In the New York Times article titled “The Perverse Effects of Rent Regulation,” Adam Davidson details the housing situation surrounding the economically and culturally diverse area known as the East Village. In order for an agreement to be reached concerning rent regulation and government housing programs in the area, the six key factors that drive public policy formation must be considered. Of the six factors to consider, the anticipated reactions of elected stakeholders and other stakeholders, and money can be thought of as major matters. Elected stakeholders actors involved in this situation would be the government units involved with affordable housing at the local, state, and federal level. As Davidson mentions in the article, Congress is “planning comprehensive tax-and-spending reform” when it comes to new affordable housing. Providing affordable housing and government subsidies in a neighborhood such as the East Village is costing the government large amounts of money they could possibly be making a large revenue from if rent regulated housing is to be eliminated from the picture. On the other hand, as Vicki Been puts it, “The political forces that would get rid of rent regulation would not be the forces looking for optimal legislation.” Davidson goes on to say that the landlords and developers, who can be considered other stakeholder actors in this situation, would be the ones looking for this legislation to be enacted in order to benefit from the potentially large payout. Their motivation would be to “invest in upgrades and charge higher rents” and to initiate the “billions of dollars of development” that rent regulated housing is currently preventing. Other stakeholder actors in this situation would be the businesses a... ... middle of paper ... ... amount of money and power they possess. In order for new legislation to be adopted, the ethics and morality must be considered and there should be an attempt at making a “win-win-win” situation for all. Lastly, practicality, which includes time pressure and flexibility, can be considered an irrelevant factor in this public policy formation. As it is mentioned at the end of the article, “Rent regulation is very likely to go away, eventually, even without any explicit effort to kill it. Some 231,000 units have been deregulated over the last 30 years.” As older apartments available at an affordable price reach the end of their cycle, naturally new apartments for the wealthy are being constructed to replace them. Overall, in the debate over Rent Control, the six key factors that drive public policy formation must be considered in order to reach an effective decision.
“How can a middle-class family afford a rent of $2,000 or even $2,800 when the family consists of four children and a single working parent. when food needs to be on the table every night and bills need to be paid. I find this ridiculous, no one ever wanted to live in Bushwick and now all of a sudden these people want to live here.” -
“Gentrification is a general term for the arrival of wealthier people in an existing urban district, a related increase in rents and property values, and changes in the district's character and culture.” (Grant) In layman’s terms, gentrification is when white people move to a black neighborhood for the sake of cheaper living, and in turn, raise up property values and force black neighbors to leave because of a higher price of living. Commonly, the government supports gentrification with the demolition of public housing in areas that are developing with more white neighbors. This is causing a decreasing amount of African Americans to be able to afford to live in the neighborhood as their homes are taken away from them, forcing them to relocate. Whilst gentrification normally has negative connotations, there are several people who believe gentrification brings about “an upward trend in property values in previously neglected neighborhoods.” (Jerzyk) On the other hand, this new trend in property value and business causes those...
Chicago’s Cabrini-Green public housing project is notorious in the United States for being the most impoverished and crime-ridden public housing development ever established. Originally established as inexpensive housing in the 1940’s, it soon became a vast complex of unsightly concrete low and high-rise apartment structures. Originally touted as a giant step forward in the development of public housing, it quickly changed from a racially and economically diverse housing complex to a predominantly black, extremely poor ghetto. As it was left to rot, so to speak, Cabrini-Green harbored drug dealers, gangs and prostitution. It continued its downward spiral of despair until the mid 1990’s when the Federal Government assumed control the Chicago Housing Authority, the organization responsible for this abomination. Cabrini-Green has slowly been recovering from its dismal state of affairs recently, with developers building mixed-income and subsidized housing. The Chicago Housing Authority has also been demolishing the monolithic concrete high-rise slums, replacing them with public housing aimed at not repeating the mistakes of the past. Fortunately, a new era of public housing has dawned from the mistakes that were made, and the lessons that were learned from the things that went on for half a century in Cabrini-Green.
Another noteworthy urban sociologist that’s invested significant research and time into gentrification is Saskia Sassen, among other topical analysis including globalization. “Gentrification was initially understood as the rehabilitation of decaying and low-income housing by middle-class outsiders in central cities. In the late 1970s a broader conceptualization of the process began to emerge, and by the early 1980s new scholarship had developed a far broader meaning of gentrification, linking it with processes of spatial, economic and social restructuring.” (Sassen 1991: 255). This account is an extract from an influential book that extended beyond the field of gentrification and summarizes its basis proficiently. In more recent and localized media, the release the documentary-film ‘In Jackson Heights’ portrayed the devastation that gentrification is causing as it plagues through Jackson Heights, Queens. One of the local businessmen interviewed is shop owner Don Tobon, stating "We live in a
“The Deeper Problems We Miss When We Attack ‘Gentrification’”exhibit their opinion on the positives of gentrification and the potential of “revitalization” in low-income urban communities. Badger argues that gentrification brings nothing more than further opportunities for urban communities while integrating citizens of different social classes.Furthermore , she continues to question if gentrification is in fact the monster that brings the prior expressions against gentrification where she says “If poor neighborhoods have historically suffered from dire disinvestment, how can the remedy to that evil — outside money finally flowing in — be the problem, too?”(Badger) Stating that the funds generated from sources external that are brought into these communities can’t be problematic. This concept is further elaborated in the article “Does Gentrification Harm the Poor” where Vigdoor list the potential positive enhancements gentrification can have on an urban area in America ,stating that gentrification can
... motivation for wealthy individuals to return to the inner-city core but it also provides impetus for commercial and retail mixed-use to follow, increasing local revenue for cities (Duany, 2001). Proponents of gentrification profess that this increase in municipal revenue from sales and property taxes allows for the funding of city improvements, in the form of job opportunities, improved schools and parks, retail markets and increased sense of security and safety ((Davidson (2009), Ellen & O’Reagan (2007), Formoso et. al (2010)). Due to the increase in housing and private rental prices and the general decrease of the affordable housing stock in gentrifying areas, financially-precarious communities such as the elderly, female-headed households, and blue-collar workers can no longer afford to live in newly developed spaces ((Schill & Nathan (1983), Atkinson, (2000)).
