scgubers
-
Posts
282 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Project Database
User Guide
Store
Events
Posts posted by scgubers
-
-
53 minutes ago, mallguy said:
scgubers, you are clearly part of the "basket of deplorables" with your racist posts.
You decided to make all sorts of statements about race, equating people of color with Section 8 housing and poverty.
Since you cannot engage in a productive discussion, I will not take part in this further. Shame on you.
You haven't answered a single one of my points. Or indicated where I made a statement of if you are x, you live in x place. There has been no equating on my end.
To the larger points made about the site not being feasible for affordable housing - I'd beg to differ. First, even with Scott Towers and Woodside the affordable housing stock will be incredibly low.
Second, the logic that it will be too expensive, so it won't be done is a dangerous mindset. If we always let profit drive development decisions there will never be enough affordable housing. If both the developer and county/city are willing to make concessions then it can be done with out destroying bottom lines. It's much more of a question of, "Are the stakeholders willing to make a little less money to accommodate increasingly displaced populations?"
-
13 minutes ago, mallguy said:
scgubers, my post had NOTHING to do with race; I am from an ethnic/immigrant background. You need to take back your racist statements that poverty = color.
Then we can engage in a civil discussion.
Sure. I'll take it back, because that's not what I said. Never did I make an equivocation between race and poverty. This is what I've said.
- "Low-income overwhelmingly minority (the two are statistically tied)"
- "Rents are pushing low-income mostly minority families out of the downtown area."
- "You're implying that public land should only be for mid-upper class largely white professionals, and that's elitist and ludicrous if not racist."
Nowhere do I say all low-income people are minorities. What I did do is point out the problematic implication of your statement "Please no Section 8 housing..."
Also, for the point of this discussion, I could care less about your race - you could be a smurf for all I care.
And to your final point mixed-use is not mixed-income. They're completely different.
-
25 minutes ago, mallguy said:
Your post is racist.
Your post implies that (1) I'm not ethnic and (2) Section 8 housing is for minorities. Your post also states that (3) higher-end uses are for whites. Point (1) is false and points (2) and (3) are directly racist. I never brought up the issue of race; you did, by associating low-income with color; you are racist.
Your logic is also faulty. Any use of the property will exclude certain people. Section 8 housing would exclude upper-income people. Retail will exclude certain people. Residential will exclude certain people. So no matter how the property is used, someone will be left out.
As a taxpayer, I have the right to weigh in on how taxpayers' property (County Square) is used. It should be sold at the highest price.
So stop your racism and faulty logic, please. This is a public forum, visible for the world to see, and now we have someone from South Carolina (you) saying that government housing is for people of color, and higher-income things are for whites. Your statements are completely offensive.
Alright, let's see what I can do here without going too far off topic.
Fact: Downtown rental prices are increasing.
Fact: Increasing rents are pushing out low-income overwhelmingly minority (the two are statistically tied) individuals and families.
Fact: Section 8 housing serves as a buffer to market forces.
Fact: Section 8 housing (especially in the South) serves low income minority families (see Fact 2).
Conclusion: By stating "Please no section 8 Housing" you are saying you do not want a development that serves marginalized, vulnerable families in spite of their displacement. The implication of that statement is what I said initially - "that public land should only be for mid-upper class largely white professionals, and that's elitist and ludicrous if not racist."
Also, you're statement "Any use of the property will exclude certain people" is flat out wrong. Mixed-income development is very much a thing.
Something I should have asked earlier, and my apologies for not, but why do you not want Section 8 housing there?
-
1 hour ago, mallguy said:
As long as it's aesthetically attractive and higher-end, I'm happy with whatever use and style comes up, although it would be great to use this site for new retail construction for national retailers as part of its uses. Please no Section 8 housing, like some of the Democrats on City Council wanted.
Because creating spaces for all people is a terrible thing. Rents are pushing low-income mostly minority families out of the downtown area. Who are you to say that certain groups of people should be excluded - especially since the land is owned by a public entity. You're implying that public land should only be for mid-upper class largely white professionals, and that's elitist and ludicrous if not racist.
