Just my opinion but I find this “my people” shit kind of stupid. Just because you share a socioeconomic and geographic background with someone doesn’t make them your people. I’m not trying to be cynical but people are out for themselves before all others in 99% of people and that is the reality. I wonder if the woman who was stabbed, was indeed stabbed by people she considered “her people”. I don’t know the answer.
Yeah, she was. I know what you mean about the way that term grates on the ear. And I hesitate to use it. But sometimes when I am defending these types of things, it comes out, and it is heartfelt.
I think when a group has been persecuted, oppressed, or just share a kind of history that sort of makes them cling to eachother for comfort, familiarity and strength…they tend to think of eachother as family.
To my mind, this is a big part of the difference: a home-owner often spends much money & sweat equity in improving the look of their home - planting flowers, doing repairs, etc. etc. That’s why it is a hassle being a home-owner.
Plus, a home-owner, with “roots” in the neighbourhood, has a big incentive to fight to improve the place in many ways - to get involved in local schools and community organizations.
The result though, if each home-owner does this-- is a street that looks nice - a nice environment. Which I think results in more people out walking, more kids playing outside, less crime, etc. In short, a good neighbourhood in which to live.
Conversely, if someone spends all their cash on a nice car or whatever and rents … well, the landlord often doesn’t have the same incentive to beautify the place. If the street is full of renters, many of the people living there don’t have the same incentives to work hard at improving the place.
That at least in part I think explains the “stigma” - it’s adaptive. In general, all else being equal, home-owners tend towards a better neighbourhood, and thus favour other home-owners over renting.
Actually, Steven Leavitt (economist) and Stephen Dubner (journalist) make that very claim in the book Freakonomics that drug-dealing gangs have wage structures almost exactly like those of fast-food franchises like McDonald’s. Peons on the low end make minimum wage or less while the leader makes six figures a year or so, equivalent to the head manager or owner of the franchise location.
The research revealing this was the work of sociologist Sudhir Venkatesh.
It would be interesting to discuss the differences between his research on gangs and your anecdotal information, but I understand that this may not be the appropriate thread to do so.
That makes sense.
I live on the top two floors of a house, above a private art gallery. All the rest of the houses around me are single family homes and most, if not all, have the owners living in them. It’s a great neighborhood and my rent isn’t cheap. That’s why I always felt a bit confused with the tone that some people sneer the word “rent”. But, I am beginning to realize that I am the exception, not the rule.
And, just to clarify, I don’t want “roots” here not because it’s not a great neigborhood. But, because it’s the country. I am finding that I HATE the country. Looking out my back windows and seeing cows is no longer a novelty. Apparently, I will always be a City Mouse 
I think the “problem” with the scenario the OP is this: Yes, what someone else you don’t know does with their money is their own business, but its just pretty comical the mindset of someone who has for example a 400.00 house/apartment payment and 800.00 car payment, especially when they are probably in their house many more hours a day then their car. If your ability to afford a better place to live in for you and yours is hampered by you Escalade payment, well that’s pretty comical to most sensible people, although it is technically none of anyone else’s business, but then again there are many things people talk about that aren’t their business.
But I do agree the notion of some that everyone black guy with an Escalade is a drug dealer is silly.
[QUOTE=Wee Bairn]
If your ability to afford a better place to live in for you and yours is hampered by you Escalade payment, well that’s pretty comical to most sensible people, QUOTE]
Yes. I also talk about things that are none of my business. I have no issue with that. The jerks in my office were spouting racist lies in the workplace, and that is something I don’t do or appreciate.
That said, I still have to wonder why some people think it comical that a young man may prefer a flashy car to a home? It is simply his preference. Why is it funny?
Some people have no interest in home ownership. Some people live for today and not for tomorrow. Some people think homeownership is crucial. Why are any of these things funny?
I’ve known lots of small-time dealers in my life. Most of them did it as supplemental to their regular job and none of them lived a lavish lifestyle. The only drug dealers who are driving the fab ride are the guys at the top. It’s a pyramid scheme.
FWIW, that was noted up there in post #60.
I might agree with you if she had lived an otherwise frugal life, and if the Charger were her one indulgence. But that’s not the case. She has lived in the moment (and not coincidentally paycheck-to-paycheck) her whole life. She has very little in savings, and now will be making mortgage payments (and thus will be forced to work) well into what should have been her retirement years.
But hey, she has a shiny Charger.
[QUOTE=Nzinga, Seated]
Its not the homeownership part- there are many sane people who perfer to live an apartment, for various reasons. To me personally, its just, why would you spend much more on a car that you are in a fraction of your day then you do on the place you live? it’s not even all about car depreciation as opposed to a house, its wouldn’t you rather spend more on where you live than what you drive?
