So, Siberia has some of the wealthiest residents in the world, then?

I'm leaving before this degenerates into another Rush thread.

/too late, "The Trees" is already playing in my head.

My bank account.

/why yes, I do work for a living.

In the interests of "affordable housing", we need to make sure trees NEVER get planted. Because then the poor couldn't afford to live there.

I'm sick of people saying this. Look, EVERTHING is visible from space. It's all a matter of the equipment available. Seriously, I'd be surprised if we couldn't see insects from space.

You can literally see the town boundaries of South Orange, NJ by the trees from space. Crazy.

lockers: Um, I am no expert but wouldn't the poor neighborhoods be blacked out in the photos?

Yes I laughed, why?

In rich neighborhoods you have lots of yuppie renters who aren't allowed to change the trees on their property. In poor neighborhoods, you have multi-generation owners who can do whatever they want with their property. And no, they don't spend their weekends landscaping like the rich owner-occupiers. They're too busy working.

thelordofcheese: I'm sick of people saying this. Look, EVERTHING is visible from space. It's all a matter of the equipment available. Seriously, I'd be surprised if we couldn't see insects from space.

farking insects from space scare me dude.

Phony_Soldier: thelordofcheese: I'm sick of people saying this. Look, EVERTHING is visible from space. It's all a matter of the equipment available. Seriously, I'd be surprised if we couldn't see insects from space.

farking insects from space scare me dude.

I. for one, welcome our new insect overlords.

Gyrfalcon: clintp: The article completely ignores the fact that poor *urban* areas look like this. Poor rural areas have trees just the same.

Some of the poorest rural areas are quite heavily forested. See also: Appalachia and most of lower Mississippi.

That "was. " going to be my point. Urban blight is hardly a new concept. You probably could have seen the same thing 100 years ago. That's not to say that income inequality isn't getting worse because it obviously is.

"...this is a classic case of the rich being given whatever they need to get richer."

it makes sense in a different way, many of the poorer neighborhoods tend to also have large amounts of industrial or non residential land use (where I am anyway) those sorts of locations tend to not plant much landscaping.

Heck, go find Elmwood lousianna (it's that grey area west of New Orleans) It looks to be mostly industrial or retail with very little greenery

this is a classic case of the rich being given whatever they need to get richer


There are 99 reasons why there aren't trees in poorer urban areas but this ain't one.

Typical class warfare tripe.

"Since trees increase property values, this is a classic case of the rich being given whatever they need to get richer. And considering the other things trees do for us, it's also a case of the rich getting to be smarter, cooler, and have fewer allergies."

Try again. Nobody gives the rich trees. That crap is just trotted out because people always judge others by their own methods and motivations. The people the author intends to incite view things in terms of "being given" because that's their own M.O. Fact is, those trees have existed there before the neighborhood, most likely, and the more affluent tend to take better care of their neighborhoods, so there's less stuff like stupid thugs carving gang signs into the trunks and pouring oil and gasoline onto the ground. Consequently, the trees in poorer neighborhoods tend to die quicker. The "fewer allergies" part is just so ludicrous it's amazing.

This must be one of the poorest areas on the planet.

So.. wealth is better for the environment because it promotes the growth of trees.

violentsalvation: "Since trees increase property values, this is a classic case of the rich being given whatever they need to get richer. And considering the other things trees do for us, it's also a case of the rich getting to be smarter, cooler, and have fewer allergies. "

This is one of the stupidest things I have ever read. Poorer people can plant trees too, unfortunately the neighborhood doesn't look like it was planned for that many trees, or a residential park.

"Only rich people are allowed that many trees!" That doesn't even look like richville, either.

Came to say this. Who the fark is giving rich people trees?

Wait, the government goes out and plants trees in rich people's yards?

RatMaster999: So, Siberia has some of the wealthiest residents in the world, then?

Not to mention West Virginia, that notorious haven for the world's trillionaire families.

I know where to buy trees in both of those pictures.

\also where the raves are (were)

So...

