3 ms·

Cities change, often for the worse. Replacing the people that made a city’s culture notable because they can’t afford it is not good for anyone. Lower Manhatta

Cities change, often for the worse. Replacing the people that made a city’s culture notable because they can’t afford it is not good for anyone. Lower Manhattan is a shining example of this. That area is built on the memory of artists who can no longer afford to live there. It’s a weird sort of fossilization and museumification.

luckylion 5y ago
> Replacing the people that made a city’s culture notable because they can’t afford it is not good for anyone. Berlin's attraction in the last 70 years (from the Western perspective) has been that it's cheap, has kind of an frontier spirit, laws and rules are much less strict, and it's being well-funded as an enclave and a thorn in East-Germany's side (it's still losing money, and is a drag on the German economy; capitals in comparable Western countries are typically strong economic motors in their country [1]). For many young men, Germany's draft (or the alternative civil service) could only be circumvented by moving to Berlin. With the Reunification, Berlin was on track to become the capital once more. That meant: gigantic amounts of money, jobs and opportunities, and that in return made Berlin extremely attractive. Before that happened, Berlin was actually shrinking. With the government moved many large corporations in Germany, and brought even more money and jobs. They made Berlin attractive. It wasn't Berlin's night life and cultural scene, those are a consequence of the attractiveness and funding, not the other way round. So it's really not that those who built it are being forced out. It's that those who were attracted to it have to share with other people who want to also live there. Sucks for them, I agree, but there's nothing unfair about it. It will also happen to those moving there today, and they'll complain as well. [1] https://qz.com/753244/berlin-is-the-only-capital-city-in-europe-that-is-a-drag-on-its-countrys-economy/ https://qz.com/753244/berlin-is-the-only-capital-city-in-eur...

luckylion 5y ago

> Replacing the people that made a city’s culture notable because they can’t afford it is not good for anyone. Berlin's attraction in the last 70 years (from the Western perspective) has been that it's cheap, has kind of an frontier spirit, laws and rules are much less strict, and it's being well-funded as an enclave and a thorn in East-Germany's side (it's still losing money, and is a drag on the German economy; capitals in comparable Western countries are typically strong economic motors in their country [1]). For many young men, Germany's draft (or the alternative civil service) could only be circumvented by moving to Berlin. With the Reunification, Berlin was on track to become the capital once more. That meant: gigantic amounts of money, jobs and opportunities, and that in return made Berlin extremely attractive. Before that happened, Berlin was actually shrinking. With the government moved many large corporations in Germany, and brought even more money and jobs. They made Berlin attractive. It wasn't Berlin's night life and cultural scene, those are a consequence of the attractiveness and funding, not the other way round. So it's really not that those who built it are being forced out. It's that those who were attracted to it have to share with other people who want to also live there. Sucks for them, I agree, but there's nothing unfair about it. It will also happen to those moving there today, and they'll complain as well. [1] https://qz.com/753244/berlin-is-the-only-capital-city-in-europe-that-is-a-drag-on-its-countrys-economy/ https://qz.com/753244/berlin-is-the-only-capital-city-in-eur...