Chicago Doesn’t Own Its Own Streets | Climate Town
www.youtube.com
DON’T TAKE THE DEAL! Check us out on Nebula: https://go.nebula.tv/climatetown Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/ClimateTown sUbScRiBe FoR mOrE ViDeOs: https:/...

Chicago is held hostage by a 75 year lease of its parking meters to Morgan Stanley, impacting public transport and alternate transportation funding.

  • chuckleslord@lemmy.worldEnglish
    122·
    1 year ago

    Nothing mentioned in the sources about this being a source. Not cited. I don’t think this video was pulled from that. Sorry, nothing against the piece (never read it), but this is definitely Climate Town’s bread and butter. It’s just what they do.

    • pdxfed@lemmy.worldEnglish
      85·
      1 year ago

      The author of the article I linked literally won a national magazine award as an investigative journalist in 2008 for several pieces he wrote, that includes what happened to chicago’s streets, which he then went on to publish in a book Griftopia and several others. Video is an important format but your video has youtube folks that care about a subject talking about well documented issues, that people like Matt Taibbi helped unearth. As long as people learn about it that’s fine, but just becuase a youtube channel who brings on an expert “matt from matt’s youtube channel” doesn’t mean it’s the same quality.

      • chuckleslord@lemmy.worldEnglish
        51·
        1 year ago

        I’m sorry, this is probably my neurodivergence speaking, but that’s not evidence that Climate Town pulled from that book.

        Listen, it’s not even relevant, because it’s not even the intent of your original comment. That could just be like, “Hey guys, if you think that’s crazy, you should check out this book that goes into this happening not only in Chicago but across the entire United States.” But you’re insistence that that book IS the source is just completely throwing me. Why? I guess I don’t understand why the need to exaggerate the connection between the two. They both cover the same topic, that was all the in you needed to plug that book/article.

        And your reply comment is an appeal to originality and an appeal to quality. It’s fallacious and irrelevant to my point. And kind of disappointing that you’re disparaging good content to make your thing look better.