Why do poor people hate trees?

pla: So...

Why do poor people hate trees?

In some countries they're used as a fuel source for heating and or cooking, they can also be used as a construction material

pla: So...

Why do poor people hate trees?

Too hard to smoke?

Well this is great news for Detroit. Another couple years of not paving and they will be back to prosperity.

"Income Inequality" sounds like a prelude to "Financial Redistribution". I wonder if Obama has assigned a Tzar to that yet?

How about "Poor people smell so bad that they can be smelled from space".

violentsalvation: This is one of the stupidest things I have ever read. Poorer people can plant trees too, unfortunately the neighborhood doesn't look like it was planned for that many trees, or a residential park.

"Only rich people are allowed that many trees!" That doesn't even look like richville, either.

You, sir, are an idiot. If a person doesn't have any money to even cover the cost of living, they won't have any spare cash floating around to purchase trees from an orchand and pay a landscape company to plant and maintain it.

...which rich people actually do, because they can afford to increase their real estate value.

pla: So...

Why do poor people hate trees?

They dont like hanging from them.

/Window seat
//leave the middle one empty, i dont like people

HAMMERTOE:
Try again. Nobody gives the rich trees. .

Well to be fair, they probably mean the rich are "given" trees on their streets. Like the road medians, common areas, etc. Granted, it's paid through their property taxes and they aren't actually "given" to the wealthy to keep or anything.

But yeah, the writer is an idiot.

emersonbiggins: This must be one of the poorest areas on the planet.

[www.sciencephoto.com image 378x530]

Even there, this method can demonstrate relative income disparity. Zoom in on 5th Ave right by central park and compare it to Hell's Kitchen, for instance.

GreatBunzinni: If a person doesn't have any money to even cover the cost of living, they won't have any spare cash floating around to purchase trees from an orchand and pay a landscape company to plant and maintain it.

Hold on a sec...why would a poor person pay a landscape company to plant and maintain a tree? They unable to cut some branches themselves or water the damn thing?

Most plants prefer rich soil.

Invalid comparison as far as Oakland goes. Piedmont is not part of Oakland. It is a separate city.

/Same can be said of West Cambridge and Somerville...two different cities.

I hate the phrase, "can be seen from space." No shiat, have you seen our farking satellites? My asshole can be seen from space when I'm sitting down for lunch.

Phony_Soldier: pla: So...

Why do poor people hate trees?

Too hard to smoke?

Golf clap

When you're poor, the last thing in the world you want is for your neighborhood to look "nice." The only reason you can afford to live there is because other people don't want to. If other people want to live there, they can and will take it right away from you. That's what being poor means.

When you're poor, you want the inside of your house or apartment to look nice, and be a pleasant place to be, because you live there, but the last thing in the world you need is some bunch of do-gooders fixing up the outside of your neighborhood and raising your rent.

Would you like to live someplace that looked beautiful? Of course. But you can't afford to, and if you beautify the place you are, all it means is you won't get to be there anymore. If you let some do-gooder beautify the place you are, it still means you won't get to be there anymore. Up goes your rent, in come your trendy "betters," and out you go--one more improvement to the neighborhood as it attracts a better quality of people. :-/

When you're poor, you know that "turning the neighborhood around" is code that includes filling it up with people who aren't like you.

Melancholy thinking. But seriously, that's why poor folks in neighborhoods sometimes get skeptical of or pissed off at do-gooders. Or at gay couples with a lot of time for home improvement projects.

Rent control has been tried as an answer--guarantee the people who live there that their rent won't go up and that they can keep living there. Downside: slum lords and sublets.

Ambiance is the ultimate public good.

Oh yeah, trees.

Trees are nice. Trees are great. Yeah, poor people could make their neighborhood look a lot ritzier if they planted some. If their neighborhood looked a lot ritzier, the landlords could get a lot more rent for their homes and apartments.

So...why would poor people want to plant trees, again?


"I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member." -- Groucho Marx

Terrydatroll: "Income Inequality" sounds like a prelude to "Financial Redistribution".