-
1
-
-
does anyone know if something is going to happen to the strip mall containing Moe's, Verizon, and the dry cleaners at the intersection of Faris and Augusta Rd.? There is a voluntary cleanup sign posted on the corner.
Word on the street is some sort of mixed use development. Stores on the bottom, condos up top.
-
Thanks! I remember seeing some report on this earlier in the year. Any idea where that is?
-
What's the total number of apartments built (in the last 12 months), being built, or planned right now?
-
There should not be parking in front. The building needs to front Augusta.
-
I usually don't respond to posts such as the one above, but:
1. First, your equation of a lower income neighborhood with African Americans is solely yours, and it's not based on fact. (I find your assertions about African-Americans extremely offensive, and for you to inpute your statements to me is extremely offensive and wrong.)
West Greenville is overwhelmingly white. African-Americans make up only a small portion of the population. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berea,_South_Carolina. Accordingly, when I walked around Falls Park recently, I saw very few African-Americans; most people there were white, with a Hispanic minority. So there goes most of your post.
2. Second, it is certainly possible to tell where someone is from by ways other than skin color. Since most West Greenvillians are white, their origins can be discerned by clothing, such as Berea High gear, and by, believe it or not, talking to them or hearing them without engaging in direct conversation.
3. Third, I certainly look at groups of white people and attribute a geographic origin to them. I live in NYC and when I see groups of fair-skinned/fair-haired whites in NYC, wearing preppy, colorful clothes, I immediately think that they are from places such as Kansas or Iowa--certainly not New York. Lots of other NYC residents also make that attribution. Perhaps we shouldn't, but there goes another of your false assertions.
4. Fourth, West Greenville does need to be changed by, as I stated, improving the incomes of people who live there. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that statement; a higher income is desired by most everyone. You don't want a higher salary? Higher incomes in all neighborhoods surrounding downtown would help attract higher-end retailers, although improving people's incomes is per se a very desirable goal.
Next time you want to make statements such as the ones you did, (1) do your homework and (2) do not attribute your own views to others. Clear?
Berea is not in West Greenville. Yes, it's west of Greenville, but it is not in the City. West Greenville generally refers to the neighborhoods directly adjacent to 123 within the city limits, including the neighborhoods West Greenville, and Southernside. These neighborhoods are overwhelmingly black. So no, my post does not go anywhere -- its validity remains the same. Yet, no matter how you define West Greenville you are comparing overwhelmingly white neighborhoods to neighborhoods that are overwhelmingly minority and saying they need be more like the white neighborhoods. That's a dangerous assertion to make. Beyond that your habit to profile remains. I wear plenty of sweatshirts and other t-shirts with geographic indicators, yet I'm not from any of those places. And just because every one is doing it means its okay? Thats just about logical fallacy number one. "Everybody" was racist in the 1950s, but that doesn't mean it was right.
Perhaps you are well meaning, but when you say improve the demographics of an area, it comes across quite strongly as this neighborhood needs to be gentrified. There is a stark difference between improving the demographics of an area and increasing current resident incomes. Yes, the incomes of West Greenville residents need to be improved, but not so they can shop on Main. So they can maintain a better livelihood.
-
West side in general. The neighborhoods to the east of downtown (particularly the southeast) have what I'd guess are very appealing demographics, and neighborhoods north and south of downtown are also fine. The west side, however, needs a lot of TLC. It always has. I've seen a lot of West Greenville residents come to Falls Park, but they don't shop on Main.
Let me rephrase this into the way you meant. "I've seen a lot of black people come to Falls Park, but they don't shop on Main."
There is no way to tell where a person is from simply by looking at them, unless you discern by looking at the color of their skin, and that is a dangerous flaw. Some would even call it racism. You don't look at groups of white people and say oh, you must be from Greer.
