Second Check...summary of eminent domain...

I think issues that are going on all over the city could pertain to eminent domain...most importantly right now and how by Division and Clark there are low income housing that is being taken down to make room for a new area or extension of an area in Cabrini Greens....I was having trouble a bit trying to find more information as well as truly being able to understand what exactly is eminent domain. I don't know if I truly understand what it is, but I think or believe that it is when for instance a government agency or another agency tries to move or buy property to get rid of an unwanted person in the area. That is what I think Cabrini Green is doing to the residents who are from low income families. Trying to kick them out of their homes and make them move. The fact remains that if the families move out of their area where will they go and what will become of them?

Second Check..discussion of classmates blog...

I really liked reading Nicole H's blog pertaining to her reflection of the "Uncool Cities" article that we read about a couple or few weeks ago. How she talked about her ideas on what the author was trying to say about the article itself. I do believe that there is a truth behind the idea that we need to learn how to survive and then go from there. That in that respect we do have a right to learn about what is going on in our own neighborhoods, cities, and or even states. That there are troubles that will always being going on and it is our responsibility to learn how to adapt to our changing troubles and then kind of move on to the next set of problems that one might face. I just think that her blog can give a new perspective to the whole idea of cities as a whole.

Second Blog check...Community Building to me.....

Community building to me is a way for the community to build up itself and the persons living in the community. Whether that is by having a garden planted by the persons living in that area. By having a pot luck night at a local community venue, the point is that a community builds itself up with the persons in the community. One can not have in my mind a community building without anybody trying to build up the community. Those two ideas have to go hand in hand.

Community building is another way to improve the area one lives in. That can be done by lets say a building in the area needs renovations and everyone in the community is going to help out by painting a wall, or an outside door and so on....

Other community buildings could be informational issues, such as letting a person know about a certain health issue that could readily affect them or someone they might very well know.

Some of the community organizations that are helping to build in Chicago or at least in the Chicago land area are for example CDC. While yes they help in the entire world they are also set up in every large city to help make sure persons living in that city are able to get, talk to and receive information that can be pregnant to some one's health. Another Chicago land organization that is building community are also non profit, for example those Near Northwest Neighborhood Network, where this organization has decided to help out the community by letting people know about housing that is available, jobs that a person might be able to fill and community safety and activities for the youth in the area to be involved with instead of doing things one could possibly regret later on in life. All of those are ways the community is building itself to be better in the city of Chicago. Like i said, a city can not have community building projects or community building in the slightest without the persons willing to put in the work to help the community. In all both community and persons go hand in hand and as along as there are people wanting to help in a community those communities will always for the most part be able to have community buildings and organizations dedicated to helping out the community around them. It is just up to everyone to lend a hand and contribute.

Second Check....Discussion of Article 18 in text...!!

First off I want to say that I would have to agree with the statement made by Jane Jacobs, "that cities are for people." In the same breath that statement makes me think though cities are for people, people needs big businesses, bankers, persons to make a city run. Otherwise without those same things in a city, making that city run, it is not a city then. For example, the city of Chicago has many highways that run right through the city. It also has many different aspects to this city that I am sure people would not like to happen to a city. The truth it that city life needs upgrades, technological advances to help to make the city work better. Though some upgrades are not good for a city they are just a way for some top notch CEO's to get more money. Some are worth the advance in technology.....

After reading the section on how Jacobs believed how cities should have street corner stores not chain stores. The only problem with that, I know some might not agree with me is that some chain stores are not that bad. Take Walgreen's or CVS stores for instances, those same stores help families save money with their prescriptions plus allow people to be able to buy things that they would need. Those same things then are universal at all of the chain stores instead of having to take a chance and guess where one could find a particular item. Some small non chain stores are nice but some chain stores try to help and give back to the community.

Though yes it seems like Jacobs was a very influential person in that time period....Jacobs seemed like she liked to see less chance in those same neighborhoods. Some change is a necessity and is needed to make good things happen. More importantly I think that change will happen continuously because technology improves. Only when technology improves then one will see how everything improves.

Someone who is addressing urban issues and talking about those same issues are politicians trying to discuss issues that are damaging to the population and the persons in out Sociology class. We are all discussing issues of urban society.

