I knew you'd start here.

ETA: We know who the messenger is. That doesn't mean the central point behind the message is incorrect. It means that it will be clouded with madmax-isms. No surprises here, people.

OK.

ETA: I agree with your ETA.

I agree with you in this. but that is more a case of certain areas not having enough resources allocated to them. What max is saying is that these areas are bad just because they are inhabited by poor black people. It really boils down to cities choosing to focus their resources for things such as public safety and education into the more affluent neighborhoods.

Once again, you all are being hoodwinked and bamboozled by madmax.

If you agree with me then you agree with madmax's central point. Simple and plain.

What neighborhood? One example does not defeat my arguement. I can list dozens of neighborhoods that are ghettos. I can even list entire cities. Anyone here from NJ? The entire city of Camden is a ghetto.

People aren't up in arms about his central point, though, and you know it.

1. Camden, NJ
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

Help us out here.

Okay, you named 1 school with 14 full time police officers. You originally said you could name "a dozen with 15 full time police officers". You have 14 more to go.

So, all of the bad neighborhoods and schools in Philadelphia are due to subsidized housing? It doesn't have anything to do with the trends in the '50s when families moved out to the suburbs due to their jobs, more affordable automobiles, and the building of the highway system that made access in and out of large cities possible?

sidenote: "Parking Wars" is one of my favorite shows.

What was the neighborhood that was supposidly successful? You said years ago? How about today?

Small doses of success is not success when you average in the large scale failures.


I don't believe that people in the poor neighborhoods want the same things as people in affluent neighborhoods. The people in those hoods don't even pick up the garbage on their front steps. Half of their kids don't even go to school. Lack of money is not the cause, it is the effect.

You aren't anymore. LOL. But, you either disagreed with the central point before or didn't know what the central point was because you were busy with madmax.

No...I agreed with the central point from the get-go. I started playing around when madmax starting spouting BS.

So, you agree with me.

Don't bang your head on the wall with me, madmax. LOL. I deal with much better instigators regarding these topics everysingleday. ;)

Do you really want to play games? Take your pick. The twenty most dangerous schools in the state are all in Philly. They all have cops. http://www.philly.com/dailynews/loca...s_schools.html

Douglas High School
Edison / Fareira High School
Fels High School
Fitzsimmons High School
Frankford High School
Furness High School
Germantown High School
Harding Middle School
Kensington Culinary Arts
Kensington Intern Business,
Fitness and Entrepreneur
Lincoln High School
Northeast High School
Olney High School East
Olney High School West
Overbrook High School
Penn High School
Theodore Roosevelt Middle School
Roxborough High School
South Philadelphia High School
Stetson Middle School
Strawberry Mansion High School
University City High School
Vare Middle School
Vaux Middle School
West Philadelphia High School





Yes most of the bad neighborhoods are a result of subsidized housing.

People leaving does not destroy neighborhoods. It is the hoodrats that move into a neighborhood that destroy the neighborhood. Highways and cheap transportation did not cause people to leave it just made it easier for them to leave. It is the criminal element that causes most of the good people to leave.

Read this again. These two sentences basically cannot coexist together - that's what DrPhil is saying. If the second is true, then madmax's sentence is also true in spirit if not to the letter. Inflammatory =/= wrong.

I respect someone like George Jefferson. The guy worked hard and took care of his family. The hoodrats that want to move to Westchester are just looking for a free ride and they will destroy everything they touch.

IIRC, those children were bussed to that pool. I don't remember integration having anything to do with that story.

I was hoping you'd come back with this . . . remember, you noted how little will change as a result of integration? You can view it either as:

A - A micro-level example of integration at a single point (the pool level; bussing kids to the pool is de facto integration of the pool)
B - An example of things that haven't changed

Either way, it's an incidental but not unimportant vestige of integration - related to DrPhil's other point about knowing who is poor being a detriment to integration. Don't you think others feel like madmax, even if they don't say it loudly or the same way?

Not playing games. You said that you could name schools with 15 police officers. The list is a list of school in Pennsylvania, not specifically Philadelphia; and, the list does not say how many police officers are in each school. If you are going to use hyperbole, be able to back it up. Otherwise, stick to facts instead of exaggerations.

