I haven't seen any comment about predominantly African American neighborhoods made of affluent home owners. They do exist, but what is their significance in this discussion?
1
The social justice folk simply do not understand science, more specifically Darwin. We all have different traits and abilities which affect our ability to compete in the natural world. Those with superior survival skills will control more resources. It is not possible to impose equal outcomes without force - and even there those with superior survival skills control the force resulting in unequal force.
We need to provide the basics for those who were born with inferior survival skills, but an attempt to impose equal outcomes is a fools errand. You social justice folk may want to try and make the successful guilty for their success, but that simply will not work with me.
We need to provide the basics for those who were born with inferior survival skills, but an attempt to impose equal outcomes is a fools errand. You social justice folk may want to try and make the successful guilty for their success, but that simply will not work with me.
5
I have seen the other side of such developments in my inner ring suburb to Dallas. Under Alphonso Jackson, inner ring suburbs had subsidized housing imposed on them. The problem was that at the time these facilities were far removed from social service offices and employment offices that those residents needed. In addition, the students of these residents were pushed into suburban schools that didn't have adequate room or staffing to handle the result. My two oldest kids attended what was then a blue ribbon middle school and experienced a great deal of success. Three years later, after the incursion of a number of students who had come from a marginal Dallas ISD school, that same school was gang central. In trying to reach the new students, a flurry of administrators-largely minority educators-were hired. They dismissed bullying that was witnessed by volunteers of kids who had come from quiet suburban schools as racism and as a result my own son and many of his friends resisted school and felt the need to cluster in groups for fear of being jumped in the hallway. My son was punched in the mouth causing cuts due to his braces and nobody, not one teacher in that hallway, bothered to file a report because they knew nothing would be done. As a result that area, of nice middle class homes and apartments, is now full of low income Section 8 housing, rental houses on verge of decay and rising crime. You can't just put housing somewhere and think that changes outcomes.
4
It's more correct to say that the grants don't stop segregation.
The research on which all this theorizing is based is very shaky indeed. Public policy should NOT be based upon it.
2
Rich people forget that they live in government subsidized housing just like the poor. Almost no residential neighborhood pays it's own way. Residential are subsidized by businesses. There's also the mortgage interest deduction. The value of both subsidies easily approach $3000/year or more.
The valid objection to low income development is the lack of supporting infrastructure. Putting 750 low income people into the neighborhood doesn't seem like much impact until you realize that's 3-400 kids into schools and parks that may already be near capacity. There were two virtually identical neighborhoods in LA in the early 70's , Chatsworth and Sylmar. Sylmar received low income housing but no infrastructure improvements and became a pit.
The poor need services but lack transportation. Suburban areas may not provide easy access to social services, education and courts that are needed. It seems to me that if you want to target anything for the poor to be near it would be entry level jobs and a suburban residential areas may not be the best hiring environment
Authors like anecdotal evidence using individuals as examples of generalities. A number of people are presented along with their very real problems. I'd like to know more details about how they reached these points. They have kids. Where are the sperm donors? Used to work retail but now disabled. Why? Injured by unfair working conditions?
The valid objection to low income development is the lack of supporting infrastructure. Putting 750 low income people into the neighborhood doesn't seem like much impact until you realize that's 3-400 kids into schools and parks that may already be near capacity. There were two virtually identical neighborhoods in LA in the early 70's , Chatsworth and Sylmar. Sylmar received low income housing but no infrastructure improvements and became a pit.
The poor need services but lack transportation. Suburban areas may not provide easy access to social services, education and courts that are needed. It seems to me that if you want to target anything for the poor to be near it would be entry level jobs and a suburban residential areas may not be the best hiring environment
Authors like anecdotal evidence using individuals as examples of generalities. A number of people are presented along with their very real problems. I'd like to know more details about how they reached these points. They have kids. Where are the sperm donors? Used to work retail but now disabled. Why? Injured by unfair working conditions?
1
It's simple- if you want to live where you want, get a job so you can afford to do so. Put in the work to make something out of yourself instead of relying on the government to fix your issues through spending money that other people earned.
3
Under Reagan, I thought the point was to move low income people out of the projects and into more affluent neighborhoods? Where are the so-called Conservatives when we actually try to put their ideas into practice?
Same with the ACA. It is a Republican idea they now hate for some "unknown " reason.
Same with the ACA. It is a Republican idea they now hate for some "unknown " reason.
1
Greg Travis dances around the issue but he's mostly correct. There are definitely racists out there but the opposition is largely economic in nature. Homeowners don't want to see their neighborhood negatively impacted by something as stigmatized as affordable housing. Even though the threat is imagined, the placement of these facilities in a neighborhood can have a very real impact on home prices and curbside appeal. This ends up being a racial issue as well because so much about racism in the United States is tied to economics. The most vocal opponents are homeowners. I'll bet money the majority of homeowners in Houston are white.
The question is why representatives don't force the issue. If you choose 5 locations fairly distributed across an urban space, you can go sell the decision to constituents. You may not like it but it's fair. Anytime you open the discussion to debate, the project is immediately punted to the poorest neighborhood possible. When one wealthy neighborhood is allowed to say no, they all say no. That's how homeowners react.
Most people don't realize that affordable housing can actually be a good thing. I once lived near a HUD building and a private apartment. The HUD building was clean and well maintained. The neighbors were friendly and polite. The private apartment was literally a slum at one point. That's what affordable housing looks like when the market is responsible. Given a choice, I'll take HUD every time.
The question is why representatives don't force the issue. If you choose 5 locations fairly distributed across an urban space, you can go sell the decision to constituents. You may not like it but it's fair. Anytime you open the discussion to debate, the project is immediately punted to the poorest neighborhood possible. When one wealthy neighborhood is allowed to say no, they all say no. That's how homeowners react.
Most people don't realize that affordable housing can actually be a good thing. I once lived near a HUD building and a private apartment. The HUD building was clean and well maintained. The neighbors were friendly and polite. The private apartment was literally a slum at one point. That's what affordable housing looks like when the market is responsible. Given a choice, I'll take HUD every time.
America's racism& prejudice in housing market&public education with state legislators refusing to fund public education by anything other than property taxes, keeping poor schools poor is in play here.If the people who oppose this could put their logic into why they oppose it,maybe they might not find logic but fear.Fear is real but can we work with it What if the neighborhood would be better with more kids playing outside&more moms supervising, awareness of what's going on&meeting neighborhoods;I lived in a poor black neighborhood in college.I had no problems, found small, good restaurants, met young kids who wanted to know about white girls living in their neighborhood.We told them we wanted to know about little black boys living there.We told them poor people come in all colors.They were not convinced.We asked what do you have here for free.They laughed.We told them there's a big public library&big science museum blocks away.They weren't allowed to leave the street;We asked, ask your mom if we can take you on Saturday.They came back the next day&said ok.They were able to touch reptiles&snakes,check out videos.They were happy.I left the library late that night&a big black guy was outside.My reaction,this is how I die;He pulled out something,it was an umbrella,he said "my kid brother told me what you did for him;he said you never go anyplace but the library;it's raining;thought I'd walk you home with umbrella to say thanks". We won't grow until we face our struggles.
2
The continuing role that Federal government policies play in fostering our rascist society has got to stop.
As others have pointed out, it's called "racism" when non-subsidized homeowners don't welcome government-subsidized low-income housing projects into their neighborhoods. But when a non-subsidized homeowner moves into a lower-cost neighborhood because home prices have spiked in the nicer areas, that's called "gentrification" and the non-subsidized homeowner is not a "racist"-- indeed, many claim simply to be "seeking diversity," and may even get extra points if they stop off on their way to or from work to shoot a few hoops with local kids at the nearby playground (and even MORE extra points if they actually pick up one of the local kids, or at least pat him on the head).
I've often wondered how diversity-seekers who move to lower-cost neighborhoods would answer this question:
"If you're still here in 15 years, would you prefer that this neighborhood be pretty much the same as it is now -- with you as one of the few non-minorities -- or would you prefer that other non-subsidized homeowners follow your lead and move into the neighborhood?"
The second alternative probably would mean the ground-breaking gentrifier will own a home that has become much more valuable during those 15 years. The first alternative probably would mean the ground-breaking gentrifier will own a home that is worth pretty much what it was worth when he or she bought it 15 years ago -- or less.
So I wonder what the answer to that key question would be. (I have a hunch I know.)
I've often wondered how diversity-seekers who move to lower-cost neighborhoods would answer this question:
"If you're still here in 15 years, would you prefer that this neighborhood be pretty much the same as it is now -- with you as one of the few non-minorities -- or would you prefer that other non-subsidized homeowners follow your lead and move into the neighborhood?"
The second alternative probably would mean the ground-breaking gentrifier will own a home that has become much more valuable during those 15 years. The first alternative probably would mean the ground-breaking gentrifier will own a home that is worth pretty much what it was worth when he or she bought it 15 years ago -- or less.
So I wonder what the answer to that key question would be. (I have a hunch I know.)
3
I'm really sick of this "hard-working-white-American" narrative. I'll bet the majority of you all who are using it grew up in an environment without gangs and open drug use, attended schools that received funding, and had parents who could afford to send you to college, were educated themselves, and could provide you a stable lifestyle. I am not doubting that many of you worked hard to gain your economic status, but to act as though you were all entitled to it is ridiculous.
I don't even think those of you with that mindset are necessarily racist. I think you're all just selfish and ignorant. And if some media outlets feed you the narrative that black people always bring crime with them, then you guys will do whatever it takes to keep them out.
Perhaps putting an entire low-income housing project in a thriving neighborhood is not the best idea. But can you guys at least consider trying to give your fellow citizens, who (let's be honest here) have had it worse than you, a chance to get out of a toxic environment? It's at least worth considering alternative approaches. That is, if you have any compassion for other people.
I don't even think those of you with that mindset are necessarily racist. I think you're all just selfish and ignorant. And if some media outlets feed you the narrative that black people always bring crime with them, then you guys will do whatever it takes to keep them out.
Perhaps putting an entire low-income housing project in a thriving neighborhood is not the best idea. But can you guys at least consider trying to give your fellow citizens, who (let's be honest here) have had it worse than you, a chance to get out of a toxic environment? It's at least worth considering alternative approaches. That is, if you have any compassion for other people.
5
I am sorry for all the decent people who are stuck in places that are basically a bad neighborhood, but low-cost housing not only brings them relief, but crime and heaven know what else to the rest of us who live there already. My neighbor opened his yard for kids to play ball in to give them something to do--before you could blink, people from the low-rent apartments down the road showed up and they weren't the types you wanted around your children, pets, etc. The yard is closed.
