3 ms·

Although trolling the second comment in the article I think said a lot "TL;DR: White folks stay winning." This is not a sustainable model and I really don't g

Although trolling the second comment in the article I think said a lot "TL;DR: White folks stay winning." This is not a sustainable model and I really don't get why people think because a place once had people it always should have people. Some people fear change I guess, things should stay the same as it has always been within their life span, this realy isn't aimed at the poor who can't afford to move.

remarkEon 12y ago
I think this comment is ill-conceived. There is no reason this model is exclusive to whites. Northeast Minneapolis in particular is considerably more racially integrated than other satellite urban areas. Here's a great visualization of this fact [1]. If you take a look, you'll notice that there are areas of Minneapolis that are considerably less racially integrated than others. In those cases, again, I do not see a reason why this model is exclusive to whites. [1] http://demographics.coopercenter.org/DotMap/index.html http://demographics.coopercenter.org/DotMap/index.html
- aaron695 12y ago
  It's more around first world problems. This article is a rich person problem. Only they are so arrogant they think the suburb should fit them. Poor people just struggle. The white bit is purely about dumb rich white people thinking the world is about them because their hundreds of thousands dollar morgage weighs them down. The two billion on 2 dollars per day are mostly not white
  - ianstallings 12y ago
    So the moral of the story is stop trying to improve your neighborhood because there are more important issues in someone else's life? I've actually been poor in my life. Like on welfare government cheese Appalachian coal-mining-town-went-busto poor. And for some reason, these people improving their own neighborhood doesn't make me feel bad at all.
laumars 12y ago
Regenerating existing areas makes a considerable more sense than abandoning and moving to a new plot, where you'll be faced with all of the same issues minus the existing infrastructure to utilize.

remarkEon 12y ago

I think this comment is ill-conceived. There is no reason this model is exclusive to whites. Northeast Minneapolis in particular is considerably more racially integrated than other satellite urban areas. Here's a great visualization of this fact [1]. If you take a look, you'll notice that there are areas of Minneapolis that are considerably less racially integrated than others. In those cases, again, I do not see a reason why this model is exclusive to whites. [1] http://demographics.coopercenter.org/DotMap/index.html http://demographics.coopercenter.org/DotMap/index.html

aaron695 12y ago
It's more around first world problems. This article is a rich person problem. Only they are so arrogant they think the suburb should fit them. Poor people just struggle. The white bit is purely about dumb rich white people thinking the world is about them because their hundreds of thousands dollar morgage weighs them down. The two billion on 2 dollars per day are mostly not white
- ianstallings 12y ago
  So the moral of the story is stop trying to improve your neighborhood because there are more important issues in someone else's life? I've actually been poor in my life. Like on welfare government cheese Appalachian coal-mining-town-went-busto poor. And for some reason, these people improving their own neighborhood doesn't make me feel bad at all.

laumars 12y ago

Regenerating existing areas makes a considerable more sense than abandoning and moving to a new plot, where you'll be faced with all of the same issues minus the existing infrastructure to utilize.