use?

It's not a very "nice" thing to do... but gated communities and projects are far more offensive to me.
While I personally hate gated communities for the monogamy of suburban life and the cookie-cutter houses that look the exact same, I don't see how they are offensive and segregated, especially as most working class families in my area live in them. A few “luxury” communities exist where the wealthy live, but most of my middle class friends live in gated communities. They built hundreds of them during the boom, and since most went into foreclosure during the crash, they have become even more affordable for working class families.

I also am finding that more and more normal streets (meaning communities that are not planned and have been around for years) are also gating off their streets. My own street, which is a middle class street not part of a larger neighborhood, has had a crime problem in the last few years. Every single house besides my own has been robbed, and several houses at the end of the street are abandoned and in foreclosure, and have frequently attracted vagrants who have been living in them-one of them died of a heroin overdose last year in a house and rotted for three days until the woman next store began to smell the odor. To keep the street clear of this problem, several neighbors have gotten together to build a gate on our street.

The gate will prevent three things-first of all, my street is the very eastern end of a busy road that cuts across town. We get a heavy amount of traffic coming east thinking that a bridge over the intercoastal is available like on the other main roads in town. There is no bridge, and they often speed down our street. The second goal is to keep out criminals. Burglars are simply less inclined to rob a house on our street if a gate is blocking their vehicle from entering or quickly escaping. Finally, even though it will not stop pedestrian traffic, they hope it will keep the vagrants out.

I personally don’t want the gate to be built, but why should my street not be allowed to have one? It’s not just “for everyone.” People who live on the other side of town shouldn’t be allowed to simply walk down the street and stare at the houses. They don’t have any business on our street any more than I have any on theirs. People can call this “segregation” all they want, and I personally don’t want the gate built as it sounds needlessly expensive even if all twenty families chip in together, but I can’t condemn anyone for wanting to protect their property. Is that so offensive?
Logged
Linus Van Pelt
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,144


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: July 22, 2014, 02:17:09 PM »
« Edited: July 22, 2014, 02:26:46 PM by Linus Van Pelt »

I think the only time I've seen a gated community is when I was on vacation in Savannah, GA. Now that I google it, though, there does appear to be at least one in the county I live in, on the outskirts of Middleton, with big million-dollar homes next to a golf course. But overall, this is pretty rare in the Midwest.
Logged
Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese
JOHN91043353
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,569
Sweden


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: July 22, 2014, 02:22:09 PM »

I feel so incredibly Swedish right now, considering that the only gated community I've ever witnessed was Visby's Old Town.



And the gates there haven't actually been closed for centuries. Tongue


Anyway I do have some sympathy with the people who wants separate doors in this case. I wouldn't either want to share an entrance with those sorts of snobby up-tight toffs that feel they need a freakin' doorman. <.<
Logged
badgate
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,466


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: July 22, 2014, 02:28:13 PM »

Gated apartments offer a false sense of security.
Logged
bedstuy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,526


Political Matrix
E: -1.16, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: July 22, 2014, 02:29:12 PM »

A bit off topic, but I have a sincere question. In other parts of the country, are gates only for rich people? Here, many neighborhoods are gated, especially apt complexes. Not all by any means, but plenty of these apartments are super ghetto places in scummy neighborhoods. From the tone of this thread, one would think only nice, or even middle class residences were gated.

I think that's mostly a issue of parking.  You can't park your bad in a bad neighborhood overnight unless you have a gate or some sort of security.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: July 22, 2014, 04:48:05 PM »

I personally don’t want the gate to be built, but why should my street not be allowed to have one? It’s not just “for everyone.” People who live on the other side of town shouldn’t be allowed to simply walk down the street and stare at the houses.

...why?
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: July 22, 2014, 05:10:23 PM »

They own the building at the end of the day.

Someone owned the lunch counters at Woolworths as well.
Yes, they did. And the Civil Rights movement succeeded in tainting Woolworth's in the eyes of history as well.

What about those who were oppressed before we were able to see what the "eyes of history" saw?
What about the victims of crucifixion before crucifixion fell out of use?

Do you think you would be okay with crucifixion had you lived before it had fallen out of use? The 'eyes of history' are trained precisely by people ceasing to be okay with these things while they are still going on.
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: July 22, 2014, 10:10:54 PM »

I personally don’t want the gate to be built, but why should my street not be allowed to have one? It’s not just “for everyone.” People who live on the other side of town shouldn’t be allowed to simply walk down the street and stare at the houses.

...why?
Why not? The collective homeowners of our street decided that, and that is that.

As for a more serious reason, I prefer privacy. I don't like old women walking their dogs down the street and letting them sh*t all over. I don't like lost tourists speeding down the road. I don't like skeezy people slowly driving by each house and looking at them. I dream of retiring to a Hunter Thompsonesque compound in the center of the state where I can grow oranges in peace when I get old for this reason.

They own the building at the end of the day.

Someone owned the lunch counters at Woolworths as well.
Yes, they did. And the Civil Rights movement succeeded in tainting Woolworth's in the eyes of history as well.