Second Check....Reflection on Joel Kotkin's Uncool Cities!!

I must agree with the end of the article saying how, "political leaders must realise that great cities need schools for families, transport that works, jobs for the middle and the aspiring working classes" says Joel Kotkin. I believe this to be true because in order for a city to be able to grow and be successful in it's own right there have to be fundamental things that work for that city, like buses to be able to go to and from work and the grocery store for necessary things that a family would need. Take for example the city of Chicago, Chicago has its own problems like crime, but one thing this city always will have is public transportation for people to use and this city has schools and most of the school in the city of Chicago are good schools that provide a good instruction for their students to learn in.

My last point is how persons will run from cities that are to busy trying to build a society based on new end industry type things....People don't want to have just non essential things in their area. People want museums to be able to learn art and show that to their children at a non expensive price. People want to be able to go out and enjoy life, i.e. eat out, see movies, travel to new areas for shows whether it is for a live show or not. People don't always want new condos being put up at every new block. Most importantly people want their city to stay a city and place where their children can grow and learn and experience life and the life around them. People do not want a city that is based like an industry, for example I Robot. In that movie technology and industry won over cities and people were not allowed to live a life like normal people should because of what industry did with the new technology and that same technology took people's fun, power for life and choices away. That is the perfect example for this reflection on what people would not want versus what they would want to have in their lives.

Second Blog Check...Entry of my choosing....text entry...!!

I travel there and everywhere....
I talk with and sit next to new and exciting people....

When I am out this place never sleeps.....
There are no open or closing hours to speak off.....
One can find a coffee place, burger bar, bar, etc...anywhere.

People love to dance and make their mark....
Boys and girls make their beats out on those streets...

We have lots of schools to choose from....
we all can make their mark in this world,
they learn in many different forms...

There is always talll and short building....
railways, trains, buses and cars....
This is our place....This is my place....
This place is the city that never sleeps.....
No it is not New York....this is Chicago!!!

Second Check...Entry of my own...None text...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5jzFICVSBM


"The City", Theme song...

I was unable to put this song on the actual blog...but I did include the song website....I think this song depicts any city very well. Everyone feels differently when the moon is out, everyone is getting ready to go out and have a good time. This song reminds me of how much Chicago loves to have a good time. Also, this song reminds me how we live in one of the cities in America where the city never sleeps. Chicago is a lively city, an upbeat city, diverse city and most of all Chicago is our city to live in and party in....!!!!

For Second Check.......What it means for Chicago not to hold the 2016 Olympics!!!

First off though it would be very interesting and cool for the city of Chicago to host the 2016 Olympics, I think that it is better that we are not hosting the games in 2016. My reasoning for this is as follows:

First, there would have to be buildings developed in order to house all of the contestants. Where exactly would those building go? There is over crowding in much of the city. Building are already close together and many homes do not already have backyards. The areas that do or would provide adequate room have trees, and flowers and beautiful space that I am sure not many people would want to give up so freely.

Not to mention that traffic will increase terribly. Most of the people in the Chicago land area have bad road rage, hosting the games will make cab drivers as well as anyone else on the road more angry. Second, there is the issue of overcrowding. I mentioned already how there would have to be building built in order to house everyone. There is not much space in Chicago to move around freely. Building more housing complexes would make this already crowed city more crowed.

Then there are taxes. Most don't like to allow tax increases when it comes to children in schools who need books, desks, etc.... Does one actually think that the people of Chicago are going to want a large increase of taxes for the paying of the housing complexes, to pay for the contractors, electricians and pave roads. The increase in taxes is going to be something that Chicago and the suburbs are going to have to pay for.

Third, I do not know about anyone else. I know that in the Chicago land area we have enough traffic, enough persons mad about anything and everything wrong with the city that can not be changed. I like our city just the way it is.....I like to be able to take the train into the city and not have to worry about not having access to the road or where I want to go because the contestants are training and doing whatever it is that contestants do..... I like to be able to enjoy my city and live a nice life coming to the city and leaving the city in the already bad traffic. Not hosting the 2016 games allows me to do more of that, enjoy life.

