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.
Exerpt:
“Segregation is a question of choice, and people who chose to live in a neighborhood, we believe, should be able to choose to stay in a neighborhood,” she said in an interview on Monday. “We shouldn’t be telling people you have to move to some other neighborhood.”
Money = Choices................ plain and simple. More money=more choices...............Less money=less choices.
I was reading and still reading Charles marruy book called coming apart. The rich and the educated practice segregation all the time, and it's completely normal to self segregate from others due to survival of thier offsprings.
A small question: Why is it that despite NYC leaning heavily leftist and liberal, it is one of the most segregated cities in America?
Many reasons.
First and foremost people do tend to live where they find others like themselves.
Next it comes down to housing opportunities. Staten Island long as been one of the "whitest" boroughs because it is a place primarily of homeowners with very little rental/multi-family housing in comparison.
First and foremost people do tend to live where they find others like themselves.
Next it comes down to housing opportunities. Staten Island long as been one of the "whitest" boroughs because it is a place primarily of homeowners with very little rental/multi-family housing in comparison.
Yeah, but the article reads that policy has reinforced segregation.
But that is how things roll. They complain about new developments will bring gentrification to Harlem (east and west), Bushwick, Bedford Stuyvesant and a few other places. But then turn around and feel it is their god given right to move into the UES, UWS, Tribeca, Chelsea, Far West Side, East Side, GV, West Village, mid-town, etc..
Anyone complaining about gentrification obviously cannot move into Manhattan below 96th Street. If they could afford to do so, there’d be nothing to complain about.
Yeah, but the article reads that policy has reinforced segregation.
Welfare programs in NYC do indeed NY their nature enforce segregation. They only cover a certain amount of rent, so anyone on them has to live in certain neighborhoods.
There are other factors, such as employment discrimination. There’s the dissolution of Black families due to mass incarceration.
It seems the claim was that the housing lottery tended to give priority to people from the local communities where the housing was located, which meant that people living in more desirable communities got in first when it came to finding the affordable apartments in their neighborhood.
City officials justified it as encouraging people to remain in their neighborhoods, a reward it seemed. Moreover there had to be a carrot to encourage broad support for affordable housing. Otherwise, the arguments regarding gentrification would have followed.
But I sense that the complainants were people from lower income segregated less desirable communities who wanted to use the affordable housing lottery and propel themselves into higher income desirable communities. Thus, the allegations of discrimination.
And because the lefty claim of the day is that all segregation is the result of discrimination rather than personal choice and affordability, the City wanted to hide the evidence of what they were doing.
It seems the claim was that the housing lottery tended to give priority to people from the local communities where the housing was located, which meant that people living in more desirable communities got in first when it came to finding the affordable apartments in their neighborhood.
City officials justified it as encouraging people to remain in their neighborhoods, a reward it seemed. Moreover there had to be a carrot to encourage broad support for affordable housing. Otherwise, the arguments regarding gentrification would have followed.
But I sense that the complainants were people from lower income segregated less desirable communities who wanted to use the affordable housing lottery and propel themselves into higher income desirable communities. Thus, the allegations of discrimination.
And because the lefty claim of the day is that all segregation is the result of discrimination rather than personal choice and affordability, the City wanted to hide the evidence of what they were doing.
That's my take anyway.
That is exactly how things went down, more or less.....
As stated people had little to no problems with new affordable (full of amenities) housing coming to busted neighborhoods. What they wanted was an in to basically Manhattan below 125th (or even 96th) streets and other rich heartlands of the city. Places not just filled with "luxury housing", but best public schools and so forth.
Just like the Jeffersons people are moving on up from busted tenement/ghetto or whatever housing to places like Via57 and other buildings where they otherwise never would get a foot past front door.
This wasn't exactly unexpected. Sam the Eagle and his some kind of housing commissioner made it clear from the get go the old way of unloading affordable housing off site was out. Developers would have to include low and "affordable" housing within same buildings as luxury.
Democrats/liberals long ago figured out what happened after civil rights laws created anti discrimination housing laws. Whites and or anyone else with money packed up and fled to the suburbs, and or otherwise created housing that wasn't affordable. So in long run things ended up same or just as segregated as before.
This mattered to democrats/liberals because on average services such as healthcare, schools, parks. etc.. are generally vastly better in high income areas than low. This is as it should be since those high income persons pay dearly in taxes to fund such things. But now dems (including BdeB) are going to bust the suburbs and any or wealthy urban area.
Affordable housing lotteries have been around since the 1980's. Only difference is back in the day the luxury was built in Manhattan somewhere below Harlem, while the low was some place out in the Bronx, east Brooklyn or other "low income" area.
Why so this big news. Segregation was always legal in Northern portion of the United States,especially in affluent northeast. It was the poorer and inferior south that was forced to desegregate. Segregation Isa big issue here in NYC especially since NYC is a lefty progressive. Do you think those lefty progressive types on the upper west side of the old testament faith, who reads the NYT like if it's a Bible want a bunch of kids north of ivy league school Columbia to attend public schools within the upper west side? Hell no.
Why do you think people pay insane house taxes to live on north-shore Long Island tony neighborhoods? Schools. Superior quality schools. Of course they want their kids socializing with those from similar educated families. It's not a racial issue.. You've bit the bait like the leftists that you accuse of. Many Asian families have moved into those neighborhoods.
LOL at old testament faith people reading NYT like it's a BIBLE. You mean like it's an old testament?
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.