What about those who were oppressed before we were able to see what the "eyes of history" saw?
What about the victims of crucifixion before crucifixion fell out of use?

Do you think you would be okay with crucifixion had you lived before it had fallen out of use? The 'eyes of history' are trained precisely by people ceasing to be okay with these things while they are still going on.
That depends on how I feel about the death penalty, which I flip-flop on admittedly. Of course, I'm not one to dodge questions, so to answer you more directly, I simply don't care for the same reasons Jaichind and Clarko have listed. If this is as horrible as some people are making it out to be, than future generations will look back at it and shake their heads while my opinion remains in the shadowy corners of my own mind (and this internet forum).

Gated apartments offer a false sense of security.
This is true, and as I noted in my own post, gates offer little security other than a deterant.
Logged
MaxQue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,600
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: July 22, 2014, 10:22:08 PM »

The issue is than the street doesn't belong to its inhabitants, but to the city. It's a public space.

Look, as a mayor, I would have no issue with a street doing that, but I would force them to buy the street and they would stop receiving on street services (no garbage collection, for example, as dump trucks aren't allowed to enter private property).
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: July 22, 2014, 10:38:56 PM »

The issue is than the street doesn't belong to its inhabitants, but to the city. It's a public space.

Look, as a mayor, I would have no issue with a street doing that, but I would force them to buy the street and they would stop receiving on street services (no garbage collection, for example, as dump trucks aren't allowed to enter private property).
If this was proposed and the inhabitants could/would collectively pay to buy the street and pay for services, I'd be a supporter of this. But seeing as our city's garbage collectors are barely any more competent than the police, I don't think much will change.

Granted, a street is public land. They have a right to be there if they want, but that still doesn’t mean that some of them are up to any good or have any reason to be there. We certainly have a right to be suspicious of them.

I look forward to getting out of South Florida and finding a nice small town up in the northern part of the state where I won't have to worry about strangers being on my street, because in those towns strangers don't equate to danger.
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: July 22, 2014, 10:57:37 PM »

Wait, so you guys got rich people to subsidize affordable apartments in a brand new building in an expensive neighborhood, and you're still complaining? Of course, I haven't really seen any rational arguments against this, just vague outrage.
Logged
Paul Kemp
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,230
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: July 23, 2014, 08:37:37 AM »
« Edited: July 23, 2014, 08:40:29 AM by Paul Kemp »

If this is as horrible as some people are making it out to be, than future generations will look back at it and shake their heads while my opinion remains in the shadowy corners of my own mind (and this internet forum).

Right, but why wait, if it is something legitimately terrible i.e. the Woolworth's counters? To simply wait and let history decide what was terrible does nothing for people who are being affected by such issues at the moment. We're supposed to let them be martyrs so that history can look back in 20 years and say "oh yea, that's wrong" or we can do something to address the issue as it arises?

I don't necessarily think that this is the case with the issue at hand (although the mentality that some don't want to interact with "poor people" or whatever coded language you want to use is despicable yet hardly unsurprising and sets a bad precedent, for sure)  and seems to just be stirring a big pot of internet outrage but the argument that "they own the building, let them do as they please" is incredible dangerous as history itself (!) has shown. If we're supposed to learn from history, why wait again to see what "history decides" or whatever?

Important issues, like segregation, need real action - not a prolonged public relations campaign.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: July 23, 2014, 08:43:28 AM »
« Edited: July 23, 2014, 09:01:45 AM by Simfan34 »

Of course, this wouldn't be a problem if we weren't so overly intent on sticking "affordable" apartments in every new project and just rolled back rent control. You get what you pay for. I believe the building in question is on Riverside Drive. One entrance is on Riverside, the other is on the side street.

Paul Kemp's surprising comparison with the Woolworth's counter is quite off. It's as if I was to insist upon access to the gym because my neighbor has access. Or the fact that since people were in first class on a plane got to board first, I deserved to board at the same time. It's not at all the same. I'm surprised he made it. I mean really, I wasn't expecting such a thing from Kemp.
Logged
Paul Kemp
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,230
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: July 23, 2014, 08:56:37 AM »
« Edited: July 23, 2014, 08:59:38 AM by Paul Kemp »

Paul Kemp's surprising comparison with the Woolworth's counter is quite off. It's as if I was to insist upon access to the gym because my neighbor has access. It's not at all the same. I'm surprised he made it.

It wasn't a comparison to this particular instance (as my post immediately preceding yours states, if you read it...) but rather addressing idea that ownership overrides all.

Also, in terms of your comparison: wouldn't it be more like you and a low income person both have gym membership to the same gym but you get to go in through the  front door while they must go in around back? Admittedly, you both may have different levels of membership to that particular gym, with different fees paid.

EDIT: This was written before you edited your post. Yes, the first class plane ticket comparison is much better and more apt.

I'm surprised he made it. I mean really, I wasn't expecting such a thing from Kemp.

