More handpicked essays just for you.
IMPACT of poverty on the economy of the country
IMPACT of poverty on the economy of the country
Positive and negative impacts of segregation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In Mexico City and other urban areas it is common to see shacks and shoddy houses right next to the gleaming mansions of the upper class. This is because of spatial inequality which is when money or resources are not divided equally in an area. It causes some places within that area to become richer or poorer than others. Spatial inequality in urban areas is usually caused by rapid migration from rural parts of the country. They migrate because they hope to find jobs and raise their standard of living.
However, there is usually not enough land or housing for the city's growing population. There is also not enough jobs in the city to keep everyone employed. Poverty increases and jobs give lower and lower pay. The poor live in slums
There are many examples of cities reforming itself over time, one significant example is Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. More than a hundred years after the discovery of gold that drew thousands of migrants to Vancouver, the city has changed a lot, and so does one of its oldest community: Downtown Eastside. Began as a small town for workers that migrants frequently, after these workers moved away with all the money they have made, Downtown Eastside faced many hardships and changes. As a city, Vancouver gave much support to improve the area’s living quality and economics, known as a process called gentrification. But is this process really benefiting everyone living in Downtown Eastside? The answer is no. Gentrification towards DTES(Downtown Eastside) did not benefit the all the inhabitants of the area. Reasons are the new rent price of the area is much higher than before the gentrification, new businesses are not community-minded, and the old culture and lifestyle of the DTES is getting erased by the new residents.
On August 16, 1984 an international conference regarding population was held in Mexico City. It was at this conference that the Reagan Administration implemented the “Mexico City Policy”, also known and the Global Gag Rule. This policy stated that Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) would be prohibited from receiving United States funds if they performed, promoted, referred or counseled patients on abortion. The funds would be withheld from the NGOs even if the money used for abortion services were non-U.S. funds. This policy was in effect from 1984-1993 when president Bill Clinton came into office. On January 22, 2001 president George Bush reinstated the Mexico City Policy. There has been much debate over whether the policy is helping or hurting those abroad. Many people in the United States are not aware that the Mexico City Policy is in effect, or even what it is. It is very important that people here are aware of how the government is controlling health care and women’s rights in other countries.
Deepening economic inequality is fundamentally associated with the spatial polarization between central cities and sprawling suburbs, and between wealthy regions and poorer ones. Government policies have promoted economic and racial segregation, encouraged businesses and the wealthy to move to outer suburbs, and effectively limited the poor and minorities to central cities or troubled inner-ring suburbs.
John Buntin notes that the arrival of high-income persons will definitely attract services such as schools, better jobs for residents, better roads and electricity among other services (Gentrification Is a Myth). Therefore, gentrification appeals to individuals who are able to put pressure on local authorities by power of their economic status. As a result, the standards of living of developing cities rise alongside the cost of living in those same cities.
Compare and contrast the ways in which housing inequalities are discussed from the perspectives of social policy and criminology, and economics (TMA 02)
The inner cities had many problems all of which linked together to form a less affluent area which was very hard to improve as to help with one problem often meant having to solve another one too.
The expansion of the Modern Sector in urban Latin America meant that millions of people living in rural areas picked up and left the countryside, in search of better paying jobs in the city. The Modern Sector was unable to absorb all of the newcomers. The result was the growth of poor neighborhoods, mostly located on the outskirts of the city. People living poor urban neighborhoods made a living doing odd jobs such as washing cars, working part time, becoming servants in middle-class households, selling items on the streets, such as newspapers, cigarettes, chewing gum.
In Urban Studies two schools of academic thought answer the “urban question”: the ecological and urban political economy schools. I will argue that the political economy perspective better allows us to fully grasp the “urban question” where society and space mutually encompass each other and allow us to better explain and address urban inequality. First, I will develop a working definition of “the urban question”. Second, I will write on the ecological school’s view of the “urban” question and how their vista explains but inadequately addresses urban inequalities. Third, I will review the political economy (social-spatial dialect) landscape of the “urban question” and how their panorama explains and gives better analyses of urban inequality.