Discussion of Census Forms and Questions

On the U.S. Census I decided to answer number 1:

1.) Why do you think "Indians not taxed" were an exception in the instructions on enumeration?

Answer: I believe that the way they wanted to embrace the Indians was to only be able to count them as humans and part of the population was if the Indians were being part of the white society. If the Indians go into the white world, be part of the white culture then that is the only way the Indians would be included into the population census.

4.) What is your overall sense about the likelihood of achieving accuracy on these forms for counting and gathering data about the population?

Answer: I believe that while these forms and ways for gathering data are nice and have many attributes for why we do them, I believe that they have just as many faults. Persons would be happy to lie about their status because of fear of being caught by immigration. I also think that the idea behind why we do a Census every ten years is a really good thing. It allows a city to understand how and why it is growing as well as what makes the population grow. Could it be the environment, families want more pace and more of a quiet life? These kinds of questions can always give a society more information on a culture and what cultures do. I just think there need to be better questions asked on the Census for those same persons in fear of answering honestly.

Reflections and Impressions on Websites.

In the first website I looked at entitled revealing Chicago I thought the pictures were nice, interesting and pretty but to be honest they didn't really stand out. I can say my favorite picture was the one of Lake Shore Drive where it meets Sheridan Road. That picture was pretty and nice and I think it does captivate the city really well but for the most part those pictures did not motivate me to want to take pictures of the city. I believe a picture one states should be motivated as well as breath taking to some degree by the picture taker.

The second website I looked at entitled picturing Chicago was a great site. I love it. Just looking at the album entitled North Shore North Side was diverse and culturally interesting. It was not just pictures of people, places, trees, or empty buildings but rather it was pictures of signs attached to building in black and white. I love black and white. I think it makes the building or picture itself more full of imagination for the viewer. The pictures show a culture and the people who live in that culture. I believe to the fullest that is the way pictures should be taken in a society and city. Especially one as big, full and diverse as Chicago. This site makes me want to go out and take pictures to see what my city has to offer.

The last website I didn't really enjoy either. I felt it was to bland and boring. There was not imagination and or intrigue to make a person want to look at what they have to offer.

Discussion of Classmates blog...!!

I read Nicole's blog posting talking about her second city, how she feels that she has a second city. I thought it was very interesting and exciting to see how she compares the facts between Mesa and Chicago. How Chicago is a fast paced city and Mesa is more slow. Where in Mesa the city dwellers tend to enjoy their day and talk to other people not worrying about the businesses of the day and in Chicago everyone is so busy going about their day that no one stops to just enjoy it. I would have to completely agree with Nicole. I have never been to Mesa, but I find it more interesting how she feels like these two cities that are totally far apart have so much in common.

I think her blog approaches the subject of cities because through the many different cities and comparing those same cities with the people who run around in them doing their daily activities we all can learn how cities have changed. By learning how cities have changed and what we can do to better them we can help improve the dynamic of the way cities are made.

Do I agree or disagree with Richard Florida's arguement as stated in Article 9?

I believe that Richard Florida has many good and valid points that he makes about the creative class. He mentions how, "the creative class wants to be in a place where there is diversity, lots to do, places to be and see while still being about to be who they are without depriving themselves of something in the process." I believe that to be true.

Though a city itself can strive for greatness, greatness does not always come to those who strive for it just because they want it bad enough. Persons especially those with power have to be willing to make changes. Like for example, instead of spending precious money on things that may not be wanted that much, like expensive stadiums for instance one can spend it on things to do in the area that will attract creative people to want to work and live in the area. Without those things no one is going to want to be with that job. A person is going to choose a job that is fun, with lots to do outside of work to be creative with. A person gets much of their creativity from their lives and their everyday activities. How will a person be able to use that creative genius if they live in a place with nothing much to offer?

The fact is that they won't be able to prosper. Cities that have been unable to get creative people to want to live in their city have done all the damage to themselves and their cities as a whole because they are unwilling to except what creative people want in their city. The political people in charge believe that people in the creative class want lots of things that deal with sports in their town, because of sports that will be the attraction that gets the creative class to come and stay when it fact it pushed persons father away says, Richard Florida.

