It appears that the city has finally got around to figuring out ways to increase the condo, apartment and shopping density, according to this report in the PI this week. This could be just the latest effort in a long line of many such endeavors. I don't know; I have only lived in this area for 5 years. Check this statement out:
The proposals alone raise several questions. How much of the effort, for instance, should go toward housing the poorest of the poor? And how much should be devoted to helping the bus drivers, teachers and other average workers Nickels would like to see living in the heart of the city?
I have my own questions:
Where are the 'bus drivers, teachers and other average workers' living now and why is it preferably to have them in the 'core' of the city versus wherever they live now voluntarily? Are these people more special than others? Is this just voting block pandering?
Why does the city housing authority have to have its hand in every developer's cookie jar? It's extortion in the name of social engineeing for the benefit of social science graduates. And that's the real scam, no? [Private wealth - taxes = fat public pensions].
Where are the 'poorest of the poor' living now? Why are they vital to the rejuvenation of the city? Shouldn't we solve the Tent city and other homeles problems first? What jobs will they have? How will they afford the high food, health, clothing and entertainment expenses while living in the 'core' of the city? Does the city have another fund for such needs? How will Seattle's poor-performing schools break the cycle of poverty or is this a scam to raise and perpetuate the number of needy family cases in the city so that social science graduates can justify more wealth-sapping feckless programs?
So many more questions to ask.....
Posted by Kevin Leo at September 23, 2004 12:41 AM | Email ThisYes, I know whereof I'm speaking. While waiting for Social Security to decide that secondary progressive MS wasn't just going to go away magically, I lived downtown, homeless. I stayed in shelters and day centers, and watched the other inhabitants. Trust me, there isn't even one person in a thousand that you'd want living in your neighborhood.
The good news is that few of them were ambitious enough to even make any money. They preferred to be fed, clothted and sheltered gratis. This gave them more time to watch TV.
How do these poor people get food? The day center serves lunch, and the night shelter serves dinner. Every morning, both places have tons of day-old pastries, from local coffeehouses. Twice a week, there's a food bank on Cherry, one once a week at Pike Place. The Georgetown food bank is usually willing to give food to those who claim to live in the jungle off I-5, but that one requires a cash bus ride, so it's seldom raided.
Many years ago, I learned a hard lesson. There was a tale about a herd of deer, and a bad winter that led them to starvation. A kind person bought food for the poor deer, and instead of dying or leaving the area, the herd thrived. Every winter, there were more and more deer to feed, and the cost of this humanitarian aid eventually outstripped the kind soul's resources. The food stopped, and instead of a dozen deer dying, now a huge number died.
Was it really humane to feed the starving deer? Did you ever wonder why Seattle is a magnet for homeless people from all over the USA?
Posted by: Jeannette on September 23, 2004 10:35 AMA city needs workers doing things like teaching your children, driving buses, bagging your groceries, or delivering mail.
As housing prices continue to skyrocket, these workers and their families are being forced to move further and further outside of the city. This decreases the time the workers have with their families and increases their commuter expenses -- particularly if they cannot afford a car -- and makes them more likely to choose a job closer to home, and outside the city.
Posted by: Michael on September 23, 2004 11:25 AMThis Higher density, more affordable blather has been going on for as long as I have been here but it simply isn't going to happen. When my 900 square foot house in north Seattle is appraised at more than $200,000 the situation has become hopeless for those who didn't buy in the last down market. If the government attempts to control prices, all that will happen is the supply will go away.
This is all basic economics which is why the Powers-That-Be hate it so much. They always remind me of the legislators in Florida many years ago who passed a corporate income tax and included a provision in the law that said corporations were not allowed to pass the cost along to their customers. King Canute, where are you when we need you?
Posted by: Carol on September 23, 2004 01:03 PM