4
Wealth is an illness. In this case the wealthy residents don't want the projects in their backyard. In California the wealthy are aggressively moving next to the projects and pushing out the already low income residents, housing, and small businesses. Where is the concern for their property values and safety of the neighborhood then? No, it's an opportunity for them to increase their wealth at the expense of the people they don't want to be around, period. They don't want them to build housing next their homes and when it's convenient they will push them out of the ghetto when they decide it's cool to move in. Houston may not be going through this yet but those kids growing up in those 'high tax' areas will soon enough use their parents money to move to California or New York and become gentrifiers, thus again pushing people they don't want in their neighborhood out. And if those people always happen to be minorities... so what?
2
The three authors of this article and, apparently, almost all of the posters to this comments board believe that we should all live together (in close proximity) regardless of achievement. I disagree. People who have succeeded should be allowed to enjoy the privileges of success. This is not Scandinavia or Massachusetts. Let there be winners and losers.
4
Really, really interesting story, told well. Also a very old story, but I detect that both sides are bringing a bit more light - and mercifully no violence - to the discourse. I'm a trained social scientist and have no idea how to cut this Gordian knot. There is merit to the arguments of both sides. I very much want to follow this story in the future.
2
In the last 5 years, San Francisco voters have approved -- overwhelmingly each time -- two very large projects that include substantial numbers of low-income housing units -- one on an old abandoned pier, the other in a huge parking lot near the SF Giants ballpark. Though neither has yet been built, it looks like they will be. (Both required voter approval because SF has a court-tested law requiring voter approval to develop certain properties along the waterfront, as both of these well be.)
The two projects have something else in common. Both of them are very far away from any other residential area -- especially residential areas where well-to-do people live or young professionals might choose to rent apartments.
How many low-income housing projects are being built in those residential areas?
If you guessed "none," you're correct. It turns out that San Franciscans are in favor of low-income housing -- as long as it's built somewhere else. When a developer proposes a market-rate residential development in an area where high prices can be charged for the new units, the city requires the developer to set aside a specified (low) percentage of units as "low-income" OR (here's the good part) pay a hefty cash "contribution" into a city fund to be used to build low-income housing somewhere else (some day, it appears). So far, every developer has chosen Door #2, the cash penalty. Why? They know low-income housing will force them to charge much less for the other units.
The two projects have something else in common. Both of them are very far away from any other residential area -- especially residential areas where well-to-do people live or young professionals might choose to rent apartments.
How many low-income housing projects are being built in those residential areas?
If you guessed "none," you're correct. It turns out that San Franciscans are in favor of low-income housing -- as long as it's built somewhere else. When a developer proposes a market-rate residential development in an area where high prices can be charged for the new units, the city requires the developer to set aside a specified (low) percentage of units as "low-income" OR (here's the good part) pay a hefty cash "contribution" into a city fund to be used to build low-income housing somewhere else (some day, it appears). So far, every developer has chosen Door #2, the cash penalty. Why? They know low-income housing will force them to charge much less for the other units.
3
Pardon my Republican even-handedness, but we would be better served by policies which made ALL housing more affordable and which ensured ALL people could afford housing, food, and clothing, the necessities of life. My proposal to tax the mortgage lenders on the unpaid principal of their loans would end their leveraging scheme, which has inflated housing prices for us all. The provision of the necessities for all, without condition or requirement, which I prove in "Popular Capitalism" to be essential for the continuance of political economies, would make housing affordable for everyone. The only things standing in the way of these policies being implemented are jealousy and greed.
2
I lived in Hyde Park, Chicago for six years and saw first hand the benefits of integration of lower income people w/ the wealthier and more educated. I lived in a building that was of mixed income, some students like myself, some single persons of middle class income (in fact my neighbor was an adjunct Northwestern professor), but there were also people who lived from housing vouchers and food stamps.
While Chicago has become infamous for its gun violence, Hyde Park unlike most areas south of the South Loop, which are generally pre dominantly black, has shown no rise in violent crime and shooting deaths. This is largely due to the presence of the University of Chicago (UChicago) campus and the heavy attention they pay to the area. An area that is 50% White and 32% Black. Hyde Park is a mixed bag consisting of UChicago students and professors, such as acclaimed philosophy professor Martha Nussbaum, and much lower income people like I stated earlier.
This economic integration allows the poorer groups and their families to witness and envision a life that otherwise would remain totally alien had they been forced to live elsewhere. A lifestyle where kids bike on lake front paths and eventually grow up unscathed and go to college. If people truly care to see that we life in a more balanced society economic integration is something that must be done. The alternative is a world where the wealthy will live in constant threat of harm done by the poor like we've never seen before.
While Chicago has become infamous for its gun violence, Hyde Park unlike most areas south of the South Loop, which are generally pre dominantly black, has shown no rise in violent crime and shooting deaths. This is largely due to the presence of the University of Chicago (UChicago) campus and the heavy attention they pay to the area. An area that is 50% White and 32% Black. Hyde Park is a mixed bag consisting of UChicago students and professors, such as acclaimed philosophy professor Martha Nussbaum, and much lower income people like I stated earlier.
This economic integration allows the poorer groups and their families to witness and envision a life that otherwise would remain totally alien had they been forced to live elsewhere. A lifestyle where kids bike on lake front paths and eventually grow up unscathed and go to college. If people truly care to see that we life in a more balanced society economic integration is something that must be done. The alternative is a world where the wealthy will live in constant threat of harm done by the poor like we've never seen before.
2
They are?
"Look at San Francisco! Housing Authority projects are well integrated into rich neighborhoods throughout the city..."
I've lived in a nice SF neighborhood for over 40 years, and I sure haven't noticed that. True, there is a low-income housing project in the so-called "Western Addition," for which I guess my neighborhood gets "credit." But one can make three observations about that project:
1. It's extremely segregated. I don't doubt there are white residents there, but they are very, very few in number. The WA project is basically all-black, and has been for decades.
2. Nobody I know -- or can recall ever having met -- who can afford to live anywhere else would even think of looking for a house or apartment in that area.
3. There are no plans -- and, to my recollection, never have been any plans -- to add more low-income units to that project. SF residents who live sort of close to it are only too happy to take "credit" for living "near" low-income housing, as long as (a) it's not TOO near; and (2) nobody gets any crazy idea about expanding it.
"Look at San Francisco! Housing Authority projects are well integrated into rich neighborhoods throughout the city..."
I've lived in a nice SF neighborhood for over 40 years, and I sure haven't noticed that. True, there is a low-income housing project in the so-called "Western Addition," for which I guess my neighborhood gets "credit." But one can make three observations about that project:
1. It's extremely segregated. I don't doubt there are white residents there, but they are very, very few in number. The WA project is basically all-black, and has been for decades.
2. Nobody I know -- or can recall ever having met -- who can afford to live anywhere else would even think of looking for a house or apartment in that area.
3. There are no plans -- and, to my recollection, never have been any plans -- to add more low-income units to that project. SF residents who live sort of close to it are only too happy to take "credit" for living "near" low-income housing, as long as (a) it's not TOO near; and (2) nobody gets any crazy idea about expanding it.
1
Don't frame this as a racial issue when it is fundamentally an economic issue. The Galleria is one of the most expensive areas in Houston to live. The people who live there have sacrificed to do so. Why is it a good place for subsidized low income housing? Why is it a good use of government funds to give a handful of poor people housing in an area which is unaffordable to many in the middle class?
4
"It is always judges living in their pristine gated communities who want to force public housing on affluent neighborhoods, but not their own."
In San Francisco, developers of new market-rate residential developments have two choices: either (1) set aside a specified percentage of the units (10%, I believe) as low-income units; or (2) contribute a much higher percentage of the overall project budget (25%, I believe) in cash to a city fund to be used to build low-income units somewhere else in the city.
Can you guess what percentage of developers have chosen Door #1 -- designate 10% of the new units as low-income units? If you guessed 0%, you're correct.
Can you guess how much of that city fund set aside to build low-income units has actually been used to build low-income units? If you guessed 0%, you're correct.
In San Francisco, developers of new market-rate residential developments have two choices: either (1) set aside a specified percentage of the units (10%, I believe) as low-income units; or (2) contribute a much higher percentage of the overall project budget (25%, I believe) in cash to a city fund to be used to build low-income units somewhere else in the city.
Can you guess what percentage of developers have chosen Door #1 -- designate 10% of the new units as low-income units? If you guessed 0%, you're correct.
Can you guess how much of that city fund set aside to build low-income units has actually been used to build low-income units? If you guessed 0%, you're correct.
8
It's a bad idea in many ways to put low income housing in an upscale neighborhood. This kind of social engineering is in direct opposition to a democratic meritocracy that goes into neighborhood creation, and also contrary to the process of bettering oneself and one's situation by hard work. People who worked hard so that they could buy a house in a nice neighborhood, do not deserve to have that neighborhood threatened by having the government stuff people there who didn't work hard to get there. That's a perfect way to ruin a neighborhood.
It is better to take a few low-income people and integrate them in apartment buildings with other middle income people, than to create one huge low income "project", with all the potential dysfunction that low income housing entails, in a nice area. If those people dont' behave well, they can be evicted. Hard to evict a whole building of miscreants.
It is better to take a few low-income people and integrate them in apartment buildings with other middle income people, than to create one huge low income "project", with all the potential dysfunction that low income housing entails, in a nice area. If those people dont' behave well, they can be evicted. Hard to evict a whole building of miscreants.
11
This idea has been tried & it was a disaster. President Clinton started a similar program in 1994 called “Moving to Opportunity Initiative,” which moved thousands of mostly African-American families from government projects to higher-quality homes in safer & less racially segregated neighborhoods in several counties across the country. The 15-year experiment bombed. A 2011 study sponsored by HUD found that adults using more generous Section 8 vouchers did not get better jobs or get off welfare. In fact, more went on food stamps. And their children did not do better in their new schools.
Worse, crime simply followed them to their safer neighborhoods, ruining the quality of life for existing residents.Of course, even when reality mugs leftists, they never scrap their social theories. They just double down. The problem, they rationalized, was that the relocation wasn’t aggressive enough. They concluded they could get the desired results if they placed urban poor in even more affluent areas. In 2012 HUD tested this new theory in Dallas with horrible results. Now Dallas has one of the highest murder rates in the nation, and recently had to call in state troopers to help police control it. For the first time, violent crime has shifted to bedroom communities north of the city. Three suburbs that have seen the most Section 8 transfers have suffered unprecedented spikes in rapes, assaults & break-ins, including home invasions. The results are in, it doesn't work. It's an idiotic idea.
