Scattered site housing should be the new norm. Congregating poverty into one blighted area was never a good idea and I can only think it came about due to elitism and racism.
14
It seems a simple concept but many fail to accept that economic segregation is as destructive as racial segregation. I once lived in Trenton NJ and had a birds eye view on how the Mount Laurel decision impacted urban-suburban development. Buried in the implementation of the Mt Laurel decision are the use of "regional contribution agreements". A regional contribution agreement is a payment made by towns to pay for affordable housing but not hosted by those same towns. Trenton, as example, would accept money from outlying suburban towns (Princeton) to build affordable housing in Trenton. You get new construction, some open space upgrades - but in the end, it acts as a long term millstone around the neck of the city. The houses are only the first of many issues that need to be addressed including lack of employment and poor education. Trenton received little by way of payment for the long-term problems associated with a high concentration of low-income households. Did the towns associated with the agreement support delivery of needed and required services to the impoverished people to which housing funds are directed? Do the regional communities support the school system in delivering special services to students who unfortunately bring a lot more than a desire to learn to the classroom? Not hardly. The results of the study show clearly that economic integration is important to everyone. Eliminate the easy out by eliminating regional contribution agreements.
9
More one-sided pablum from the NYT Editorial Board on race issues. Busing didn't work. Public housing has largely been underfunded and underinvested and as a result is not desirable to many. But the NYT Editorial Board seems to find one case that it has worked, for now. One of the key reasons seems to be limitations on who can live in this development.
What is actually missing in this piece is the connection to the lack of job opportunities, especially at the lower end of the income scale that destroys the mindset needed to succeed and improve oneself.
And those policies, like the bad trade policies that export American jobs, and support of illegal immigration for low cost workers, have happened under both Republican and Democratic administrations (including the Obama administration).
Better opportunities for jobs, and subsequently for life, (rather than subsidized housing, paid for tax-wise and consequence-wise by middle class rather than the politicians, elite and liberal media that push these solutions) should be the focus when "cures" are suggested.
What is actually missing in this piece is the connection to the lack of job opportunities, especially at the lower end of the income scale that destroys the mindset needed to succeed and improve oneself.
And those policies, like the bad trade policies that export American jobs, and support of illegal immigration for low cost workers, have happened under both Republican and Democratic administrations (including the Obama administration).
Better opportunities for jobs, and subsequently for life, (rather than subsidized housing, paid for tax-wise and consequence-wise by middle class rather than the politicians, elite and liberal media that push these solutions) should be the focus when "cures" are suggested.
31
Houston, the 4th largest city in the country, is VERY business friendly as it is the only major U.S. city w/o zoning laws. However, there are suburbs w/i and outside the city limits with zoning laws.
Separate and apart from the other programs meant to address this pandemic cycle of maintain all low-income housing "off in the corner somewhere else", I'm very pleased to be part of a nonprofit organization actively involved in providing the HUD-Approved Home Buyer's Education class that is required for individuals who pre-qualify for a mortgage in the purchase of their 1st home; "we" also provide free credit counseling so as to help teach individual/family the importance of building and maintaining good credit regardless of their goals.
As related to inclusion, "we're" a partner THRIVE organization.
United Way THRIVE, a collaborative launched and led by United Way of Greater Houston, leverages more than 20 nonprofit partners and partnerships with employers, community colleges, financial institutions and city and state agencies, to provide families with the best and most comprehensive resources, wraparound support and the services they need to reach real and lasting financial independence. United Way THRIVE helps families build stronger financial futures by acquiring skills and education, obtaining better jobs, developing good financial habits and building savings.
https://www.unitedwayhouston.org/our-work/family-stability/united-way-th...
Separate and apart from the other programs meant to address this pandemic cycle of maintain all low-income housing "off in the corner somewhere else", I'm very pleased to be part of a nonprofit organization actively involved in providing the HUD-Approved Home Buyer's Education class that is required for individuals who pre-qualify for a mortgage in the purchase of their 1st home; "we" also provide free credit counseling so as to help teach individual/family the importance of building and maintaining good credit regardless of their goals.
As related to inclusion, "we're" a partner THRIVE organization.
United Way THRIVE, a collaborative launched and led by United Way of Greater Houston, leverages more than 20 nonprofit partners and partnerships with employers, community colleges, financial institutions and city and state agencies, to provide families with the best and most comprehensive resources, wraparound support and the services they need to reach real and lasting financial independence. United Way THRIVE helps families build stronger financial futures by acquiring skills and education, obtaining better jobs, developing good financial habits and building savings.
https://www.unitedwayhouston.org/our-work/family-stability/united-way-th...
3
It's always disappointing to see yet another naive article about diversity and the ever present miinterpretation of racial differences. Racial differences ARE NORMAL; human have always been "Tribal" in some respect. This is simply a human characteristic that is neither good or bad. Perhaps it would be enriching for the Mount Laurel community to live among the BOKO Haram, or ISIL cdommunities. You would gain a rich indepth understanding of what real-estate value is based upon in these communities.
14
When I was a graduate student in city planning, the Mount Laurel case was still fresh. Nice to see this report from the Times. Nice to see that doing the right thing had a good outcome, and that the public interest was well-served. Planning and zoning issues don't make great copy, so you don't see them reported very often. It's a shame, because these are issues that immediately affect people and particularly influence the quality of their lives.
10
You can live where you can afford to in America. But, you have to be competent, bright, friendly, useful, and your culture has to accept those around you. If not, stay where you are!
19
To make housing affordable pay livable wages!
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not make somebody Poor:
And Mercy no more could be,
If all were as happy as we;"
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not make somebody Poor:
And Mercy no more could be,
If all were as happy as we;"
8
I hope the Times editors will exposure communities such as Friendly Maryland, Hillcrest New York, Kettering, MD, Ladera Heights, Calif
Michelleville, MD and other segregated communities as an affront to diversity and integration. It's time those communities are no longer segregated and become integrated like Mount Laurel.
Michelleville, MD and other segregated communities as an affront to diversity and integration. It's time those communities are no longer segregated and become integrated like Mount Laurel.
8
So something that progressives like has happened in New Jersey but the Times attacks the governor instead of giving him credit. Does the the editor have proof, real solid proof, of his allegations and if so please cite them. Or is this another slanderous hatchet job by the Times protected by the first ammendment?
7
If everything turned out well I'm happy - but skeptical. Why? My grandparents lived in Philadelphia in the 60's. It was a mainly Polish working class neighborhood; tradesmen, teachers, civil servants. Around 1970 the houses started to be bought up by a single real estate firm. They were blockbusters ( and black). In the ensuing year most sold as they were told their property would be worth less with each passing day. My grandparents, in strong Polish tradition, were stubborn and refused to acquiesce. My grandfather became ill and passed. My grandmother, with tail between her legs and just her clothes, sold. The buyers demanded the rest.
A few years ago I was considering investing in Philadelphia. I called my brother (the family member who seems to know all family history) and asked for their address. As I drove through the area I became upset. I didn't weep as I'm fairly stoic, but it was enough to make you cry. The rowhouse that I once tossed a Spaldeen off of still stood. It looked like a boxer in the 12th round of a heavyweight tilt; battered and bruised. The neighborhood, now predominantly black, was a hodgepodge of drug dealers and drunks.
I wish Mount Laurel and its inhabitants well. I also hope they remember the prices paid by those in the past, both black and white.
A few years ago I was considering investing in Philadelphia. I called my brother (the family member who seems to know all family history) and asked for their address. As I drove through the area I became upset. I didn't weep as I'm fairly stoic, but it was enough to make you cry. The rowhouse that I once tossed a Spaldeen off of still stood. It looked like a boxer in the 12th round of a heavyweight tilt; battered and bruised. The neighborhood, now predominantly black, was a hodgepodge of drug dealers and drunks.
I wish Mount Laurel and its inhabitants well. I also hope they remember the prices paid by those in the past, both black and white.
21
The success or failure of a low income housing development is squarely upon the shoulders of the property management.
The lease and general rules of the living area(s) MUST be enforced. This can only be done properly if there is continuity in the lease enforcement. Unfortunately there is a high turnover rate of the property management team members. Tenants must comply and also be highly, properly screened/vetted.
Also there must be money available to regularly upkeep the usually low quality, (lowest bidder/materials/workmanship), built developments or they fall into dis-repair and the broken windows syndrome takes over.
Ask any police dept. and they will tell you that they spend in inordinate amount of time at low income housing developments, as well as fire depts. and EMTs. The towns that provide low income housing must factor in these ongoing expenses as well.
On another note, it may not be as much as race but cultural/class differences that come into play. And until there are ENFORCED laws against playing extremely loud music in vehicles and/or apts., I would highly recommend not living nearby.
Ultimately, forced integration is never a positive idea for either side of the fence.
The lease and general rules of the living area(s) MUST be enforced. This can only be done properly if there is continuity in the lease enforcement. Unfortunately there is a high turnover rate of the property management team members. Tenants must comply and also be highly, properly screened/vetted.
Also there must be money available to regularly upkeep the usually low quality, (lowest bidder/materials/workmanship), built developments or they fall into dis-repair and the broken windows syndrome takes over.
Ask any police dept. and they will tell you that they spend in inordinate amount of time at low income housing developments, as well as fire depts. and EMTs. The towns that provide low income housing must factor in these ongoing expenses as well.
On another note, it may not be as much as race but cultural/class differences that come into play. And until there are ENFORCED laws against playing extremely loud music in vehicles and/or apts., I would highly recommend not living nearby.
Ultimately, forced integration is never a positive idea for either side of the fence.
17
Forcing low-income people on hard-working communities is the wrong way to address issues of exclusionary zoning. The culture of low-income people needs to be changed so they can participate in the American dream by their own achievements, not having it given to them on a silver plate.
Prime example, Judge Sand forced Yonkers to build low-income housing among middle and upper middle class families. The results after 20 years has been a disaster. With the resultant white flight Yonkers has gone from once being a very vibrant city to now housing some of the worst performing schools in NY State, It is more segregated now then before Judge Sand performed his social engineering experiment.
Yet Judge Sand doesn't care. He lives comfortably in Pound Ridge zoned to eliminate any riff-raff, coming into contact with the poor only if they tend to his lawn.
Prime example, Judge Sand forced Yonkers to build low-income housing among middle and upper middle class families. The results after 20 years has been a disaster. With the resultant white flight Yonkers has gone from once being a very vibrant city to now housing some of the worst performing schools in NY State, It is more segregated now then before Judge Sand performed his social engineering experiment.
Yet Judge Sand doesn't care. He lives comfortably in Pound Ridge zoned to eliminate any riff-raff, coming into contact with the poor only if they tend to his lawn.
28
@ Michael H. in Alameda--I live a couple of blocks from Section 8 housing. In this particular building, most of the residents are disabled. A large percentage are black. Their non-disabled relatives visit them regularly. We don't hear the kind of loud volume profanity you write about in your post. In fact, I am more likely to hear it from drunken youths of all races (but mostly white) on the main street of our little neighborhood. My only complaint about the Section 8 building is the design--it is probably the ugliest building in Portland.
6
This example demonstrates only that 36 "rigorously screened" families, selected with "broader" (ie., higher average) income guidelines than are usually used for affordable housing, could move into attractive affordable housing, with supportive services for their children, without destroying the surrounding community. Not very significant.
19
Mt Laurel may be the exception that proves the rule. from personal experience, I know a federally subsidized tax credit property that ran three nearby apartment properties into foreclosure because it took all of their good tenants, not the poor ones (A good couple paying their rent on time that makes too much for an affordable housing project simply has one person sign on the lease to fall below the required income levels, then the other person moves in anyway without being on the lease) A good couple paying their rent on time that makes too much for an affordable housing project simply has one person sign on the lease to fall below the required income levels, then the other person moves in anyway without being on the lease and left the other properties without their previously good tenants. In short, corporations benefited from the tax credits, developers benefited from the development of the property, and middle income tenants benefited from lower rents, and the neighborhood wound up three apartment buildings boarded up. Not to mention the losses incurred by the lenders on the foreclosed properties and the private investors. A financial and social disaster that exacerbated the problem it was supposed to fix.
As for neighboring property values, I don't know where this guy gets his information. I don't know anyone that would rather buy a property near an affordable housing project than away from one.
As for neighboring property values, I don't know where this guy gets his information. I don't know anyone that would rather buy a property near an affordable housing project than away from one.
11
This is the latest in a series of NY Times articles that suggests racism is the root of segregated neighborhoods. But the NIMBYism over low-cost housing isn't about race. In your next article perform this survey in a middle class white neighborhood - would you rather have college educated minorities or white people from the nearest trailer park living next to you?
25
Hmmm, no interviews with, or any other consideration of, the white residents who saw their neighborhoods invaded by blacks.
Surely no sacrifice on their part was too great, when balanced against a benefit for blacks.
One wonders how many members of the Editorial Board have subsidized housing next door to their homes. I guarantee you that the answer is "none."
Surely no sacrifice on their part was too great, when balanced against a benefit for blacks.
One wonders how many members of the Editorial Board have subsidized housing next door to their homes. I guarantee you that the answer is "none."
29
The real problem is poverty. Housing is a symptom of the problem. If I don't have a job or job skills I need to live in low income neighborhoods. Unemployment in the black community is way too high. There are also poor hispanic and white folks that live in those neighborhoods. Because they are so poor they need access to public transportation so moving them someplace that does not have those services is not a choice.
Income brings choice and a lot of people don't have the income to make a different choice. Government intervention except to raise job skills and incomes is misdirected.
Income brings choice and a lot of people don't have the income to make a different choice. Government intervention except to raise job skills and incomes is misdirected.
10
I am somewhat familiar with public housing projects in only two cities, Seattle and Savannah. In both, the housing projects are in great locations for access to public transportation and jobs. What I see as a big problem for these "projects" is that while the buildings may be decently kept up, the grounds around them are bleak and bare. What if residents were given the right to modify the immediate area around their apartment? Many might create small gardens or patio areas that would both beautify and provide areas for community gatherings . By being allowed to personalize a residence a sense of ownership can be created, even for renters. I can think of civic groups in both cities that might help to promote these changes. I think I will be sending some emails and calling some friends this week.
6
Wow. Such hateful, angry, bigoted, racist comments directed towards this column! But I'm sure many of them are "good" church going individuals. Why not blame the uber wealthy who are making our country unlivable rather than berating good ideas for helping those who want a better life.
