Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In theory, there should be no poverty or rough neighborhoods in Manhattan, in 2015, because there is perhaps a million people working there who would love to live somewhere, anywhere, on the Island of Manhattan- instead of driving or taking mass transit back in forth to their homes miles and miles away. There are lots of housing options for them but mostly in the Northern part of Manhattan where gentrification attempts are struggling due to poor housing stock and rough neighborhoods.
If we had a system like China, the government would see that the old run down housing stock on the North Side of Manhattan was torn down and replaced it with beautiful housing for the countless middle class or richer people who would love to live in a safe beautiful home close to their work and where the action is. The poor people who use to live there would go to the Bronx, etc.
But we are in a democracy and a capitalistic economy in America, so there is still poverty stricken people and rough neighborhoods close to subway lines close to millions of jobs in Manhattan.
Where has the capitalistic system failed in Manhattan (NYC) and there was an attempt at gentrification, but it failed due to the people- or other issues? (What happened?)
Government housing projects and, to some extent, rent regulation are the only things hold back gentrification in Manhattan (and may other areas of NYC.) These should be eliminated, and redevelopment allowed to happen. The city economy would be much better off.
Government housing projects and, to some extent, rent regulation are the only things hold back gentrification in Manhattan (and may other areas of NYC.) These should be eliminated, and redevelopment allowed to happen. The city economy would be much better off.
If they tried to totalky eliminate the housing projects think riots that make Baltimore look like childs play.
Look at the political consequences of the Baltimore riots.
Look at the political consequences of the Baltimore riots.
Aside from they might actually prosecute a few cops for once, none?
I don't think gentrification has failed anywhere in Manhattan; it just hasn't reached parts of upper Manhattan. The projects in gentrified areas are basically just islands. There may have been some failed attempts before the current state though.
Another clueless troll post from someone who does not have a firm grasp of NYC history, in particular Manhattan.
First of all what law says in theory or otherwise "... there should be no poverty or rough neighborhoods in Manhattan, in 2015..." Who died and made you king?
It is only within *VERY* recent memory that formerly "bad" areas of Manhattan below Harlem have gentrified to the point of becoming highly desirable.
Am not just speaking of Hell's Kitchen but wide swaths of Manhattan including but not limited to; The Lower East Side, East Village, The Bowery, China Town, Tribeca, Soho, parts of the West Village, parts of Greenwich Village, Chelsea, Far West Side, Meat Packing District, Yorkville and so forth.
Can remember when Mid-Town East (high twenties though the thirties from Lexington going east) was full of streetwalkers. I know this because when looking for apartments on the UES back in the early 1990's brokers warned one off the area.
It was not *THAT* long ago that much of the Upper West Side was pretty much a slum. So much so that the area from West 81st Street to West 97th Street from CPW to Amsterdam was slated for clearance and development under "Urban Renewal".
Not everyone living in these "rough" areas were poor or whatever. People however lived where they could find affordable housing. That or they simply were born in or had lived in the area and saw no need to move. Many of these neighborhoods were mixtures of low, working and middle class households.
There are many still living who know first hand what the above "urban renewal" schemes accomplished. The author James Baldwin called them "negro removal") which has given wholesale gentrification a bad name ever since.
Thanks to the efforts of Robert Moses and others pushing such devices entire once stable but low income neighborhoods were torn down, torn apart, divided and so forth with their residents scattered. Whatever sense of local community was often destroyed which is why many today are very leery of gentrification. They also learned how to fight government officials which not only lead to the downfall of Robert Moses but put an end to wholesale gentrification in NYC.
What is going on now is a piece meal approach as slowly developers buy up buildings and push out previous residents. Much of the new housing is *not* for former low or even moderate income households but those on the higher end of the scale. Indeed the City is having so much problems creating "affordable housing" because it does not own enough land nor can it take it without a long and probably bitter fight using eminent domain. What is left is for various "80/20" schemes to lure property owners into doing the gentrification but also provide some sort of low or moderate housing in the process.
Regarding the rest of the OP's premise that there shouldn't be "rough or poor" neighborhoods in Manhattan, who says so?
It may come as a shock to the OP but many "low income" areas of NYC house large numbers of civil servants and others whose employment make this city function.
Actors and those in the performing arts long lived in Hell's Kitchen though the UWS. Again much of the former and most of the latter were slums/low rent areas but they provided housing for people who couldn't afford living in NYC otherwise.
Last edited by BugsyPal; 05-02-2015 at 08:37 PM..
Reason: content added/corrections.
Housing projects in a lot of cities have been closed. Massachusetts got rid of rent regulation. It can be done.
And riots only happen when the local LE (usually under the direction of the local political leadership) allow them to happen.
They were closed in Chicago as well, when they moved people out of housing projects into working class suburbs. What happened to those suburbs? They became new ghettos.
So what suburbs in NYC want to take in all those people from the projects? I can tell you none of them do . Short of putting people from the housing projects before they firing squad and doing a mass murder I think NYC is stuck with them.
Even when housing project buildings are destroyed, they give the former housing project residents Section 8 and put them in new welfare housing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