Worse, crime simply followed them to their safer neighborhoods, ruining the quality of life for existing residents.Of course, even when reality mugs leftists, they never scrap their social theories. They just double down. The problem, they rationalized, was that the relocation wasn’t aggressive enough. They concluded they could get the desired results if they placed urban poor in even more affluent areas. In 2012 HUD tested this new theory in Dallas with horrible results. Now Dallas has one of the highest murder rates in the nation, and recently had to call in state troopers to help police control it. For the first time, violent crime has shifted to bedroom communities north of the city. Three suburbs that have seen the most Section 8 transfers have suffered unprecedented spikes in rapes, assaults & break-ins, including home invasions. The results are in, it doesn't work. It's an idiotic idea.
11
Crime, far more than race, is the major opposition to housing authority projects. Look at San Francisco! Housing Authority projects are well integrated into rich neighborhoods throughout the city and it's easy to pick them out just by looking at the crime heat map. I lived half a block from SFHA housing and every house on my block was still 1.5 million or up, but the crime, the crime was just brutal and mean. Elderly nurses being beaten and robbed feet from my door--several times!, my motorcycle stolen on video and being told by the SFPD "We don't do investigations anymore" declining even to view the film, and when my daughter's friend was mugged at gunpoint on our doorstep and the SFPD just shrugged and said, "Yeah, they just disappear back into the projects," I had to get out. My sympathies to all who live within and near high density low income housing.
14
Why do some elected officials insist on trying to force this on people? The affluent of any race work hard to escape housing project areas and their attendant problems; why would they welcome such a residence? In middle class black areas, the opposition is equally strong; just try to build Section 8 housing projects in areas like Laurelton, Queens, where homes are worth between $500,000 and $700,000.
15
As a formerly homeless person who has lived in shelters and on the streets of several large cities, including Washington, DC, LA, Atlantic City, Rockville, Md, Raleigh, NC and Las Vegas, I would be leery of any government-funded housing projects or shelters in my neighborhood, especially if I had children. Most homeless people--and I have met thousands-- are decent folks, but some are severely mentally ill, drug addicted, violent, and carry diseases like Norovirus, TB, HIV, hepatitis, syphilis, etc due to sexually promiscuous lifestyles (many of the women trade sex for drugs) and poor, almost zero, hygiene. Homeless people, women with small children, veterans, and handicapped/disabled people (both physically and mentally handicapped) are first in line for housing vouchers and other public housing programs. If you doubt my word, check the HUD statistics. A few months ago here in Sin City (aka Las Vegas) a man living in the large men's homeless shelter across the parking lot from my apartment was going around bashing in the heads of homeless men sleeping outside. Two acquaintances of mine died during his nocturnal attacks. So, despite my personal experience of being homeless and empathy for other homeless people, I also understand the fears of those who do not want shelters, rehab centers, halfway houses, low-income housing projects, or any other government-funded housing in their neighborhoods.
18
Swoosh! That's the sound of all the liberal commenters on this forum shifting from the left to the right of the political divide when the results of liberal policies hit close to home. Once hippies now hypocrites?
7
Didn't the US try this already? Most neighbourhoods in US cities we once solidly middle or even upper class, what happened to that? The same thing that will happen all over again if the social engineers have their way. They will just move suburbia further and further out, without otherwise solving the problems that cause the need for public housing in the first place.
10
Here you have a group of American citizens who were brought here against their will and worked like dogs for 400 years never being allowed to access or enjoy the fruits of their own labor. This is followed by more than 50 years of violent Jim Crow. The chaser on that is Government supported and implemented policy that denied them access to VA backed loans and FHA mortgages unless they lived in already blighted and segregated neighborhoods. Programs that built housing for poor whites were specifically deemed off limits to Blacks. There is no need to bring up the discrimination faced in education and employment opportunity. What you end up with is not a scenario conducive to up by the bootstrap success.People regardless of their race need a decent place to live. The idea that people who are Black should be relegated to dangerous and substandard housing is odious and anti American. Today almost half this country's population is technically poor. White flight may have worked in the past but the problem of poverty is now to sweeping. It is time to stop fleeing from this "problem" and properly solve it.
14
What if many of the people who are living in dangerous and substandard housing, are contributing to its being dangerous and substandard? I mean, it didnt' start off that way, did it? People living there made it that way.
7
I shared a one room apartment with a roommate for 15 years in an outer borough of NYC so I can save a down payment and buy a one bedroom co-op. I would deeply resent if someone moves in the same building through no section 8 or in the same neighborhood via a project. I would not be welcoming at all
15
Literally seems like rent-seeking behavior. If you can't support yourself, it would be wise to move where you can. If you still can't support yourself, it would make sense to move to places with dwindling populations that need folks to build communities, attend schools and populate hospitals. Not sure why the government is in the business of paying rent for people who cannot support themselves in desirable areas to hold back those who are economically productive and would generate greater tax revenue.
9
I'm white, professional, upper-middle class, left-of-center politically, and I strongly support low-income housing in my neighborhood. My current small town (population approx. 16K) is currently in the process of trying to provide exactly that to the large numbers of under-employed and minimum wage workers in the area. However, when approving applications for this housing, in addition to an appropriate income range, I would mandate the following:
1) No criminal record, period (no misdemeanors, no DUI's, nothing)
2) A full-time job, or a part-time job if you're a single parent with minor kids (exceptions to be made for elderly and disabled or those in school)
3) Three strikes and you're out for legitimate "lifestyle" complaints against you - loud partying, aggressive behavior, etc.
4) If anyone living in your home is caught dealing drugs, carrying (unlicensed) weapons, or engaging in other criminal behavior, the entire household is evicted from the apartment.
5) Priority for housing goes to long-term locals, families with children, and people fully employed and engaged in the local economy (or who have job offers to that effect).
Build low-income housing with these requirements for entry and I guarantee that you'll get high-quality people who won't drive down property prices with their behavior. I also guarantee that most people coming from the currently "blighted" neighborhoods unfortunately wouldn't qualify.
1) No criminal record, period (no misdemeanors, no DUI's, nothing)
2) A full-time job, or a part-time job if you're a single parent with minor kids (exceptions to be made for elderly and disabled or those in school)
3) Three strikes and you're out for legitimate "lifestyle" complaints against you - loud partying, aggressive behavior, etc.
4) If anyone living in your home is caught dealing drugs, carrying (unlicensed) weapons, or engaging in other criminal behavior, the entire household is evicted from the apartment.
5) Priority for housing goes to long-term locals, families with children, and people fully employed and engaged in the local economy (or who have job offers to that effect).
Build low-income housing with these requirements for entry and I guarantee that you'll get high-quality people who won't drive down property prices with their behavior. I also guarantee that most people coming from the currently "blighted" neighborhoods unfortunately wouldn't qualify.
11
The most affluent areas in many cities seem to have the best street maintenance, the best park maintenance, the best school maintenance, the most public investment, etc.... Can't that be changed? While it's not right to just give economically depressed areas what they want, it is right to give them some of the tools and resources they need to develop and become more competitive.
3
The most affluent area also pay the largest share of taxes. Can't that be changed?
17
The most downtrodden areas are partially like that because of the enormous amount of littering and vandalism. I live in a complex with 2 floors of section 8 housing along with 2 units on every floor also being section 8. The difference in behavior is stark. The lack of regard for public spaces is appauling. I have seen people litter when they are standing right next to a trash can. I see people dump things on other people's property right in front of them. I've seen more of this in an hour from these people then I have from the rest of the population combined in an hour.
16
Housing segregation policies in major US cities nationwide is causing the states to go financially bankrupt like Illinois for example, putting additional strain on our social safety net programs like Medicaid putting poor people at greater health risks than ever beforehand, and driving a wedge in congressional districts known as Gerrymandering to favor one party over the other without fair representation by the voters needs. It's an outrage that needs to be addressed and eradicated from our society. The majority of the legal courts have said that housing segregation is unconstitutional and it does violate the Fair Housing laws. What point do those with the most incomes and live in their privileged world at the far reaches of affluent suburbs or the gentrified communities within the inner cities facing urban renewal simply don't understand here? We have laws and rules to protect those who are minorities, low income, disabled, and sexual orientation. You Americans with those prejudice, hostile bigoted views know better.
5
"The majority of the legal courts have said that housing segregation is unconstitutional and it does violate the Fair Housing laws."
Well I'll tell you what, let's end segregation once and for all. All African-Americans will be distributed among the white, asian and latino (white or otherwise) population. It all take some doing. But essentially each block, apartment building, condo complex, subdivision and groups of estates must be 12% African American.
This will take some doing and money but we must be every vigilant not to let the 12% population get out of whack.
Let's do it!
Well I'll tell you what, let's end segregation once and for all. All African-Americans will be distributed among the white, asian and latino (white or otherwise) population. It all take some doing. But essentially each block, apartment building, condo complex, subdivision and groups of estates must be 12% African American.
This will take some doing and money but we must be every vigilant not to let the 12% population get out of whack.
Let's do it!
2
...and let us watch the reaction of the Trump voters who claimed to want school choice, when the black kids from the other side of town select the more highly funded white school.
7
"...and let us watch the reaction of the Trump voters who claimed to want school choice,"
Trump voters? NY City has some of the most racially segregated public schools in the country. It's second only to Dallas and Chicago. NY City public schools are more racially segregated than those of Houston, Phoenix, Indianapolis or Jacksonville.
Almost half of the white students attend private schools. The majority of those students attend Jewish schools (almost 100% white) with Catholic Schools coming in seconds (something like 40% white). In your public schools a vast majority of the white students attend schools that are majority white.
Your public schools are some of the most segregated in the US.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/05/11/nyregion/segregation-in-ne...
It appears like your children learn this from an early age:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/21/nyregion/racial-segregation-in-new-yo...
That's a lot of NY City Trump voters.
Trump voters? NY City has some of the most racially segregated public schools in the country. It's second only to Dallas and Chicago. NY City public schools are more racially segregated than those of Houston, Phoenix, Indianapolis or Jacksonville.
Almost half of the white students attend private schools. The majority of those students attend Jewish schools (almost 100% white) with Catholic Schools coming in seconds (something like 40% white). In your public schools a vast majority of the white students attend schools that are majority white.
Your public schools are some of the most segregated in the US.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/05/11/nyregion/segregation-in-ne...
It appears like your children learn this from an early age:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/21/nyregion/racial-segregation-in-new-yo...
That's a lot of NY City Trump voters.
5
Fair criticism
1
BTW, East Setauket is 89% White and less than 2% African-American.
2
Integrating white, Asian neighborhoods thrive.
4
I think what most folks are missing is the housing being discussed here is not the much vilified section 8 housing, but housing built with federal tax credits by private developers. Residents of this housing contribute to their rent in some form and are not the poorest of the poor but rather working class folks who need help with affording decent housing (what the industry coins "60-80% of area median income") The people who are lucky enough to get selected are often families with young kids or the elderly on fixed income. I'm ashamed of these comments denouncing people who need help with housing as not hard working enough or criminals who will degrade wealthier neighborhoods. This is the mindset that contributes to the socio economic divisions that deepen every day in the US.