7
Mount Laurel is an exception rather than an example of the majority of affordable housing. Most affordable housing is actually welfare housing, or possibly Section 8 subsidized housing. If you want to see how the "affordable housing" projects really are, take a look into Mount Vernon, NY.
11
One thing for sure it won't occur in Chappaqua, Darien, Rumson or the dozens of other elite NYC suburbs. It will happen in more middle class environs, while those living there are chided by their betters living in gated splendor, to be more welcoming and less racist.
30
People not involved in affordable housing often miss the forest for the trees. If you don't build and invest in low income areas you can not fundamentally address the problems in those communities. Sure - you can pick some winners but you've left millions on the sidelines and further isolated the people living there.
7
This article ignores the fact that for each "affordable" unit a developer can require that between 4 and 9 market-rate units can be built in a municipality, leading to massive increases in population density and escalating property taxes. Since in NJ property taxes make up a significant percentage of monthly housing costs their increase makes NJ municipalities LESS affordable, rather than more. In 1997 the Institute for Race and Poverty demonstrated that the pro-developer application of the Mt. Laurel decision had made NJ MORE racially and economically segregated than it was before. This finding was replicated by a 2004 student done at The College of New Jersey. Not surprisingly, the pro-developer advocacy group Fair Share Housing--allied to the NJ Builders' Association--ignores all of the evidence that shows that as Mt. Laurel is currently applied it hurts the very people it is supposed to help.
8
I once lived in a place where if you made $75,000 or less you qualified for Affordable Housing. People should not be afraid of the term
I wonder whether inner cities, strange as it may sound, will need some extra-market help to remain integrated as gentrification arrives.
2
More one-sided pablum from the NYT Editorial Board on race issues. Busing didn't work. Public housing has largely been underfunded and underinvested and as a result is not desirable to many. But the NYT Editorial Board seems to find one case that it has worked, for now. One of the key reasons seems to be limitations on who can live in this development.
What is actually missing in this piece is the connection to the lack of job opportunities, especially at the lower end of the income scale that destroys the mindset needed to succeed and improve oneself.
And those policies, like the bad trade policies that export American jobs, and support of illegal immigration for low cost workers, have happened under both Republican and Democratic administrations (including the Obama administration).
Better opportunities for jobs, and subsequently for life, (rather than subsidized housing, paid for tax-wise and consequence-wise by middle class rather than the politicians, elite and liberal media that push these solutions) should be the focus when "cures" are suggested.
What is actually missing in this piece is the connection to the lack of job opportunities, especially at the lower end of the income scale that destroys the mindset needed to succeed and improve oneself.
And those policies, like the bad trade policies that export American jobs, and support of illegal immigration for low cost workers, have happened under both Republican and Democratic administrations (including the Obama administration).
Better opportunities for jobs, and subsequently for life, (rather than subsidized housing, paid for tax-wise and consequence-wise by middle class rather than the politicians, elite and liberal media that push these solutions) should be the focus when "cures" are suggested.
7
You speak glowingly about the Ethel Lawrence Homes as an example of how good affordable housing can help to end racial discrimination and note approvingly that “Its management has rigorously screened applicants…” What is the practical difference between “rigorous screening” and “discriminating”? Of course the Ethel Lawrence Homes is successful if it discriminates against low income families that can’t afford to maintain properties or against individuals with criminal records or any of the other forms of rational (not racial) discrimination. I think the New York Times is saying that racial discrimination is simply wrong and stupid but rational discrimination is, well, sensible. How many individuals and communities accused of racial discrimination have actually been exercising rational discrimination?
14
And THIS is supposed to be a "revelation"? Here is a REAL revelation for you. Subsidized housing CAN be successful, even in the most dangerous "ghettoes", if those in leadership positions involved in creating the housing are REAL leaders (who, by definition, are courageous), SINCERE, and competent. I know this from DIRECT experience, regardless of all the weak-kneed excuses/reasons given to the contrary by the so-called "experts", and "leaders", who prove every day they are not "experts", nor "leaders".
4
"..practice of building subsidized housing mainly in existing ghettos instead of in areas that offer low- and moderate-income families access to safe neighborhoods, good jobs and schools that allow their children to thrive."
No. Bringing low-income people to middle-class neighborhoods just makes the neighborhood a ghetto.
No. Bringing low-income people to middle-class neighborhoods just makes the neighborhood a ghetto.
19
Whether its racism or just self-preservation, when black people move into a white neighborhood, the whites leave. What makes the Times so sure building projects in better neighborhoods will be any different? And, by the way, I don't think it is the color of the new residents' skin, I think it is the increase in crime that always occurs.
21
Stagnant wages in the last 30 or so years has permanently created an underclass of lower income and poor Americans, who are mostly blacks and Hispanics. With less disposable income to spend on housing, poorer Americans are forced to move to and live in areas that are far from the business and employment centers and this has reinforced the racial discrimination in housing. This is the major reason why after 60 years of Congressional legislation, federal and "some" local efforts to end housing discrimination, the racial discrimination in housing remains. Federal legislation and mandate are laudable but only serve to raise political tension in the current racial climate. The solutions must start with expanded fiscal and less inflation focused monetary policies conducive to robust economic growth and thus income gains for poor Americans, who are mostly black and Hispanics.
The integration is laudable and will be hard to accomplish. The schools are the drivers. I read recently of the Kelo decision, which allowed a Connecticut town to raise a poorer neighborhood apparently to have a nice neighborhood built for rich people. If Conneticut is like New Jersey, rich people won't move to poorer towns unless the schools are great. (For whatever reason, this town's project failed spectacularly.)
Improving schools in all cities is the only remedy. Compared to other states, even working class NJ towns have marvelous schools. (The ranking system hides this) But this editorial isn't about getting rich kids going to working-class but decent schools. It's getting inner city or urban ghetto kids into the same schools/neighborhoods as the working class kids, however that's acomplished. The urban ghetto schools are truly bad. The working class parents won't stand for it. Somehow that has to be acknowledged and dealt with or these laudable plans will fail. Maybe some real progress in inner city schools will comfort parents and allow for the idea of integration to germinate.
Improving schools in all cities is the only remedy. Compared to other states, even working class NJ towns have marvelous schools. (The ranking system hides this) But this editorial isn't about getting rich kids going to working-class but decent schools. It's getting inner city or urban ghetto kids into the same schools/neighborhoods as the working class kids, however that's acomplished. The urban ghetto schools are truly bad. The working class parents won't stand for it. Somehow that has to be acknowledged and dealt with or these laudable plans will fail. Maybe some real progress in inner city schools will comfort parents and allow for the idea of integration to germinate.
4
From Bob: for so long as many in the black community see no reason for cops to act aggressively, even in situations where a young man high on drugs, pushes aside a merchant while taking fifty dollars of merchandise; then attacks a cop for his gun (inside the patrol car) causing shots to be fired; then tries to attack a second time; all this proven by forensic, ballistic and eye witness evidence, and continues to use this 'hands up', 'don't shoot' event as a template for justice, integrating everyone will be a difficult prospect.
14
Another solution is to foster low-income children with families in upper middle class and upper class neighborhoods. Let's start with Greenwich, Connecticut and Locust Valley, New York. These families will be able to deduct the cost of fostering directly from the amount they owe in federal, state and local income taxes.
4
Hans-Gregor Gadamer argues that western society has a 'prejudice against prejudice."
In the 1960s I was a civil rights activists. All but expelled from college for bringing black militants and students to campus. Having Julian Bond address the college student body. I grew up in a racially integrated elementary school. The education was so bad in elementary school, I was told I should choose a trade. I graduated from Michigan with PhD.
I know about prejudice first hand. And the implications that can be devastating. Mary Coon (6th grade) ripped my shirt off in class because it was new.
After 60 years after that event, prejudice will always be with us. We will never be prejudice free. But we have social obligations. And that includes discipline, and the education for character (physical and mental) and thought. To straighten out my education deficit I spent 2 years at military prep-school, football scholarship.
There was no hazing but you respected your teachers, you walked tours the parade ground when you got demerits. I graduated 6th in class of 80.
My point is this -- Aristotle established this emphasis on excellence character and thought.
We do neither -- there is no critical thought, there is no development of character.
I propose a new Conservation Corps. Climate change is devastating our watersheds. I attended forestry camp that coupled work vital work and classes. the cost for establishing a fully functional CCC camp is minuscule compared with benefits
In the 1960s I was a civil rights activists. All but expelled from college for bringing black militants and students to campus. Having Julian Bond address the college student body. I grew up in a racially integrated elementary school. The education was so bad in elementary school, I was told I should choose a trade. I graduated from Michigan with PhD.
I know about prejudice first hand. And the implications that can be devastating. Mary Coon (6th grade) ripped my shirt off in class because it was new.
After 60 years after that event, prejudice will always be with us. We will never be prejudice free. But we have social obligations. And that includes discipline, and the education for character (physical and mental) and thought. To straighten out my education deficit I spent 2 years at military prep-school, football scholarship.
There was no hazing but you respected your teachers, you walked tours the parade ground when you got demerits. I graduated 6th in class of 80.
My point is this -- Aristotle established this emphasis on excellence character and thought.
We do neither -- there is no critical thought, there is no development of character.
I propose a new Conservation Corps. Climate change is devastating our watersheds. I attended forestry camp that coupled work vital work and classes. the cost for establishing a fully functional CCC camp is minuscule compared with benefits
4
The common usage of the phrase "affordable housing" is a result of there being too many full-time workers who can't afford decent housing priced at market rates, in part because market rates are inflated by affluent investors and speculators. (No where is that more true than in NYC) Still, low pay creates a myriad of social problems. If we want housing to be affordable for more working people, we need to pay them more, and then we need to think about limiting the number of houses any one person can own.
2
Typically myopic and biased storytelling, and I mean making things up, going on here. African Americans with sufficient means and credit have always lived in South Jersey throughout my own lifetime of 55 years, in places like CInnaminson and Oaklyn. There may have been redlining back in the 1970s but we see the lenders have been writing house notes for people of color since then and not just "paying lip service" to the Fair Housing Act. Please don't exaggerate the severity of a problem lest you appear to contrive one to sell newspapers and attract online readers.
14
So the applicants for homes in the Eleanor Lawrence Homes are rigorously screened?
For what?
Have the merely substituted another form of discrimination to rule out "undesrireables".
Isn't it one of the most important purposes of low-income housing to give those that have trouble affording comfortable and safe housing at a reasonable cost?
And isn't it counterproductive, not to mention illegal, to discriminate in housing on any basis whatsoever?
Seems to me that the NY Times Editorial Board once again establishes itself as an organization that places themselves once again on the wrong side of society and the mores and laws that govern that society.
For what?
Have the merely substituted another form of discrimination to rule out "undesrireables".
Isn't it one of the most important purposes of low-income housing to give those that have trouble affording comfortable and safe housing at a reasonable cost?
And isn't it counterproductive, not to mention illegal, to discriminate in housing on any basis whatsoever?
Seems to me that the NY Times Editorial Board once again establishes itself as an organization that places themselves once again on the wrong side of society and the mores and laws that govern that society.
6
This editorial is conflates racial discrimination with economic discrimination. While there is an obvious connection, in that people of color are disproportionally at the lower end of the economic spectrum, a large part of the objection to affordable housing in the suburbs is economic, not racial. Like it or not, property values are impacted by the value of nearby housing, and the quality of schools is related to, among other things, the local tax base (which directly impacts teacher's salaries, for example). So to force affordable housing into established neighborhoods does impact values, lowers tax income per student, and does impact local education. Sure, I am being defensive about my own suburban community, but until I see affordable housing inserted into the upper East Side of Manhattan, I will continue to see the Mt. Laurel decision more as a tool used by developers to force communities to allow them to build more housing than as a solution to a discrimination problem.
11
Very interesting comments. It appears that when something concrete like actual building under enforceable legislation with real consequences is involved, thoughtful, realistic, practical conclusions follow. Rarely is there a "sounds good, can't legislate the desired result" reaction. Usually it is, absolutely, that is how it should be. Note some of the foreign remarks: this kind of thing works in other cultures and in significantly smaller countries. We are who we are and we must deal with that, as some actually understand. The idea that we are where we live seems backwards to many: the upwardly mobile culture of a neighborhood is not written in its zip code but in the hearts and minds of its residents. How quickly the same folks who are very sure you cannot nation build think you can neighborhood build; importing and imposing certain values and responses on a group. There is no silver bullet. Lots of posturing, rhetoric, power and money in such schemes but little positive results on the ground. People do best when they are the architects of their own lives: they need better building blocks, not a different address. Real, challenging education, families that care and work hard - at everything including parenting, supportive neighbors, small businesses, laws that protect and punish, most of, self-respect. Can't enforce that. It is SELF Respect, not self-regard and self-pity that works. Let's build self-respect with the less fortunate.
6
I am for affordable housing. I detest projects. America is segregated along income lines. The rich live here the middle class there and the poor over there. That was the America that existed over 80 years ago when I was born when good neighborhoods were also “restricted,” or where I lived, proclaimed on signs “no dogs or Jews allowed.” It is a sociological fact that people like to live among their own and those “who do not belong” are kept out or squeezed out.
Enter government. You know the enemy who wants to take away conservative’s freedom and give it to the blacks and gays and the lazy poor and insists on such radical notions of all people being born equal, a hotly disputed claim in conservative quarters, and equal protection under the law. Govt has abused its power by enacting the Civil Rights law and the Fair Housing law and ended racial and religious restrictions in deeds prohibiting sale to non-Christians and non-Whites. Look what iy did in Laurel Hill? Conservatives are hopping mad. Yes too many people want to return to a state of nature and to do that govt must be destroyed.
Yet these people say want a free market which when it exists is a great equalizer. In the 1930's and 40' a black not dressed as a servant or janitor walking in the street in Jackson Heights would be stopped by the police. Today it is the most cosmopolitan neighborhood in the world. Our schools look like the world lives here in peace. Economics did that with govt help.
Enter government. You know the enemy who wants to take away conservative’s freedom and give it to the blacks and gays and the lazy poor and insists on such radical notions of all people being born equal, a hotly disputed claim in conservative quarters, and equal protection under the law. Govt has abused its power by enacting the Civil Rights law and the Fair Housing law and ended racial and religious restrictions in deeds prohibiting sale to non-Christians and non-Whites. Look what iy did in Laurel Hill? Conservatives are hopping mad. Yes too many people want to return to a state of nature and to do that govt must be destroyed.
