Found this setup of flowers in the middle of the street. For Jersey City having a bad reputation, they have some really nice displays all overaporochito t1_iu4d12w wrote
Reply to comment by Certain_Minimum_8862 in Found this setup of flowers in the middle of the street. For Jersey City having a bad reputation, they have some really nice displays all over by FishinDrones
Light rail covers big parts of JC. Not just downtown. Administration, both city and the state, should be pushed to cover more. In any case, complaining about JC building housing for residents is stupid.
Certain_Minimum_8862 t1_iu4drq1 wrote
It sure does but what if you live too far to walk to the light rail and have mobility issues.
What if you don’t work in the city - because I’m telling you know most of the people that live outside downtown aren’t all commuting to NYC.
The fact you think everyone just lives works and plays in JC shows how out of touch you are with the reality of the city. Take that light rail for a little ride and walk around where you get off. And I don’t mean Liberty State Park.
aporochito t1_iu4fpeb wrote
Hence the government should be pushed to provide more public transport, not more parking lots.
Certain_Minimum_8862 t1_iu4h66s wrote
Again if someone lives outside the city, and just needs a car to get around, more public transportation and less parking won’t help that situation.
America as a whole is way behind on public transport. That needs to be a nationwide effort to fix it just city to city.
And building high rises and pushing long term residents out of their homes to make way for the richer residents technically does help the numbers the city shows off. But building more homes that people can’t afford only makes those people move. So was the poverty issue ever really addressed or did the mayor just essentially hide it under a proverbial rug?
Really solutions are finding schools properly, creating outdoor spaces that everyone can use, providing support for families and those that need it. Support for job loss, addiction, rehabs, affordable extra curricular activities
effort268 t1_iu5eozw wrote
I use to think just the way you do, and I'm all for keeping people in their neighborhoods. But let's be honest, if demand increases and we purposely block every new residential, then new residents will just buy up the homes where people rent, thus forcing them to leave. I rather have large high towers where all the middle-upper class people live, then to have them come after my neighborhood.
FYI - i'm in Ironbound Newark, and I rather them build in downtown then here. PLenty of empty parking lots to build hundreds of housing units. JC has less space but you guys are building very tall which is good. Ya just need better public transportations so everyone can get around.
Certain_Minimum_8862 t1_iu68ne8 wrote
That’s not good and they are buying up residencies all over the city from people. Every area of the city is starting to feel the squeeze and no one benefits except the out of towners taking over. Have a great weekend.
moobycow t1_iu4zzmv wrote
People outside of DT have some of the lowest car ownership rates in the country.
Certain_Minimum_8862 t1_iu4dvft wrote
It’s not building housing for all residents. Just the ones who can afford 2k rent for a shoebox apartment. 🤷🏻♀️
aporochito t1_iu4fhr4 wrote
So building less will make the housing cheaper? What happens when they build less of "shoebox apartment"? Where do those go who can afford 2K+ rents, and are now living in those apartments? Aren't they going to occupy currently cheaper, slightly older places? Additionally, most of the new developments have affordable units in them, which in itself increases the number of available affordable units in the city. Without this building boom, JC would be less affordable.
Certain_Minimum_8862 t1_iu4g25o wrote
Ummmmm you seriously need to like venture outside or your little bubble. All of JC isn’t a bunch of young folks with city jobs. Most of the city are working class and people in poverty. Long time residents being forced out of their homeS, intimidated to sell, so the developers can knock it down and build something newer (aka a shit ton more expensive) in its place.
I spent the last 8 years paying kids graduation dues, buying lunches, school supplies, uniforms, dresses and clothes for dances, contributing to endless fundraisers, because parents can’t afford it. I’ve been to more funerals for kids who have died to gang violence then any one person should have to.
You think the solution to that is “most of the buildings have affordable units.” Go back to your bubble please.
aporochito t1_iu4goa4 wrote
You think the solution is not building? How will that reduce poverty? You did not answer the question I asked. How is building less makes JC more affordable?
effort268 t1_iu5fyrz wrote
I'm from Newark and I know exactly what you're talking about. But let's not play into our emotions. We need to increase supply because demand is high. If we refuse to build, prices will go up....that's literally what inflation is all about...
I do realize that a good amount of people are working class folks and I want to help them but reducing housing won't help not one. I do think we should focus on increasing wages, providing more social safety nets, etc. I'm also in favor of taxing big corporations to help fund this, I mean Goldman Sachs has received $165Million in tax breaks to bring their headquarters. None of us received tax breaks for our rent.
Please realize that the middle class is not your enemy, it's the people at the very top.
Certain_Minimum_8862 t1_iu5h9i4 wrote
Yeah but then build the right types of housing. The demand is up because rich assholes from across the River want cheap rent and a nice view.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments