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.
We need our leaders to step up and stop this nonsense. Social inequality stems from people's OWN actions. If you want to live in a nice area you have to WORK like the rest of us. This hand out mentality is becoming sickening.
A democrat will be the city's next mayor. They will cooperate with HUD. Get ready for some new friends from Mott Haven moving into your neighborhood, dude. On Section 8. There won't be any point of you and your buddies in Riverdale denying that Riverdale is apart of the Bronx, because your new friends from Mott Haven will still gladly claim the Bronx identity. I'm sure they can send some people in from the Edenwald projects over to your hood as well.
A democrat will be the city's next mayor. They will cooperate with HUD. Get ready for some new friends from Mott Haven moving into your neighborhood, dude. On Section 8. There won't be any point of you and your buddies in Riverdale denying that Riverdale is apart of the Bronx, because your new friends from Mott Haven will still gladly claim the Bronx identity. I'm sure they can send some people in from the Edenwald projects over to your hood as well.
I never thought NYCHA was an integration program. You could say that the 80/20s and the rent stabilization help big time with integration as they keep lots of low income people in Manhattan. But the NYCHA units segregate people in public housing, while the low income in 80/20s live in the same buildings as those who are wealthy. Ditto for the rent stabilized apartments.
They're not talking about building integration. They're talking about neighborhood integration. NYCHA definitely succeeds at that in at least some places (Lincoln Center area, Chelsea, etc.), though that was not the original intent. (Then again, nor was the original intent of NYCHA to house the poor, or provide permanent homes.)
The point of reference is to things like the recent mandate for Westchester County to build more low-income housing in wealthy towns.
They're not talking about building integration. They're talking about neighborhood integration. NYCHA definitely succeeds at that in at least some places (Lincoln Center area, Chelsea, etc.), though that was not the original intent. (Then again, nor was the original intent of NYCHA to house the poor, or provide permanent homes.)
The point of reference is to things like the recent mandate for Westchester County to build more low-income housing in wealthy towns.
We all should be aware that NYCHA was originally implemented to be temporary housing. However salary stagnation, fluctuating unemployment, and rising item prices forced NYCHA tenants to continue to house second and third generations. HUD plan may not proceed since powerful NYC real estate lobby (ex. Corcoran, Trump, Lefrak aka Kings & Queens aka Urban American) blocks these initatives. Rent and mortgages in New York will continue to be "TOO DAMN HIGH" since politicians bow to this mighty lobby.
NYCHA was NOT created to be temporary housing. It was created to provide decent housing to working class people who were, at the time, living in overcrowded and unsafe tenement buildings. Whole neighborhoods of tenements were razed for this purpose. It was part of the 1930s vision of the modern city and was absolutely intended to be permanent.
This idea that NYCHA was created as temporary housing is repeated CONSTANTLY but is false.
NYCHA was NOT created to be temporary housing. It was created to provide decent housing to working class people who were, at the time, living in overcrowded and unsafe tenement buildings. Whole neighborhoods of tenements were razed for this purpose. It was part of the 1930s vision of the modern city and was absolutely intended to be permanent.
This idea that NYCHA was created as temporary housing is repeated CONSTANTLY but is false.
Well, it's more nuanced than that. The very first NYCHA buildings were constructed as temporary housing for returning soldiers after WWII. The buildings themselves were of a permanent sort, but it's less than clear what the creators of NYCHA thought would happen with the buildings once the soldiers left. It's also unclear why they thought any residents would leave, though certainly it was marketed that way. It is true that back in the 1940s and 50s it was considered desirable urban policy to encourage middle class families to decamp for the suburbs, and NYCHA was viewed to an extent as a way to transition families from urban squalor to suburban life. And, for the first decade or so of NYCHA, up until the 1960s, they really were a bit of a revolving door, with most families not staying more than a few years--possibly because they were initially marketed to middle class families, who found the slowly decaying buildings less desirable than advertised.
The problem really was part of the general failure of mid-century architecture and urban planning to understand the human psyche and basic tenets of proper policy. Arguing about it today is pretty pointless.
NYCHA was NOT created to be temporary housing. It was created to provide decent housing to working class people who were, at the time, living in overcrowded and unsafe tenement buildings. Whole neighborhoods of tenements were razed for this purpose. It was part of the 1930s vision of the modern city and was absolutely intended to be permanent.
This idea that NYCHA was created as temporary housing is repeated CONSTANTLY but is false.
Your opinion that NYCHA was not created for temporary housing was main impetus for New York politicians to ignore the agency. You must think working families who took part in agency back in 1930s ONLY aspired to stay in these buildings forever. The agency originally wanted working ethnicities to use agency as alternate choice to tenements TEMPORARILY and save up money from work or social programs like G.I. Bill to progress economically. The fact that unambitious low-income "leeches" dominated this city system does not falsify fact that NYCHA was originally intended for temporary living. You thinking that NYCHA was created to permanently keep low-income and working class folk there is false and irresponsible. BB - don't be mad bro. You really don't believe everything you read in Wikipedia... DO YOU ?! peace
Your opinion that NYCHA was not created for temporary housing was main impetus for New York politicians to ignore the agency. You must think working families who took part in agency back in 1930s ONLY aspired to stay in these buildings forever. The agency originally wanted working ethnicities to use agency as alternate choice to tenements TEMPORARILY and save up money from work or social programs like G.I. Bill to progress economically. The fact that unambitious low-income "leeches" dominated this city system does not falsify fact that NYCHA was originally intended for temporary living. You thinking that NYCHA was created to permanently keep low-income and working class folk there is false and irresponsible. BB - don't be mad bro. You really don't believe everything you read in Wikipedia... DO YOU ?! peace
So then, what made NYCHA into what it is today? And I wonder if NYCHA also wasn't also a big public works/make works project as well. It was during the depression and the Roosevelt administration was experimenting with everything, including public housing, in an attempt to get the nation back on its feet.
A democrat will be the city's next mayor. They will cooperate with HUD. Get ready for some new friends from Mott Haven moving into your neighborhood, dude. On Section 8. There won't be any point of you and your buddies in Riverdale denying that Riverdale is apart of the Bronx, because your new friends from Mott Haven will still gladly claim the Bronx identity. I'm sure they can send some people in from the Edenwald projects over to your hood as well.
If Barack Hussein Obama so strongly believes in neighborhoods integrating, he should surely welcome nice big housing projects next to his places of residence (both the White House and his other residences).
If Barack Hussein Obama so strongly believes in neighborhoods integrating, he should surely welcome nice big housing projects next to his places of residence (both the White House and his other residences).
There are already some pretty gully areas not far from the White House
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.
peace