Yet these people say want a free market which when it exists is a great equalizer. In the 1930's and 40' a black not dressed as a servant or janitor walking in the street in Jackson Heights would be stopped by the police. Today it is the most cosmopolitan neighborhood in the world. Our schools look like the world lives here in peace. Economics did that with govt help.
3
So yesterday you want us to ignore laws if we don't like them - the Sanctuary Cities editorial.
Today you want us to obey the laws about forcing low-income housing into middle-class neighborhoods.
So which is it? Does the editorial board think we should obey laws or not?
Today you want us to obey the laws about forcing low-income housing into middle-class neighborhoods.
So which is it? Does the editorial board think we should obey laws or not?
49
The Times Editorial Board, most of whom don't live anywhere near subsidized housing, preaching again. Chances are most live in Co-ops that routinely exclude prospective buyers, with no reason required.
How diverse is their apartment buildings? Not at all in most cases. But that's OK because the law permits their boards to discriminate any way they want to. Just don't put it in writing, say the lawyers.
How diverse is their apartment buildings? Not at all in most cases. But that's OK because the law permits their boards to discriminate any way they want to. Just don't put it in writing, say the lawyers.
58
Northerners and liberals think they invented racial integration. Hate to tell you, but the blacks and white have been living and working together closely forever, in the South.
15
The richest White communities in America usually vote Democrat. (Eight of the ten wealthiest counties voted for Obama in the last election). And it's the Democrats who favor imposing government-subsidized "minority" housing in White neighborhoods.
So why are these housing projects always built in low and middle income (usually Republican) White neighborhoods? Why aren't these projects instead built in the rich White communities that vote for the political party that supports subsidized-housing?
How about the ultra-liberal Hamptons? Or Nassau County in NY? Or Somerset and Morris counties in NJ? Or anywhere in the rich, milky-white state of Vermont? (Rich Whites in Vermont up there just love socialist Bernie Sanders).
And I'm sure minorities from the inner-cities would be perfectly happy to attend school with those breast-fed White kids in those very exclusive liberal schools in NYC.
So why are these housing projects always built in low and middle income (usually Republican) White neighborhoods? Why aren't these projects instead built in the rich White communities that vote for the political party that supports subsidized-housing?
How about the ultra-liberal Hamptons? Or Nassau County in NY? Or Somerset and Morris counties in NJ? Or anywhere in the rich, milky-white state of Vermont? (Rich Whites in Vermont up there just love socialist Bernie Sanders).
And I'm sure minorities from the inner-cities would be perfectly happy to attend school with those breast-fed White kids in those very exclusive liberal schools in NYC.
42
Yes. Perfect. I recently visited some "progressive" relatives in the milky white (and progressive) town of North Andover, Mass. Liberals there are obsessed with promoting "diversity" in every conversation, in every political opinion and, most lazily, in their presidential vote for their beloved Obama (which they believed would absolve them of their white "guilt" - but how delicious that the eternally bitter Obama keeps scolding them for their eternal moral insufficiency on racial matters). Diversity i their own town? Oh, we can't have any of that!
1
The reality is the Vermont legislature and Burlington City Council and South Burlington City Council have all worked, for good and bad, to provide plenty of subsidized affordable housing in Burlington, South Burlington and elsewhere. For many of the new residents of the housing, it has worked out well. Also, been great for the crony insiders who benefit from more tax money to their nonprofits & the builders who get to profit. For prior existing residents around the affordable housing, not so great. Housing values have predictably plummeted and crime rates increased. Several drug deal killings and shootings near the multi-story affordable housing in South Burlington. There is a significant minority of Vermont residents who see through Bernie Sanders (or who worked with him and know the real Bernie). He did some good things as Mayor but since election to Congress, has proven he's just as hypocritical as most politicians.
Unfortunately, the author does not reveal what percentage of residents were from the "ghetto" class that people fear the most. Gushing about landscaping is fine but if the former "ghetto" residents are kept to a minimum then what have you really accomplished. The success has more to do with "rigorous screening" than with integration into an upscale suburb.
13
I agree - from experience. I had to move out of a nice integrated apartment complex in Englewood NJ when management stopped enforcing its intake policies. Suddenly apartments meant for a specified size family became havens for large groups that changed often. The place became unpredictable and unsafe. My child was assaulted on Halloween and came home crying - for the first time. Not to mention the schools and even the main street, where folks roamed down the middle, jeopardizing drivers. If we don't self-regulate and officials don't regulate, we will move.
1
This does give promise to answering the problems that many face at the hands of racism. The key is that management does to fulfill its responsibility for upkeep and maintenance to such housing. Though I must take issue with the constant jabs at schools in Urban areas vs. Suburban areas. In a way you have pointed out what this community has done to the housing should be applied to the schools . We neglect the Urban Schools in terms of upkeep, financial resonsibility and fail to ensure that programs are in place that will lead to all children having access to AP programs and other expectations of the Suburban counterparts. Hence the lawsuit filed in New York over school funding that continues to be ignored by Mr. Cuomo. The inference is that there is a substandard educator in front of the urban classroom. This will become increasingly important as we see more gentrification of our Urban neighborhoods. This editorial points out how we cherry- pick what we deem is worthy of proper public support and respnsibility .
5
The township where I've lived for many years has changed radically in its ethnic composition. The impact on the high school is that the proportion of AP classes has switched with the proportion of special education classes. There are physical fights in the hallways. The SAT scores have dropped significantly. The civil rights of children who attend school to learn in peace and quiet, in a physically safe environment, have been affected. These are published facts. When we sell our house it will be worth less than similar homes in other suburbs where the educational standards have been maintained. To be clear, I do NOT generalize the facts of the changes in this township to social change elsewhere. I'm very much in favor of a just society with good housing for all. But forcing young parents to go to other townships where academic standards have been maintained is a hard problem to address. Especially without being accused of ethnic and/or racial bias. Are other readers aware of townships where schools have taken successful measures to maintain high academic standards successfully?
25
So applicants are "rigorously screened". Exactly what does that mean? Because that too reeks of discrimination. Worse, it's not the government or the buildings that make a ghetto, it's the people within.
To the Times editorial board who will never have to live in a ghetto: You can't have it both ways.
To the Times editorial board who will never have to live in a ghetto: You can't have it both ways.
26
So you all want to help fix what is arguably America's greatest problem unless it requires some change of real significance?
Is this the same crowd that cheers for Mr. Sanders liberal solutions and believes it's only a matter of time before the rest of America sees your wisdom and joins in?
By and large the most popular responses here angrily (fearfully?) defend the status quo of class and race. Until you really put some skin in the game, like this would require, it all sounds like one of the biggest cries of NIMBY ever.
Is this the same crowd that cheers for Mr. Sanders liberal solutions and believes it's only a matter of time before the rest of America sees your wisdom and joins in?
By and large the most popular responses here angrily (fearfully?) defend the status quo of class and race. Until you really put some skin in the game, like this would require, it all sounds like one of the biggest cries of NIMBY ever.
3
I still do not get why liberal moan when wealthy people move into poor neighborhoods and then wine when the poor can not move into wealthy neighborhoods...
Pick one, please
Pick one, please
25
The color of money is green.
I'm unaware of any seller of real estate with a ready buyer, cash in hand, saying, "Nah... I don't want your money... in hand... right there... ready to close the sale..."
Money is money. Profit is profit. If you have it, you can buy it. Gimme a break.
I'm unaware of any seller of real estate with a ready buyer, cash in hand, saying, "Nah... I don't want your money... in hand... right there... ready to close the sale..."
Money is money. Profit is profit. If you have it, you can buy it. Gimme a break.
12
Then you need to speak to some honest realtors. Not taking money from African Americans trying to buy or rent homes in white neighborhoods is documented fact Not all money is created equally.
1
You seem blissfully unaware of the whole concept of privilege.
Actually, the editors are right, racial isolation should be stamped out beginning with the editorial and management ranks of the NYT. Along with other groups that experience discrimination.
The NYT should post an analysis of their employee population by job type of the racial and ethnic diversity of their organization. That means starting with their ownership structure, their Board of Directors, their editors, journalists, management and so on, all the way through their ranks. No co-mingling of jobs, let's see how fare.
At the same time, they should post an analysis of the racial diversity of their neighborhoods and their condos and the schools they send their kids to attend. No fair resorting broad groupings; eg, "Manhattan." They need to post the data for where they call home.
At the same time, it would be useful for the NYT to do an analysis of their organization to determine how many individuals have prison backgrounds. This is an ox the editors love to pontificate about, so let's hear how they manage their own effort to reach out to ex-cons.
Finally, the NYT never seems to publish any articles about the need to find well paying jobs for veterans, especially those who are young and perhaps with limited civilian job skills, say infantry or armor. How many veterans does the NYT employ?
Don't hold your breath readers. It ain't gonna happen.
The NYT should post an analysis of their employee population by job type of the racial and ethnic diversity of their organization. That means starting with their ownership structure, their Board of Directors, their editors, journalists, management and so on, all the way through their ranks. No co-mingling of jobs, let's see how fare.
At the same time, they should post an analysis of the racial diversity of their neighborhoods and their condos and the schools they send their kids to attend. No fair resorting broad groupings; eg, "Manhattan." They need to post the data for where they call home.
At the same time, it would be useful for the NYT to do an analysis of their organization to determine how many individuals have prison backgrounds. This is an ox the editors love to pontificate about, so let's hear how they manage their own effort to reach out to ex-cons.
Finally, the NYT never seems to publish any articles about the need to find well paying jobs for veterans, especially those who are young and perhaps with limited civilian job skills, say infantry or armor. How many veterans does the NYT employ?
Don't hold your breath readers. It ain't gonna happen.
55
the problem with these racial management programs is that they devolve into people of color (i don't like the term, but it is de rigeur) limitation programs with unstated when are there too many of them (tipping points). real voluntary integration will not happen until people who are not classifiable as white (people of no color) have the equal opportunity to move into the middle and higher classes, as well as equal opportunity to live in decent affordable housing.
2
Most people CHOOSE to live with those of their own race!
21
I don't. However I DO choose to live among those who share my values and mirror my behavior.
1
They may choose to live with their own race, but did their race collectively choose to live in the most run down, ugly parts of town with the least access to needed resources? No. That was the decision of the political leaders in those towns.
1
It is interesting that The Times did not mention the practice of "selling one's quota" of low income housing to surrounding communities. Blue collar towns (such as Pennsauken, NJ) that have struggled with difficult financial situations have been paid by the more affluent towns to accept their housing quotas. The one time payments help to balance the current budget, but fail to help pay for the ongoing increased cost of the infrastructure necessary to support the influx of new residents. The Mount Laurel ruling is not the shining success portrayed in this article. How much low income housing exists in Moorsetown?
6
"...rigorously screened applicants..." What does that mean?
23
I am going to hazard a guess that it means they screen out those who have criminal records or a history of trouble within other subsidized housing. I worked in property management, including section 8 housing, and it is the truth that only a few trouble makers are responsible for the crime, etc. that can plaque subsidized housing. If you screen out those few, you are left with people who just want a decent home and good schools along with access to jobs, grocery stores, etc. In other words, they are just like you and me.
1
This is an example of an argument that sounds really good on its face without confronting or addressing the assumed premise--that diversity (whatever the proponent wants it to mean) is a legitimate end on its own terms. It also assumes one of the key elements of the editorial board's statist approach to every social problem--that seemingly benevolent government action can change for the better attitudes that have predominated and governed human behavior throughout history. The philosophical matters aside, I wholeheartedly agree with other commenters that these programs, when unsuccessful, have a disproportionate adverse impact on middle class and upper middle class areas--not on affluent areas. I see it every day here in Louisville, which has to be one of the most racially and economically balkanized cities in the United States.
11
I do not believe this for a minute. Around here if you have the cash or can get a loan you can live anywhere you desire.
In this real estate market money talks. Race does not matter if you have the cabbage.
In this real estate market money talks. Race does not matter if you have the cabbage.
17
I am currently working on a community project in a small town in the heart of Cajun country. The town recently closed its skateboard park for renovations. They're allowing these active skateboarders to use this covered pavilion during the renovation, looking the other way would be more accurate. What I've witnessed has not only surprised me, it's been thrilling. The kids come from every direction, attend different schools, come from diverse backgrounds and a wide range in income levels. Several walk, because they live nearby. Others drive their cars, some of which are clunkers and others are brand new. One kid's mother drops by frequently in her new Jaguar.
The racial mix is roughly consistent with the region. They all know each other, call each other by name, and applaud when one starts to master a new skill or trick. Some of the tricks are quite hard, thus the more experienced jump in to help the novices. They dress differently, but none of them ever get angry, none of them curse. They emphatically offer each other help, when they tire, they gather and tell stories. An older one may be helping someone else with issues they're having at school. Some of them bring their girl friends, who then become friends too.
Here's the kicker. Not one of them is over weight. They're all extremely active. Within a just a few minutes after arriving, they're soaking wet with sweat. Sure, they all have cell phones, but guess what. They all have each other's numbers too.
The racial mix is roughly consistent with the region. They all know each other, call each other by name, and applaud when one starts to master a new skill or trick. Some of the tricks are quite hard, thus the more experienced jump in to help the novices. They dress differently, but none of them ever get angry, none of them curse. They emphatically offer each other help, when they tire, they gather and tell stories. An older one may be helping someone else with issues they're having at school. Some of them bring their girl friends, who then become friends too.
Here's the kicker. Not one of them is over weight. They're all extremely active. Within a just a few minutes after arriving, they're soaking wet with sweat. Sure, they all have cell phones, but guess what. They all have each other's numbers too.
1
Look at the Massachusetts Comprehensive Permit Act, Chapter 40B. If a community doesn't have as much affordable housing as it is supposed to, a developer can buy land zoned for houses and build apartments on it as long as 20% of the housing is made "affordable". The municipalities must prove that 10% of their housing stock or housing built on at least 1.5% of their land is affordable or the developer can ignore their zoning.
