It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Elitism... it's still here

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Hi everyone...

I'm from St Albert, a suburb of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. I'd just like to share with you something that is causing MASSIVE outrage in our community.... First I'll give you a little background.

St Albert is a suburb city of Edmonton, with about 60 000 people, it is generally viewed as being a wealthier city with a low crime rate and low density housing. Recently, there has been a proposal to build a 58 low-income housing complex. This has been an incredible hotly debated issue, and there was a letter written recently about it that has sparked outrage in not only our community level, but in the provincial, and even national level.

This letter shows that Elitism is not only an attitude that TPTB have and use, but that it is also running rank at the community level. This letter absolutely disgusts me, and proves what I think is wrong with the divisions between income classes... i.e. rich and the poor.

Here is the letter:



In the past few months it has become apparent to the people of St. Albert that a proposed project by Habitat for Humanity has been planned for an area of Akinsdale. At first word of this my wife and I had no comment as we believed this would not affect us, but as time wears on we have come to realize that this is an issue that will affect all St. Albert residents.

My family and I are homeowners in a new development in Kingswood. We moved our family and business to St. Albert so our children could have what we believed would be a better upbringing. The list of amenities made the decision easy; some examples are good schools and programs (not so crowded), low crime, a higher standard of living, great recreational possibilities and numerous other aspects. Every example owes itself to one major factor: high or above-average income.

The average family income for St. Albert is higher than in Edmonton or any other area municipality. We moved to St. Albert because we can afford it and we deserve it. This is a great city with great families. We feel comfortable joining in activities we would not have considered in Edmonton.

This development is a bad idea for St. Albert for both current residents and the people who will occupy the new development. Current residents will have to deal with the likeliness of children influenced by crime in our schools and adults in our community. Our cost of living will increase as we will have to pay for low-income subsidies due to higher school fees or other taxes. We won’t feel comfortable taking our kids to activities like movie night in the park or other St. Albert events for fear that there will be unruly families. We can assure each other that measures will be taken to prevent this influence, but that’s not what we want.

We don’t want a police presence at family outings. We don’t want to worry about drugs at elementary schools or gang fights at the high schools. We don’t want to worry about people speeding, possibly hitting our kids, or having to increase our police force. What we want is for St. Albert to remain as it is with very few low-income households, a place for families that work hard to live here. You can say we will screen to make sure those families won’t make the cut, but there is no level of pre-screening that will prevent some form of crime from infiltrating the proposed development. It will happen, guaranteed.

This will start a landslide of things that will turn southeast St. Albert into a low-income area instead of middle class. Low-income families will have difficulty up-keeping the proposed development, and in turn it will bring down the value of the surrounding houses. This sounds unjustified; look at some of the Habitat for Humanity developments in Edmonton where this has already occurred.

This development will be hard for the families moving in. Being low income will make it difficult for children to be accepted in local schools. Like it or not, the children of St. Albert are high-standard children and have no place for low-income classmates. When we first moved to St. Albert our teen had a hard time fitting in because of money and it was hard on him. Now he is good, but it did not go away with just a loving hug — his status was accomplished once his friends saw our house and other possessions. It sounds cruel but that is how it is; ask your children, they will tell you.

Sports activities in St. Albert are another problem area. Sure the base costs are the same as other areas, but the teams here expect more financially from families. In Edmonton there are recreational activities at the YMCA; there are no subsidies for families in St. Albert, nor do we want to pay for it. Our family membership to Servus Place is $1,300 a year plus costs for Fountain Park and other activities, but we can afford it. Putting low-income families in this situation is not reasonable or fair — it would be like giving a new car to someone that can’t afford the gas. They would be better off with a bus pass. I am all for low-income housing in Edmonton. I believe more independent living housing is required in St. Albert and would be better suited than this proposal.


I still can't believe that people can be so ignorant


[edit on 7/4/1010 by Monts]




posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Monts
 


Yeah, St Albert is like the Canadian version of the Hamptons.

Those snobs have always had their noses up. I can understand them not wanting to have low income housing, cause I am if you do look at the stats they do bring crime and increased subsidies to any community.

Altough this is a relatively small project and it's blown out of proportion.

Sad that this sort of elitism is still present. They should just move to another upscale neighboorhood if they don't want to live with folk that are just down on their luck.

~Keeper



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   


We won’t feel comfortable taking our kids to activities like movie night in the park or other St. Albert events for fear that there will be unruly families.


People with less money are unruly?



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by Monts
 

Sad that this sort of elitism is still present. They should just move to another upscale neighboorhood if they don't want to live with folk that are just down on their luck.

~Keeper


Well said... I remember we had pretty snobby neighbors a few years ago... they would complain when we mowed our lawn at 10 in the morning, yet they could have hot tub parties that went on into the wee hours of the morning.

Eventually they moved to a new neighborhood where they had the only built house on the street... all the rest were lots.

I always say... If you don't like the city folk... move to the country. There are less people. Fair enough IMO



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 03:01 AM
link   
i'd say it was shocking, but it isn't. there's more people with this attitude than not, that's why the world is the way it is.



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Just another problem associated with the differential-advantage that Capitalism creates.



new topics

top topics
 
7

log in

join