13
Policy that artificially raises the cost to tenants is a good thing? And we are supposed to spend federal money for the privilege?
1
If the building of public housing has failed it is not because of racism, it is because the idea - motivated by an admirable instinct to solve a real problem - was only thought through to its first-order effects. Same thing with rent control - all rent control has done is distort the housing market to the benefit of a few lucky subleasors, almost literally none of whom would warrent economic transfers (ie., they're of the elite Manhattan professional class). Same with misguided zoning for aesthetics- all that's done is skyrocket housing costs in places like NYC and SF.
I know it will garner ridicule at this site but letting markets work in regulated but not suffocated ways would solve this problem and, within the right regulatory parameters, almost certainly ameliorate the defacto segregation in housing at the same time.
I know it will garner ridicule at this site but letting markets work in regulated but not suffocated ways would solve this problem and, within the right regulatory parameters, almost certainly ameliorate the defacto segregation in housing at the same time.
4
If you want to turn a liberal into a conservative fast, move in poor minorities that will wipe away real estate wealth. Arm chair, feel good politics is great unless it is you losing 300k in real estate wealth.
I did not work 11 years, 60 hr weeks and my wife didnt go through 13 years of medical/cardiology training to share housing with those that do not share our values of hard work and sacrifice. Go read about what happens when we move the poor into nice neighborhoods. Personally, I would just move.
I did not work 11 years, 60 hr weeks and my wife didnt go through 13 years of medical/cardiology training to share housing with those that do not share our values of hard work and sacrifice. Go read about what happens when we move the poor into nice neighborhoods. Personally, I would just move.
31
Do you deduct mortgage interest and and property taxes?
1
I live in Houston and I grew up in the south suburbs of Chicago (Riverdale where one of the most notorious suppliers of guns to the city of Chicago). Houston had legalized segregation in housing, Chicago had de facto segretation in housing. Much of the flight of whites is due to race and the kinds of perceived crime that will follow. White collar criminals who will gladly take these people for all their money by "nonviolent" means, like Ken Lay, Jeff Skilling, Bernie Madoff, are welcome neighbors.
7
Not perceived but proven statistically based facts.
4
The best method to destroy a clean, peaceful neighborhood is to build housing for low-income, poorly educated people who rely on the government for their needs.
23
In other news, the law of unintended consequences remains in effect and gravity is still a thing.
4
But Darwin's observation is that the fittest survive is not applicable to humans or countries.
2
Even if the United States where made up of ONLY a series of free-market Widget factories, there still has to Management Hierarchy. A CEO, Management, Department Supervisors, Shift Supervisors and employees.
Forget food, housing, medical, EVERYTHING.
There will still be different levels of pay because of different job duties. Further, there will be those who do NOT get hired because of market demands and those who get fired for any number of reasons.
Such, there will ALWAYS be income inequality regardless of race and people, as individuals, must be held accountable and be responsible for their OWN efforts to succeed in spite of SURMOUNTABLE obstacles.
Forget food, housing, medical, EVERYTHING.
There will still be different levels of pay because of different job duties. Further, there will be those who do NOT get hired because of market demands and those who get fired for any number of reasons.
Such, there will ALWAYS be income inequality regardless of race and people, as individuals, must be held accountable and be responsible for their OWN efforts to succeed in spite of SURMOUNTABLE obstacles.
5
In areas of Westchester with great schools low-income housing appears as single, two family homes being rented by an investor to two maybe three families of questionable legal status. Instead of one to two kids going to the school system you now have six kids emanating from one structure resulting in higher school taxes for residents.
Come the weekend these families disappear only to reappear when the school week begins again.
Come the weekend these families disappear only to reappear when the school week begins again.
6
You want to live in a nice neighborhood? Get an education, a job and work, pay taxes, be a good citizen. Once you can afford to live where you want nobody is stopping you. If you want to continue your ghetto behavior stay in the ghetto. Moving a low class uneducated criminal to a better neighborhood does not change them – it changes the neighborhood.
22
Sadly, even well-educated and well-employed minorities face discrimination from the likes of co-op and condo boards and unethical real estate agents. This certainly happens in Westchester County, NY (which also has a very poor record of where low-income housing projects are built).
Also low-income does not equal "criminal."
Also low-income does not equal "criminal."
8
If a system produces any failure the system must be made perfect or destroyed
Exploring the difficulties of government-subsidized housing that drops sledgehammer hints of racism while ignoring the connection to crime borders on fake news by omission. It does not take a racist to be concerned about imposing on one's neighborhood a type of housing that studies strongly suggest increases crime.
The article centers on Texas. Here is a Texas-based paper that, had they read it, might have educated the reporters so that a more nuanced, informed analysis could have been published:
https://economics.nd.edu/assets/153486/carr_jillian_jmp.pdf
The article centers on Texas. Here is a Texas-based paper that, had they read it, might have educated the reporters so that a more nuanced, informed analysis could have been published:
https://economics.nd.edu/assets/153486/carr_jillian_jmp.pdf
6
It will never work for the government to try to impose racial integration.
A free country allows folks to live where by choose.
A free country allows folks to live where by choose.
9
Yes, but unlike Sweden, the US has a long history of shameful legalized racism and discrimination. Hint: Jim Crow. These rascist & discriminatory attitudes run deep and have resulted in certain groups not being able to as easily attain the opportunities and dreams that other groups have been able to.
6
The IRS and HUD are not on the same page in how this program is administered. The IRS rewards projects built in qualified census tracts (census tracts with high poverty) by giving the developer a 30% equity boost when they apply for the tax credits. HUD directs state housing agencies to award tax credits to projects that are built in affluent areas. The LIHTC program needs to be streamlined. It's gotten too complex and that complexity has only increased the costs of the projects. Tax payers will continue to the foot the bill. The amount of money that is wasted every year would be better saved by re-investing in schools and infrastructure so poor people do not have to move from their neighborhood in order to feel like they can achieve success in this country.
1
Especially in the last 10 years, Seattle has endured a level of economic boom that's positively steroidal. The resultant job-immigrants (mostly in tech) are highly paid and have driven up prices everywhere. Our city government loves the increased tax revenue, but can't handle the cognitive dissonance of the predictable fallout: solid middle class folks (and lower) being forced out of the city. The pushback here against rezoning has little to nothing to do with racism, and everything to do with destruction of middle-class single family neighborhoods and the limits to densification relative to livability. Our city government is so "out there" they recently had the temerity to call single family-zoning inherently racist. But the real "tell" in their own biases surfaces with a look at their latest re-zoning proposals, ie, which neighborhoods they've exempted.
As other readers here have pointed out, these "diversity" conflicts are often more complicated than they appear to outside reporters.
As other readers here have pointed out, these "diversity" conflicts are often more complicated than they appear to outside reporters.
9
Where I lived for over a decade in Maryland the low income project a block from my home was demolished to make way for new mixed income development, including low income housing but not all low income. The crime rate most notably murders and gunfire and open drug dealing dropped to near zero in the neighborhood.
6
Where I do not believe in housing segregation, it appears unfair that if you work hard and make it, that not only do you pay a disproportionate share of income taxes - but property taxes as well.
While I am fine with paying taxes, I am not fine with the federal, state and local government locating these communities right next to my real estate investments - which diminishes their value - then insist on rent control provisions on top of that as well.
I started out virtually homeless and broke, and sacrificed a lot to get into the upper middle class.
There needs to be balance to these housing policies so that more people benefit without hurting those who made it through hard work and determination.
While I am fine with paying taxes, I am not fine with the federal, state and local government locating these communities right next to my real estate investments - which diminishes their value - then insist on rent control provisions on top of that as well.
I started out virtually homeless and broke, and sacrificed a lot to get into the upper middle class.
There needs to be balance to these housing policies so that more people benefit without hurting those who made it through hard work and determination.
15
So... many... NIMBYs...
That said, I agree large housing complexes are inferior to integrated neighborhoods/communities and public transit improvements, as well as initiatives to slow/reverse the pace of rural-urban flight, which continues to drive rent through the roof. Perhaps also targeted housing subsidies, rather than the projects.
That said, I agree large housing complexes are inferior to integrated neighborhoods/communities and public transit improvements, as well as initiatives to slow/reverse the pace of rural-urban flight, which continues to drive rent through the roof. Perhaps also targeted housing subsidies, rather than the projects.
3
Good and affluent neighborhood doesn't necessarily mean " all whites" and neither the residency of housing projects necessary mean all " Minorities " the difference isn't the race but poverty and crime.
In Poverty axis, I don't it is the best interest of the poor kids to live next door to the rich kids. That will damage them psychologically as they may struggle with low self esteem and sense of unworthiness and subsequently childhood depression.
On the axis of crime; now, tell me who wants to live next to crime?
In Poverty axis, I don't it is the best interest of the poor kids to live next door to the rich kids. That will damage them psychologically as they may struggle with low self esteem and sense of unworthiness and subsequently childhood depression.
On the axis of crime; now, tell me who wants to live next to crime?
5
While I don't know all the details of this project, a better solution would be to partner with developers to build a lot more housing but make it 25% low income housing. The whole point of this is to integrate poor people into wealthier areas, so it makes way more sense to build a bigger mixed income project than a smaller low income project.
2
Simple solution to this problem. The main issue with section 8 is that many landlords do not want to take it. Instead of a voucher program, the state should simply make it a cash transfer that can be counted as income. That way, these families can choose where to apply for housing. If they want to spend a portion on housing and live somewhere more cheaply, that is fine. Cash transfer programs have proven successful in many places. Put the money into the hands of the people. You will then see real estate companies competing to build properties in a range of zip codes without facing citizen push back. Food stamp programs could be similar configured. Some people may waste the money, but on average, most poor families can be trusted to manage their household appropriately.
People oppose the low income housing not because of race or poor socioeconomic status of the residents but because of gangs and high level of crimes oozing out of these projects.
Every reasonable parents of all colors and background wants to protect their children from undue bad influence. I think the government should stop playing the segregation card and clean these projects first.
They should put in place stricter and tighter criminal background vetting process as part of their eligibility criteria.
Every reasonable parents of all colors and background wants to protect their children from undue bad influence. I think the government should stop playing the segregation card and clean these projects first.
They should put in place stricter and tighter criminal background vetting process as part of their eligibility criteria.
10
Nothing wrong with self-segregating.
3
What the bulk of white America continues to deny is that whites in general, but well-off whites in particular, were able to amass assets and use their secure financial status to pass their wealth from generation to generation, aided and abetted by the expressed racist policies of the federal government.
Nowhere is this so blatantly obvious than in the area of housing. The institutional racism of the federal government not only played a direct role in maintaining the color line, but also in “strengthening the walls of the ghetto,” as Douglas Massey & Nancy Denton writes in their book, “American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass.”
The main culprit was the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), now an entity of HUD. Through its expressed racist underwriting practices and policies that recommended the application of racially restricted covenants, it financed the suburbanization of America, creating massive white wealth while constraining Black Americans’ residential opportunities to central-city ghettos of major U.S. metropolitan communities and denying them one of the most successful generators of wealth in American history—the suburban tract home, i.e. the “Levittowns” of America.
What is often not acknowledged is that the same social system that fosters the accumulation of private wealth for whites denies it to Blacks.
"Social Engineering" built white wealth, especially in the area of housing.
Nowhere is this so blatantly obvious than in the area of housing. The institutional racism of the federal government not only played a direct role in maintaining the color line, but also in “strengthening the walls of the ghetto,” as Douglas Massey & Nancy Denton writes in their book, “American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass.”
The main culprit was the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), now an entity of HUD. Through its expressed racist underwriting practices and policies that recommended the application of racially restricted covenants, it financed the suburbanization of America, creating massive white wealth while constraining Black Americans’ residential opportunities to central-city ghettos of major U.S. metropolitan communities and denying them one of the most successful generators of wealth in American history—the suburban tract home, i.e. the “Levittowns” of America.
What is often not acknowledged is that the same social system that fosters the accumulation of private wealth for whites denies it to Blacks.
"Social Engineering" built white wealth, especially in the area of housing.
10
I think the upper west side New York liberals must make sure their children go to fully diversified schools. Sure!
6
I believe that the main problem is the large housing complexes to start with. I think that the only way to help these families get out of systemic poverty is to divide individual family groups up and then place them individually in middle class towns with decent schools/safety etc, perhaps with a church or social worker involved to help them transition. One or two families somewhere can hopefully learn to adapt without "bringing the whole neighborhood down". Slowly with some guidance if need be, they can assimilate into the neighborhood.
I grew up in a small former mill town, small farm community. We had some different ethnic groups and minorities and everyone got along fine, I didn't even really realize that they were "different" till I was an adult looking back. But then a fairly large section 8 housing complex was built, and bussed people in from ? I'm not sure where. Crime shot up, there were murders, the police were in the complex constantly. My brother had a paper route there and saw it first hand. It truly did bring the whole town down. This was back in the late 70's/80's.
I'm a "liberal" but on this issue, I think we need a better plan, looking at history and common sense. Repeating more of the same will not work, and part of the more of the same is large housing complexes.
I grew up in a small former mill town, small farm community. We had some different ethnic groups and minorities and everyone got along fine, I didn't even really realize that they were "different" till I was an adult looking back. But then a fairly large section 8 housing complex was built, and bussed people in from ? I'm not sure where. Crime shot up, there were murders, the police were in the complex constantly. My brother had a paper route there and saw it first hand. It truly did bring the whole town down. This was back in the late 70's/80's.
I'm a "liberal" but on this issue, I think we need a better plan, looking at history and common sense. Repeating more of the same will not work, and part of the more of the same is large housing complexes.
20
Dilution is the only way. We live in an upper income area and one neighbor has a relative that comes by frequently who has mores typically associated with much rougher neighborhoods. This single person has added a level of chaos that is unwelcome: large aggressive dogs that are not under voice control that are terrifying to the free range children on the block; a very noisy car that they sit in while idling for hours at a time, and zooming away and back in that same noisy car at high speeds. If there were a whole household with relatives and friends like this, it would bring misery to the whole block and ruin any semblance of peace.
Dilution, training in better mores - oh, and dilution.
Dilution, training in better mores - oh, and dilution.
8
The problem is not race, it's poverty. Poor people behave differently and have different ethics than even lower middle class. Stealing is ok if you are fighting to survive, some might assert (I dont)
I lived in a higher end neighborhood with one section 8 house, crammed full of people. Police there every weekend. One murder in an otherwise quiet neighborhood with top 20% type wagearners. I moved. Square peg in round hole. Ultra poor do not deserve to live in wealthy areas until they can prove they will adhere to a higher level of discipline
I lived in a higher end neighborhood with one section 8 house, crammed full of people. Police there every weekend. One murder in an otherwise quiet neighborhood with top 20% type wagearners. I moved. Square peg in round hole. Ultra poor do not deserve to live in wealthy areas until they can prove they will adhere to a higher level of discipline
9
And yet, the democrates run most of these large cities. Why would a poor person(minority) or not keep voting this party in office . This has been going on for decades, decades.
6
Because the Democrats at least have some understanding of the problems. Republicans express contempt for large cities and their inhabitants every chance they get.
4
Why would minorities vote for a party that produced a travel ban against their families and the notion of building a wall to increase the separation from their relatives?
4
Upper income professionals of all colors will not live among lower income groups which display statistically proven higher rates of violence, crime, and lower quality of life style behaviors. Not most residents, of course, but more than a few.
Oh, and why would anybody presume that well-to-do residents, no matter how liberal, would wish to actively practice "inclusive lifestyles" next to urban poor?
Oh, and why would anybody presume that well-to-do residents, no matter how liberal, would wish to actively practice "inclusive lifestyles" next to urban poor?
29
Lower income Asians, whites score higher than middle class blacks on standardized testing. Another justification for white flight
3
Educated your self about the history of inherited wealth, housing discrimination, and segregation in this country:
https://dianerehm.org/shows/2015-09-16/housing-discrimination-racial-seg...
The privileged and entitlement you enjoy White America is hardly something you've worked hard to earn.
https://dianerehm.org/shows/2015-09-16/housing-discrimination-racial-seg...
The privileged and entitlement you enjoy White America is hardly something you've worked hard to earn.
8
I live on the border of a very nice middle class municipality/suburb where the median home value is $250K. It is a nice neighborhood because the residents agree to pay very high property taxes for good schools, services, and law enforcement. We have ordinances that require people to keep their properties to a certain standard. People choose to live here because of these things. On the side of my house that is within the city limits, my neighbors are homeowners, mostly families, who work regular middle class jobs. They are friendly, quiet, and keep up their properties. On the other side of my house, the houses are mostly rentals. Guess which side has the noisy drunks, overgrown lawns, and peeling paint? I've lived in poor neighborhoods and rich neighborhoods in my life, and there's reason people want out of the poor ones! So why is there any surprise if people who worked hard to "make it" don't want to take the poor neighborhood and stick it next door?
27
I live in a nice middle to upper middle class area but i am honest: our lawn is a small disaster but also healthy, as we will not use pesticides. And really, I like some of these so called "bad" herbs. Having sait this, I think that this lawn issue is less strict in European countries than the U.S.
1
Our ordinances are pretty mellow. We mow our lawn and trim our hedges with clippers--no pesticides, no leaf blowers or any of that. Maybe our neighbors wish we did more; I don't know. One can be neat and tidy without much effort and without chemicals (at least with our climate). No need for the yard to look like a vacant lot.
1
I am a black, I don't agree that keeping one's neighborhood safe and free of crime is segregation. Let's be real and clear, those low income housing projects affordable housing of residents of all color are the breeding nest for crimes.
I have lived in one and couldn't last there for a year. That's simply not the environment I want to raise my young son at the time 6 years old . I, as a single mother, literally handed a landlord in a decent neighborhood all my income to keep my son safe from bad influence.
Let's be realistic in this segregation thing.
I have lived in one and couldn't last there for a year. That's simply not the environment I want to raise my young son at the time 6 years old . I, as a single mother, literally handed a landlord in a decent neighborhood all my income to keep my son safe from bad influence.
Let's be realistic in this segregation thing.
36
Thank you for taking race out of it. It's poverty. Really poor people tend to create more neighborhood problems than non poor.
5
What a shock: wealthy people don't want poor people living in subsidized housing near them. Of course, they're wrong, but this is an old story. Nothing new here.
Nehemiah houses are one solution. There are thousands of them built since the early 1980s. They are high quality, single-family houses built by real community organizations in struggling neighborhoods and are funded with a mix of building loans from local member congregations, free city land, and low mortgage rates. Homeowners faced very, very few foreclosures. Nehemiah neighborhoods are strong ones.
Nehemiah houses are one solution. There are thousands of them built since the early 1980s. They are high quality, single-family houses built by real community organizations in struggling neighborhoods and are funded with a mix of building loans from local member congregations, free city land, and low mortgage rates. Homeowners faced very, very few foreclosures. Nehemiah neighborhoods are strong ones.
2
Why should a financially successful person be forced to live with the poor?
21
to Andy,
"I got to learn that subsidized housing in the US means that after getting a Ph.D. I have to pay taxes so that high-school dropouts may live in housing that I can't afford. "Back to the USSR" for me !"
The Left despises people like you. Russia has a flat tax and even with the collapse of the price oil is in way better financial shape than the US. my guess is if you go back, in spite of corruption, you will not regret your decision.
lots of luck.
"I got to learn that subsidized housing in the US means that after getting a Ph.D. I have to pay taxes so that high-school dropouts may live in housing that I can't afford. "Back to the USSR" for me !"
The Left despises people like you. Russia has a flat tax and even with the collapse of the price oil is in way better financial shape than the US. my guess is if you go back, in spite of corruption, you will not regret your decision.
lots of luck.
7
Have you been to Russia?
I have. And I'll take my chances in America, thanks.
I have. And I'll take my chances in America, thanks.
5
No doubt the left despises people like me, but by saying it's "back in the USSR" for me, I meant that this government-subsidized housing reminds me of the Soviet Union. I think the actions of the HUD in particular are loaded with leftist ideology. Thirty years ago, living in a communist country, I would have never believed the US has this kind of misguided policies - and it hasn't become any better since then. I don't think much of Ben Carson and I didn't vote for his boss, but I do expect an improvement in this respect.
4
were you born in Russia?
I have friends who are going back. one of them just opened a bank. the parents of another went back and made a fortunate in real estate. a third is going in a week to buy a business over there. the US is in a slow (?) death spiral economically. debt, poor educational system and an expanding underclass are undermining the economic vitality of this country.
I have friends who are going back. one of them just opened a bank. the parents of another went back and made a fortunate in real estate. a third is going in a week to buy a business over there. the US is in a slow (?) death spiral economically. debt, poor educational system and an expanding underclass are undermining the economic vitality of this country.
Our gerrymandered landscape has kept development and people herded into economically, class and racial pockets. Our entire quest to get away from 'those kinds of people' cuts across racial, class and economic lines with political power; and has sprawled out of cities into the suburban world gobbling up farmland and green space and otherwise cycling back reclaiming urban spaces pushing out the poor to completing the 'gentrification' of the cities. If the Supreme court does its job addressing gerrmandering the physical landscape will go under the most dramatic change in our history. Or we will continue to have buildings with poor doors around the corner. The disenfranchised by definition is politically powerless, less mobile, less educated, and inclusively social incestuous just like everybody else. As long as we reserve dignity for our own tribe and segregate ourselves we will keep getting further and further from the ideals that created our 'perfect union'. These days though it looks like we are a bit incapable of creating the society we want TOGETHER so I must say: God save the United States of America.
2
One of the most destructive political constructs in history is the ridiculously inane notion that 'integration' is desirable. Thinking people have always known integration is undesirable, unworkable, destructive. Most normal people of any age and ethnic/racial group naturally self segregate. People are naturally, understandably more comfortable with their own people. This is self evident , blindingly obvious. This is the way nature has hard wired humanity, the natural order of things. And yet, misguided, malignant government policies continue to impose destructive, unwanted forced integration policies with the misguided, discredited notion this will (somehow?) benefit a political 'protected class.' People naturally wish to avoid interacting with certain people, certain sub-cultures. Such self preservation is only natural. Most normal people only wish is to be left alone, to live with their own, to enjoy their natural freedom. Is this really asking too much? The insane integration paradigm is so 20th Century. We are done!
27
You just can't say it better! Bravo!
7
Someone has been watching Frontline...
1
Who would object to a drug and gang infested cesspool being built in their neighborhood? Only racists, apparently.
This approach has failed again and again and again, for decades.
And we expect it to help the poor now?
It won't.
Its only "success" is as a political patronage and corruption machine.
Get the government out of the housing business.
This approach has failed again and again and again, for decades.
And we expect it to help the poor now?
It won't.
Its only "success" is as a political patronage and corruption machine.
Get the government out of the housing business.
29
You can locate poor people in affluent neighborhoods but if they remain poor, they are still going to live segregated. The affluent will socialize with the affluent and the poor will socialize with the poor. While one might think that the affluent will insist upon a well funded K-12 school system, they might just opt to send their kids to private schools and oppose giving much support to public schools who would end up teaching mostly poor kids. There must be a commitment to offer all the basics of life and the opportunities to improve themselves before the benefits of integrated neighborhoods will mean anything. The poor but intelligent children must be fed and clothed and housed and live safely and be able to go to university so that they have an equal chance with the intelligent children of the affluent.
6
Robin Hood economics is the new Trickle-Down economics.
Want to legislate something meaningful to help people with housing?
Outlaw rental housing below $5,000 per month and ban foreign nationals from residential property ownership above $500,000. Watch how all of a sudden the property market becomes accessible to the real Americans - the working class, the middle class, the poor and the upper middle classes.
Who owns our cities, especially those most segregated? Disinterested parties of lampreys, foreign shell companies and slum lords.
Convert all public housing to condominiums and cooperatives and empower the residents to invest in their futures and enable them to build the generational wealth and momentum that every single successful family in this nation has exploited since July 4, 1776.
#RENT=SLAVERY!
Want to legislate something meaningful to help people with housing?
Outlaw rental housing below $5,000 per month and ban foreign nationals from residential property ownership above $500,000. Watch how all of a sudden the property market becomes accessible to the real Americans - the working class, the middle class, the poor and the upper middle classes.
Who owns our cities, especially those most segregated? Disinterested parties of lampreys, foreign shell companies and slum lords.
Convert all public housing to condominiums and cooperatives and empower the residents to invest in their futures and enable them to build the generational wealth and momentum that every single successful family in this nation has exploited since July 4, 1776.
#RENT=SLAVERY!
8
I grew up in small-town Midwest and I live in "flyover country" now, so I'm not a Hollywood or East Coast liberal elite. I get that people are concerned about having poor people live near them for a number of reasons. What I don't get is how angry and narrow-minded so many of the commentators here are. There is a lot of blaming the poor for their condition (some of which is deserved and a lot of which isn't), and a lot of attacking those who have tried to find solutions to housing for low-income people. Practically none of these angry commentators offer a suggestion of what to do to help the situation and in fact they seem to be pretty okay with poor people just suffering as they are. If you think I'm being unfair, read these comments again and see how many people just want to lash out at both the poor and those who want to do something about it. So much bitterness and so little caring.
17
I agree - it's unbelievable and embarrassing. Meanwhile these selfish commenters are likely taking advantage of the most expensive tax break in The US - the mortgage interest deduction
3
The market seems the determining factor. People may or may not be prejudiced; mostly we are, it seems. But fear of one's home value going down is probably the main factor in opposing low cost housing in affluent areas. That darn market. Its got us.
9
Homeownership should be front and center to solving housing issues. Give tax credits to home buyers. Simple.
The sign posted for the proposed site housing project is 2640 Fountain View YET nowhere in the article does it state the CURRENT address of the Houston Housing Authority's address is in the office building located at 2640 Fountain View (http://www.housingforhouston.com/contact-us.aspx). Will the Housing Authority simply move to one of the mixed-use three-story office buildings next door or the 20+ story bank building on the other side of Fountain View?
Working with Down Payment Assistance programs that help low-income individuals and families become first time Homeowner’s. It’s the city of Houston that’s dropped the ball in providing the needed assistance to the low-income families needing subsidized housing over time(http://www.houstonchronicle.com/lostmoney/); building one new complex in a nice area of town is tantamount to covering a gaping wound with a Band-Aid.
From 09/92 – 08/05, I lived in the Three Fountains (http://threefountains.com/) apartment complex the next block up that (2310-2100) in the 2100 block right next door to Rice Epicurean Market (https://www.riceepicurean.com/) at 2020 Fountain View. I know firsthand, the area is expensive.
So the area is 87% white – that means is the people who can AFFORD to purchase/live in that area HAPPEN TO BE white. Two and a half miles to the NW of Fountain View, the city of Bunker Hill Village (part of the Memorial Villages), is where some REAL money is; no talk of low-income housing moving in over there – curious.
Working with Down Payment Assistance programs that help low-income individuals and families become first time Homeowner’s. It’s the city of Houston that’s dropped the ball in providing the needed assistance to the low-income families needing subsidized housing over time(http://www.houstonchronicle.com/lostmoney/); building one new complex in a nice area of town is tantamount to covering a gaping wound with a Band-Aid.
From 09/92 – 08/05, I lived in the Three Fountains (http://threefountains.com/) apartment complex the next block up that (2310-2100) in the 2100 block right next door to Rice Epicurean Market (https://www.riceepicurean.com/) at 2020 Fountain View. I know firsthand, the area is expensive.
So the area is 87% white – that means is the people who can AFFORD to purchase/live in that area HAPPEN TO BE white. Two and a half miles to the NW of Fountain View, the city of Bunker Hill Village (part of the Memorial Villages), is where some REAL money is; no talk of low-income housing moving in over there – curious.
4
Back in the 1960's, as Dad was driving from our NJ home across the GW Bridge, I asked about the brightly colored apartment building and who lived there. He told me that it was probably poorer minorities.
He explained that people were prejudiced against groups they didn't know, and that if the government made a law that moved one minority family on every block of every town and state in the US, racism would probably be gone in a generation.
What a concept my 86 yr old father had 50 years ago.
He explained that people were prejudiced against groups they didn't know, and that if the government made a law that moved one minority family on every block of every town and state in the US, racism would probably be gone in a generation.
What a concept my 86 yr old father had 50 years ago.
7
Where did he live?
2
I admit: I want to live with people like myself, which means middle-class; the skin color does not matter.
What I do not want is to live with the top 20% or with the bottom 30%.
What I do not want is to live with the top 20% or with the bottom 30%.
17
I notice that you claim to live in Luxembourg....
2
Yes I live in Luxembourg, a country with heavy immigration leading to high property prices that not only a few cannot afford. Subsidised housing is an almost daily feature in the papers and more recent, housing for refugees is being built / existing houses are renovated.
1
... where the bottom 30% live out of their E Classes.
Haha, totally agree with her though.
Haha, totally agree with her though.
1
It is astounding to read some of these comments which seem to divorce the long-term financial and social consequences of decades of racial segregation in America. In the aftermath of the housing bubble, hundreds of millions in fines have been paid by major money center banks for disproportionately steering minority home buyers into mortgage loans with predatory terms and conditions.
Suggesting lowering home values is a primary concern of building affordable housing, the "demographic" homeowners in upscale areas should be afraid of isn't racial but economic/professional because the inhabitants Platinum Ghetto of Wall Street did far more
Suggesting lowering home values is a primary concern of building affordable housing, the "demographic" homeowners in upscale areas should be afraid of isn't racial but economic/professional because the inhabitants Platinum Ghetto of Wall Street did far more
6
I grew up in a mixed income neighborhood. My family was working class, but I got to go to school with kids from upper middle class and even wealthy families. I still remember reading a letter in the local paper, in which a man whined about his kids having to share a school with children from poor families. Anyway, I got a great education, but more importantly I was able to access educated, succesful mentors that guided me. Now I'm in my third year of medical school. Eventually, I'll be upper middle class -- and I'll be looking to live in an area that welcomes socioeconomic diversity rather than fears it. I don't think I could stand to live surrounded by such self-righteous elitism.
10
"What this means, fair-housing advocates say, is that the government is essentially helping to maintain entrenched racial divides, even though federal law requires government agencies to promote integration."
The government essentially created and sustained these segregated practices, from before 1900. So much of the argument, and it comes out in the article (from both sides) is the us vs. them; "They [Black or Hispanic] are going to...[increase crime, decrease property values, sublet, or overcrowd]." "They [White] are going to...[discriminate, flee, or remove their children from schools]."
It seems that the answer is not as easy as spending money in one particular location. Why not find solutions that allow affordable housing and opportunities in suburban areas, and also renews urban areas that lack resources, safety, and schools?
The government essentially created and sustained these segregated practices, from before 1900. So much of the argument, and it comes out in the article (from both sides) is the us vs. them; "They [Black or Hispanic] are going to...[increase crime, decrease property values, sublet, or overcrowd]." "They [White] are going to...[discriminate, flee, or remove their children from schools]."
It seems that the answer is not as easy as spending money in one particular location. Why not find solutions that allow affordable housing and opportunities in suburban areas, and also renews urban areas that lack resources, safety, and schools?
1
Throughout history people live in areas that are like them. Race, religion, social relations, and other variables that make people feel comfortable. Yes, this promotes discrimination. But people tend to self-segregate.
But building housing in the middle of a different socioeconomic area (yes, that usually means race) instills anxiety and is a counter-productive strategy. Housing should nibble at the edges of different neighborhoods. My analogy is putting people at the shallow end of the pool rather than dropping them in the deep end. The shallow end shows people can mix without the fear of being drowned.
But building housing in the middle of a different socioeconomic area (yes, that usually means race) instills anxiety and is a counter-productive strategy. Housing should nibble at the edges of different neighborhoods. My analogy is putting people at the shallow end of the pool rather than dropping them in the deep end. The shallow end shows people can mix without the fear of being drowned.
2
If we stopped trying to get wealth from real estate in the form of your own house that you plan to sell when you retire, no one cares that its value will decrease. But increase in housing supply is one thing that will decrease the value. If the population grows at the same time, maybe even faster than housing supply, then the people won't care as much. But there is also the cultural aspect to this. Do you want people who may be harmful to your family in the same neighborhood? No. Poverty is not a sin, but the culture of addiction and crime is scary to most people with families. I don't want neighbors who blasts loud music from their cars whenever they drive by. America is diverse, but people are not really ready for the diversity. And it's silly that home values will increase over time because it's really the land and location and not your old, outdated house built in 1980s. I will never live in an old house filled with problems neglected by the previous owner. I will destroy and rebuild in that space though. But we should really get rid of private property laws if we want to live in harmonious community with everyone, not just people with similar income and interests.
2
Those who don't want their preconceived notion that improving the lot of others will destroy theirs are off base, as studies have shown. And, the concept that welfare is "stealing" form others falls right into the mental trap set by libertarians eg, the deceased economist James Buchanan and his underwriter, Charles Koch. America is changing colors and those who are afraid will have to catch up psychologically or exclude themselves from the evolution of this country. Blacks want no less from life than do whites. But, with segregation (overt and covert; intentional and inadvertent) their opportunities are limited. When you wake up every morning as a white person it is hard to feel the oppression, the constraints, felt by a person of color. Don't buy into the idea that "those" people are any less intelligent. That their hopes, wishes, and dreams are any less real than a white person. They're just more out of reach. Ideally, the same opportunities are out there for everyone. But, in reality, the color of you skin dictates where you are welcome (see comments in this string), where you go to school, the opportunities your parents had before you. It's a complex issue that will only be resolved when the fear instilled by distorted information fed to us produces. Blacks, Hispanics, what do they want then is any different from what you want for yourself and your kids. Those concerns expressed are visceral fears. Not rational or based on real facts.
2
How many "person(s) of color"live in lily white Rumson?
2
The author writes: "A review of federal data by The New York Times found that in the United States’ biggest metropolitan areas, low-income housing projects that use federal tax credits — the nation’s biggest source of funding for affordable housing — are disproportionately built in majority nonwhite communities." I wonder if the majority of those communities were always nonwhite or if the so-called white flight is to blame for this disproportion
4
Let me get this straight. When wealthier folks move into poor areas and renovate the housing stock, the uproar is about gentrification, not racism. But, when poor people want vouchers to move into a wealthier areas, the uproar is about racism?
15
Toronto has quite a few low-income developments in wealthier neighborhoods. Despite what this article implies - it really doesn't solve anything - let alone racism. It does mean having a solid presence of people with substance abuse issues and mental health issues in the neighbourhood - not to mention higher instances of crime. Building low-income housing is simply a Band-Aid to much larger problems that no one is willing to talk.
20
I read this with interest as we work on addressing health disparities in our north and south neighborhoods in Tulsa, neighborhoods that differ by race and income levels. Some 25 years ago, Section 8 housing was placed in Tulsa in an area that was traditionally affluent, just one mile from one of the country's finest golf courses that hosts national PGA and US Open tournaments, Southern Hills Country Club. The intersection where the Section 8 housing sits is now the highest crime area in town and surrounding property values plummeted.
At first, I hoped to improve that neighborhood by bringing in services and amenities. Then I had a chance to speak with those who live there. They wanted OUT, not more services. Even surrounded by wealth, the citizens in the low income housing felt trapped, without private transportation, they had to spend hours every day on city buses to get to school and work. They felt fenced in by natural barriers around the neighborhood: the Arkansas River, a highway, and two busy roads. They had no connections to the area except it was where they could afford to live.
Now, I am working to try to help the neighbors there find affordable housing near their schools and jobs so they can avoid long bus rides, helping them to move in small groups, not in mass, to areas they prefer. That will allow our city to develop retail and hospitality businesses in an area that should be our economic engine. Everyone would be better off, and I say that as a "liberal".
At first, I hoped to improve that neighborhood by bringing in services and amenities. Then I had a chance to speak with those who live there. They wanted OUT, not more services. Even surrounded by wealth, the citizens in the low income housing felt trapped, without private transportation, they had to spend hours every day on city buses to get to school and work. They felt fenced in by natural barriers around the neighborhood: the Arkansas River, a highway, and two busy roads. They had no connections to the area except it was where they could afford to live.
Now, I am working to try to help the neighbors there find affordable housing near their schools and jobs so they can avoid long bus rides, helping them to move in small groups, not in mass, to areas they prefer. That will allow our city to develop retail and hospitality businesses in an area that should be our economic engine. Everyone would be better off, and I say that as a "liberal".
3
People self-ghettoize, and projects of any kind, simply reinforce that condition. It is no surprise then, that "dumping" them in a neighborhood would meet with stiff resistance, aside from whatever density factor, usually considerable, is involved.
Time and time again the results of "urban renewal" have had the opposite effect for just these reasons. If provisions are to be made for low-income people, then they must be racially diverse and "scattered" in more upscale communities with the full commitment that they will maintain their premises (another issue rarely discussed) and keep their household membership (again an issue) within neighborhood standards. Grudging acceptance might then be possible. En-masse solutions will always meet resistance which is, to some extent, fully justified.
Time and time again the results of "urban renewal" have had the opposite effect for just these reasons. If provisions are to be made for low-income people, then they must be racially diverse and "scattered" in more upscale communities with the full commitment that they will maintain their premises (another issue rarely discussed) and keep their household membership (again an issue) within neighborhood standards. Grudging acceptance might then be possible. En-masse solutions will always meet resistance which is, to some extent, fully justified.
2
Wait--low income housing is being build where low-income families live? Unthinkable!
8
look, the problem is that middle class people have worked and saved all their lives and all they own is the equity in their home -- their inflated-value home.
Building low income housing in the neighborhood lowers property values for those who have managed to survive the assault of the rich.
The real fix is to hike taxes a lot, so rich people can't afford to outbid the working class for everything we worked so hard to maintain.
Building low income housing in the neighborhood lowers property values for those who have managed to survive the assault of the rich.
The real fix is to hike taxes a lot, so rich people can't afford to outbid the working class for everything we worked so hard to maintain.
5
The problem of affordable housing has endured every solution we have tried so far, and we seem no closer except in the sense that we have exhausted many of the ineffective alternatives. We need a fresh perspective.
There is bad housing (unsanitary, dangerous), and there are bad outcomes (poverty, crime). The "common sense" conclusion is that bad housing leads to bad outcomes, but it's not clear how or why. For example, Pruitt-Igoe in St Louis is often held up as an failure of outcomes because it was badly designed. Yet in Singapore, much larger and denser housing estates, with no better interior accommodations, greatly contribute to the social welfare and prosperity of that nation. What's different? In Singapore, housing ownership (currently about 91%) is encouraged, and renting is discouraged. I often hear people say that poor people can't afford to buy, but counter that if a family can afford to pay rent, they can afford to buy and own something.
Lifelong renting may be a viable alternative in other countries with different culture, but the US was populated by immigrants seeking ownership tenancy. My family's story is the same as a huge number of other American families: my grandparents came from countries where they had no prospect of ownership so that they could own their own home.
There certainly are people for whom renting is a viable solution. But that does not change the fact that homeownership is the one 95% certain path to good social outcomes.
There is bad housing (unsanitary, dangerous), and there are bad outcomes (poverty, crime). The "common sense" conclusion is that bad housing leads to bad outcomes, but it's not clear how or why. For example, Pruitt-Igoe in St Louis is often held up as an failure of outcomes because it was badly designed. Yet in Singapore, much larger and denser housing estates, with no better interior accommodations, greatly contribute to the social welfare and prosperity of that nation. What's different? In Singapore, housing ownership (currently about 91%) is encouraged, and renting is discouraged. I often hear people say that poor people can't afford to buy, but counter that if a family can afford to pay rent, they can afford to buy and own something.
Lifelong renting may be a viable alternative in other countries with different culture, but the US was populated by immigrants seeking ownership tenancy. My family's story is the same as a huge number of other American families: my grandparents came from countries where they had no prospect of ownership so that they could own their own home.
There certainly are people for whom renting is a viable solution. But that does not change the fact that homeownership is the one 95% certain path to good social outcomes.
1
Really?? No wealthy area would allow a low-income housing project to be built in its community. Single-family homes and select units in expensive and not-so-expensive condo buildings are perfectly acceptable; however, residents wouldn't even want to live in one of these projects if given a choice. These kinds of problems are why the Republicans control government. No one is speaking up about low-income communities such as trailer parks and "the wrong side of the tracks" because I guess certain kinds of poverty are okay.
5
Why is this even an article? The affordable housing projects aren't built in affluent neighborhoods because the developer can't afford the land even with the federal tax credits. End of story.
9
How about building projects in the Hamptons or in The Woodlands in Houston, for example? Why is it that always the middle class has to bear the brunt of government actions?
8
Like it our not, admit it or not, we have a class system in America. It's one based on wealth (both earned and inherited), and on ethnicity and race. This leads those who have to not want those who don't have living in their neighborhoods. This leads folks who have (whether they earned it or inherited it) to applaud their hard work and success and to see those who don't have as having no incentive and being unwilling to work hard. It's tough being on the bottom and trying to scrape your way up, but it's even harder having to face the sense of privilege possessed by those who have. I would just ask that all of us embrace grace.
3
I am at the point of believing that getting decent housing for low to lower middle to middle income people take precedence over the exact locations. By I want to see the housing be designed well and well constructed, made safe ,and convenient to schools and in cities, mass transit and shopping.
What has happened to the efforts that were common going back to the 70's to encourage architects to come up with plans that meet needs, attractively, efficiently?
This well designed housing should have apartments designated at multiple income levels. Perhaps with rent supports that vary with income. Voila: no more total isolation of the poorest. And housing that younger people can afford. Or perhaps older folks wanting to return to apartment living.
Make it desirable and they will come.
There is a dearth of rental housing in most places; endless fights over location have helped to delay any building at all -
except for the very wealthy, where powerful builders seem to get what they want. People are desperate.
What has happened to the efforts that were common going back to the 70's to encourage architects to come up with plans that meet needs, attractively, efficiently?
This well designed housing should have apartments designated at multiple income levels. Perhaps with rent supports that vary with income. Voila: no more total isolation of the poorest. And housing that younger people can afford. Or perhaps older folks wanting to return to apartment living.
Make it desirable and they will come.
There is a dearth of rental housing in most places; endless fights over location have helped to delay any building at all -
except for the very wealthy, where powerful builders seem to get what they want. People are desperate.
