Chicagoist: Urbs in Whatnow?

via chicago

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:35:07 -0600

this asshole can really have a one track mind. we have so many other issues facing our city (budget, public transit, infrastructure, schools, violence), and yet this is the cause he his championing: putting a private museum in a public park. of course there are hundreds of other suitable alternatives that people would be fine with, but then he wouldnt have a fight or a distraction from everything else.

mrdeltoid

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 10:34:02 -0600

Daley's plan is to change the motto to "City of Children" then use it as ammo to tear up Grant Park for the Childrens Museum all the while saying "I think it's a, you know, travesty that, in a city whose motto is all about the children, should, you know, not follow through on that promise..."

dan l

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 10:17:51 -0600

Dan: are you Daley's intern? Next you'll be telling us that Da Mare shits roses. Yeah, because I don't see him as the root of all evil and the cause of violence in chicago public schools, I must be a shill.

matilda

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 09:38:05 -0600

Funny thing about Jimbo. He/she makes some good points, but never once suggests that bad or inattentive parents, as well as TIFs, might play a role in this issue.

Spook

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 09:26:15 -0600

I was gonna say something sarcastic, but then I read usagiyojimbo first post, I think its the first time I've been moved to silence on Chicagoist. Needless to say I agree about our "City of Lost Children"

matilda

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 08:49:02 -0600

"TIF's are a fantastic way to finance development." For whom? And where? As well, I think you need to take a closer look at TIFs--a handout to traders who were not going to move away from Chicago in any case hardly spurs development.

sparky

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 08:45:18 -0600

Dan: are you Daley's intern? Next you'll be telling us that Da Mare shits roses.

adamselzer

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 08:25:59 -0600

A politician in favor of children? Outrageous!

dan l

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 07:48:23 -0600

Where did I suggest that development is a bad thing? Do you feel TIFs are the ONLY way to spur development? Given that I work for a developer, I know it's not the case. TIF's are a fantastic way to finance development. Of course, let's get to your real beef: gentrification.

mofoloco

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 01:46:23 -0600

Somebody dosed him.

usagiyojimbo

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 23:36:18 -0600

SC - If your post was addressed towards me, I think you are eitehr operating on a number of false assumptions about my views and/or misinterpreted my post. If not, my apologies, have a nice evening...

simplecreature

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 23:29:57 -0600

Considering the way Daley and his ilk behave calling this the city of children is a fairly accurate summation of our leadership. As for the kids being murdered, you're all buying into the media's latest way to spin homicides. "X many kids killed this school year" is the new "Carjackings! Will you be a victim?" or "There's an odorless, colorless, tasteless gas in your house that could kill you! Tune in at 10 and find out more!" If you live in an impoverished, gang-filled neighborhood the likelihood of something awful happening to you, even in your own home, is much increased. Not many walk-up shootings in Lincoln Park or Winnetka. You want to decrease poverty, save these rotting neighborhoods, decrease violent crime? Stop biting on every lead the news media toss out there, vote out the parasites at the top and get involved. Or just bitch on the net. It's easier.

usagiyojimbo

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 23:29:42 -0600

Where did I suggest that development is a bad thing? Do you feel TIFs are the ONLY way to spur development? Given that I work for a developer, I know it's not the case.

dan l

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 22:47:34 -0600

Ah yes. The obligatory "poverty is the leading cause of poverty and all things related to poverty" post. What should we do? Halt urban development and give up on viable neighborhoods?

usagiyojimbo

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 21:10:28 -0600

Now I've heard it all: TIF's kill the children. I can sleep easily knowing that I've found the nuttiest person on the webz. Correlation not causation. That is, less money for programs designed to mitigate the effects of poverty (Like SCHOOLS...) where the poverty actually lives would seem to put additional pressure on a social fabric that's already torn. What is the net gain or loss for kids in at-risk families when evaluating the effect of TIFs? Were there no TIFs, what would the overall tax base of the city have been; that is how many dollars would have been available to be distributed where the need is greatest? TIFs theoretically provide an incentive to create development that wouldn't have taken place in that location, resulting in greater tax revenue. But then most of that revenue only benefits these specific areas that, assuming the stimulus mechanism has worked, are now less prone to have intractable social problems requiring the new funds because gentrification is the desired result. Meanwhile, the displaced residents move to areas that, guess what, already suffer from social decay, amplifying the existing problems. Ultimately, money that would go for better schools, better vocational training, better family counseling, better transportation, and such which could promote an escape from poverty goes to do what? Building new planters? New wrought iron fencing? New libraries in now wealthy areas? I don't think it's unreasonable to think that fewer resources for social problems, more resources for aesthetic problems could perhaps contribute to more social instability. Agree or not, is there such a need to be a strident jackass in your comments? Or maybe that's just par for the course with you?

dan l

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:19:05 -0600

Surely the two dozen CPS students to die this year have had their dreams sucked away. Of course, the continuing victimization of poor kids in this city couldn't be a symptom of his policy of funneling massive sums of money into the pockets of developers and big business via rampant TIFing, could it? Now I've heard it all: TIF's kill the children. I can sleep easily knowing that I've found the nuttiest person on the webz.

sparky

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:02:36 -0600

Was Whitney Houston's "The Greatest Love of All" playing in the backround as he said this? What a douchebag. Right on, jimbo and slaphappy

Slaphappy

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:41:55 -0600

With the politicians we've got, City of Children might be right on the money.

usagiyojimbo

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:11:02 -0600

Considering the high rates of youth violence and low rates of primary and secondary educational achievment in this city, I'd say Daley needs to add an adjective to his new city slogan - that is City of LOST Children. Surely the two dozen CPS students to die this year have had their dreams sucked away. Of course, the continuing victimization of poor kids in this city couldn't be a symptom of his policy of funneling massive sums of money into the pockets of developers and big business via rampant TIFing, could it?