Jackson highlights the steps taken by President Hoover’s Administration to avoid being forced into the creation of American public housing. He leads us through the fight to prevent public housing into Franklin D. Roosevelt’s presidency, where we get the Federal Housing Administration and the Veterans Administration. Jackson argues that these two administrations revolutionized home financing. At this point, Jackson shows us how prejudices and a perceived need for segregation influenced the Federal Housing Administration, which gives us the phenomena observed by Mohl in his articles. Further along in his article, and after a case study of St. Louis, Jackson makes the assumptions that the federal policies not only favored the suburbs, but also preferred neighborhoods given a “B” grade. He also claims that private lenders were influenced by the Federal Housing Administration. Moving on into the second half of his article, we see how public housing got its start. Jackson notes that while public housing was successful in providing affordable housing to poorer Americans, it was less than successful through the eyes of its supporters. In agreement with Mohl, Jackson finds that public housing reinforced
Goetz, Edward G.. New Deal ruins: race, economic justice, and public housing policy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2013. Print.
Gentrification is defined as the process by which the wealthy or upper middle class uproot poorer individuals through the renovation and rebuilding of poor neighborhoods. Many long-term residents find themselves no longer able to afford to live in an area, where the rent and property values are increasing. Gentrification is a very controversial topic, revealing both the positive and negative aspects of the process. Some of the more desirable outcomes include reduced crime rate, increased economic activity, and the building of new infrastructures. However, it is debated whether the negatives overwhelm the positive. An increase in the number of evictions of low-income families, often racial minorities can lead to a decline of diversity
It consistently affects the urban development of neighborhoods. Even though there are positives in gentrification such as social and economic development of communities but there are also negatives specifically lower income families are forced to move out of their homes because of high rent prices. This also causes people to become homeless because they can’t afford the newly inflated rent prices. In my opinion, I believe there should be some sort of system where apartments and houses are made based of what you can afford so families have places to live. Landlords shouldn’t raise their prices just so they can get people they desire to live in their homes. Even though it's understandable that landlords want to make more money but they shouldn’t force families out. There should only be a legitimate reason for families to be evicted out of their homes. Even though Gentrification has been around for a long time, hopefully there is some positive change in the
Gentrification is described as the renovation of certain neighborhoods in order to accommodate to young workers and the middle-class. For an area to be considered gentrified, a neighborhood must meet a certain median home value and hold a percentage of adults earning Bachelor’s degree. Philadelphia’s gentrification rate is among the top in the nation; different neighborhoods have pushed for gentrification and have seen immense changes as a result. However, deciding on whether or not gentrification is a beneficial process can become complicated. Various groups of people believe that cities should implementing policy on advancing gentrification, and others believe that this process shouldn’t executed. Both sides are impacted by the decision to progress gentrification; it is unclear of the true implications of completely renovating impoverished urban areas; gentrification surely doesn’t solve all of a community’s issues. I personally believe that gentrification is not necessarily a good or bad process; gentrification should occur as a natural progression of innovative economies and novel lifestyles collide within certain areas. Policy involving gentrification should not support the removal of people out of their neighborhood for the sake of advancement.
Lance Freeman tackles the issue of gentrification from the perspectives of residents in the gentrified neighborhood. He criticizes the literature for overlooking the experiences of the victims of gentrification. The author argues that people’s conceptions on the issue are somewhat misinformed in that most people consider it as completely deplorable, whereas in reality, it benefits the community by promoting businesses, different types of stores, and cleaner streets. These benefits are even acknowledged by many residents in the gentrified neighborhood. However, the author admits that gentrification indeed does harm. Although gentrification does not equate to displacement per se, it serves to benefit primarily homeowners and harm the poor. Additionally,
Gentrification is designed to improve the quality of life for the residents, but the fact is that it pushes out old residents to welcome in young and wealthy citizens. To analyze the demographic even further, gentrified neighborhoods in New York City have seen an increase in white population despite a city wide decrease. As Kate Abbey-Lamertz of the Huffington Post states, “The report notes that change is driven by educated people moving in, rather than by existing residents becoming more educated.” These changes are being driven by a millennial demographic who can afford the changed aesthetic. The influx of millennials are pushing out families whose lifestyle can’t keep up with the changing demographic. Even though these changes have been occurring for almost thirty years, and the city hasn’t made the changes needed for people who need low income housing. New York City’s gentrification must be slowed in order for people in low income housing to catch
Compare and contrast the ways in which housing inequalities are discussed from the perspectives of social policy and criminology, and economics (TMA 02)
This paper will be predominantly focusing on public housing within Ontario. Not only will it look at the basics of Ontario but examine more directly on Regent Park within Toronto. It will discuss what public housing is and the explanation for why it exists, the government housing programs that are present with regards to public housing and the results of the government programs. The Purpose of this essay is to argue that the problem of public housing will never