Waiting for my Cash to Trickle

The cover of the most recent Washingtonian features a blonde middle-aged woman and a middle-aged dude in a blazer (or a blue suit jacket) in an immaculately designed room. Here's the text:

How Washington Got Really Rich...And How It's Changed Us

What an inappropriate cover. Guess what Washingtonian editors, your two middle-aged blue-blood models do not represent the Washington that I'm living in. I'm willing to bet that most of Washington is not raking it in. Last I checked, large swaths of DC still had some discouraging problems with poverty, unemployment, and homelessness.

Wikipedia features the following graph documenting unemployment rates by ward:

Well, God damn. Once you get rid of everything east of the Capitol, Washington is doing great!

Seriously. 16.3%!? Holy shit.

Washingtonian sure has a lot of nerve. I guess they didn't get the memo that most real Washingtonians aren't wealthy Georgetowners. Half of Washington is startlingly poor. But it's easier to ignore the other half, isn't it?


  1. Well, wealthy DC residents are the primary readers of The Washingtonian.

    This month's issue is meant to allow rich old white guys to masturbate to themselves.

  2. 50% of black men in NYC are unemployed, and among the other half who knows how many are underemployed.

    16% isn't so bad. there are other areas of the country w/ double-digit unemployment rates but they are most rural. the media does make it always seem like everyone but you is making it....

  3. 50% of black men in NYC are unemployed...

    That can't be close to accurate. I need a link or something.

  4. "Guess what Washingtonian editors, your two middle-aged blue-blood models do not represent the Washington that I'm living in."

    But they represent the Washingtonian readership.

    Actually, since you live in the Friendship Heights area with the 1.5% to 3.0% unemployment rate, that IS the Washington you live in. East of the Capitol is another world. You have really no idea what it is like to live other there, other than that residents don't have a Rodman's nearby to pick up a nice fresh slice of Manchego.

    I live in Upper NW DC and have read the Washingtonian a few times. I've noticed the Washingtonian isn't for people who actually live in DC. It's more for the upper 30's plus, well-heeled crowed who might work in DC, but who lives in Alexandria, Potomac, Bethesda, King Farm, etc. Those who view DC as a place to be entertained for the night before they retire back to their cushy, ginormous suburban dwellings.

  5. I know all this. But the nerve to talk about how Washington is so rich while ignoring the problems that effect (affect?) the majority of the city is totally negligent.

    It's a "let them eat cake" mentality.

  6. Rusty,

    How many Washingtonian magazines do you think are delivered into areas east of the capital.

    If I went into the heavily fortified stores in Anacostia do you think that there are Washingtonian magazines in the magazine stand next to The Source, XXL and Vibe magazines?

  7. >>50% of black men in NYC are unemployed...

    This is wildly inaccurate.

    Do you people really not understand Rusty's point? A magazine makes an assertion about a city that only applies to one part of that city. Regardless of the readership of the magazine, that is still a misleading statement.

    I think Rusty's point is, if anything, so obvious that its very simplicity is escaping you.

  8. Burger king is always hiring. Of course, that would require actually showing up for work and not being a miscreant while at your job. Despite what "The Post" says and "Being a Black Man", there's plenty of work to be had - if you're willing to work.
    Shit, why do you think Latinos are swimming and climbing over the border for work??? The Blacks missed the boat (can't really blame them after their last experience getting on a boat).