jam40jeff

I am not sure of the actual crime rate of Buckeye, but I was under the impression it wasn't much different than some gentrifying areas of the west side, but I may be way off. If I am, my apologies. No doubt that crime is a big factor and that lack of jobs is a factor in crime as well.

I'm not saying the area isn't high crime or that crime doesn't often present a challenge to redeveloping inner city areas. But I believe (just based on personal observations so I may be wrong) that areas of equally high crime with a "white presence" seem to attract more redevelopment efforts.

I'm not saying that there can't be successful black neighborhoods or that successful neighborhoods don't have black people living in them (hence the Warrensville Heights example being a moot point as it was an established suburb that saw an increasing percentage of African Americans, although it didn't hit 75% minority until 1980), but it's very difficult to garner investment into an area in disrepair in an economically challenged area of an economically challenged city when nearly 100% of the residents are of a race collectively not holding very much capital. It's a shame this is how investment works (often along racial lines), and it's the reason you see people like Magic Johnson purposely trying to invest in African American areas to offset the fact that this so often is the case amongst white investors. I'm not justifying it or saying it's fair or right. I wish it wasn't the way it is. But it's the reality until peoples' mindsets, prejudices, and preconceptions change. It's not going to do any good to ignore it. But it's time to move on. Hopefully, I'm wrong and the east side of Cleveland can see a turnaround that's good for all, both in neighborhood revitalization and number of jobs.

If your parents are the type that would get into fights over or wait in line 3 hours for a 23 cent pizza from Papa Johns, I'm sure it wouldn't be difficult to get them to sign a piece of paper for a free Pizza Hut pizza, as long as you'd give up half. Maybe I'm not remembering correctly, but I thought it was at least partially based on the honor of the parents. Not a big problem at Canterbury Elementary School back in the late 1980s/early 1990s. I'm sure there's some of these types of parents at every school, urban or suburban.

I have many friends with iPhones and own an iPod Touch. I also own an Android phone. The multitasking alone is a reason I would choose it over the iPhone (I can't imagine not being able to leave Pandora and be logged in to Google Talk while browsing or playing a game). I also like the fact that I can install any app I want, not just those from the official store, and access the file system directly. AT&T does not allow tethering with the iPhone. I regularly tether laptop while traveling so I can be online anywhere. And then of course there is Flash. Flash will not be supported on the iPhone. Supposedly, we will be seeing a beta for Android in a few days, and an official release in June. The screen (both brightness and resolution) on the Android phones is far superior to that on the iPhone. And last but not least, I love having the physical keyboard available. The onscreen keyboard works just as well as the iPhone's and I do use it for shorter texts and sometimes entering URLs (or parts of URLs), but especially for emails or forum posts, I can't imagine not having the keyboard to type on. That's not to say I don't see any things on the iPhone (mainly the smoothness and aesthetics of the UI, although Android isn't far behind) which are better, but the advantages of the Droid (and Android phones in general) outweigh those of the iPhone in my opinion. Also, I have friends with (and they have let me try out) Blackberry phones (Pearl and Storm). I really don't like the OS or apps available, and the browser is terrible. If you have used and like the iPhone's web browser, you know that it blows away the Blackberry browser. Android's web browser is on par with the iPhone browser, especially now that they implemented pinch-to-zoom.

Are you talking about the two buildings on either side of Cedar just west of MLK? I had never really noticed those buildings before even though I'm in that area all the time, but I just Google street viewed them, and, man, are they awful! Maybe I just try to block them out when I go by them.

Go with the Android phone if your current provider offers it and you are happy with them. I like my Android phone better than the iPhone.

I remembered because we had this same discussion last year (except about Cleveland instead of Cincinnati). It was a good advertisement for Cleveland then, and now it's a good advertisement for Cincinnati (and a bad advertisement for Cleveland at the same time, which is strange since we were on the list last year).

If your parents are the type that would get into fights over or wait in line 3 hours for a 23 cent pizza from Papa Johns, I'm sure it wouldn't be difficult to get them to sign a piece of paper for a free Pizza Hut pizza, as long as you'd give up half.

http://www.nctr.usf.edu/clearinghouse/censusavo.htm The vehicle occupancy for the entire state is 1.05, so I would definitely believe KJP's numbers. We actually have the lowest AVO in the country. As an aside, the last 5 trips I've people I've known have made from Cleveland to Columbus have all been solo.

Yes. But it's an ad. They can say almost whatever they want. This is why I consistently state, these list aren't worth posting. That's what I was getting at. It's advertisement. Not much else should be read into it.

^True. And wasn't Cleveland high on this list last year?

