@kimmaicutler @petesaunders3 because a market based argument for addressing structural inequality would be something we'd dig in these parts
-
-
-
@tolles@kimmaicutler Lead to loss of chance for city residents to build value the same way suburbanites did. Is that more equitable? 3/3 - 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@kimmaicutler@petesaunders3 is there an implication here that if we actually ran cities more equitably, we'd see value created? :)Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
@ISANobody_@tanzoak@tmccormick@tolles@kimmaicutler You make my point about "citadels of affluence" when you question if S Side needed. - 3 more replies
-
-
-
@tanzoak@tmccormick@tolles@kimmaicutler No "no-go" zones in Chicago? Then whey doesn't S lakefront look a whole lot better?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@tanzoak@petesaunders3@tmccormick@kimmaicutler what? We're as racist as anywhere! Bayview, lowland Oakland l, EPA...Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@tanzoak@tolles@petesaunders3@kimmaicutler you don't think it would be viewed with suspicion by many, as gentrification/displacement? -
@tmccormick@tanzoak@tolles@petesaunders3@kimmaicutler don't wanna build in rich nabes, fear of decline, not poor nabes, gentrification.. - 6 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.