Trader Joe's grocery store doesn't help black people?

The blurb you bolded there (which was from the conservative blog, not the news story) paraphrases the actual quote "remain opposed to any development in N/NE Portland that does not primarily benefit the Black community" as "They also said that they would remain opposed to all development of the land that doesn’t solely benefit African Americans."

Hard to not think a site has an agenda when it does stuff like that.

 

The summary in the OP doesn't come close to describing what really happened. For all interested, here's a long article. The bolded portion of the OP is not an accurate summary of what happened.

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/02/portland_african_american_lead_2.html

 

Not really that crazy. Most people there I am assuming rent their places. The only people that would be aided by these raising property values are the landowners who will jack up the rents and price these families out of the neighborhood. How many jobs would the Trader Joes even create?

I get the reasoning. If you read the article posted, it gives a clearer indication of what happened. Not some biased account.

 

Smh. We don't enjoy healthy food so we don't want anyone else to either. Trader Joes is not more expensive than KFC. Said people who have labeled themselves oppressed are lazy and won't try something new. WE made a statement at Michelle Obama's bday having fun, and THEY weren't invited.

AA's -- lighten up! One nation under God!

 

What? How hard is it for AA's to shop at a healthy store with unique items? You can't just keep nice things out of the ghetto and not expose people to a healthy lifestyle. Less chance for drug dealing and alcohol addiction, more energy towards work.

 

A new plan to open a
pawn shop
washateria
nail salon
payday loan
liquor store, would be accepted.

solely benefit African Americans and not “increase the desirability of the neighborhood,” for “non-oppressed populations.”

 

If you actually bothered to read the articles posted, you'd know that the issue had nothing to do specifically with Trader Joe's. It wasn't even universally opposed by "black people" - there was a significant divide within the community. It's a debate about city promises and history between the city and the community and all sorts of other in-the-weeds type things. But the OP either had an agenda or just read a biased blog and came up with the title. And you fell right in line.

 

As Houston's population grows, the city's real estate's scarcity value increases. This is true in other cities as well. As a result of this increase in real estate value, developers and citizens will look for real estate that is near the city center. Low income areas are targeted for higher value economic projects. This threatens the sustainability of existing low income communities and through higher property taxes, and displaces those who cannot afford (or do not desire) to live next to new development. It's not an ideal situation, but efforts to prevent this type of economic progress merely stunt the growth of the overall economic and further mires these low income people in the poverty trap. The reality of the situation is that the economy must grow in order for low income people to have the chance to raise their standard of living. The status quo will not do so. Government assistance and policies to redistribute income will not do so. You must grow the pie. As an example, can you imagine if the indigenous Indians that sold Manhattan in 1626 still owned the land and lived there? To grow, you must move out those who cannot properly develop an economy.

 

Not sure why I'm being attacked for being a forward thinking fiscal conservative. This is about wealth distribution and society moving forward, and delaying the inevitable for petty symbolic victories. I'm also an advocate of better nutrition an dhealth practices for people in low economic neighborhoods instead of the usual fast food and corner shops. The ones offering resistance do so because they live in ignorance and need to be shown the light. It would be resisting a change in broadcast technology through satellite dishes, for the better, because I don't understand it or have a degree in it.

 

That's some real christian values right there folks!

 

*akin
It would be akin

 

Repugs are christians by name, they are morally depraved individuals that use faths like christianity to blend in and help them sleep at night.

 

You don't support a Trail of Tears scenario in situations where the tax base won't play along with the plans of property speculators?

 

Raising standards of living improves low income people's lives. That's the point of my post and that's a very selfless view. The misinterpretation of my post illustrates why the Democrats' way of thinking is flawed. They believe that handouts and perpetuating the endless cycle of poverty is beneficial for low income people. It's not. Decades of failed policy prove it. Growing the economy creates jobs and opportunities to rise up out of poverty. If this means that low income citizens are displaced temporarily, then so be it. It's progress, and for these people to be helped, this must occur. This is 100% consistent with helping people advance in life. The alternative is that everyone is poor together. When you don't step out of your comfort zone and try new things, your comfort zone will shrink. Think about that.

 

Whatever I posted just went way over your head didn't it?

 

I'm very comfortable with my way of thinking. You might want to pray over yours.

 

Alternatively the rich could just give away all their money to the poor. Its progress, and for those people to be helped, this must occur. Why are the poor always tasked with taking the burden and hardships?

 

This ignores one simple truth. Development of an area with this type of retail tends to increase property value. When that happens, the people who have lived there for decades can no longer afford to live there.

It has happened along Washington Avenue in Houston. They started building new restaurants and night spots. Thereafter property values skyrocketed. The families that lived there could not afford the property taxes anymore. They started selling their homes to developers. Now they are building a zillion town homes that are selling for $350,000 and up.

This has nothing to do with the people who live in the area. Them being there in 5 years is not part of the development equation.