As it comes across to me, you are saying I see black people downtown they must all be coming from West Greenville. And because they are not buying things their neighborhood needs to be changed. Changed into a place where white rich people want to live, so that they buy things downtown. Through your logic I infer that you want all white people downtown, because the black people you see aren't buying things. And all black people are from West Greenville and you want West Greenville to improve "their demographics." When a neighborhood becomes richer, it becomes whiter.
You forget cities exist to serve all of its residents, even if they are not putting money directly into the economy. Thank goodness people like you do not run the city.
-
1
-
-
UBJ Article - http://upstatebusinessjournal.com/news/future-takes-shape-greenville-news-site/ . Says "...The development will likely reach 10 stories high, he said, but it won’t be a skyscraper, as the developers want to fit in with the downtown Greenville landscape. Parking will be “in a hole underneath the buildings.”
That's key. I'm glad they're doing that.
-
Did see the video on their webpage? Click on the link in the blog at the bottom of the page, www.southridgeliving.com. It is very progressive.
Here's the link.
-
Page 12 of the PDF file I posted shows May 2014 having more passengers than May 2013 so I am not sure where you're seeing the opposite of that.
Southwest. Not the airport in general terms. Southwest numbers are continuing to fall. See page 14.
-
Another dead project for downtown. Just perfect.
I don't know why you're whining so much. It's the story of development. Not every project announced is going to get built immediately. :facepalm:
-
Lofts at Stone and Rowley is dead. Property no longer under contract.
Know what happened?
-
Probably Publix from what I hear. No clue what happens to Lewis Plaza itself.
I've heard talk of a publix greenwise. If you think about it it makes pretty good sense.
-
The apartment project is dead, per a very reliable source.
Thanks for affirming.
-
It's likely dead. Market is becoming difficult for apartments.
-
What I don't get is how this site is too small for elephants but the little train cars and tents they use in the circus aren't. Makes no sense to me.
All regulations on Zoos are placed by the AZA (Association of Zoos and Aquariums). Its the organization that ultimately coordinates animal loans and breeding programs. Circus's are private entities and states have no regulation on Circus's. They can do whatever they want, to an extent.
-
Ladybird, one of two elderly African elephants at the Greenville Zoo, has died. According to news reports, zoo officials have announced that they will transfer the remaining elephant to another facility and eliminate the elephant exhibit altogether. Current zoo standards and regulations disallow having only one elephant, and Greenville Zoo officials apparently have no interest in acquiring a second animal to replace Ladybird.
The current exhibit, as determined by regulations, is too small for elephants. To expand the elephant exhibit to meet current regulations would be both expensive and consume too many other exhibits. So the Zoo will no longer have elephants.
-
This is becoming the most confused corridor in the Southeast.
Does Trader Joe's scream "redneck"? What about REI, Whole Foods Market, World Market, Starbucks, etc.? No reason for concern. Many wealthy outdoorsmen and women shop at stores like Cabela's. We needed more options for fly fishing supplies in town anyway.
-
The mayor wants a convention center. Is it big enough for a hotel and a convention center(4 acres)? Is it possible that these buyers chomping at the bit are investors that could buy it, sit on it a few years and the resell it for a big profit?
The convention center would certainly be a squeeze, especially when incorporating the necessary on site parking for the hotel. To your second point, no. The review process for the purchase seems to be extremely stringent. They (Earle Furman, Gannett, and the City) are not going to let the property "sit."
-
There goes the Greenville News Building
-
You heard it months before it happened about Nashville (above), now hear this......GSP is not working out......resources can be better deployed.....Southwest is looking to completely pull out of GSP. Heard it direct at a cocktail party from a very high up in the company, here in Dallas. The future of Southwest at GSP is in SERIOUS jeopardy.
Unfortunately I think there is some validity in your statement. However there are multiple variables in play, including Airtran's smaller planes taking the place of Southwest's economically unviable 737's. If Southwest pulls out completely, it will be the first time they've ever done so, embarrassing them, and marring their perfect record. I expect Airtran to take their place eventually.
Greenville County Square redevelopment
in Greenville
Posted
What did I say that was racist? You haven't told me. Quote where I was racist.