Historically, highways and cheap transportation were the reason people left the inner-cities in the post-War boom.

Also, in today's world, most schools have police officers in them. I teach at a very nice high school in what has been identified as one of the highest per capita income cities in America. Each of our schools has police officers.

My intent was to stop destroying neighborhoods.

I'm positive others feel the same way.

I've already said that I agree with the "central" point here. If you can tell me how "taking care of my kids" and George Jefferson fit into this discussion, then we might get on the same page. That was the point of my tangent.

Highways and cheaper transportation made "white flight" possible and easier. They are not the reason people left the inner cities in the post-War boom.

the idea for the suburbs is straight out of the communist manifesto


dirty commie leaches

I don't know how many of you have actually been to a real, live ghetto, but let me assure you -- the houses most of the time are in far better shape than even wealthy neighborhoods. HUD, which pays for Section 8, forces landlords to keep the places up to insanely good standards. Not only does everything have to completely work (we're talking even the smallest of details), but most of it also has to be new, and replaced with each tenant. This is way above the standards most universities and colleges have for student housing. Most of the time, if a ghetto was completely abandoned, with the people, cars, trash, and graffiti gone, it would be identical to a wealthier neighborhood elsewhere. There is no real difference structurally.

The problem comes with the people -- they make bad choices time and time again throughout life, and they end up stuck in dead end jobs and only able to afford subsidized housing. When several of these people get together to form a community, what do you expect?

And the apartment complex mentioned earlier that was mentioned as "good example of subsidized housing" was Morningside Gardens Apartment Complex. You can probably read about it on Wikipedia -- but so what? The evidence there is merely anecdotal.

Ya think? LOL. That would be removing the things that typically characterize lower income neighborhoods.

Poor neighborhoods include, but are not limited to, neighborhoods with Section 8. Even with Section 8, the standards are often not upheld, which continues the cycle of delapidated housing and criminogenic environments.

Right. So why would you want to take these people, who have histories of abuse and misuse of property, and put them into wealthier neighborhoods that people have spent their entire lives building from the ground up? I know that if I was paying hundreds or thousands of dollars a month for a mortgage, I'd be pretty pissed to know that someone else was getting the same use of a home from Uncle Sam via my tax dollars.

I say let the cycle continue. If we're going to be giving out welfare, then lets keep it down to the basics. A structure to live in would be considered a "basic"... a neighborhood to destroy would not.

Then your entire point is moot.

So you admit that the problem is linked to poverty? Like I told you before (madmax) there are poor Whites, Latinos, Blacks, etc. living in ghettos or poor neighborhoods so stop trying to attach race to this argument. I can name some ghettos in Philly where poor Whites live and these areas look no different from where poor Blacks live and have many of the same issues like crime. In case you didn't know, White folks can be thugs too. I have been in these poor White neighborhoods I'm refering to (when I was younger) and when I saw a group of young White boys together (late at night) looking like they were up to no good (and they usually were), I crossed the street. Research that.

And this is your problem Madmax. You might be able to have an intelligent conversation about this topic if you weren't so busy trying to be racist. It's clear that you've done SOME research on this topic but it's also clear that you haven't done enough and that you don't care to research everything, just those points that appear to back up your comments. It is absolutely false to conclude that there aren't hard working people in poor neighborhoods and to conclude that most of these people do not want what most of us want. You are really showing your ignorance here regarding this topic. It is so obvious that you can only do research and read articles on the subject, but know nothing about the reality. And these neighborhoods are also very diverse (which you obviously have no clue about). Where else can you find people who work 2-3 jobs to make ends meet, welfare recipients, home owners, school teachers, honor roll students, strict parents, not so strict parents, etc. etc. all living on one street? In the low income neighborhoods in cities and most of these people are just as afraid of the crime they hear about, as suburbanites.

Now you might have made some good points but you've also made way too many generalizations to be taken seriously. All of those areas you named in Philly also have middle class neighborhoods and calling all of North Philly the badlands is certainly not accurate. There is a particular neighborhood in North Philly that is infamously known as the badlands due to high crime. However, there are also neighborhoods in North Philly where the middle class live and thrive. So my problem with you is not researching and telling the whole story. Stop with the generalizations and racial comments and we can indeed have an intelligent conversation regarding this topic, and Philly which I see you love to talk about. Oh and I'm still waiting for the list of schools with 14-15 full time cops. I'm sure that the city cannot afford such a thing so please enlighten us. :rolleyes:

Race is a correlate of social class and poverty.