It is already happening via Capitalism.

Companies in rich counties are pouring capital into the poorer countries in the form of wages and infrastructure improvements. This raises the standard of living of the people in poorer countries making them effectively richer. As the wealth drains from the richer countries, their standard of living decreases as they become poorer. When the standard of living in a once poor country begin to reach polarity with the richer countries, the capitalist look for new poor labor markets and the process repeats.

We are already seeing this as companies move from labor the labor markets of India and China to Africa. Trade restrictions and protectionist polices slow this process somewhat, but so long as the world continues to embrace capitalism and free trade, the process will continue.

ultraholland: I hate the phrase, "can be seen from space." No shiat, have you seen our farking satellites? My asshole can be seen from space when I'm sitting down for lunch.

you sound fat

Thelyphthoric: Having read the article I can deduce that if we plant some trees we'll all be rich and better looking.

Bingo. The rich given whatever they want to get richer? Really? That is beyond stupid. How 'bout we breakout the before and after photos of brand new HUD facilities.

I'll start worrying about income equality once we've tackled ability equality.

ultraholland: I hate the phrase, "can be seen from space." No shiat, have you seen our farking satellites? My asshole can be seen from space when I'm sitting down for lunch.

You sit on your face and chew with your ass?

ultraholland: I hate the phrase, "can be seen from space." No shiat, have you seen our farking satellites? My asshole can be seen from space when I'm sitting down for lunch.

How's the foliage match with your income?

/Will take your word for it.
//No need for photographic evidence.
///No, really.

If you move into a new subdivision, the houses will be more expensive but all the trees will be saplings. Come back 30 years later; a lot of the houses will be run-down, but the trees will be big and plentiful.

thelordofcheese: I'm sick of people saying this. Look, EVERTHING is visible from space. It's all a matter of the equipment available. Seriously, I'd be surprised if we couldn't see insects from space.

So if I said your mom could be seen from space that wouldn't be an insult?

The article was so stupid it blew the semi-valid point it made straight outta the water.

It also gets the Razzberry of the Week for its thumpingly clumsy use of the correlation/causation fallacy.

I RAZ U LONG TIME

GreatBunzinni:
If a person doesn't have any money to even cover the cost of living, they won't have any spare cash floating around to purchase trees from an orchand and pay a landscape company to plant and maintain it.

A five foot live oak is under $20 at Home Depot.

Planting consists of digging a hole and putting the tree in it.

"Maintaining" a tree, in most of the US, consists of applying dihydrogen monoxide to the root system, and occasionally using a tool called a "rake" to gather the leaves that fall off. I can see how that could be difficult for many people.

What it breaks down to is "trees are not a cause of rich neighborhoods, they're a symptom."

Corporate Self: Terrydatroll: "Income Inequality" sounds like a prelude to "Financial Redistribution".

It is already happening via Capitalism.

Companies in rich counties are pouring capital into the poorer countries in the form of wages and infrastructure improvements. This raises the standard of living of the people in poorer countries making them effectively richer. As the wealth drains from the richer countries, their standard of living decreases as they become poorer. When the standard of living in a once poor country begin to reach polarity with the richer countries, the capitalist look for new poor labor markets and the process repeats.

We are already seeing this as companies move from labor the labor markets of India and China to Africa. Trade restrictions and protectionist polices slow this process somewhat, but so long as the world continues to embrace capitalism and free trade, the process will continue.

You are making this process sound like some noble cause. Hardly. As you exploit more depressed areas and bring their standard of living up, you then have to look for poorer areas to find cheaper labor. There is no grand plan to bring the wealth of the world up. There is a plan to find cheaper labor and thus, more profit.

/unless, like, sarcasm

ultraholland: I hate the phrase, "can be seen from space." No shiat, have you seen our farking satellites? My asshole can be seen from space when I'm sitting down for lunch.

So we now know what login Kirk Johnson uses

Tree lined streets make it harder to see working women on the sidewalks. This is a jobs issue.