1
You write:
"Compared with families who applied for housing at the development but ended up elsewhere, the Ethel Lawrence families have shown higher rates of employment and family income, and lower rates of welfare dependency. The parents are more closely engaged in the school lives of their children, who did well academically even though they found themselves in more challenging schools."
Substitute 'charter school' for 'housing' in the first sentence and you have an accurate depiction of the difference charter schools make in the lives of poor minority students. You use one study of one subsidized housing development to argue for an aggressive housing program but you have ignored multiple studies of many successful charter school programs. Why is that? The benefits are similar. Many more students can be accommodated quicker and easier in a charter school expansion than in a subsidized housing expansion.
One is left with the impression that you are willing to advocate for improvement in the lives of poor minority children and families as long as you don't have to confront the teacher unions. Easier to promote 'ending the cycle of racial isolation' through subsidized housing than promote 'ending the monopoly of unionized public education' through charter schools because white suburbia is an easier opponent- for you- than entrenched and unionized educators and administrators.
"Compared with families who applied for housing at the development but ended up elsewhere, the Ethel Lawrence families have shown higher rates of employment and family income, and lower rates of welfare dependency. The parents are more closely engaged in the school lives of their children, who did well academically even though they found themselves in more challenging schools."
Substitute 'charter school' for 'housing' in the first sentence and you have an accurate depiction of the difference charter schools make in the lives of poor minority students. You use one study of one subsidized housing development to argue for an aggressive housing program but you have ignored multiple studies of many successful charter school programs. Why is that? The benefits are similar. Many more students can be accommodated quicker and easier in a charter school expansion than in a subsidized housing expansion.
One is left with the impression that you are willing to advocate for improvement in the lives of poor minority children and families as long as you don't have to confront the teacher unions. Easier to promote 'ending the cycle of racial isolation' through subsidized housing than promote 'ending the monopoly of unionized public education' through charter schools because white suburbia is an easier opponent- for you- than entrenched and unionized educators and administrators.
14
Yet another puff of smoke from the Ivory Tower. But let's take this a face value: if Grey Lady's Editorial Board really believes in mandating behavior to citizens, start with itself. Until NYT mandates that it's senior staff lives in "ghettos" (their term) as continued condition of employment, no more pompous, preachy editorials to the great unwashed (us).
59
"Ending Racial Isolation" means destroying communities. Would the writer break up the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church for the good of the churchgoers? Scatter Chinatown to end its dreaded racial isolation? Probably, in pursuit of some never-ending perfect society.
29
Isolating minorities sets up huge problems anywhere. What follows this form of segregation are reduced services, poorer schools/jobs and transportation patterns designed to maintain isolation. These results then seem to confirm prejudices against the minorities which result in even more isolation. You can see extreme examples of this in the current Israel and the old segregated US South. However, modern day Atlanta and parts of Connecticut as just two examples showing how subtly segregation serves to maintain the majority's privileges and superiority.
5
The Times' use of the term "ghetto" as it applies here is patently offensive. Jews suffering under the rule of Nazi Germany didn't have the option to move to an area of their choosing. This piece also seems to indicate subtly, that minorities are somehow unable to control their own destiny, and that the solution to their problems can only be fixed by "progressives" like those well-heeled, ultra-educated navel-gazers who write holier-than-thou, finger-wagging pieces like this. The illegal-immigration piece yesterday followed a similar pattern.
Note to the editorial staff: your readership is annoyed. They are more intelligent than you are giving them credit for.
Note to the editorial staff: your readership is annoyed. They are more intelligent than you are giving them credit for.
49
Why are the authors so perpetually deluded. I must assume that these positive illusions make them feel happy.
It's really encouraging the see the number of NYT readers who recognize this piece as utter claptap, and who also recognize that the editorial board continues to wrap itself in a diversity-at-any-cost cocoon. The entire newspaper is becoming increasingly predictable, "progressive" to the point of self parody and, ultimately, boring.
You need to look up the definition of ghetto.
It is perfectly fine to use it for economic; social or legal purposes.
It is perfectly fine to use it for economic; social or legal purposes.
I'm looking for a diverse community in Florida where we can buy a retirement home? Does such a place exist?
I would like to suggest that the authorities in New York ask the elite to set an example and start by building in a nice neighborhood, one which would enable residents to "climb New York." Lets have a special tax on the East Side and then build a building suitable for families in a super nice area, something like 79th and Park. Can't do it? Won't do it? Then don't ask people in Queens or Nassau County to do it either.
Let's face it. I rent and won't rent in a complex that accepts section 8. There are too many problems. Don't believe me? Read our local newspaper.
Let's face it. I rent and won't rent in a complex that accepts section 8. There are too many problems. Don't believe me? Read our local newspaper.
27
The only reason why it work in this town was because "management throughly scened each applicant.. " if that doesn't happen things in that neighborhood would get bad
10
Come on bleeding heart liberal NYT Editorial board. DEMAND federals laws to integrate the UES (and Georgetown too.)
Upper East side demographics from US Census Bureau
89.25% White
6.14% Asian
0.04% Pacific Islander
1.34% African American
0.09% Native American
1.39% from other races
1.74% from two or more races.
Upper East side demographics from US Census Bureau
89.25% White
6.14% Asian
0.04% Pacific Islander
1.34% African American
0.09% Native American
1.39% from other races
1.74% from two or more races.
35
If you "rigorously screen applicants" and only exclude the prohibition of unwanted black people, you have excluded the vast majority of blacks who make up the vast majority of black ghettos in every large American city. If 5% of the Blacks pass the screening and flee the black ghettos, they benefit, as they should and the black ghettos they left become even worse. The problem is, what do you do with the semi-illiterate, bottom feeding inhabitants of the ghettos other than keep them fenced in? Letting the "good" people out is no solution.
7
It is for them.
I'll feel like something has been accomplished in New Jersey when affordable housing is also mandated in, oh, Essex Fells, Alpine and Ho-Ho-Kus.
Or maybe it would be easier if we stopped with the affordable housing piety and just paid people a decent wage.
Or maybe it would be easier if we stopped with the affordable housing piety and just paid people a decent wage.
9
On Saturday, the Ed Brd lavishly praised " sanctuary cities" that receive Fed. law enforcement money, but refuse to comply with Fed immigration law.
Today, the Brd. sternly berates cities that receive Fed. housing money, but refuse to comply with Fed. fair howling laws.
Nothing like a little hypocrisy.
Today, the Brd. sternly berates cities that receive Fed. housing money, but refuse to comply with Fed. fair howling laws.
Nothing like a little hypocrisy.
49
In the small town where I grew up, wealthy (some extremely so) and poor (some actually homeless) families all went to the same school, shopped at the same grocery store, walked the same streets, and attended the same community meetings. I am a better person for it, as I believe are all my town's citizens of different "classes" and "races."
Mount Laurel's development sounds like a way to make a larger town function more like my small town. Perhaps that's not a bad goal for every city in this country.
Mount Laurel's development sounds like a way to make a larger town function more like my small town. Perhaps that's not a bad goal for every city in this country.
4
High density low income housing forced on single family home communities does change the entire atmosphere of the community. Suburban and semi-rural communities should not have to become urbanized for the sake of political correctness.
13
Wow, I think I just read an NYT editorial that advocated deregulation, free markets and property rights. Government programs and subsidies are not required to create affordable housing; you just need to get out of the way and let it happen.
Believe it or not, greedy capitalists would actually love to build affordable housing. Most of the great business fortunes were made not by catering to the one percent but by mass producing widely affordable products and services. Unfortunately, restrictive zoning limiting the type and density of housing - a violation of private property rights - essentially tells the housing industry that it is only permitted to sell Cadillacs, not Chevys.
Believe it or not, greedy capitalists would actually love to build affordable housing. Most of the great business fortunes were made not by catering to the one percent but by mass producing widely affordable products and services. Unfortunately, restrictive zoning limiting the type and density of housing - a violation of private property rights - essentially tells the housing industry that it is only permitted to sell Cadillacs, not Chevys.
1
You're assuming that all men are of good will, and that we are helpful to one another like we once were and will all be reasoned with by statistics.
hah, your high-minded statistics, says Christie and also one of our two political parties, for whom those positves you mentioned are not shared ones for the nation. Fear has great currency, spreads like a malignancy.
The dark money behind so many of these attempts to re-litigate and overturn settled law has turned out to be quite dark, indeed.
hah, your high-minded statistics, says Christie and also one of our two political parties, for whom those positves you mentioned are not shared ones for the nation. Fear has great currency, spreads like a malignancy.
The dark money behind so many of these attempts to re-litigate and overturn settled law has turned out to be quite dark, indeed.
3
This is easy for the Times opinion editor and publisher to say. They will inherit nice apartments along with their jobs, from their fathers. Those apartments are in places where subsidized housing will be very difficult and expensive to build. So they do not have to worry about the increase in turbulent behavior that comes from living next door to troubled unmarried women and their numerous out-of-wedlock children, sometimes by several different fathers who may or may not be present.
31
It won't be long before the "screenings" are deemed prejudicial against serial felons and the neighborhood becomes exactly like the neighborhood these people broke their backs to escape.
25
Outcome fixes is what will never happen as long as we have a capitalistic society. Thinking the government can be the 'fixer' is what The Times editorial people give us 24/7. Its hopeless. Wise up.
3
I think (hope) Jimmy is being sarcastic. Believe it or not, there are many happy people who are relatively poor. I have no desire to live in another person's big house. Nor even own a big house. Would be nice, though, to keep as much of my own money as possible and to be able to buy something somewhere if I can put the money together.
We will never be happy in the US until the government assigns all housing. The first step is the elimination of the ownership of private property. We have many large homes with only two or three people living in them. Other families should be moved in to these private homes regardless of race.
6
I will believe the NYTimes, Liberals, Progressives, etc., etc., really mean this when they require Malibu Beach, CA, to build low income housing for the poor and persons of color.
21
So at what point does "rigorous vetting" become racial discrimination?
As usual, the editors are very long on sermons and very short on pragmatic solutions. Not to mention their indifference to the people who have invested most of their life savings to own a home in a middle class suburban neighborhood.
As usual, the editors are very long on sermons and very short on pragmatic solutions. Not to mention their indifference to the people who have invested most of their life savings to own a home in a middle class suburban neighborhood.
31
I have lived all over the United States, but no place as white as where I presently live: the uber-liberal, Democratic, Times-reading, and diversity-extolling Upper West Side. And the good white liberal Times readers who live here would not have it any other way, especially as regards the public schools to which they send their children. Before wagging its finger at this or that community in Maryland or elsewhere, perhaps the Times should devote its energies to imposing its vision of diversity on its own people on its own front stoop.
70
The worse thing about being poor in modern America is not that you can't afford to buy enough stuff, but that you can't afford to get away from other poor people.
16
As a refugee from communism I find forced (and, fortunately, discredited) school busing and government tyrannical forcing communities to build housing for "diverse" (and Orwellian and PC double speak for statistically more crime and a whole array of destructive behavioral problems bearing) population an abuse of state power rather similar to that we fled from.
Using legislation, powers of state, media, school curriculum to instil in majority population sense of guilt for all kinds of "past injustices", even if almost none of us got rich on or exploited others will always work to only a limited degree, again similarly to communist dogma a totalitarian enforcement of the same, crushing people down to achive "equality" of results while actual abilities among individuals and even group vary widely, especially when considering generation-to-generation cumulative effects.
Our New England town's zoning doesn't allow for building municipal sewage and water system in order to prevent any apartment building in the community and we support that.
Using legislation, powers of state, media, school curriculum to instil in majority population sense of guilt for all kinds of "past injustices", even if almost none of us got rich on or exploited others will always work to only a limited degree, again similarly to communist dogma a totalitarian enforcement of the same, crushing people down to achive "equality" of results while actual abilities among individuals and even group vary widely, especially when considering generation-to-generation cumulative effects.
Our New England town's zoning doesn't allow for building municipal sewage and water system in order to prevent any apartment building in the community and we support that.
36
The error is in believing that one can make a law and banish the prejudices of millions of people thereby - and not just racial prejudices. After all these efforts since 1968 and all the distractions from the real causal factors, one of the very few successes we can point to is Mount Laurel, NJ, to support the editors’ argument – and it only began to gather steam in 2000. The fact that there are so few is the sad reality that should be highlighted, not an attempt to make more of little than little deserves.
The problem isn’t solved by transplanting the impoverished to middle-class neighborhoods en masse, to stick out like sore thumbs and to be isolated WITHIN communities based not so much on race as on class, but to improve education dramatically in impoverished neighborhoods. We have African Americans throughout our middle class communities because they’re middle-class themselves and they FIT. What we need to do is nurture the skills necessary to compete for solid jobs that make MORE people fit in middle-class communities.
The real challenge is that a strategic solution to this problem of racial isolation, largely based on class, requires one-to-two generations and a large investment to secure. Everyone wants to solve the problem NOW, and in so doing fails to solve the problem at all. Perhaps after 47 years of failure in outcomes since the Fair Housing act, we might consider the whole approach a massive failure and look to what could really work. It’s not Mount Laurel.
The problem isn’t solved by transplanting the impoverished to middle-class neighborhoods en masse, to stick out like sore thumbs and to be isolated WITHIN communities based not so much on race as on class, but to improve education dramatically in impoverished neighborhoods. We have African Americans throughout our middle class communities because they’re middle-class themselves and they FIT. What we need to do is nurture the skills necessary to compete for solid jobs that make MORE people fit in middle-class communities.
The real challenge is that a strategic solution to this problem of racial isolation, largely based on class, requires one-to-two generations and a large investment to secure. Everyone wants to solve the problem NOW, and in so doing fails to solve the problem at all. Perhaps after 47 years of failure in outcomes since the Fair Housing act, we might consider the whole approach a massive failure and look to what could really work. It’s not Mount Laurel.
9
According to a professor involved in the study of Mt. Lauel's success, “Most of the [original Mt. Lauel] residents had no clue that there was even low-income housing in their town.” Furthermore, according to the study, putting low-income black people into white suburbs (where, apparently, most residents didn't know they existed) magically improved their lives.
