Hacker News Reader

Comment by Zigurd | Hacker News Reader

Tl;dr: Cranky hipster bemoans, five years too late, that Cambridge is overrun with VCs and their money, and the clean, boring bistros they go to, and that the money even managed to squeeze the seediness out of Central Square.

Every cool person, and cool place, has moved to Somerville, but rents are way up there, too.

So go to the Gods, and to the Cantab Lounge, while you can. Before some story of a deal that closed over PBRs in plastic cups shows up in TechCrunch.

View on HN

Eh, that's not quite right--the observation is more that the cities are bending-over backwards for this "Innovation Economy", that they are doing so to the detriment of existing citizens, that social and arts programs are usually not on the preservation list during this sort of change, and that ultimately there is perhaps something ugly about this mad scramble for money.

So, no, not "cranky hipster".

Every week, the Somerville Journal is full of angry letters from "old-time" Somervillians who can't afford to live there anymore - every one of them blames the mayor. But, when you've got a town that is right next to hyper-expensive Cambridge and less than a mile from downtown Boston with an old repairable housing stock.... Reminds me of the old Busboy's song "There goes the neighborhood" from the early 80s - an ironic look at what would happen if white people realized the neighborhoods they gave up in the mad dash for the suburbs in the 50s and 60s were actually pretty nice and really convenient to their jobs.

But really, the problem with the article is it doesn't give any alternative. How would Cambridge pay for all those nice parks and amenities without the Kendall Square company's tax receipts?

First they came for the dives, and then they took the basement venues away too, just to spite me.

Oh no, people who are willing to pay more than you to live somewhere have caused you to have to live somewhere else. TL;DR: The same thing that has been happening since the dawn of time continues to happen.

The issue that OP is concerned with is that those who are displaced don't necessarily have the means to relocate to an area and remain in the same living situation they were previously in. When you uproot lower-income residents from their existing social structure, which may have served as their safety net, where are they supposed to go? They may relocate physically but the economic and mental/psychological strain from being forcibly moved may have detrimental consequences that we haven't properly taken the time to understand.

'Progress' and residential gentrification are not necessarily evil things, but they become destructive when the people moving in have no interest in maintaining social services for people other than themselves. If the tech sector wishes to maintain the image that it is an industry with a 'heart', it would behoove those of us working in it to inform ourselves as to the consequences of our economic decisions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com