I do not understand why people always make this claim. I see no evidence that private schools perform any better than public schools when you compare apples to apples. Private schools only accept wealthy students that can pay tuition and then can offer scholarships to the best of the best of what's left. They don't have to (and rarely do) educate "everyone else". That is left to the public schools, and the ones full of the "private school rejects" are OF COURSE going to do worse than the wealthy and hand-picked private school students. A more fair comparison is a wealthy suburban public school (like Shaker Heights or Solon) to a private school, and I think you'd see the public schools performing just as well or even better.

Why's that? Owning a casino is quite different than gambling in a casino. Besides, I doubt the league cares if players play blackjack. I would guess that it's betting on sports (especially basketball) that they care about.

You keep contradicting yourself. You just talked about people investing in and paying a premium for houses in a high-crime area of Seattle. Even in Cleveland, people are investing in and moving into areas with crime rates not all that different from these areas. A lot of it comes down to perception, and I still maintain that race plays a large part in that.

I think that there is plenty of evidence that race and property values are correlated. The question people usually argue is why. The seemingly popular line of thought I always encounter is that those "misbehaving minorities come in and ruin the neighborhood" where I tend to think white flight happens causing property values to fall due to lowered demand before the problems (crime, bad neighbors, etc.) eventually fill in when the property values are lowered and it's difficult to keep homes occupied. Then of course there is the argument about why this initial white flight happens in the first place. I think it's a combination of one or all of the following reasons: fear of other races, hatred of other races, fear of property values falling. I'm sure there's more, but you know what I'm getting at. Of course it's not impossible for an all minority neighborhood to be stable, but given the current wealth distribution by race in this country, it's much more likely for these neighborhoods to have all of the problems associated with poverty. Then add in that white people with money are (on average) less likely to invest in an all-minority neighborhood and you get what you have happening in large swaths of the inner city all over the country. I know you're going to tell me that it doesn't take white people to invest in the neighborhood and of course that's true, but it's simply a fact that there's not as much capital floating around right now in the black community that can be invested back into black communities, even if people wish to remain segregated and keep money within their own community (or for that matter, for black people to invest in white areas). I know it's uncomfortable to think that we have a lot of problems due to racism, but it's the truth. It's not the only cause, and not everybody is racist, but it's definitely one of the causes of problems in the inner city.

This was really the point I was trying to make. The only difference between Seattle's Columbia city neighborhood and Buckeye is the local economy. I don't get that impression. You said it was a mixed race neighborhood. There is nothing mixed race about Buckeye (it's over 95% African American). And even though that alone SHOULDN'T matter, it does to enough people that it lowers demand, which further hampers home value and redevelopment opportunities. You can't talk about the decline of Cleveland's east side without talking about race and white flight.

Think Chicago can afford James? Calipari might be headed there... Lebron will most likely be playing for either Chicago or Cleveland next year, and I think he'll be playing for the team that hires Calipari. The other rumor I've hear is if the Nets land the #1 pick...hire Calipari, draft John Wall, and sign LeBron. I've heard that as well, but I just don't see Calipari going back to the Nets.

Think Chicago can afford James? Calipari might be headed there... Lebron will most likely be playing for either Chicago or Cleveland next year, and I think he'll be playing for the team that hires Calipari.

Did anyone notice Calipari sitting next to Lebron's agent a few seats down from Gilbert? I think that Lebron wants Brown out and Calipari in if he's going to resign with the Cavs.

This is where I mostly disagree. I don't think the Celtics gave more effort than the Cavs. They were putting the ball in the basket better than we were during that given game. It happens. It doesn't mean they're overall better than us, or that we need to play harder. We just need some shots to go down. Game 3 was a blowout because Delonte and Lebron couldn't miss from outside. In Game 4, Delonte was 0-7 from the field and Lebron was 7-18. Only one of those seven shots made was outside 12 feet. Jamison didn't hit any outside shots. We just need to make some outside shots and we'll be fine. I agree. I've felt that way since the middle of last year. They could use a little humble pie.

How about the Rosetta deal?

He's not the only one. The NBA is filled with whiners, and I think we're unfortunately one of the worst offending teams. Andy almost took a fastball to the nuts when Rondo saved the ball going out of bounds. The replay showed he was whining to the ref as Rondo saved it. It also showed that he tried to grab Rondo, then acted like he got fouled. I love the Cavs, but come on, stop acting like whiny babies, ESPECIALLY when you don't even have a reason to whine.

If we shoot just 35% from 3 point land, we win the game. Basketball is easy when the ball's going in the hoop.

CMYK!