AUSTIN | Misc. Discussions - No Politics

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by urbancore

Texas turning blue has been talked about since as long as I can remember. I never liked the pigeon hole politics puts people into....I've known quite a few Hispanic conservatives who follow their religious views more than anything else.

I've been voting in Austin Texas since the 80's and I've heard this line since then..."just wait, one day Texas will inevitably turn blue". After all these years, I still don't see it. Maybe not ever in my lifetime. Texas is a very complex place.

I have gay friends who own/love guns and voted for Hilary. A CEO of a respectable, very conservative REIT located here, voted for Obama...first time he voted Democrat since LBJ he said.

Most all my colleagues/friends share the same 2 qualities... They are socially liberal, fiscally conservative.

What i find amusing is "progressives" who act like conservatives, never realizing the irony. Talking bout you....nimbys.

I wasn't here in the 80s, but things are a bit different now. The urban metros of the country are becoming way more "blue" now than they were in the 80s. Also, the urbanization of Texas is happening at an ever faster rate. It is urbanizing faster than any other state. The rural, mostly red areas have unchanging demographics with stagnant or declining population. The urban, mostly blue areas have changing demographics with growth charts that have become more hockey stick like than ever before. The amount of time before the urban vote simply overwhelms the rural is shortening...quickly.

Also, whether or not Texas "turns blue" depends on one's definition. Blue as in all of the state wide races going to Democrats? That won't happen anytime soon. Will the governorship go Democratic anytime soon? It doesn't look like it. Will the state's electoral votes go blue? It looks like there's a fair chance in 2020. The 2020 senate election? I'm guessing not, but it's plausible. Will the congressional reps or the state house reps be at least half Democratic? Plausible. Etc....

[the Genral]

Just wanted to share some skyscraper porn with you guys.
https://youtu.be/PuTqWxuAazI

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by paul78701

I wasn't here in the 80s, but things are a bit different now. The urban metros of the country are becoming way more "blue" now than they were in the 80s. Also, the urbanization of Texas is happening at an ever faster rate. It is urbanizing faster than any other state. The rural, mostly red areas have unchanging demographics with stagnant or declining population. The urban, mostly blue areas have changing demographics with growth charts that have become more hockey stick like than ever before. The amount of time before the urban vote simply overwhelms the rural is shortening...quickly.

Also, whether or not Texas "turns blue" depends on one's definition. Blue as in all of the state wide races going to Democrats? That won't happen anytime soon. Will the governorship go Democratic anytime soon? It doesn't look like it. Will the state's electoral votes go blue? It looks like there's a fair chance in 2020. The 2020 senate election? I'm guessing not, but it's plausible. Will the congressional reps or the state house reps be at least half Democratic? Plausible. Etc....

I’d like to see it. I voted for Ann. I bartended a few parties for her at the Gov Mansion. She was one of kind.

But Democrats back then weren’t really like today’s Democrats.

Without undoing gerrymandered districts, I’m confident the state will say red for the foreseeable future. Sure the electorate of the cities is blue, but they have an awful turnout record.

The fact we voted for a megalomaniac who’s been a dem and a republican, I don’t hold out hope for Texas. If Kayne West ran for 2020, he would pick up 30%. If Oprah runs, she wins. Voters have changed, they want a celebrity. It’s really been that way since Reagan.

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by paul78701

I wasn't here in the 80s, but things are a bit different now. The urban metros of the country are becoming way more "blue" now than they were in the 80s. Also, the urbanization of Texas is happening at an ever faster rate. It is urbanizing faster than any other state. The rural, mostly red areas have unchanging demographics with stagnant or declining population. The urban, mostly blue areas have changing demographics with growth charts that have become more hockey stick like than ever before. The amount of time before the urban vote simply overwhelms the rural is shortening...quickly.

Also, whether or not Texas "turns blue" depends on one's definition. Blue as in all of the state wide races going to Democrats? That won't happen anytime soon. Will the governorship go Democratic anytime soon? It doesn't look like it. Will the state's electoral votes go blue? It looks like there's a fair chance in 2020. The 2020 senate election? I'm guessing not, but it's plausible. Will the congressional reps or the state house reps be at least half Democratic? Plausible. Etc....

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but I just ran into this recent article. It speaks to what I was saying above:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...fy-gop/598153/

[AusTxDevelopment]

Oof. This is a discouraging story. The building was redeveloped by Riverside Resources, and usually they do a great job on their projects.

https://www.austinmonitor.com/storie...-is-political/

Here is the whole twitter story: https://twitter.com/TheeChad/status/...849280/photo/1

[txtriathlete]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I like the idea of creating district names. It sounds sophisticated and I like the organizational aspect of it, but I really think it just complicates things since there isn't always a clear definition of uses or a feel between one neighborhood from the next, and it can be a bit confusing sometimes since there isn't always a uniformed method applied. For example, is it West End or Market District? Or is it both? And wh does the Seaholm District really need a name when it's rather small? The Green Water Plant next to it was at least double the size, and we've pretty forgotten about. That neighborhood now has been folded into what we've been calling the 2nd Street District after it was expanded.

