Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

dopkick t1_itct195 wrote

Did you conveniently miss the part where I quoted

> Seeding abandoned city neighborhoods with enough immigrant households to build real communities is just an idea now. But it is under serious consideration.

Because that picture IS a picture of the mentioned "abandoned city neighborhoods." Don't take my word for it, go visit yourself. I promise you there will be abundant parking available.

Also did you miss the part of history where building isolated high density housing for marginalized populations led to crime and decay and those are now being torn down in favor of mixed income housing? That happened across the country, including here in Baltimore. Turns out "let's throw the poor people facing significant challenges and with limited resources into camps" wasn't actually a recipe for success.

I really don't see how you could possibly argue in favor of putting a bunch of Afghan refugees, as an example, in an area with no jobs, poor transportation, and plenty of crime. They already had their entire lives uprooted and face tons of barriers to success. Do we need to make it even harder? Why can't they be within walking distance of Fells Point, as an example, so they can have employment options available to them without the need for a car or figuring out how to navigate some shitty bus system? There's plenty of housing stock available for that.

6

sllewgh t1_itctjzn wrote

Ok, but do you understand that this is a news article and the vacants in that picture are an editor illustrating the content of the article, and not literally the exact units they're "considering"? You're just making up your own facts here about where, when, and how this would be done.

−1

dopkick t1_itcu5am wrote

So you're saying the author didn't intend to refer to abandoned city blocks despite referring to them in both words and the picture? And the author instead meant to refer to entirely different properties instead but provided no contextual clues to this, leaving it as an exercise to the reader to jump through hoops to figure out what is actually intended? Brings back memories of textbooks with "the proof is left as an exercise to the reader" kind of statements.

3

sllewgh t1_itcvasx wrote

>So you're saying the author didn't intend to refer to abandoned city blocks despite referring to them in both words and the picture?

Here is what you said:

>Because that picture IS a picture of the mentioned "abandoned city neighborhoods."

That's false. The article is not referring to the homes in the picture, it's referring to vacants in general. The article does not reference any specific locations this would happen whatsoever, so all your criticism is based on facts you invented yourself.

There are plenty of habitable, good vacants in this city to be filled.

1

dopkick t1_itcvq9v wrote

The article literally says

> Seeding abandoned city neighborhoods with enough immigrant households to build real communities is just an idea now. But it is under serious consideration.

I think you need to visit these abandoned city neighborhoods. The places that are generally habitable are not abandoned. Run down with some vacants, yes, but not abandoned.

2

sllewgh t1_itcwiwt wrote

I've visited them plenty. I've gone door to door talking to poor folks in just about every area of the city. I help run a community garden in Harlem Park. I've personally observed the purchase, renovation, and occupation of a vacant as described in this article. I've helped establish community land trusts and I helped fight to secure a permanent source of funding from the city for projects like this. How about you take a look at your own ignorance before you assume mine?

Plenty of people are living decent lives in these neighborhoods you're writing off. There are plenty of problems to be solved, sure, but you've got the audacity to accuse me of ignorance when you don't know a damn thing about the people actually living in places like this.

2