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.
While both sides of the spectrum can make moral arguments for or against social engineering in Yonkers, I'm not sure one can say at this point that the exercise was a success in the tangible sense, or how comparing it to Newark helps make the case. Now they are trying to apply the same exercise to other towns. Yonkers today has one of the lowest household per capita incomes in Westchester and is facing financial difficulties:
Granted, I have not lived in the area for a long time, so I don't know what Yonkers was like before, but judging by what I saw while living in Yonkers, having a child in the school system, and dealing with local authorities...I can't imagine the desegregation could be called a success.
Instead of forcing the issues correlated with public housing into better-run towns, wouldn't it make more sense to focus energies on improving the already-existing public housing areas? Improve services, schools, crime rates, etc. in places like Yonkers; it just makes sense.
The Yonkers matter back then is a prime example of where one gets beat; everyone, including the loser, knows its over, but the loser still wants to fight!
One of the great difficulties of leadership is convincing the people you lead that all avenues of fight have been exhausted, and to comply by proposing a plan that has as little of a bad impact as possible on the people you lead! But it's hard to lead when the people you lead want little or no compromise, even though some form of what you don't want will have to be accepted. Both Wacisko, and even Spillone, learned those points the hard way. And so did the people of Yonkers.
I remember watching the interviews back then. The same 'issues' of 'economic, not race' brought up on the miniseries came from the interviewees. I remember watching one interview at that time where someone was asked if they would accept any African-Americans in their neighborhood. The answer: Patrick Ewing and Eddie Murphy! I laughed so damn hard......!
Instead of forcing the issues correlated with public housing into better-run towns, wouldn't it make more sense to focus energies on improving the already-existing public housing areas? Improve services, schools, crime rates, etc. in places like Yonkers; it just makes sense.
Translation: Improve public housing, as long as it stays on the other side of town!
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.