It's a shame that our beautiful downtown is seeing all of this amazing growth and development, yet simultaneously it is becoming a homeless wasteland where people are starting to actively avoid. Mayor Adler and the rest of City Council needs to go.

[ATXboom]

Originally Posted by txtriathlete

It's a shame that our beautiful downtown is seeing all of this amazing growth and development, yet simultaneously it is becoming a homeless wasteland where people are starting to actively avoid. Mayor Adler and the rest of City Council needs to go.

What sort of policies or solutions do you think they should pursue?

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by txtriathlete

It's a shame that our beautiful downtown is seeing all of this amazing growth and development, yet simultaneously it is becoming a homeless wasteland where people are starting to actively avoid. Mayor Adler and the rest of City Council needs to go.

And where is this wasteland you speak of? I'm Downtown every week, actually getting ready to head there now. There's still a lot of activity, lots of foot traffic. It's still crowded with people out at night. Quit spreading misinformation! There has always been homeless in DT. 20+ years ago there were homeless on the streets in DT.

I was wandering the streets of DT Austin with my friends as teenagers as far back as the mid 90s. There were homeless people all over coming up to us asking for money or even asking for drugs or if we were looking to buy drugs. In those days DT had nowhere near the kind of activity we see today. There were areas that were completely devoid of people save for ourselves walking through and the homeless. Now I'm not saying there isn't an issue that we as a community need to takle but I can tell you right now that I feel safer in DT today than I did in the 90s or even early 2000s. We were always on guard, it's how I developed my Street sense.

[Sigaven]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

And where is this wasteland you speak of? I'm Downtown every week, actually getting ready to head there now. There's still a lot of activity, lots of foot traffic. It's still crowded with people out at night. Quit spreading misinformation! There has always been homeless in DT. 20+ years ago there were homeless on the streets in DT.

This. There has always been homeless downtown and there has always been occasional crime.

I think the only thing that has changed is that the homeless are starting to camp in a wider area of town...further south and further north as time goes on.

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by ATXboom

What sort of policies or solutions do you think they should pursue?

Yeah, not that this is the thread for it, but almost anything political when someone says "hey, let's throw them all out" very rarely offers an idea to the alternative. Maybe it's not homelessness in downtown that people don't like.

And, yes, there has always been homelessness in downtown. I can remember as a kid in the early 90s being weirded out after my dad and his friend and I when we found a guy sleeping in a dumpster in the alley in the 500 block of Colorado Street. My dad's friend was in the process of moving and was looking for some boxes to pack with. I was too short to see into the dumpster, but they jumped back, to which I asked, "what's wrong?" and then quietly told me "there's a man sleeping in that dumpster". I was sure the guy was dead, though.

I also remember a story from my dad saying that same friend and he were visiting New Orleans, and that would have been in the late 80s or very early 90s. He said they were riding a streetcar down St. Charles Avenue and saw what they described as a dead guy lying in the street. Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. Anyway, it's not like homelessness is some new problem. Cities have been dealing with it for a long time.

[txtriathlete]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

And where is this wasteland you speak of? I'm Downtown every week, actually getting ready to head there now. There's still a lot of activity, lots of foot traffic. It's still crowded with people out at night. Quit spreading misinformation! There has always been homeless in DT. 20+ years ago there were homeless on the streets in DT.

I was wandering the streets of DT Austin with my friends as teenagers as far back as the mid 90s. There were homeless people all over coming up to us asking for money or even asking for drugs or if we were looking to buy drugs. In those days DT had nowhere near the kind of activity we see today. There were areas that were completely devoid of people save for ourselves walking through and the homeless. Now I'm not saying there isn't an issue that we as a community need to takle but I can tell you right now that I feel safer in DT today than I did in the 90s or even early 2000s. We were always on guard, it's how I developed my Street sense.

I work and live downtown and get hassled daily by aggressive homeless people.

Didn't mean to turn this into a debate, but I should have known better than to bring up a topic like this. I had a frustrating encounter this morning and had to voice my opinion.

We'll just agree to disagree on the topic

[the Genral]

I wonder what people thought of me when I was homeless, roaming the streets because I had nowhere to go. I do remember people throwing shit at me from their cars. Got hit in the head once with a can full of beer. Manna from heaven... Somehow the topic of homelessness pops up at any time on any thread. We probably should off topic discussions of this. Fyi, homelessness is not confined to the bigger cities. I was homeless in a town of 36K. Ahhhh, good times, good times....