In the early twentieth century, there is a lot of suburbanization going on. Most of the white population and factories were being move to suburb area, so suburbs become economically advanced areas. There are more housing opportunity in the inner city, since the whites were move out, so there are a lot of blacks and poor people start to move in. Inner city soon become black people’s living space. However, they were isolated from suburb area, the economic depression is everywhere in the city, the house are poor and crowded, most of the residents live under the poverty and many other social problems.
Because the factory's are in the city, the workers must leave their farms in order to work. Workers are drawn in with promises of higher wages, but since there's so much competition, owners can get people to work for practically nothing! And if it's bad enough they are poorly paid, their working conditions see terrible. With 14 hour shifts, 6 days a week, people have no time to sleep! In the factories, the woman have it the worst; their skirts and hair get stuck in the machine resulting in injury. Don't get me started in the coal miners. The coal miners face polluted tunnels, cave ins, and drowning threats from high water levels. And if that wasn't enough the children were forced to work as well. These kids were only paid 10% of their fathers earnings. As a result from their hard labor, they had weak bodies, diseases, and faced deformities for life from accidents. If you have horrible factories you might want to at least give the workers decent shelters. But it isn't surprising that the conditions of these new cities are terrible. The urbanization has occurred so fast that owners do not have the resources to make a proper living space. The housing are dark, poorly constructed, and are badly ventilated. There's also no police force, who is going to stop the crime? But crime isn't even that concerning compared to the hygiene problem. Anything that isn't needed anymore is thrown out the window. Digestive waste, trash, animals, you name it; it's probably out on the street. As a result, disease is rampant and people are right at deaths
Regeneration of urban cities increases job opportunities and decrease the rate of crime. Many people will get jobs as they will be clearing slums and building new houses, hotels and constructing new roads. The increase in job opportunities will lead to parents paying better education for their children in order for them to have better future. Crime will decrease because there will be street lights, this will expose criminals.
...population distribution designed to reduce the rate of rural-urban migration appears to have had limited success in many developing countries. Policies must be directed at altering the rural economy in order to slow the rate of urban sprawl. Broad land use planning and changing of planning standards and governmental procedures would go a long way to reduce many of the problems that face urban populations in the developing areas, especially Africa. Urbanization can cause a lot of problems for a city or even a country. It can cause cities to become overpopulated which are known as mega-cites, and cause problems with living arrangements and finding a job. Urbanization can also cause health problems. Urbanization is supposed to be good for developing countries on the rise but with this rapid growth in Africa, these problems can become a major concern in the future.
These non-durable, unstable, unsanitary and illegal areas developed during the 19th century industrialization in developed countries. For example, the slum area of East London, also known as the “darkest London” developed because of the rapid population growth fed by the migration waves from rural areas. However, while the living conditions may be similar, third-world slums are nowadays characterized by their incredible density and size. For example, Neza-Chalco-Itza in Mexico, one of the greatest slums of the world, hosts at least 4 million people with a density of 800 000 people per square kilometre. In addition to the poor sanitary conditions – 1,8 million people live without water in their homes –, the population also has no legal status, as the settlements are often illegal (Shi Yun, 2014). This has raised many human issues in other major slums in the world, like Dharavi in Mumbai, India, Kibera in Nairobi, Nigeria, and the Brazilian favelas. Overall, since the beginning of the 20th century, more than one billion people live in slums (Murphy, 2003). The difference of scales between both worlds is due to the weak government control and planning as well as the immigration rhythm, which is faster than industrialization and urbanization. The cities therefor can’t integrate the
people work in the center of the city and also there is another problem, city attractions for
Urbanization occurs naturally from individual and corporate efforts to cut time and cost in commuting and transportation while improving opportunities for jobs, education, housing, and transportation. Living in cities allows individuals and families to take advantage of the opportunities of proximity, diversity, and marketplace competition. People began moving into cities to seek economic opportunities.