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.
There was nothing natural in his writing, I'd diss his perceptions just because of that. He's writing in "high scholar" style and frequently folks who do that aren't really part of the real and natural world.
Ultimately the biggest problems are economic - declining wages, the loss of decent paying low skilled jobs, the shift of profits to investments instead of labor, and corporate taxes on the poor through payday loan scams and other methods. Gentrification is nothing more than a symptom of a growing income disparity, and that cannot be fixed through any sort of urban planning. Pretending that it can be just allows the problem to grow.
That's where your incorrect. Gentrification is the income gap made manifest via a shortage of housing where it is desired. It is a "problem" only insofar as it is suggestive or representative of a supply shortage. Shortages of housing very much are the domain of urban planners. They can direct higher densities to specific locations but can also protect areas from wholesale razing by developers.
Shortages of housing very much are the domain of urban planners. They can direct higher densities to specific locations but can also protect areas from wholesale razing by developers.
To be sure - urban planners can only make policy suggestions.
Codes are not put into place to "screw the poor". That is NOT their intention.
Reverse gentrification also displaces people. Houses turn into rentals, rentals turn in to boarding houses. Next thing you know, the neighborhood is unlivable.
As for housing with mediocre quality, it sounds good now, but the first time shoddy building causes someone harm, the folks that shrieked for affordable housing would be the first ones to sue because they were forced to live in sub-standard conditions.
??? The neighborhood by definition IS livable, since you describe a neighborhood into which poor people are moving. You apparently desire to impose your standards if you deem the neighborhood unlivable.
In the scenario you suggest, a cost-benefit analysis would be necessary; like the Fram commercial suggests, poor people are going to pay one way or another. A lot of people would accept some added neighborhood crappiness in exchange for saving enough money.
The problem is that middle class policymakers and NIMBYs believe they are more qualified than the poor to dictate the conditions under which the poor should be permitted to live.
I actually think that it is.. are people entitled to living in a highly desirable area? Not in my opinion.
Nobody is entitled to move into a highly desirable area, but incumbent residents of an area should enjoy some protection. Starting with Proposition 13 in California, this principle is well-established.
Nobody is entitled to move into a highly desirable area, but incumbent residents of an area should enjoy some protection. Starting with Proposition 13 in California, this principle is well-established.
Prop 13 was meant as a check on property taxes - which is great in intent - but the delivery hasn't really worked out that way. The 2% increases have been significantly outpaced by inflation which pushes revenue raising into more regressive forms of taxation. There's also a quite a strong case to be made that while it has protected homeowners who bought a house pre-1978 it's actually made housing more expensive for everyone else who came along after that.
That's where your incorrect. Gentrification is the income gap made manifest via a shortage of housing where it is desired. It is a "problem" only insofar as it is suggestive or representative of a supply shortage. Shortages of housing very much are the domain of urban planners. They can direct higher densities to specific locations but can also protect areas from wholesale razing by developers.
If that is true then why is some of the most expensive real estate in the world also in some of the densely populated areas? Are you saying NYC, Hong Kong, and Tokyo suffer from a lack of density?
I live in an area that is gentrifying right now. Currently there are plans to add about 500 units of housing within 100 yards of my house, and it will not do anything to make housing more affordable, in fact it will probably end up increasing property values.
Honestly, I don't get the whole anti gentrification thing. If people are so against gentrification, do themselves a favor and move to Detroit. Then they can see first hand what a city looks like from lack of development and abandonment. Many older cities need an influx of money to support existing stately older buildings and infrastructure. The poor don't have the money and neighborhoods will decline and in time vanish.
Most of the poor are looking to get out of their aging neighborhoods to newer more spacious suburbs and outer parts of the city. It's a phony argument.
We should be thankful there is reinvestments in our cities so they don't become sprawling slums.
It's hard to believe we are evening having this discussion after seeing what happened in our cities in the 1960's through the early 90's. It's almost laughable.
While very well written, the bottom line of the article could be make much easier...
Gentrification is not a natural outcome. It is, however, the logical outcome of 21st century capitalism, as applied to the urban environment. If we lived under a different socio-economic system (for example, one in which all neighborhoods were run as self-governing housing cooperatives, and there was no private ownership of land at all) we wouldn't see massive changes to neighborhoods in only a decade or two. To actually address gentrification, we must address global capitalism itself.
When I was in China (ten years ago admittedly) the most unusual element to me was there didn't appear to be tremendous income stratification by neighborhood. You'd see a luxury apartment building next to a "middle-class" tower, with both close to shantytowns. Admittedly it might have merely been because the area was in severe flux, but it was very different from what I was used to.
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.
