Tuesday, November 27, 2007

Portland's Anti Family Social Engineering Earns a Dart in the WSJ *But if Portland Really Wanted to Change That...

The Wall Street Journal had a mention about Portland and other cities like it today.

And city leaders aren’t going to like it much. Find it here.


As you know if you live or visit here, city leaders have gone overboard making Portland inhospitable to families of all income levels and the working class through their high taxes, small yards, and rabbit hutch living in a misguided attempt to capture the bike and pedestrian culture.
The gist of the article explains why cities that purport to be reaching out to the cool, young, jet setters, and creative class people find themselves losing jobs, losing families, and losing cache.
It says about Portland,

“Advocates of the brew-latte- and- they -will -come approach often point to greater Portland, Oregon, which has experienced consistent net gains of educated workers, including families. Yet most of that migration—as well as at least three quarters of that region’s population and job growth has been not to the increasingly childless city, but to the suburban periphery. This pattern holds true in virtually every major urban region.”

As Joel Kotkin points out in the Wall Street Journal piece,
“The evidence thus suggests that the obsession with luring singles to cities is misplaced. ...Instead the emphasis should be on retaining young people as they grow up, marry, start families and continue to raise them."

But it’s hard to do that in Portland.
Mayor Moonbeam and the Rainbow city council, along with the entire planning class, don’t like yards for kids to play, don’t want parents to use their car to take their kids to after school activities, and don’t even want mom and dad to have a car even if they could afford one AND the outrageously expensive and overtaxed property.*If Portland would like to change this trek toward anti family negative growth they could be the first around here to work a deal offering school vouchers. Full vouchers. Add to that reduced taxes and transportation flexibility and just watch the families--and capital--pour in.

6 comments:

Scottiebill said...

If things keep up as they are under Potter the Irrelevant and his Toadies, Portland will very likely become just another small town with a lot of uninhabited buildings and houses along the Willamette. Nobody will want to live there, except possibly a few ne'er-do-well bike riders and the residents of "Dignity Village". The only thing that will keep Portland from becoming a veritable ghost town will be the welcome demise of the Potter administration and the compete change of people on the city council, from Mayor wannabe, Sam Adams down to and including Randy "Duct tape" Leonard and Eric Sten (he of the Water Bureau debacle) and every one in between.

Maybe then, and only then, will Portland have a chance of surviving. Otherwise the city, whats left of it, will come under the control of creeps like the ones who drove the Schumachers out of business and the bicyclist who sem to want to dominate the traffic flow of the city.

Damn! It is good not to live in Portland. As much as I do not like the small town in Montana that I grew up in, even it would be better than living in Portland. At least there they are not saddled with some one like Potter the Irrelevent.

Tromatic said...

But they have a dream!

eddie said...

I wish the planners had gone the route Disney was headed when he passed away... namely, gone out into the wilderness, bought a big bunch of land, built their utopia with their own money, and advertised for people to live in it.

That would have been much better than taking an established city, selling the residents a bill of goods, and spending 30 years pounding the square pegs into round holes with a recycled piledriver.

Scottiebill said...

Back during the War years, my mother and I would come to Portland each summer to spend a few weeks with my grandmother. Back then we would ride the trolley, just like the one in the picture, to just about everywhere we wanted to go without fear of gangs or other kinds of violence. My cousins and I would go to Laurelhurst Park and spend hours there, even into the evenings without any fears of violence. And we could go downtown day or night, without being panhandled or pushed off the sidewalks by a pack of idiots such as the ones who ran the Schumachers out of business or bike riders who think that they own the streets and don't have to obey traffic signs and/or rules. And Tommy the Irrelevant is part of this bunch when he rides with the "Critical Mass" gang.

Now, one cannot get on the Max trains or go to any park without taking your life in your hands, day or night.

Just another reason not to live in or around Portland and itw suburbs.

Victoria Taft said...

You won't be able to visit in some parts of Portland soon...if you have a car, I mean.

eddie said...

I've had an idea bouncing around in my imagination for a while now. I look at the "transit" solutions in Portland and I see big train rides, little train rides, special bike paths, and now sky buckets.

The problem here, is not that they've gone too far, but that they really haven't gone far enough. The underlying theme here is amusement park-style transportation, but as yet we're not really getting the big ticket rides. In old Disney terms, we're getting B and C ticket attractions... perhaps it's time for the E tickets.

I'd like to propose that the next transit project in Portland be either a roller coaster, or to be "in theme," a log flume ride. It wouldn't cost any more than the next leg of MAX is going to... in fact it'll probably save money.
Plus there's the potential boost to the nearly-nonexistant tourist industry we hear so much about.