Blacks are disproportionately poor.

Black and Hispanic poverty is documented to be substantially different than, and arguably worse than, white poverty in terms of the lack of inter- and intragenerational mobility, among other things.

These sentiments and "truths" are the foundation for many initiatives and programs. "We" can't support the above statements when it suits "us" but disagree with them when someone like madmax says them in a fashion to get a rise out of people.

I understand the points you're making but I'm going by my personal experiences, which is why I edited my post. For someone to just generalize as if crime doesn't exist in other neighborhoods or that ghettos only include Black folks is just false. I can remember being 13-14 whenever staying at my cousin's house in South Philly (lots of Italians in South Philly) and not going into an Italian neighborhood after a certain time due to crime, including racial. I'm not saying this is always the case but it definitely goes down. I just don't respect people that make broad generalizations; I have no problem with madmax's point of view, if only he didn't talk out of his ass and stuck to the facts.

You don't need personal experiences to know that the majority of the poor and those on welfare are whites based on population size. It's the disproportionate poverty of Blacks that garners more attention because it is disproportionate and has had a measurable impact that differentiates it from the poverty of others.

It simply is not true that poverty has nothing to do with race (madmax isn't the one "attaching race," he's simply successfully getting to you all). Whether discussing white poverty, Black poverty, or Hispanic poverty, race remains a factor and poverty varies across race.

:rolleyes: hope making an ass of yourself on the INTERNET felt good.

Hell, the way housing prices still are in some of these cities, "white-collar" professionals need subsidies to be able to afford a home.

I agreed that ghettos look like shit because of the people in them, and so that makes my point that they should not be allowed to make other areas look like shit totally moot? You sound like a real champion debater....

Yeah, I would have to agree with this. It's just wasting big money funding ghettos. You fix it up, they fuck it up.

Edit: I had to go back and read again. I'm not just talking about blacks only. I'm speaking of fucked up people in general. I'm talking about the meth making pieces of trailer trash shit too. Those illiterate bastards are annoying as fuck. Seriously.

It's not just subsidized housing. I think it's anywhere, where the rent is dirt cheap. Subsidized or not is going to attract hood rats and trailer trash, as long as the rent is cheap. Poor people bitch a lot and complain about how fucked up shit is in the areas they live in, when they're the ones fucking it up. What separates rich people from poor people is rich people do what poor people won't do, because they're too fucking lazy. I don't give a shit what race it is. A poor douche is a poor douche and they're going to fuck up a neighborhood regardless of their race.

I know a chick who lived on a fucking school bus. It was her and her trailer trash piece of shit family who lived in it. I didn't believe her at first, but she showed me pictures. It was unbelievable. They took the seats out and put beds in there and walls. They actually had bedrooms dude, I kid you not. Race doesn't matter. A piece of shit is a piece of shit.

What might be great to you might be shitty to someone else.

Poverty is linked to the problem but poverty is not the cause, it is the effect.


Are you from N. Philly? Just look at all the professional athletes from that neighborhood. Most of them are millionares and they are still criminals. Eddie Griffin(NBA criminal), Aaron Mckie(arrested last year), Marvin Harrison(shot a guy last summer), Dionte Christman( arrested this summer). What is their excuse?


http://www.eastbayexpress.com/news/r...ent?oid=285317

True but I don't see the trailer trash getting freebies. In the city HUD builds 10 story apartments fo free and then ten years later they tear down the buildings and build new buildings.

You are probably talking about San Francisco but there are not too many cities like that. They should do away with their subsidies too. SF had a ton of .com money which boosted the housing prices. The market should set the price and in a weak market the prices will eventually come down. It was the school teachers and city workers that wanted the subsidies. If the prices don't come down then labor should negotiate better contracts to get a piece of the pie.

There was never a debate. You agreed with me.

But, I never agreed with you. It's unfortunate that you thought that I did. ;)