Given a choice between a 100k house and 30k car and 30k house and 100k car, the house (or apartment) just is more sensible to most.
Like if you have a family and live in a poor neighborhood but can afford a 800 car note, wouldn’t it be better for your family to take 5-600 of that 800 and apply to better safer housing, and have a 2-300 dollar note?
For me it’s more sad than funny to see someone (like my mom’s cousin) fronting with a status symbol when they don’t have any actual status. Whereas, if they would just invest some of their money instead, they might actually be able to get some of the financial wherewithal they are now only faking.
(Not that a Dodge Charger is indicative of any great status. But in her world it is.)
[QUOTE=Nzinga, Seated]
[QUOTE=Wee Bairn]
If your ability to afford a better place to live in for you and yours is hampered by you Escalade payment, well that’s pretty comical to most sensible people,
I myself don’t think it is “funny” so much as it is unfortunate.
The problem with “living for today and not tomorrow” is that people who literally do this are all the more likely, if things do not go well tomorrow, to end up on social assistance or otherwise in a bad situation - and, if they have dependents, those dependents will end up there as well.
To me, it seems sensible that there should be something of a social stigma on “living for today” in the sense of purchasing expensive luxury goods like a fancy car, rather than providing for one’s future (and that of your dependents if any). That’s why “thrift” is often considered a good thing, and being a “spendthrift” a bad thing - though of course one should not take it to the extreme of being a killjoy or a miser.
None of which has anything to do with race, though.
[QUOTE=Wee Bairn]
Sure, you said to most, but not everyone wants a 100k house. Personally, I don’t want a yard; I hate the damn things. I also have no need for more space than about 5 rooms would give me (dining/living room, kitchen, bathroom, bedroom, storage). Storage can be rented out elsewhere or done away with entirely, kitchen/living room can be combined, which gets me down to three rooms: kitchen+dining/living, bath, bed.
Unless it was purely for investment purposes, why would I buy a 100k house when a 30k-50k one could meet my needs? I’d rather have a nice car, since that provides something other than headaches. I’m also not convinced that a house is all that great of an investment if you don’t want to do much of the normal maintenance work yourself, but that’s a topic for a different thread.
[QUOTE=Yag Rannavach]
I didn’t say house only, I was referring to anywhere you live- house, apartment, trailer, wherever- if given a choice you’d rather live in an apartment in a dodgy area with an awesome car than live in a decent area and drive a Honda Civic? Really?
If you can afford both, great, but many with flashy cars with rims sacrifice the living quarters for the car.
[QUOTE=Wee Bairn]
What makes a neighborhood ‘dodgy’? Higher crime rates? How far should I take this. Should I pack up and move to Japan, since the crime rates are lower than the U.S.?
If you were born and raised in a neighborhood where everyone is struggling, that is your home. You don’t see it as dodgy. You know it is rougher than some other areas, but you have no desire to flee your home. Instead you choose to stay, work together, go to church (not me!), open barber shops and hair salons, maybe just settle down in an apartment with your woman and your baby and she works as a receptionist, and you work as a telemarketer, and you send your baby to school and teach him to study hard and you have block parties and summer barbecues and you buy a fancy car because you have always wanted one, and with this bonus from telemarketing commision dargon it, you are gonna get one.
What if that is your mindset? Are people going to look down on you for choosing not to live in a ‘decent’ neighborhood? That of course is their right. But if they do, they shouldn’t be surprised if we ghetto folks don’t think much of them.*
- It has always annoyed me when folks say “if you do, don’t be surprised if people look at you and…blah” I mean so what?? You can look at folks anyway you please. It doesn’t make you superior.
Because not all choices are equal. If it makes you feel better, replace “funny” with “foolish.”
[QUOTE=Wee Bairn]
I’m saying that the place I live is simply there so I have somewhere relatively safe to sleep and keep things(they need to be mostly secure). As long as it meets those needs, I’m happy with the cheapest thing I can get. I’d prefer to spend more on a nice car than buy a more expensive house with a bigger yard, more rooms, or in a nicer area. Now, if I’m in danger of losing vast amounts of money from replacing TVs, then it fails the ‘keep things’ qualification. If dodgy means that a certain subset of the population gets in trouble with other members of that same subset, then, well, who cares? (as long as I’m not part of the ‘getting in trouble’ group)
[QUOTE=Yag Rannavach]
And just where do those 30-50k houses exist?
As a matter of fact, they did. They also showed the city clean up done in honor of the man who was robbed and killed on his way back from a community activist meeting.
Thanks for your perspective. I’ll say that you seem to have greater love for the people of your area that I do mine, which is admirable (your traits). I love my area, and the deep ties I have here, and care about my neighbors, but I don’t consider them “my people” and if it gets dangerous, those ties will get cut. Paraphrased from an earlier poster: I guess my suburban values just run too deep.