I have to agree with most if not all of what he is saying. I am getting closer to graduation, probably within the next year in a half or so maybe less and I even have been thinking about where I want to work and live for my future. I can say this without a doubt I would not want to live in a city where there is no diversity, people being able to live how they want, where they want. I love the fact that cities that are good have lots to do and so much more to offer then just a place to live. Chicago does a great job in being a place where creative people can grow and prosper.

One interesting thing wrote, either poem or picture....Deals with city.

I love walking through the area seeing all the buildings.
There's so much to do, so many friends be hanging.
People conversate with multiple nationalities.
Going here and there and everywhere in small and big yellows moving mobiles.

There are police officials, teachers, students and home business owners.
Mothers, sisters, dads and children all walking side by side.
You can live high in the sky or low to the ground.

The night life is always alive, whether it be at the bar at the concert or in a ballfeild.
Everyone visits here at least once in their life.
Traffic always sucks.
Yes it's a city, It's my city.

Discussion of article "Gentrification", from internet readings for September 17.

Upon reading this article entitled "Gentrification", by Tom Slater I was sort of confused. I was a little like what is exactly going on and if I can figure out exactly what is Gentrification? I have an idea of what the article was talking about, which is basically how the business developers have found a way to push or move people from poor neighboring cities which have slummed a little bit to become better and bigger if the developers can just move the poor out of the way.

The article seems to imply that in order to make these cities better and improve them with business is to replace the old wit the new. Which means in a sense that one has to get rid of the bad, old and stuff that does not belong and replace it with new homes, businesses and ideas that would then bring more people and possibly a better class of persons into an area. In order to do this, those same persons who have not had a place to go before still will not have a place to go when Gentrification begins. The poor/lower middle class will be disbursed and left without possibly a place to live. With that said, if one does not have a place to live some could possibly loose their jobs because of Gentrification taking place in their area.

If one starts to think about the neighborhoods who have people who live there that are poorer, and Gentrification starts those same people might not want to leave and this can cause a fight/riots or disagreements. Persons starting these fights, riots and when that happens the police tend to get involved. That causes an increase in violence, criminals and brutality. When Gentrification happens more people tend to get arrested and put into the jail system. This causes a higher rate of people that could be unable to get a jobs because of felonies and the end result is that those same people will have no place to go. That number of people can rise substantially. The process just repeats itself in Gentrification. It may repeat itself in the same area in some way shape or form or it may move from one area to another. That is what I believe to be some what true when I think of how Gentrification can affect some one's lives.

Reflection on Article 5 of Textbook.

I must say that once I started to read this article I couldn't help but start asking questions about what happened and why they happened. I also couldn't help but ask questions like why does this happen and if this happens to people then this could be why it is happening. It was like I was trying to figure out a cause and effect type of situation.

I first asked about race and class. If persons were trying to flee and police were not letting them flee from the flood in New Orleans, were the persons being turned away white or black? I think that from a Sociological standpoint it is important to ask those types of questions because with the answer being either yes or no it can give an impression on whether or not discrimination or social class could be an issue on why some were turned away. Then there was a mention on how, "Lawson placed a more important emphasis on property and not on a human life." This can tell a person without speaking that the police department believed at the time that the persons living in New Orleans were going to spread crime from their town to the town the evacuees were being taken too, which was Gretna. The police department didn't want to have the violence spread and escalate. Plus by this statement that describes Lawson, and how they wanted to place a price on property. Shows how much they discriminate from those who live in New Orleans thinking that persons who live there steal and pillage the area and are no good at all. With that kind of thinking, why would Gretna care about those who might be less fortunate then they are?

When I read how the persons living in Gretna which is where this all happened at, believe that the law enforcement agency was correct in the way they handled the situations of cutting people off and not letting people be helped by staying in the city. The reason why I thought this was particularly interesting is because both white and black persons believed that the law enforcement was correct in their actions. This was interesting, it makes one wonder why they both feel this way as well as how long black persons have been living in a predominately white area? Last but not least, have white persons had more of an affect on a black persons ways? Like for example, studies always show that when different persons come together to live in close proximity sometimes one person brings and takes on straights of the other person.