What is omitted from the academic review is that, in connection with the plaintiffs' lawsuit, a corporation was retained to conduct a strict selection process in order to select applicants for Mt. Laurel that would be the best fit for the community. (The application process was a multi-step procedure involving an initial screening, followed by in-person and in-home visits before a candidate could be selected.) Also, the professors and "friends" looked far and wide for applicants who fit into a precise range of incomes deemed ideal. Finally, they arranged for financing including outright "grants, developer contributions, reduced township fees, and loans”
Ethel Lawrence is a model project carefully shaped and specially financed. If you can engineer utopias for tens of millions of minorities, Ethel Lawrence is a great guide. But, if you have typical resources available, Ethel Lawrence is pie in the sky.
What is omitted from the academic review is that, in connection with the plaintiffs' lawsuit, a corporation was retained to conduct a strict selection process in order to select applicants for Mt. Laurel that would be the best fit for the community. (The application process was a multi-step procedure involving an initial screening, followed by in-person and in-home visits before a candidate could be selected.) Also, the professors and "friends" looked far and wide for applicants who fit into a precise range of incomes deemed ideal. Finally, they arranged for financing including outright "grants, developer contributions, reduced township fees, and loans”
Ethel Lawrence is a model project carefully shaped and specially financed. If you can engineer utopias for tens of millions of minorities, Ethel Lawrence is a great guide. But, if you have typical resources available, Ethel Lawrence is pie in the sky.
41
Good! maybe the anonymous "Editorial Board" can volunteer to take them as neighbors next? It would only be fair since they support the measure. But we know that will never happen. This article epitomizes modern progressivism: diversity for thee but not for me. As so it goes...
33
Perhaps The New York Times should establish an employment policy that requires its staff to live only in economically and racially diverse neighborhoods. Nick Kristof, for example, lives in affluent Scarsdale, NY, where there are virtually no African-Amerians. The Times can't ask the rest of America to do what its own people won't do.
60
Unless members of the Editorial Board are proactively working to get subsidized housing built in their own neighborhoods, this is just the usual cost-free finger-wagging.
64
The sad fact is that tribalism and the tendency to segregate is deeply embedded in the DNA of most Americans regardless of race.
8
Hey, fellow liberals, don't be so paternalistic. It's not just racial minorities and lower income folks who benefit from housing patterns that mix income levels and "races." It's all of us who gain a wider perspective on the world and on human beings who aren't like us in some ways, but are in so many others, and in all the ways that count.
1
So what do the people who question the court decisions say about the claimed statistics?
2
I grew up in what was then the all-white community of West Orange, New Jersey, which was surrounded by predominantly black towns, like Montclair, Orange, East Orange, and the city of Newark. My father often spoke about how there was a community understanding that you would never sell your house to a black family, which still held it seems when I moved to Canada in 1968. On rare visits to New Jersey I have noticed to my great relief that that racist policy no longer holds true in West Orange, at least in the part of town where I lived. It is long past time to face the truth. The United States has long been, and remains, a deeply racist society. These problems exist elsewhere, of course, including in Canada with the treatment of our First Nations people, but everything must be done to address these problems, which in Jersey means replacing Christ Christie with someone more interested in healing the wounds rather than deepening them. In Canada in begins with voting out the noxious Stephen Harper, on Monday. Let's make it happen.
2
Contrary to the NYT's assertion, there is very little racial discrimination in housing. Economic discrimination - absolutely. Statistically, poverty and crime go together. You can argue about why, but those who can avoid crime will do so, regardless of race. The same factors are at play in the overwhelming white, rural counties of Ohio, which are segregated by class. (As the song says: "The poor side of town.")
The real key to the success of Mt. Laurel is the statement that "management has rigorously screened applicants....and set broader income guidelines." Both of these actions are the opposite of what the NYT advocates. Essentially the management of Mt. Laurel is cherry picking its residents, and allowing higher income families to qualify. It's not a surprise that it has been successful.
But think about what this means. As the slightly better off and most law abiding citizens of poor communities leave for developments like Mt. Laurel, those left behind will be increasing poorer and more crime prone. The elimination of legal segregation led to the exodus of middle class blacks from black communities. That benefited the middle class black families but adversely affected those left behind. This is just the next step.
I applaud the effort to give those who are law abiding and who value education an opportunity to escape crime ridden ghettos, but we shouldn't ignore the unintended consequences of such actions.
The real key to the success of Mt. Laurel is the statement that "management has rigorously screened applicants....and set broader income guidelines." Both of these actions are the opposite of what the NYT advocates. Essentially the management of Mt. Laurel is cherry picking its residents, and allowing higher income families to qualify. It's not a surprise that it has been successful.
But think about what this means. As the slightly better off and most law abiding citizens of poor communities leave for developments like Mt. Laurel, those left behind will be increasing poorer and more crime prone. The elimination of legal segregation led to the exodus of middle class blacks from black communities. That benefited the middle class black families but adversely affected those left behind. This is just the next step.
I applaud the effort to give those who are law abiding and who value education an opportunity to escape crime ridden ghettos, but we shouldn't ignore the unintended consequences of such actions.
29
Very nice article. As long as almost all the subdivisions in America are not like Ethel Lawrence Homes in New Jersey, we cannot call this a very progressive country. As a general rule, there should not be any discrimination as far as housing is concerned. And here we are still going through so many obstacles in enforcing the 'Fair Housing Act' is concerned. Luckily for the minority families of Mount Laurel everything turned out to be good including good education for their children. Hope all the communities in America take a lesson from this community and kick the Racism out into the dustbins of our societies. "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH'....tkb
3
Diversity should be voluntary - not mandatory.
28
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Laurel decision led to what we New Jersians call "Laurel housing" -- units sold to financially strapped cities like Newark by wealthier, white suburbs who don't want subsidized housing inside their borders. If I'm correct on this, then that's still a loophole that allows for ghettoization.
3
From what I read, Regional Contribution Agreements have not been allowed since 2008. I guess that's what you are referring to.
Somehow, I doubt that anyone on the Editorial Board has any Section 8 housing within hearing distance.
When you live anywhere near Section 8 housing, you get to overhear 'conversations' like this: "F*** You, Mother F*****!!!! How many b****** you f***?" For some reason, whether on cell phone or face to face, these 'conversations' occur at high volume. That is an actual screaming match I got to overhear, with small children nearby. With little variation, the same thoughts were loudly expressed, over and over. With Section 8, you also get lots of visits from the police and emergency vehicles.
The Black middle class, the Hispanic middle class, the Asia middle class, the white middle class, none of us want to live around that kind of behavior and loudness and disruption.
Reading about one little community, with no supporting links, where everything has been swell for 15 entire years isn't convincing. If the Editorial Board wants to go live in the ghetto, great, go for it. But don't pretend that folks don't have good reason for not wanting the government forcing disruptive and dangerous neighbors on middle class people, of all races.
When you live anywhere near Section 8 housing, you get to overhear 'conversations' like this: "F*** You, Mother F*****!!!! How many b****** you f***?" For some reason, whether on cell phone or face to face, these 'conversations' occur at high volume. That is an actual screaming match I got to overhear, with small children nearby. With little variation, the same thoughts were loudly expressed, over and over. With Section 8, you also get lots of visits from the police and emergency vehicles.
The Black middle class, the Hispanic middle class, the Asia middle class, the white middle class, none of us want to live around that kind of behavior and loudness and disruption.
Reading about one little community, with no supporting links, where everything has been swell for 15 entire years isn't convincing. If the Editorial Board wants to go live in the ghetto, great, go for it. But don't pretend that folks don't have good reason for not wanting the government forcing disruptive and dangerous neighbors on middle class people, of all races.
67
I get to listen to that language all around me and I live in a white middle class neighborhood in Maine. My adult neighbors argue with their adult children and I have to shut my windows. I also got to witness those neighbors and one other threaten to phone the police when two african friends of the sons of another neighbor came over to wait for their buddies. While my idiot neighbors were threatening, I went over and spoke to the young men, who decided to move on and wait elsewhere. When the family returned, I went over to explain what happened--as did the idiot neighbors--who were very embarrassed when told that the visitors were asked to wait at the house until the family returned. Two doors up, the son was robbing people at knife point, another 40 year old son of a neighbor was dealing drugs on our street. All these people are white. Crime is everywhere but when you put housing in areas with no jobs and surrounded by poverty, you will get concentrated crime. People need jobs that pay a livable wage, which they won't find in high poverty/crime areas. So maybe this worked was that there were more jobs available in the Mt. Laurel area.
In The Villages, Florida, a retirement community of about 122,000 aging baby boomers and 55,000 homes, there are about 15 African American couples. I have never seen an Asian or Hispanic couple. The Villages recently named a metropolitan area is billed as the "Friendliest" retirement community in America. People zip around in their golf carts. They play golf, listen to free nightly entertainment in one of the 3 town squares. They also belong to clubs, organizations and other recreational activities of retirement.
Immediately upon visiting or moving here the first thing you notice is that this is a very white community. There is no poverty, no crime, no hunger and no thirst unquenched.
The racial isolation of The Villages is not an accident. The price of entry is steep. An average home is $260,000 and most, are paid for in cash. Homes above $350,000 are almost always not mortgaged. The major source of mortgages is Citizens Bank, owned by the Morse family, builders of The Villages.
Overt racism may be denied but the truth is that this gated community sends out a clear signal; No poor, no Hispanics, No African Americans, No Asians and no one else who doesn't fit in. Jews are allowed because they're white and rich and because they'd fight.
The street I live on has 22 homes. The total net worth of this street is greater than $500 million. Remember there are 55,000 thousand homes here.
Within this community ending the cycle of racial isolation is all but impossible.
Immediately upon visiting or moving here the first thing you notice is that this is a very white community. There is no poverty, no crime, no hunger and no thirst unquenched.
The racial isolation of The Villages is not an accident. The price of entry is steep. An average home is $260,000 and most, are paid for in cash. Homes above $350,000 are almost always not mortgaged. The major source of mortgages is Citizens Bank, owned by the Morse family, builders of The Villages.
Overt racism may be denied but the truth is that this gated community sends out a clear signal; No poor, no Hispanics, No African Americans, No Asians and no one else who doesn't fit in. Jews are allowed because they're white and rich and because they'd fight.
The street I live on has 22 homes. The total net worth of this street is greater than $500 million. Remember there are 55,000 thousand homes here.
Within this community ending the cycle of racial isolation is all but impossible.
6
I wouldn't want any subsidized housing near me. I don't care what color the people there are; I care about increased crime. It's bad enough my tax dollars are paying someone else's way. Don't come destroy my neighborhood too.
49
In "The Open Society and its Enemies," Karl Popper distinguishes between two kinds of social engineering: piecemeal social engineering and utopian social engineering. The former is often conflated with the latter and hence with the Soviet Union; and once this is done, the argument is effectively over, at least in the minds of the people who have conflated the two. Any proposal to rectify past injustice or even to simply set about enforcing existing law, flouted by racists for decades, is shouted down and the proposers condemned as Bolshevik types.
No serious person thinks ending racial segregation and injustice can be done ham-handedly; everyone is aware that it must be done with proper sensitivity. And this editorial clearly demonstrates what everyone knows: It can be done, and as far as I'm concerned, must be done. It is just wrong to continue cramming subsidized housing into miserable ghettos.
No serious person thinks ending racial segregation and injustice can be done ham-handedly; everyone is aware that it must be done with proper sensitivity. And this editorial clearly demonstrates what everyone knows: It can be done, and as far as I'm concerned, must be done. It is just wrong to continue cramming subsidized housing into miserable ghettos.
17
Absolutely. Socio econoxmic and racial integration are a hugely important goal. It is staggeringly difficult to find a place that is both racially, and social exconomically integrated, and stays that way for a long period of time. Most places hit the ideal on their way to something else; usually while they are in the middle stages of gentrification.
.
And this is what's so frustrating about the current tenor of the housing debate. It's all about trying to force affordable housing on middle class, presumably white, suburbs. There is no discussion of what can be done to prevent the displacement of the poor from gentrifying cities. What could very well happen over the next fifty or sixty years, is a reversal of the urban dynamics of the 20th century. Concentrate poverty could be shunted off to the suburbs; while cities enjoy newfound wealth. Neither would have the socio economic and racial diversity that should be everyone's goal.
.
And this is what's so frustrating about the current tenor of the housing debate. It's all about trying to force affordable housing on middle class, presumably white, suburbs. There is no discussion of what can be done to prevent the displacement of the poor from gentrifying cities. What could very well happen over the next fifty or sixty years, is a reversal of the urban dynamics of the 20th century. Concentrate poverty could be shunted off to the suburbs; while cities enjoy newfound wealth. Neither would have the socio economic and racial diversity that should be everyone's goal.
1
Dekalb county, where I live, was once a mostly agrarian area with a few scattered small southern towns, and it was virtually all white. That started to change in 60's with gradual urban expansion. Now the county has a majority African-American population. There are still some almost all-white areas in the north and some almost all black areas in the south, but large sections of the county are thoroughly integrated with whose in the majority varying from place to place.
If I were to drive two miles to the southwest from where I live, I would pass some 1970's to 1980's era housing developments of moderately priced homes intermixed with modest apartment complexes. I would also pass by the center of Clarkston (my actual city of residence) with very old southern homes on tree-lined streets and some areas with very cheap multi-story apartment buildings. Turn a corner anywhere and you have no idea which of those you'll find.
That same pattern, with some variation, persists across much of the central part of the county. The result is a lot of areas that are integrated not just in terms of race, but also income level (with the very wealthy noticeably absent).
I don't think anybody planned it that way; I think it was just driven by economic realities. This doesn't seem like rocket science, it seems like a natural evolution and it appears that people would have to be doing everything they could to avoid it happening for it not to occur in more urban areas.
If I were to drive two miles to the southwest from where I live, I would pass some 1970's to 1980's era housing developments of moderately priced homes intermixed with modest apartment complexes. I would also pass by the center of Clarkston (my actual city of residence) with very old southern homes on tree-lined streets and some areas with very cheap multi-story apartment buildings. Turn a corner anywhere and you have no idea which of those you'll find.
That same pattern, with some variation, persists across much of the central part of the county. The result is a lot of areas that are integrated not just in terms of race, but also income level (with the very wealthy noticeably absent).
I don't think anybody planned it that way; I think it was just driven by economic realities. This doesn't seem like rocket science, it seems like a natural evolution and it appears that people would have to be doing everything they could to avoid it happening for it not to occur in more urban areas.
10
The same exists in northeast/ north central Pennsylvania. The towns are isolated by undeveloped or farm land and all classes live together: engineers and managers at small local industry, doctors, dentists, orthodontists, teachers, farmers, mechanics, welfare recipients. There isn't much minority population.