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by txtriathlete

I work and live downtown and get hassled daily by aggressive homeless people.

Didn't mean to turn this into a debate, but I should have known better than to bring up a topic like this. I had a frustrating encounter this morning and had to voice my opinion.

We'll just agree to disagree on the topic

I don't get bothered when I'm down there aside from the occasional asking for money, but it's no different from before the changes, at least from my perspective. Having said that, I understand that for those like yourself who live in DT that you come in contact with homeless daily and can see the subtle changes. By the way if you are being harrassed you can call the police. It is against the law for aggressive harrassment.

[Geographer]

Homeless is a largely unsolveable problem in a democratic, capitalist country. The government cannot force mentally ill people to get treatment, cannot hospitalize them or institutionalize them for long periods of time, and cannot build mass amounts of public housing that, even if built, would have their own problems considering the reasons for homelessness are often antisocial behavior, mental illness, and drug abuse. But homelessness can be hidden.

The homeless are surprisingly mobile. Many cities give them free one way tickets to other cities. Intercity bus tickets are inexpensive and many homeless can find the money. If people are able to live on the street for decades then they must have a steady source of income. So cities that provide a welcoming environment for homeless will attract them and cities that provide an unwelcoming environment will see a reduction in homelessness. San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego exemplify this. They are ultra-rich cities with generous citizens who give many personal donations of cash, food, and clothing, have liberal governments with tons of aid for the homeless, warm climates, and a tepid police force. It's better to be homeless in LA than Omaha so it's no surprise that those cities attract destitute people from around the country. Detroit, despite having far more poverty than LA or San Francisco, has fewer homeless because the winters are frigid and the city is so poor that its residents cannot afford the scale of handouts that LA residents can.

People say that arresting homeless for camping on the sidewalk and related crimes is useless and a waste of resources because they will cycle in and out of jail. But jail is so awful that many homeless probably tire of that and hitch a ride to another city like LA that leaves them alone.

Liberals seem to be at the forefront of urban development who see it as a progressive alternative to suburbanization. Well, they need to figure out how to make attractive urban spaces for families who do not want to be harassed and panhandled when out with their kids. The scale of homelessness and associated crime and sidewalk pollution are staggering in San Francisco and are killing their tourist districts. Nobody wants to walk around when you have to step over homeless, watch out for needles, and get yelled at. Progressives may hate the suburbs but at least your family can walk around the neighborhood without those problems.

How does New York City ensure safe public spaces? They don't have tent cities in Times Square.

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by Geographer

How does New York City ensure safe public spaces? They don't have tent cities in Times Square.

That's true, but they have a lot of subway vent grates on the sidewalks that vent warmish air I've seen plenty of homeless laying on to try to stay warm in the winter.

[AusTxDevelopment]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

There has always been homeless in DT. 20+ years ago there were homeless on the streets in DT.

Not just downtown. A buddy of mine worked on those office buildings on the SE corner of 360 and MoPac that overlook the south end Barton Creek. When they cleared the land, they found a huge homeless camp back there. Over 100 people and they pulled 7 dumpsters of trash out. This was almost 20 years ago.

You hear people say that Austin has more homeless people since the camping ban was lifted, but it's not that there are more per se, it's just that they are more visible. If one of the unstated goals of lifting the camping ban was to make homelessness more visible to the public, it's working.

[Geographer]

Austin needs to avoid becoming a city that attracts homeless from other cities. People also need to feel comfortable and safe walking around downtown. If downtown Austin becomes like downtown San Francisco then Austin's great downtown orientation will fail.

[StoOgE]

Yeah, because San Fran is a wasteland with no active nightlife.

[Austinite101]

Homelessness will continue to be a problem until people finally realize it’s a state and federal issue too, rather than just an issue for the city proper. Not even small cities and towns are immune, it occurs everywhere.

And too often I notice when people yell at the city re: the homeless issue, what they’re really saying is, “I don’t want to see them in my neighborhood. Make them go away or push them somewhere else and don’t spend any of MY tax dollars doing it.”

[KevinFromTexas]

It's not just Austin. I see a lot of Austin bashing on social media on this issue, but there is homelessness everywhere you go. I was up in Temple on Saturday and saw a homeless guy dragging a comforter behind him up to the Whataburger. Considering it was Temple, that might have been a case of the military and the VA not taking care of their veterans. A federal government issue. I've seen homeless people in just about every city I've visited both big and small. It's the smaller places that I wasn't fully expecting, like Lubbock, Midland and Tyler.

I also don't believe that big cities are "attracting" them here as if they're the pied piper of the homeless or that cities are prone to causing homelessness. Part of it is that the big cities have more resources to deal with the issue than small towns do, and so those people come here for those services. That DOES NOT mean, however, that we shouldn't be providing those resources.