?
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: July 23, 2014, 09:06:52 AM »

I suppose I missed that point, obviously ownership doesn't preclude equal treatment, you're right about that. I thought it was a bit hyperbolic, but I get what you mean.

Also realise said "poor" people could be making close to $200,000 a year with a middle income housing program such as what is in this building. At another time these would be the very same people many of you would call parasites, needing to be guillotined, etc. It's the 5% as opposed to the 1%.
Logged
Paul Kemp
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,230
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: July 23, 2014, 09:12:21 AM »

This all being said, I think we can agree that David Von Spreckelsen himself needs a lesson in public relations language. That quote in the article... oof...
Logged
Badger
badger
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,237
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: July 23, 2014, 09:21:23 AM »

I feel so incredibly Swedish right now, considering that the only gated community I've ever witnessed was Visby's Old Town.



And the gates there haven't actually been closed for centuries. Tongue


Anyway I do have some sympathy with the people who wants separate doors in this case. I wouldn't either want to share an entrance with those sorts of snobby up-tight toffs that feel they need a freakin' doorman. <.<

My sister lived in Manhatten for several years, and a doorman isn't quite such a "toff-ish" luxury. Contrary to the image of a gaudily dressed guy holding a door and saying good morning, they accept deliveries and let workers into your apartment--which is HUGE in a delivery-service driven city like nyc. Maybe I'm seeing this through the eyes of my sister's upper west side economic mileau, and I'm not saying it's by any means a necessity, but a doorman is more a part of ny life than it would superficiallly seem.

<now waiting for actual new yorkers to scoff>
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: July 23, 2014, 11:23:24 AM »

<now waiting for actual new yorkers to scoff>

No, you're right.
Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: July 23, 2014, 06:32:48 PM »

Badger, lots of little convenienves we all take for granted are hard to come by in NYC, and especially in Manhattan. Consider forgoing a washer and dryer in your home, convenient parking, central air conditioning, fresh air and personal space. I get that New York exudes energy and that appeals to some people, but living there has got to be the biggest damn hassle ever. The doorman is just the tip of the iceberg.
Logged
bedstuy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,526


Political Matrix
E: -1.16, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: July 23, 2014, 08:59:35 PM »

Badger, lots of little convenienves we all take for granted are hard to come by in NYC, and especially in Manhattan. Consider forgoing a washer and dryer in your home, convenient parking, central air conditioning, fresh air and personal space. I get that New York exudes energy and that appeals to some people, but living there has got to be the biggest damn hassle ever. The doorman is just the tip of the iceberg.

The parking issue is neither here nor there because you don't need a car.  And, some people do have convenient parking.  I think public housing parking is $20 per year.  And, I don't have a washer or dryer, it's not a big issue.  It's actually nice in a way because I never do laundry. 

Essentially, you're lamenting that New Yorker don't get to participate in chores.  Getting your oil changed, mowing your lawn, doing tons of laundry, fixing things up around your house, sitting in traffic, adjusting the acid level in your backyard pool, shovelling snow...  Those are chores. I'm glad we get to largely avoid those chores.

The general point of space and air is valid.  However, I think many Americans have just become accustomed to a giant home.  You don't need 800 sq ft of space per person.  Living in more modest lifestyle in terms of space and material possessions isn't the end of the world.  Ultimately, material possessions are worthless and the only valuable thing is your life experience.   
Logged
patrick1
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,865


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: July 23, 2014, 09:44:32 PM »

Wait, so you guys got rich people to subsidize affordable apartments in a brand new building in an expensive neighborhood, and you're still complaining? Of course, I haven't really seen any rational arguments against this, just vague outrage.

The developers are the ones really collecting the subsidies in the form of tax breaks- they are not really doing it out of the goodness of their heart. It doesnt matter though because I still think mixed income developments are a good idea.

There have been many good posts in the thread. I dont know the specifics of this development but as Simfan pointed out it is likely we arent really dealing with "poor" people here.  Ive read through many of the housing schemes and most have a minimum income levels that would be comfortably middle class in other areas of the country.  I think it is good for communities and sustainability to give people an opportunity to live near where they work.

The optics of this are bad but do we really need this as an example of how people are treated differently according to their wealth in this country?
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: July 23, 2014, 10:42:42 PM »
« Edited: July 23, 2014, 10:45:48 PM by Simfan34 »

I wish I had air conditioning. Just saying.

However, I think many Americans have just become accustomed to a giant home.  You don't need 800 sq ft of space per person.

800 sq ft = giant home?!
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: July 23, 2014, 10:52:21 PM »

I wish I had air conditioning. Just saying.

However, I think many Americans have just become accustomed to a giant home.  You don't need 800 sq ft of space per person.

800 sq ft = giant home?!

800 per person. For a family of four that means 3200.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: July 23, 2014, 11:18:26 PM »
« Edited: July 23, 2014, 11:21:14 PM by Simfan34 »

You call that giant? That's an average house, maybe a little above average. Even in NYC, the average four bedroom apartment is 2,700 sq ft- not that much smaller.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.067 seconds with 12 queries.