The schools provide integration. Kids don't socialize according to class, but instead according to popularity and interest. The tall athletic handsome boys and pretty girls who develop early become popular and these characteristics aren't necessarily or even mostly given to children of orthodontists and engineers. The status of the welfare recipient family rises when their son becomes quarterback. The dentist's kid might be dismissed as a nerd. When kids become friends, their parents become friends.
However, the schools are bad aacademically and don't prepare kids for life outside that town or for college. Sports are king.
The schools provide integration. Kids don't socialize according to class, but instead according to popularity and interest. The tall athletic handsome boys and pretty girls who develop early become popular and these characteristics aren't necessarily or even mostly given to children of orthodontists and engineers. The status of the welfare recipient family rises when their son becomes quarterback. The dentist's kid might be dismissed as a nerd. When kids become friends, their parents become friends.
However, the schools are bad aacademically and don't prepare kids for life outside that town or for college. Sports are king.
2
The ultimate irony here: the Southern states, which did have racial discrimination in housing and schools, were forcibly desegregated in the 60s and 70s. Today, they are models of racial integration COMPARED TO THE NORTHEAST. In 2015, it is not the Old South which is racially segregated. It is the big urban cities of the Northeast. The worst of the worst: NEW YORK CITY. It is literally the most segregated city (and the most segregated public schools) in the ENTIRE NATION.
Yet the NYT, in their eternal battle to put down everyone else (*anyone who disagrees with their political agenda), attacks other locales but curiously, has no prescription for the immense racial AND ECONOMIC segregation of their own town and their own schools.
Yet the NYT, in their eternal battle to put down everyone else (*anyone who disagrees with their political agenda), attacks other locales but curiously, has no prescription for the immense racial AND ECONOMIC segregation of their own town and their own schools.
"Its management has rigorously screened applicants and has tried to ensure an income mix by setting broader income guidelines."
So, they discriminate, eh? They don't just let in anyone, lest all kinds of riffraff come in and wreck the place. I'm just waiting for the lawsuits by 'activists' demanding that worthless criminals be given housing.
So, they discriminate, eh? They don't just let in anyone, lest all kinds of riffraff come in and wreck the place. I'm just waiting for the lawsuits by 'activists' demanding that worthless criminals be given housing.
84
All mortgage applicants are screened. Or, excuse me, racially profiled.
1
Absolutely. This article is very slanted, looking at one 40 year old housing development that is an extreme outlier.
Why not look at the absolute disaster that is the Section 8 housing voucher program? Riddled with abuse, unfair, costly and ridiculous.
BTW: the new lefty meme is to pay Section 8 recipients thousands of dollars per month, so they can rent in the poshest upscale supposedly-white areas. Yeah, that will solve all the problems they have failed to solve for 40 years, plus cost an arm & a leg.
Why not look at the absolute disaster that is the Section 8 housing voucher program? Riddled with abuse, unfair, costly and ridiculous.
BTW: the new lefty meme is to pay Section 8 recipients thousands of dollars per month, so they can rent in the poshest upscale supposedly-white areas. Yeah, that will solve all the problems they have failed to solve for 40 years, plus cost an arm & a leg.
2
Mt Laurel seems to owe much of its success to adequate funding for timely maintenance and good management. But when it comes to government funding that's never a guarantee. Quality public housing anywhere is one budget crisis away from turning into a ghetto.
47
"Mt Laurel seems to owe much of its success to adequate funding for timely maintenance and good management."
But even the government loving NYTs, that never saw a tax that it did not want to increase or impose, has said on numerous occasions that "government is ALWAYS inefficient and OFTEN corrupt".
But even the government loving NYTs, that never saw a tax that it did not want to increase or impose, has said on numerous occasions that "government is ALWAYS inefficient and OFTEN corrupt".
2
So is any neighborhood.
Change to: Quality...housing anywhere is one banking crisis away from turning into a ghetto.
Look at how the banking / mortgage lending crisis turned whole neighborhoods into places where underwater homeowners handed over keys to the banks and walked away. Large, privately owned homes became unkempt and even targets for copper thieves.
It is a false feeling of safety for those who think privately "owned" housing will ensure the property values of the already privileged. Safe, affordable housing with better access to jobs and education shouldn't be prevented because of fear of the what-ifs. We are all potential victims of malevolent political and commercial bad actors. In the meantime, striving people with low and moderate incomes only have one life to live, one chance to educate their children. Your fear should not stand in their way.
Change to: Quality...housing anywhere is one banking crisis away from turning into a ghetto.
Look at how the banking / mortgage lending crisis turned whole neighborhoods into places where underwater homeowners handed over keys to the banks and walked away. Large, privately owned homes became unkempt and even targets for copper thieves.
It is a false feeling of safety for those who think privately "owned" housing will ensure the property values of the already privileged. Safe, affordable housing with better access to jobs and education shouldn't be prevented because of fear of the what-ifs. We are all potential victims of malevolent political and commercial bad actors. In the meantime, striving people with low and moderate incomes only have one life to live, one chance to educate their children. Your fear should not stand in their way.
1
Not just public housing. ALL affordable housing is one crisis, or sale, away from becoming a ghetto. Houston, Texas, has been very lucky to have only a limited, easily manageable, number of public housing units. We never had the massive housing projects that were built in Chicago and St Louis, among other places. But we do have a huge number of older, privately owned apartment complexes; a result of the massive overbuilding that Houston saw during the 1970s and early 1980s. Some of these complexes are really awful - I mean like Cabrini Green awful. One local architecture professor calls them "the new projects," though they largely fly under the radar of local housing officials, HUD, and the housing advocates alike.
.
The sad reality is that, while HUD is quick to use the full force of the Federal Government to enforce housing segregation law, they leave safety, sanitation, and other habitability requirements largely up to local governments. This is why the NYCHA has gotten away with such huge backlogs in maintenance at their housing projects. It's also why Houston has such a problem. If it doesn't show up on a low income housing roster, HUD generally doesn't care. I keep wishing they would change course and give these issues more weight, but they seem to be more interested in entrenching themselves to go to war with middle class suburbs.
.
The sad reality is that, while HUD is quick to use the full force of the Federal Government to enforce housing segregation law, they leave safety, sanitation, and other habitability requirements largely up to local governments. This is why the NYCHA has gotten away with such huge backlogs in maintenance at their housing projects. It's also why Houston has such a problem. If it doesn't show up on a low income housing roster, HUD generally doesn't care. I keep wishing they would change course and give these issues more weight, but they seem to be more interested in entrenching themselves to go to war with middle class suburbs.
1
While the Editorial Board makes a valiant case for the lack of government intervention in bringing about fairer housing practices, the problem of racial discrimination also lies in landlords who overwhelmingly prefer white tenants over non-white tenants. A fact that has been proven more than once by agents pretending to be perspective renters/buyers, and getting no further than the preliminary application process.
It is perhaps fair to assume that there is not one member of the New York Times Editorial Board who has ever encountered this problem. For if there were, it would be very evident that an end to the cycle of racial isolation is nowhere in sight.
It is perhaps fair to assume that there is not one member of the New York Times Editorial Board who has ever encountered this problem. For if there were, it would be very evident that an end to the cycle of racial isolation is nowhere in sight.
31
IF a landlord did that -- screen applicants in order to discriminate -- and you could prove it (perhaps with phony white and black applicants)....that landlord would be liable for huge, devastating lawsuits.
It is illegal. Most landlords live in fear of such lawsuits. I don't believe ANY major apartment complex would dare to do such a thing anymore, as so many landlords have been successfully sued for discrimination.
Like the Editorial Board, you seem to think (or WANT to think) it is still 1965. It isn't.
It is illegal. Most landlords live in fear of such lawsuits. I don't believe ANY major apartment complex would dare to do such a thing anymore, as so many landlords have been successfully sued for discrimination.
Like the Editorial Board, you seem to think (or WANT to think) it is still 1965. It isn't.
4
Many years ago, I remember a college professor engaging the class with a simple question: "Is it the ghetto that makes the people who live there, or is it the people who make the ghetto"? The question is as relevant today as it was then. Those who are driven to educate and improve themselves, more often than not, eventually do make it out of the ghetto on their own anyway. If the aim is to export the rest to the neighborhoods where those same people who successfully pulled themselves up and out of the ghetto now reside, I suspect there is either going to be pushback or flight.
67
If by some judicial edict, you could move every single person out of a white suburb and into a "ghetto" -- and move every single poor person out of that ghetto, and into a pretty suburb (or urban hipster enclave).....in about a year, that former ghetto would a thriving, revived and gentrified area with lots of shops and beautiful renovated homes & apartments.
The former "beautiful suburb" or hipster enclave, would now be .... a ghetto, with run down homes, dirty apartments, crime, anti-social behavior, etc.
IT'S THE PEOPLE. It their jobs and income. But above all, it is the very thing that lefty liberals hate and scorn and despise above all else -- morals and values.
The former "beautiful suburb" or hipster enclave, would now be .... a ghetto, with run down homes, dirty apartments, crime, anti-social behavior, etc.
IT'S THE PEOPLE. It their jobs and income. But above all, it is the very thing that lefty liberals hate and scorn and despise above all else -- morals and values.
14
This article was clearly written by people who have no experience in poorer neighborhoods. Whenever I hear housing advocates and others lament the construction of low income housing in "ghettos" (as the New York Times calls them) I feel compelled to ask a few questions.
.
First, one of the biggest problems facing poor minority neighborhoods is a lack of investment. They have to beg decent businesses to move in. Landlords have to be forced just to bring their buildings up to code. Tax credited, low income housing is often the only real investment these neighborhoods can get. What happens if that investment goes away?
.
Second, many suburbs will fight affordable housing, and it's not always just because of racism. It doesn't matter that low income housing today is light years beyond the failed public housing projects of the 1950s. The reputation persists. Is it really fair to keep spending money and time on court battles, instead of using those resources to help improve poorer neighborhoods?
.
Finally, suburbs are becoming poorer while cities become wealthier. Gentrification is happening at a startling pace in many cities. The neighborhood around New York's High Line are a good example. But there is no program to help poor minorities stay in neighborhoods as they gentrify. Why not? How can you talk about fair housing, while forcing poor minorities out of cities?
.
If you can answer these questions, you'll be the first. Housing advocates seem to shy away from them.
.
First, one of the biggest problems facing poor minority neighborhoods is a lack of investment. They have to beg decent businesses to move in. Landlords have to be forced just to bring their buildings up to code. Tax credited, low income housing is often the only real investment these neighborhoods can get. What happens if that investment goes away?
.
Second, many suburbs will fight affordable housing, and it's not always just because of racism. It doesn't matter that low income housing today is light years beyond the failed public housing projects of the 1950s. The reputation persists. Is it really fair to keep spending money and time on court battles, instead of using those resources to help improve poorer neighborhoods?
.
Finally, suburbs are becoming poorer while cities become wealthier. Gentrification is happening at a startling pace in many cities. The neighborhood around New York's High Line are a good example. But there is no program to help poor minorities stay in neighborhoods as they gentrify. Why not? How can you talk about fair housing, while forcing poor minorities out of cities?
.
If you can answer these questions, you'll be the first. Housing advocates seem to shy away from them.
95
The "us-them" tone of these arguments suggests the core issue at hand. Whether it is racism, classism, fear of the "other," or whatever, our communities have broken along economic and racial lines. Most middle-class Americans don't know any poor people, don't associate with poor families, don't have any sense of shared life with people outside of their comfortable, "people like us" circles. America's churches are a clear and enduring reflection of our tendencies to wall ourselves off from others who are not like us. We will not make meaningful progress toward a more diverse inclusion in the American dream unless and until we take intentional steps to remedy this basic rift in our social fabric.
2
The Editorial Board here is talking about ONE "successful" integrated housing project in New Jersey -- built in the 60s.
So I guess, since that "worked" -- there is no more racial segregation in New Jersey? How about Newark? Camden?
The fact is that it has NOT worked. If it worked, there would be no housing projects AT ALL in New Jersey, since those children who grew up in Mt. Laurel would now be affluent and successful, and not poor AT ALL and living without comment in beautiful intregrated communities.
So I guess, since that "worked" -- there is no more racial segregation in New Jersey? How about Newark? Camden?
The fact is that it has NOT worked. If it worked, there would be no housing projects AT ALL in New Jersey, since those children who grew up in Mt. Laurel would now be affluent and successful, and not poor AT ALL and living without comment in beautiful intregrated communities.
4
The answer to that question as tow why there is no program to help poor minorities stay in neighborhoods as they gentrify is that if would cost the taxpayer far too much and would likely result in the flight of the very investment necessary to sustain the gentrified neighborhood over the years.
Put simply, undesirable neighborhoods are made undesirable because of the lack of understanding on the part of the neighborhoods that they have a vested interest in the local quality of life.
As long as 14- and 15-year old in gangs with guns are allowed to roam the streets and terrorize the residents, you are not going to have a safe neighborhood.
And while safety can certainly benefit the the security of a neighborhood, it is the residents who will not tolerate violence as a way of life...or even an occasional excursion...who make it such that security is the hallmark of community.
Put simply, undesirable neighborhoods are made undesirable because of the lack of understanding on the part of the neighborhoods that they have a vested interest in the local quality of life.
As long as 14- and 15-year old in gangs with guns are allowed to roam the streets and terrorize the residents, you are not going to have a safe neighborhood.
And while safety can certainly benefit the the security of a neighborhood, it is the residents who will not tolerate violence as a way of life...or even an occasional excursion...who make it such that security is the hallmark of community.
1
Inferentially, the Times is calling for massive low income housing projects to
be built throughout the Hamptons, where too few people occupy too much property. I agree wholeheartedly. It would be wonderful for the Hamptons' progressive millionaires and billionaires to embrace the same diversity they impose on everybody else.
be built throughout the Hamptons, where too few people occupy too much property. I agree wholeheartedly. It would be wonderful for the Hamptons' progressive millionaires and billionaires to embrace the same diversity they impose on everybody else.
146
And also, in Manhattan and Park Slope and Carroll Gardens and Williamsburg -- oh wait. Those areas DID have plenty of poor parts, until the rich moved in and gentrified everything and turned integrated areas into all-white RICH areas.
