Quote:
Originally Posted by bricky
So that's your grand vision for LA? To make downtown a fun place to hang out for all those dudes living 15 people to a tract home? I occasionally read the posts on this subforum, and had the idea that you were among the most intelligent people here. What happened?
LA county has a big housing shortage. LA county is essentially built out. The solution is not to make a cool downtown where you can chill and grab some interesting ethnic food followed by cocktails and clubbing. The solution is to build a hell of a lot more high density housing for those millions of people who live in the most poorly housed big metro in America. Downtown is neither remotely large enough nor inexpensive enough to fit the bill. In fact, infill housing construction in LA this decade has been piss poor considering the needs of the population.
People won't have a real alternative to auto traffic in LA until infill happens on a much more massive scale, and until the government gets serious about building some kind of rapid transit system. Not the joke of the subway you have now, or even the relatively minor additions that are currently being discussed for 10 (read 20) years into the future.
|
The solution to the problem is multifaceted and will probably never be resolved. Part of LA's "problem" is explosive population growth and English illiteracy from a large foreign population. The divide between rich and poor is fueled by that. More and more poor immigrants are moving in, speak little/to no English, and aren't able to compete fairly in the job market so they can't make money. Therefore you have a large working-class population cramming "15 into one house." Then you have a lot of people/entrepreneurs who ARE making a lot of money because they're starting their own businesses or competing FAIRLY in the job market and succeeding (you label them as "yuppies). Is it the American gov't responsibility to help subsidize more afforable housing? Basically, should these rich folk who made their money fairly (or legally I should say), subsidize the poor who cannot compete in the higher job market?
So the infill you speak of will never be cheap enough to house any group unles they can afford it. And if you can't make the money fairly, you won't be able to live there, period. It's a sad reality that the entire world faces. Is CAPITALISM fair? is it possible for all humans living in a capitalistic system be "equally" able/capable of being in the same level?
And the sad reality is, many people will continue to suffer in traffic by their own choice in LA. This is one aspect of a society gone wrong based on a collective CHOICE that riding transit in LA is "low-class." That's your own fucking fault if you have some inferiority complex riding a bus (I sure don't!). Ever realize how vibrant a Latino area is (Westlake, etc.) because they have PROVEN that you CAN get around LA by mass transit. If everyone else emulated them on this aspect, we would have a higher quality of life and more vibrant streets in general. (PLEASE don't emulate the squalor conditions of those areas though.)
So no, "fixing" Downtown LA by itself does not SOLVE the problem. It is definitely IMPORTANT in LA since our mass transit converges all into Downtown LA (Union Station). The "joke of a subway" we have now will no longer be a joke when people depend on it to get to Downtown LA. It's very wrong of you to come in here and judge our rail system based on your ignorance of how people live in this city.