Next there was a mention on how persons were not allowed to enter without a vehicle. This is somewhat of a bias statement to make. What happens to those who lost their vehicle in the flood? What do they do because they do not have a car anymore, DIE? That is what it sounds like the city of Gretna wants to happen to those who are now less fortunate then themselves. Also if one wants to go a step deeper. What if one can not afford a car? Are the people of Gretna saying that they are better because they have a car, and are able to buy things for themselves? The persons of New Orleans are not because something bad happened to them? People have the raw tendency to look bad upon those who have had misfortunes. It is something that people have always done and can not usually be ignored.

Lastly, the one thing that started to make me think is though it sucks that some people got turned away if the police department did not turn some away would another city have been ruined. I say ruined because over population, violence, poverty, social economic stimulus or the bringing down of property prices could happen to an area when something tragic happens. Though this might be unlikely, it can still happen. I just think that the people who lost so much when the hurricane happened in New Orleans got really screwed. That the city and police from Lawson and Gretna should not have done what they did to the evacuees. They should have helped them more. Set up housing and food destinations. Not turned them away like they were a peice of trash.

My favorite time in the City!!

I remember my favorite time I was in the city. There is something so special about the way a person can feel going into the city with friends or meeting up with friends. I specifically remember a winter about three years ago maybe two years ago where one of my friends and I took the train into the city so that we can walk around and see the lights on building and the huge Christmas tree that gets put up every year.

The best part was that when we got there, there were vendors and little shops open all around this Christmas tree. It was really nice, awesome and really cool. There was not just one kind of person but rather there were persons from every minority and majority. Everyone here didn't mind who was who and where someone else came from it was like everyone was just happy to be there around friends and family and persons. It was a really nice experience to have.

The main reason why I hold that experience so close to my heart is not so much because something big happened on that day but rather the times I ever went into the city it was always like people were so busy trying to get where they were going and not caring about other people along the way. The loud noises, the car horns going off because someone has taken to long to turn right or left or has not gone through the green light yet. On that day, it seemed like none of that was going on. There was no one yelling at another person for some reason, no horns, no screaming, and so on. It was just a nice, relaxing day in the city. On days like that, I love the city.

Differences...why I think we choose Suburbia over Cities?

After getting out of class on last Tuesday, something stuck with me. Why do people choose to live in Suburbia over the City life? I heard in class by another student that possibly one reason why people choose Suburbia is because they want to be left alone. I started to think is that why my family lives in the Suburbs?

I started to dissect my life living in the area I live in verses living in a city. If my family was to live in a city then there would probably not be as much yard space and that is something my mom wanted to have for my brothers and I growing up. My mom also wanted the added advantage of possibly not having her kids go to schools that might be over crowed because of the amened population in the area. Yes though my neighborhood is a lot quieter then the city is, it is rather enjoy able non the less. I don't have to hear loud car horns late at night or person's slamming on their brakes or yelling for that matter. I can say, "I'm going to bed and have the added advantage of falling asleep and very rarely do I get woken up late at night by some noise." That I enjoy and so do my brothers and mother.

I also started to look around and think was is the violence down as much as one would think in the Suburbs? I don't hear about that much violence. There are always the kid who jumped someone else at school or outside of school. There are always going to be muggings no matter where one goes. On a gran scheme of things, I won't say that the Suburbs are violence free. Possibly not as much violence as a bigger city would have at any given moment. Not because I think that my area I live in is better, but simply because a student in class said this best, "when there are more people in an area then one would expect the violence rate to be higher or at least more noticeable." I believe that to be true. I know my area has violence but I also know that because my area does not have that many people then the violence is not going to be that high.

For me in conclusion, I love living in Suburbia. I love the trees and the garden in my backyard. I love being able to take a cup of coffee onto my back deck and listen to the birds and see the sun go down or come up. I can talk to my neighbors which I do frequently. I do know all of my neighbors, next to me and behind me. I like being able to have a fire in the back yard and not have to worry about getting caught and having to put it out. I enjoy the laid back way of living and that is what I get to have by living in the Suburbs. If one enjoys the City then that is great. I am not trying to make my area sound better. I am just trying to figure out some kind of differences of City life and existence over Suburb live, that is all.