Really, let's back up and see what this is ABOUT. The Editorial Board and lefties in general, want to integrate NOT their own neighborhoods -- but those of working class & middle class white people. And it is as "punishment" for "wrong thinking" -- these are people who dare to vote Republican.
Really, let's back up and see what this is ABOUT. The Editorial Board and lefties in general, want to integrate NOT their own neighborhoods -- but those of working class & middle class white people. And it is as "punishment" for "wrong thinking" -- these are people who dare to vote Republican.
6
If low income housing were built in the Hamptons what kind of jobs would residents have to choose from. Store clerks? Domestic help?
I wager that 100 years from now Easter L. I. would still look the same.
I wager that 100 years from now Easter L. I. would still look the same.
Hampton resident here. All municipalities have zoning regulations that require affordable housing element for new subdivisions. Someone has to cut those lawns. How's it going in LA?
1
No one should be excluded from living in any community they choose by law or regulation. What is an 'inconvenient truth' and not talked about, is that many segregated communities are that way because people choose to live there. Many people are more comfortable living near others with similar backgrounds and cultural history. I live in such a community, there is nothing preventing my neighbors from moving 5 or 10 blocks away. The housing costs and living are about the same in this entire area, yet about 10 blocks square has become known as 'Little Saigon' because many people like to have neighbors with whom they share a similar culture.
The same thing happens with all ethnic groups. The problem is when regulators get involved. I note that segregated communities among minority groups is called 'ethnic diversity' and in white communities its called racism.
The same thing happens with all ethnic groups. The problem is when regulators get involved. I note that segregated communities among minority groups is called 'ethnic diversity' and in white communities its called racism.
109
I am in shock that the NY times even published your comment since it rationalizes a basic trait of human nature to bond where there is a common core of similarity...
3
I haven't seen one lately but I remember not too many years ago about Black students generally sitting with other Black students in High School and College cafeterias. I guess you could call that self segregation.
1
The problem is that a lot of "affordable housing" doesn't end up in communities that are wealthy enough to absorb the social costs. It ends up in communities that are borderline middle class, and can serve to drag them downward by elevating crime rates and decreasing school test scores (both of which have a real impact on home values, and thus on family wealth.) The best place for low income housing is the kind of place that can afford to buy off politicians to send it elsewhere.
There are a number of tricky issues about enacting these kind of policies. While outright racial bias in housing is illegal, you're not going to get people who have the means to stop seeking out better school districts if their local schools go downhill. You're also going to find it hard to get real estate agents to bring white clients to mostly black neighborhoods when the real estate agents know, from experience, that a white client is 90% not going to want to buy there. So they tend to steer black clients toward buying in black neighborhoods because that's the easiest way to unload the home. And then of course, the neighborhood that was 60% black becomes 90% black.
My point is that this solution of integration involves going against a lot of human tendencies that are remarkably slippery. It's not impossible to do, but simply banning overt racism isn't going to do it. It's probably more effective to push to raise people's wages in poor neighborhoods and let them go where they will.
There are a number of tricky issues about enacting these kind of policies. While outright racial bias in housing is illegal, you're not going to get people who have the means to stop seeking out better school districts if their local schools go downhill. You're also going to find it hard to get real estate agents to bring white clients to mostly black neighborhoods when the real estate agents know, from experience, that a white client is 90% not going to want to buy there. So they tend to steer black clients toward buying in black neighborhoods because that's the easiest way to unload the home. And then of course, the neighborhood that was 60% black becomes 90% black.
My point is that this solution of integration involves going against a lot of human tendencies that are remarkably slippery. It's not impossible to do, but simply banning overt racism isn't going to do it. It's probably more effective to push to raise people's wages in poor neighborhoods and let them go where they will.
77
There is no intent nor possibility of banning overt racism. Whatever that means. Everyone is free to be an individual bigot and to choose to live in those communities that fulfill their ideal racial colored socioeconomic political educational prejudices. They are forbidden from getting any aid from others public or private in doing so.
Housing segregation was formerly and formally legally enforced. The intent of fair housing is to ban discrimination along with affirmatively promoting the virtues of integrated socioeconomic racial ethnic diversity.
There are no "tricky issues" involved in a nation born in black African enslavement and sustained in colored Jim Crow. A physically identifiable minority is inextricably intertwined between colored caste and socioeconomic class. The majority of poorly educated single parent welfare dependent families in America are white. While the proportion is higher among blacks, there are 5x as many whites in America. Casting this issue simply in terms of poor pathological blacks and wealthy wonderful moral whites is disingenuous and prejudiced.
Integration is that brief period between the arrival of the first black person in a community and the flight of the last white person. More myth than reality.
Housing segregation was formerly and formally legally enforced. The intent of fair housing is to ban discrimination along with affirmatively promoting the virtues of integrated socioeconomic racial ethnic diversity.
There are no "tricky issues" involved in a nation born in black African enslavement and sustained in colored Jim Crow. A physically identifiable minority is inextricably intertwined between colored caste and socioeconomic class. The majority of poorly educated single parent welfare dependent families in America are white. While the proportion is higher among blacks, there are 5x as many whites in America. Casting this issue simply in terms of poor pathological blacks and wealthy wonderful moral whites is disingenuous and prejudiced.
Integration is that brief period between the arrival of the first black person in a community and the flight of the last white person. More myth than reality.
3
Rachel: For eight years I lived in a "borderline middle class" neighborhood in Houston, that was next to some very poor neighborhoods. The answer to your concerns are simple: we're going about affordable housing all wrong. The key should be to invest in, and improve poorer neighborhoods to the point that middle class and wealthy people will move back; while simultaneously developing programs that will help poor minorities stay in neighborhoods as they gentrify. If we do it right, we can absorb the social costs of poverty, without leaning on middle class and wealthy suburbs to do it.
.
It's not an easy thing to do, granted. It can't just be about housing. There has to be a full-court-press to improve public safety through better policing, make the schools safer and more rigorous, fix up parks, entice businesses to bring in jobs.... But I've seen places where it's successful.
.
I also wonder if there shouldn't be programs to 'bell the cat' - to get certain middle class and upper middle class people to live in poorer neighborhoods. Housing officials are a good place to start. Give apartments, in public housing, to housing authority and housing development department officials as part of their pay. This doesn't mean -all- the apartments are parceled out: just 1 or 2 per 100 units. Criminal court judges are another. Make houses come with the job: big, comfortable houses in poor neighborhoods. I'm serious about this. It would have tremendous benefits for everyone.
.
It's not an easy thing to do, granted. It can't just be about housing. There has to be a full-court-press to improve public safety through better policing, make the schools safer and more rigorous, fix up parks, entice businesses to bring in jobs.... But I've seen places where it's successful.
.
I also wonder if there shouldn't be programs to 'bell the cat' - to get certain middle class and upper middle class people to live in poorer neighborhoods. Housing officials are a good place to start. Give apartments, in public housing, to housing authority and housing development department officials as part of their pay. This doesn't mean -all- the apartments are parceled out: just 1 or 2 per 100 units. Criminal court judges are another. Make houses come with the job: big, comfortable houses in poor neighborhoods. I'm serious about this. It would have tremendous benefits for everyone.
6
I must live on one of the most integrated blocks in America. The plurality now seems to be orthodox Jewish due to a recent influx but there are a still a couple of old guard reform Jewish families, a Puerto Rican family, a Colombian family, a family from Guyana, a Haitian family, a retired Irish cop, etc. It's a nice block, everyone gets along.
There were no special programs or any other govt meddling that forced everyone together. One thing I did notice about my neighbors is that a great majority of them are/were small business owners or worked for themselves in some capacity. Real NYC strivers. I say all this to point out that neighborhood make up is mostly driven by some strain of commonality in its residents. Many times it is racial or ethnic but sometimes it's not. The idea that a roomful of govt bureaucrats armed with "demographic" data having the power to dictate who lives where and why should frighten us all and will lead to worse outcomes than the status quo.
Resources would be better spent going after individual discrimination, e.g., the black professionals who can't get into the snooty UWS coop for unknown reasons.
There were no special programs or any other govt meddling that forced everyone together. One thing I did notice about my neighbors is that a great majority of them are/were small business owners or worked for themselves in some capacity. Real NYC strivers. I say all this to point out that neighborhood make up is mostly driven by some strain of commonality in its residents. Many times it is racial or ethnic but sometimes it's not. The idea that a roomful of govt bureaucrats armed with "demographic" data having the power to dictate who lives where and why should frighten us all and will lead to worse outcomes than the status quo.
Resources would be better spent going after individual discrimination, e.g., the black professionals who can't get into the snooty UWS coop for unknown reasons.
59
This comment conflates ethnicity, nationality and religion with socio-economic class. By and large, you don't find small business owners and the self-employed in ghetto communities. Either they've never lived there, or they move away as soon as they have the means.
1
I fully agree. It's a mistake to think that bringing people from disadvantaged backgrounds into a higher social strata - be it schools or housing - is somehow "good" for those who are already affluent. The reason for doing it, particularly in education, is to give those who are less well off access to resources (e.g. professors, courses, recruiters and placement programs) and a chance to acculturate themselves in ways that will help them achieve social mobility.
If they happen to befriend people who belong to the dominant culture, so much the better, but it is safer to assume that tribalism will prevail and people will segregate themselves according to their socio-economic status.
If they happen to befriend people who belong to the dominant culture, so much the better, but it is safer to assume that tribalism will prevail and people will segregate themselves according to their socio-economic status.
1
The notion that people should live in racially mixed environments, or to attempt to mandate it, is unrealistic. Humans are tribal beings. Our ancestral and cultural roots, family history, and resulting ways of thinking (conscious or subconscious) make us favor, expect, and long for behaviors and traditions that people of different races do not share.
When we're young and adventurous, we are usually excited by the prospect of mingling with people of other races and cultures - but when it comes to settling down, choosing a neighborhood, starting families, sending kids to school, sustaining long adult friendships, or preparing for the final exit, we tend to gravitate toward people who are like us.
We want to live in places that reflect our cultural and religious beliefs, and therefore make us feel comfortable, and allow us to pass our culture to our children (you can't do it just at your family's kitchen table - it takes a village!)
All of this does not mean that we are intolerant or racist, or that we don't want contacts with people who are not like us, or that we don't wish them well. It only means that each of us has only one life, and in our private sphere we have a right to choose how, where, and with what kind of neighbors we want to spend our lives -- the NYT's tiresome moralizing notwithstanding.
When we're young and adventurous, we are usually excited by the prospect of mingling with people of other races and cultures - but when it comes to settling down, choosing a neighborhood, starting families, sending kids to school, sustaining long adult friendships, or preparing for the final exit, we tend to gravitate toward people who are like us.
We want to live in places that reflect our cultural and religious beliefs, and therefore make us feel comfortable, and allow us to pass our culture to our children (you can't do it just at your family's kitchen table - it takes a village!)
All of this does not mean that we are intolerant or racist, or that we don't want contacts with people who are not like us, or that we don't wish them well. It only means that each of us has only one life, and in our private sphere we have a right to choose how, where, and with what kind of neighbors we want to spend our lives -- the NYT's tiresome moralizing notwithstanding.
124
Pew Research states that only seven percent of the country is segregated. If you/we can get pass your/our biases race based stereotypes and assumptions can be addressed.
1
Let's see does this imply that people who do not have the opportunity to develop culture are forever doomed to places where they cannot?
Yes, we are tribal beings. But the one thing that accentuates the "Us vs Them" instinct that we and other primates have is to live apart from other tribes. When we live apart, we learn nothing of one another and develop fears about other tribes' differences. The entrenched racism in the US is an extension of this basic rule, magnified horrifically by centuries of separation.
As this article reports, and as other comments here also report, living among people of other cultural and racial origins does much to lessen our unease and fear of "Others." As we learn that other people with other histories are fundamentally just like us, despite the superficial differences, we become more accepting. Our sense of who belongs in our tribe expands to include a more diverse array of people.
As you have said, most people like to live among others who are just like them; the tribal instinct is quite strong. We can consciously overcome it, and choose to view other races and cultures as part of our own tribe, but only if we understand the nature of our Us vs Them tribal instinct. Because most people do not even know about it (the science is still quite new), we tend to see the breakdown of strict, limited tribal identity only where programs like the Mount Laurel and Singapore examples have intentionally built diverse communities. Let's try creating more such communities in the US, and see if it helps us.
As this article reports, and as other comments here also report, living among people of other cultural and racial origins does much to lessen our unease and fear of "Others." As we learn that other people with other histories are fundamentally just like us, despite the superficial differences, we become more accepting. Our sense of who belongs in our tribe expands to include a more diverse array of people.
As you have said, most people like to live among others who are just like them; the tribal instinct is quite strong. We can consciously overcome it, and choose to view other races and cultures as part of our own tribe, but only if we understand the nature of our Us vs Them tribal instinct. Because most people do not even know about it (the science is still quite new), we tend to see the breakdown of strict, limited tribal identity only where programs like the Mount Laurel and Singapore examples have intentionally built diverse communities. Let's try creating more such communities in the US, and see if it helps us.
2
In 1965, when Singapore became independent, its premier Lee Kuan Yew came out with a housing policy where it was manadatory for people belonging to different race and religions to live together.The ide behind such a policy was that people of all faiths should live in harmony. Lee's vision of Singapore was one of promoting unity among the three major ethnic groups-Chinese, Malays and Indians.
Lee came out with the concept of the integrated housing scheme because, a year prior to independence, Singapore had witnessed riots between two ethnic groups - Chinese and Malays. Lee felt that the only way to integrate these groups was to make them all live together in harmony in these housing colonies. In one stroke, he prevented ghettoization based on race and religion. It is here the United States and other countries, that have a mix of people belonging to different race and religions, should emulate Lee's model of integrated housing schemes so that people can understand one another, and try to live in peace and harmony.
Lee came out with the concept of the integrated housing scheme because, a year prior to independence, Singapore had witnessed riots between two ethnic groups - Chinese and Malays. Lee felt that the only way to integrate these groups was to make them all live together in harmony in these housing colonies. In one stroke, he prevented ghettoization based on race and religion. It is here the United States and other countries, that have a mix of people belonging to different race and religions, should emulate Lee's model of integrated housing schemes so that people can understand one another, and try to live in peace and harmony.
12
A grave mistake, with five decades of affected lives, when also committed when Singapore established a housing policy forbidding single people and LGBT couples from purchasing homes built for the middle and lower income. Only in 1997 were those over age 35 allowed to do so. Housing policy from the 1960's to this day states that de facto 100% of middle income homes (the public market) are meant only for married heterosexual couples. This prevents LGBT families and single people from buying a home, amassing wealth, living under the same roof, and access to good neighbourhoods. Until 2015 even single parents with kids had to rent or bunk with relatives. Only the extremely expensive private market (priced similarly to SF and NYC) is open to them. Most observers of Singapore and journalists unfortunately overlook this fact.
1
"should emulate Lee's model of integrated housing schemes so that people can understand one another, and try to live in peace and harmony."
And what happens when the "peace and harmony" doesn't occur? This has been the case in too many programs like this in the US.
And what happens when the "peace and harmony" doesn't occur? This has been the case in too many programs like this in the US.
5
State mandates of that kind are absurd and a gross violation of individual rights.
4
As Dr. Kahlenberg of the Century Foundation stated, "Secondly, the research in academic achievement never suggested there was something about the whiteness of the skin that benefited African-American students. It was always that low-income students of all races do better in an economically mixed environment. … Their classmates had parents with higher education levels, which was related to higher aspirations."
In other words, the children did better academically because they were placed in better schools not because of the racial makeup of the schools. Some charter schools like Success and KIPP likewise provide better educational opportunities for poor children stuck in failing schools.
Where I take issue, however, is in the hypocrisy of the teachers unions. One of the criticisms of charter schools is that they leave those who remain in failing schools with fewer resources and less opportunity. But this same charge can be leveled against voluntary racial integration such as Ethel Lawrence. But somehow this bothers the teachers unions less. Maybe this is because charters provide a non-union choice whereas the Mt Laurel traditional schools remain unionized. Such self-interest by teachers unions in preserving union dues detracts from any noble purpose that such racial integration may have achieved.
In other words, the children did better academically because they were placed in better schools not because of the racial makeup of the schools. Some charter schools like Success and KIPP likewise provide better educational opportunities for poor children stuck in failing schools.
Where I take issue, however, is in the hypocrisy of the teachers unions. One of the criticisms of charter schools is that they leave those who remain in failing schools with fewer resources and less opportunity. But this same charge can be leveled against voluntary racial integration such as Ethel Lawrence. But somehow this bothers the teachers unions less. Maybe this is because charters provide a non-union choice whereas the Mt Laurel traditional schools remain unionized. Such self-interest by teachers unions in preserving union dues detracts from any noble purpose that such racial integration may have achieved.
21
The solution is not charter schools, many of which are just profit making ventures, but to improve the quality of public schools. This takes more money which poorer districts just do not have, and charter schools take money from our public schools. BUT richer districts like Princeton do have more money in spite of the drain of charter schools.. Would you call our public schools failing? Just look at where they go to college.
PS Have you talked to members if the teachers union? Have you looked at the teacher turnover in charter schools? Maybe charter schools need a teachers union.
PS Have you talked to members if the teachers union? Have you looked at the teacher turnover in charter schools? Maybe charter schools need a teachers union.
Teacher's unions are about self-preservation. Teachers have unique benefits and very high pay, short hours, zero standards (they can never be fired and have automatic tenure) and extremely long paid vacations, as well as very early retirement -- conditions that are completely unique, and exceed even what other public unions have. Heck, they exceed what people have in socialist paradise like Sweden or Denmark!
Charter schools threaten that "paradise" by showing that non-union teachers can do a better job with poor minority students than union teachers could ever do. Simply an ALTERNATIVE is a threat!
Union teachers want absolute control -- heck, they want to increase public school from K-12 to preschool -- another TWO YEARS, hence many tens of thousands of new union teachers. At least an 8% increase in their membership! They already control national ELECTIONS by giving billions that dwarf even the contributions of "rich people" like the Koch brothers.
Charter schools threaten that "paradise" by showing that non-union teachers can do a better job with poor minority students than union teachers could ever do. Simply an ALTERNATIVE is a threat!
Union teachers want absolute control -- heck, they want to increase public school from K-12 to preschool -- another TWO YEARS, hence many tens of thousands of new union teachers. At least an 8% increase in their membership! They already control national ELECTIONS by giving billions that dwarf even the contributions of "rich people" like the Koch brothers.
1
The criticism against charter schools is based on the fact that charter schools can "counsel out" those kids with sever behavior and other issues that impede their own learning as well as other students in their class, or simply those who cannot withstand the rigor and thus fail to perform well. Those who are counseled out then return to the district school which must accept and retain them. In addition, charter schools implement discipline and parental policies which are prohibited in district schools. Moreover, charter schools consist of a self-selected motivated cohort due to parental involvement in the first place. Therefore, a culture of learning and appreciation for education that is akin to middle class and affluent schools is created. Charter school pontificators wouldn't last five minutes in high needs district schools. Finally, charters benefit from Wall Street philanthropy only because Wall Street wants to participate in dismantling the unions.
2
In the beginning Lyndon B. Johnson proposed fair housing legislation in January, 1966 and ran into bipartisan political and binational geographic opposition. The bill quickly went into committee and died. A weary nation had gone through enacting the 1964 and 1965 civil rights legislation dealing with employment, education, public accommodations and voting all preceded by active resistance and violence in the South.
On April 4, 1968 Martin Luther King, Jr. was murdered and within a week fair housing legislation was voted out of committee, passed by both houses of Congress and signed into law by LBJ. But the Poor People's Campaign that Dr. King was planning for Washington D.C. in the spring that was to emphasize socioeconomics over being colored floundered and failed miserably. A year to the day before his murder Dr. King spoke at the Riverside Church in NYC warning about the negative confluence of poverty, war and racism.
The fair housing law as enacted along with being underfunded lacks effective investigation, enforcement and penalty mechanisms. Detecting discrimination among all the parties to a real estate housing transaction is difficult without testing. Racial housing discrimination was endemic and enduring in the North before and after the fair housing era. I was born and raised on the South Side of Chicago in the oldest largest contiguous black community in America. Housing determines socioeconomic, educational and political opportunity.
On April 4, 1968 Martin Luther King, Jr. was murdered and within a week fair housing legislation was voted out of committee, passed by both houses of Congress and signed into law by LBJ. But the Poor People's Campaign that Dr. King was planning for Washington D.C. in the spring that was to emphasize socioeconomics over being colored floundered and failed miserably. A year to the day before his murder Dr. King spoke at the Riverside Church in NYC warning about the negative confluence of poverty, war and racism.
The fair housing law as enacted along with being underfunded lacks effective investigation, enforcement and penalty mechanisms. Detecting discrimination among all the parties to a real estate housing transaction is difficult without testing. Racial housing discrimination was endemic and enduring in the North before and after the fair housing era. I was born and raised on the South Side of Chicago in the oldest largest contiguous black community in America. Housing determines socioeconomic, educational and political opportunity.
13
You are, like so many lefty liberals, stuck in 1965.
Those conditions do not exist any more. Nobody would DARE to refuse housing to a black applicant, for fear of being sued.
Those conditions do not exist any more. Nobody would DARE to refuse housing to a black applicant, for fear of being sued.
3
The elimination of discrimination protected by law is critical in a democratic society. But it is only honest to admit that government programs such as the one in Mount Laurel, create a clash between the equality favored by legislators and the individual freedom that forms a core element of America's public philosophy.
It is one thing to ban laws that exclude groups from housing areas. It is quite another to require that low-income housing be located in an existing neighborhood. Concerns about crime rates and falling property values do not make homeowners racists, just prudent investors. In the Mount Laurel case, rigorous vetting of new residents quieted anxieties. Crime rates did not rise and property values did not fall.
It seems unlikely, however, that this formula could work nationwide, if only because too many applicants would face exclusion for purely economic reasons. While helpful, the Mount Laurel approach, by itself, cannot end segregation. Attempts to force communities nationwide to incorporate housing for low-income families would arouse hostility as an attack on individual freedom and a threat to property values. Middle-class flight (of all ethnic groups) would ensue, as it has so many times before.
Effective bans on legal discrimination; experiments with approaches similar to the Mount Laurel project; and a national commitment to reduce poverty, can all help increase residential integration. But there are no panaceas.
It is one thing to ban laws that exclude groups from housing areas. It is quite another to require that low-income housing be located in an existing neighborhood. Concerns about crime rates and falling property values do not make homeowners racists, just prudent investors. In the Mount Laurel case, rigorous vetting of new residents quieted anxieties. Crime rates did not rise and property values did not fall.
It seems unlikely, however, that this formula could work nationwide, if only because too many applicants would face exclusion for purely economic reasons. While helpful, the Mount Laurel approach, by itself, cannot end segregation. Attempts to force communities nationwide to incorporate housing for low-income families would arouse hostility as an attack on individual freedom and a threat to property values. Middle-class flight (of all ethnic groups) would ensue, as it has so many times before.
Effective bans on legal discrimination; experiments with approaches similar to the Mount Laurel project; and a national commitment to reduce poverty, can all help increase residential integration. But there are no panaceas.
23
In the US individuals do not have the right to freedom to discriminate even if it cost them money. People are more important that dollar bills.
PS We have affordable housing in Princeton and little of it is located in the traditional black areas. I will admit that none of it is located in the areas of large estates, but that is because public transportation is not available there and the streets are narrow and winding, but there are developments of affordable housing in beautiful wooded settings.
PS We have affordable housing in Princeton and little of it is located in the traditional black areas. I will admit that none of it is located in the areas of large estates, but that is because public transportation is not available there and the streets are narrow and winding, but there are developments of affordable housing in beautiful wooded settings.
2
"experiments with approaches similar to the Mount Laurel project; "
There's the arrogance manifested in one word "experiments". Without the apparent careful vetting of potential residents what happens if an experiment fails?
The liberal response is that the people whose neighborhoods has been destroyed by these programs are just so much collateral damage. Those people end up being the targets of liberals who claim they vote against their own economic interests. They are part of the white flight which the OP-Ed pages of the NY Times has claimed is a cause of many of our social ills.
Having experienced this while living in Detroit the only way to sum up the attitudes of the people whose neighborhoods have been hurt by these experiments is: never again.
Now if affluent liberals would like to lead by example and absorb these costs that would be great. But here's a rule that should be in place: your children must attend your public schools.
There's the arrogance manifested in one word "experiments". Without the apparent careful vetting of potential residents what happens if an experiment fails?
The liberal response is that the people whose neighborhoods has been destroyed by these programs are just so much collateral damage. Those people end up being the targets of liberals who claim they vote against their own economic interests. They are part of the white flight which the OP-Ed pages of the NY Times has claimed is a cause of many of our social ills.
Having experienced this while living in Detroit the only way to sum up the attitudes of the people whose neighborhoods have been hurt by these experiments is: never again.
Now if affluent liberals would like to lead by example and absorb these costs that would be great. But here's a rule that should be in place: your children must attend your public schools.
7
This sounds like a wonderful program. It would be great if it could be emulated throughout the US.
But I have concerns on implementation. Programs like this, with carefully screened applicants and broader income guidelines, at some point seem to get sued, because they exclude "those most requiring help."
But I have concerns on implementation. Programs like this, with carefully screened applicants and broader income guidelines, at some point seem to get sued, because they exclude "those most requiring help."
22
Look at Section 8 -- it is basically doing the same thing, using existing housing. It moves dysfunctional poor families into middle and working class neighborhoods (never into RICH neighborhoods) and ends up destabilizing them, with crime, run down properties, disinvestment, poverty.
It's working brilliantly. I live in an inner ring suburb in the Rustbelt, being eaten away and destroyed by Section 8 housing.
It's working brilliantly. I live in an inner ring suburb in the Rustbelt, being eaten away and destroyed by Section 8 housing.
11
If we put only the "carefully screened applicants" into these developments to please the existing homeowners what does that do to the already crime ridden, poorly performing schools and run down areas that these people leave? I assume the vacated properties will just be re-inhabited by the "carefully screened applicants" who are not eligible for these utopias and their neighborhoods will become even worse.
It's more than legislative action that's needed to dismantle the ghettoised mentalblocks acquired over the centuries of social segregation. Once it's achieved the urban landscape would automatically be dotted with the fair and affordable housing patterns around.
2
"It's more than legislative action that's needed to dismantle the ghettoised mentalblocks acquired over the centuries of social segregation."
A nice criticism from a man living in a place where shanty towns are started and grow up around major cities like Mumbai and Delhi where utilities and schools are nonexistent. From what I've sen the municipal and national governments in India think the solution is to bulldoze the shanty towns down with little notice and putting people out on the streets. Some these bulldozings even destroy the businesses that provide the only income these people have. Poorly designed apartment buildings sit empty or are filled with squatters. The problem seems to be the outlawed caste system that still exists in India.
Perhaps you could take your plan to the Modi government?
A nice criticism from a man living in a place where shanty towns are started and grow up around major cities like Mumbai and Delhi where utilities and schools are nonexistent. From what I've sen the municipal and national governments in India think the solution is to bulldoze the shanty towns down with little notice and putting people out on the streets. Some these bulldozings even destroy the businesses that provide the only income these people have. Poorly designed apartment buildings sit empty or are filled with squatters. The problem seems to be the outlawed caste system that still exists in India.
Perhaps you could take your plan to the Modi government?
8
Sounds great. Lets identify where all the NYT Editorial board members live and start a program where poor people can live next door. I await the excuses.
198
Mixed income housing is common in the UK. In London public housing caked council flats fit next to luxury homes and apartments - the result is greater social cohesion and better education for all kids - the USA is still a place of too much segregation at all levels - the results are clear for all these see
34
The barriers of segregation have always been supported by the economic argument and a social argument. Let them in and property values will drop and taxes will go up. Let them in and crime will surge. It's not fair to let them in here unless and until we first let them into someone else's community.
Bigotry, thy name is privilege,
Bigotry, thy name is privilege,
3
"Do as I say, not as I do."
10
"Work places go over here and housing for the folks making the amount of money working there will be 20 miles away" so we need highways and freeways and lots and lots of parking lots. BTW-- we never zoned in space for mass transit systems or train stations.
Were urban planning done with human scale convenience and sustainability considered we would have a different lifestyle and different society and could have a decrease in the extreme stratification of incomes and classes we see today.