1
If The New York Times wanted to do an article about Section 8 housing, and where it is located, Houston is not the place to do it. Houston, fro a long time, did not do zoning. A drive around neighborhoods, inside Loop 610, can attest to that. Drive through these neighborhoods, you see gas t stations next to homes, type of thing.
It si easy t o go to a southern city, and say it is segregated. Houston is one of the most integrated cities in Texas. In a way, it is more like New York City, even its founders, teh Allen Brothers, were from New York.
If The New York Times, has a nice southern ax to grind, then how about Dallas? I lived in both cities, between 1984 and 1995; Dallas was far more segregated than Houston ever was. It still, more or less, is.
Though, I feel fro those who will eb affected by this development. Not because it is Section 8, but because of the Housing Authority and how they do things. They expect Houston Police,Harris County Sheriff Deputies and Harris County taxpayers to police their tenants, as the Housing Authority doesn't. A nice forgotten part of this story, and the reason for the backlash.
I saw this played almost daily about 1/2 south where I used to live, in Fondren-Southwest-Sharpstowbn It certainly gave KTRKTV13 good news stories, as they were about 3 miles to the north east of where I used to live.
It si easy t o go to a southern city, and say it is segregated. Houston is one of the most integrated cities in Texas. In a way, it is more like New York City, even its founders, teh Allen Brothers, were from New York.
If The New York Times, has a nice southern ax to grind, then how about Dallas? I lived in both cities, between 1984 and 1995; Dallas was far more segregated than Houston ever was. It still, more or less, is.
Though, I feel fro those who will eb affected by this development. Not because it is Section 8, but because of the Housing Authority and how they do things. They expect Houston Police,Harris County Sheriff Deputies and Harris County taxpayers to police their tenants, as the Housing Authority doesn't. A nice forgotten part of this story, and the reason for the backlash.
I saw this played almost daily about 1/2 south where I used to live, in Fondren-Southwest-Sharpstowbn It certainly gave KTRKTV13 good news stories, as they were about 3 miles to the north east of where I used to live.
7
How about we get rid of these tax credits as part of tax reform, I bet it is ineffective. How about we try charity to manage these needs with mostly private money.
4
Here's a little secret the New York Times needs to know. The vast majority of white people living in a white neighborhood would rather have a black professional couple and their kids living next to them, than a single white woman who dropped out of high school, has no job or job prospects, no husband, a couple of kids, and a Section 8 voucher.
127
The NY Times doesn't sell media that way. If it's not framed by strictly black and white race relations, they're not interested in reporting on it. If it doesn't make the status quo in America look racist, it's not a front page headline.
11
Some people are never satisfied. I am sure that the majority of Americans do not mind at all supporting through hard earned tax dollars people who are unable to support themselves, but it is rich that advocates expect that these recipients also live in public housing next door.
Have an idea, build public housing all through out Hollywood Hills, Malibu, Chappagua, and wherever the armchair jet set liberals live. Oh what was that, they are NIMBY types just like the rest of us??!!
Have an idea, build public housing all through out Hollywood Hills, Malibu, Chappagua, and wherever the armchair jet set liberals live. Oh what was that, they are NIMBY types just like the rest of us??!!
39
Exactly. But it's ok on the back of the middle class.
11
Jesus told us to be neighbors to people unlike ourselves. Don't pretend to be a Christian if you consider your property value more important than that.
7
This is totally incorrect, totally!!!
3
Somewhere I heard from a wise man that so far there has only been one Christian, and, according to my wife a devout Catholic, he was Jewish
4
Single "disabled" mom with three kids. Spend more on birth control and less on housing.
41
Birth control is very cheap to free. And yes disabled people should have no children.
3
American racism is so endemic it is amazing how many immigrants, who themselves are Black or Dark Skinned, buy into it. Several African immigrants have chosen to move out of apartments with too many Black Americans in many parts of Texas. On the other hand, my travels through the ghettos of America reveal not just "economic deprivation but a terrible psychological depravity" that leads to environmental neglect, poor public hygiene, poor parenting (this I think is pervasive in many White communities these days too), poor schooling and poor sense of community belonging, responsibility and appropriate social compliance.
Lot of middle class families, struggling themselves, do not want to take the risk of moving into neighborhoods with badly brought up people, or people they assume are badly brought up. And sometimes there is White flight based on White fright.
In the apartment complex we are in, which was pretty good a year ago, with all the amenities, is slowly declining with a lot of younger irresponsible people moving in (who don't train and/or clean their dogs well), few ghetto people (White and Black) who are not very good at keeping things clean and a management that just wants to collect money and not supervise properly. We plan to move soon, but because of my Huntington's I will move into a nursing facility. But my wife, soon to be ex, actually wants to move out of the country itself.
Our housing problems are more than a race issue! It is a huge class divide too!
Lot of middle class families, struggling themselves, do not want to take the risk of moving into neighborhoods with badly brought up people, or people they assume are badly brought up. And sometimes there is White flight based on White fright.
In the apartment complex we are in, which was pretty good a year ago, with all the amenities, is slowly declining with a lot of younger irresponsible people moving in (who don't train and/or clean their dogs well), few ghetto people (White and Black) who are not very good at keeping things clean and a management that just wants to collect money and not supervise properly. We plan to move soon, but because of my Huntington's I will move into a nursing facility. But my wife, soon to be ex, actually wants to move out of the country itself.
Our housing problems are more than a race issue! It is a huge class divide too!
10
We are not a racist country, and it is not about class divide. It is about culture, one that is traditional American and plenty that are not. Poor people can be clean and neat.
7
Housing is always a huge class divide. Everyone wants to live in the best part of town but can't afford it. So why make an exception by placing this class of people into a prosperous neighborhood only to see it ruined as well?
6
No, based on the history of how American cities have unfolded in the last 50 years, it is TOTALLY about racism. Along with your state of denial, it is quite clear people with your attitude have always been part of the problem, NEVER, the solution.
1
Tell Ms Rhodes that she does have an opportunity "to move over there"; of course she might have to do it on her own initiative. I'm not going to hold my breath.
Why does the NYT never ask where are the fathers in these stories? Why always such a lopsided view?
Why does the NYT never ask where are the fathers in these stories? Why always such a lopsided view?
32
The fathers do not have to be present. The government takes care of single mothers this is why the fathers are absent. Failure set up and financed into perpetuity by the government.
12
One more deranged idea from the Liberal agenda which, the Real World, never works because only insane people think you can successfully mix people together in neighborhoods from vastly different cultures, lifestyles, family structures, and work history.
23
What?! I've heard for years from the left that "diversity makes us stronger". The only problem seems to be that people sort themselves out in ways that seem to defy that. Successful, stable people of any color seem to have more in common and are more comfortabLe with like people.
birds of a feather, flock together. it is a law of nature. no liberal progressives will or can change that.
16
"Ben Carson, the secretary of housing and urban development, declined to comment". Can we look at the quality of this housing complex. Seen all over the US so-called Affordable Housing built inferior with leaky roofs, mold,and other construction defects. Nobody will address this. Maybe, the wedding planner/HUD rep in NY recently hired by conman in the White House wants to say something about that since Ben Carson has no comment.
3
How stupid, a manager can manage anything, and no comment means that nothing more or less.
Really is this some kind of surprise?? Really Captain Obvious! If you are going to build low cost housing you must keep your building costs as low as possible. These types of homes do not return much when they are sold. Sooooo where to build. WHERE PROPERTY IS CHEAP!!! Do you get that. IF you go into a high income area, homes sell in the neighborhood of a million dollars or more. Same goes for the property that the home will sit on. What sane builder will buy a lot for $100K or more than put a low cost home on it??? Jeesh. Just a little thinking will get you through this so-called "problem".
15
The programs are not "keeping cities segregated." Disparate levels of income, wealth and credit are doing that. These programs - to the surprise of no sane person anywhere - are unable to miraculously mix poor black people with wealthy white people in the same neighborhoods. Gee...surprise.
24
It seems Republicans prefer to keep "those people" in a state of permanent public squalor... Safely tucked away in their ghettos... Ghettos created by, and maintained through, generations of racial discrimination and economic deprivation...
Cut education! Cut jobs programs! Cut drug programs! Cut after school programs! Cut healthcare, food, and housing! Cut the minimum wage!
Cut MY TAXES!
All is well!
All is well until they are asked to live anywhere near the consequences of their demands...
How Christian of them.
Cut education! Cut jobs programs! Cut drug programs! Cut after school programs! Cut healthcare, food, and housing! Cut the minimum wage!
Cut MY TAXES!
All is well!
All is well until they are asked to live anywhere near the consequences of their demands...
How Christian of them.
8
Keeping cities segregated by building more Black Areas, is somewhat like a concentration camp mentality, or the townships of Apartheid South Africa.
Any businessperson should want to have a supply of skillful workers available; however, segregating them, some miles away, just adds to the time and expense of workers to be available, and thus perhaps the expense!
When the demographic facts-of-life are considered--inter-marriage, and higher minority birth rates--the Lily-White Only lobby should look-ahead. Perhaps it'll be in the lifetime of today's children; but, at some point, there will be a role-reversal.
Cities that are open to assimilation--different races, ethnicities, nationalities, sexual orientation, nationalities--will hardly notice the change; but, those cities and people who have to are dragged, kicking and screaming into the the New Reality--might suffer Future Shock!
As I have told my children, a long, long time ago, in the end: We're all Mutts!
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
Any businessperson should want to have a supply of skillful workers available; however, segregating them, some miles away, just adds to the time and expense of workers to be available, and thus perhaps the expense!
When the demographic facts-of-life are considered--inter-marriage, and higher minority birth rates--the Lily-White Only lobby should look-ahead. Perhaps it'll be in the lifetime of today's children; but, at some point, there will be a role-reversal.
Cities that are open to assimilation--different races, ethnicities, nationalities, sexual orientation, nationalities--will hardly notice the change; but, those cities and people who have to are dragged, kicking and screaming into the the New Reality--might suffer Future Shock!
As I have told my children, a long, long time ago, in the end: We're all Mutts!
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
1
You and your spouse work your butts off to buy a home in a nice, quiet, relatively crime free neighborhood, among people who tend to share your same values. Your home, which you must pour money into every year to insure, pay for a burglar and fire alarm, physically maintain and update, is not just the place you have a strong emotional attachment to, but also a financial investment. Let's be honest, housing projects tend to bring problems with them; or, housing projects are strongly perceived as bringing problems with them. So, now, after paying taxes through the nose for years because one makes a good income, good enough to buy a nice house in a nice neighborhood, the government comes along and wants to tax you again by driving down the value of your neighborhood and your home--both a psychological and financial blow delivered by some nameless, faceless, bloodless, government bureaucrat you didn't vote for or elect. And, if you don't accept the government's will in this matter it isn't because you just want peace and quiet and a crime-free place to call home, but rather because you are a bigot and a racist.
I don't care about the color, religion or national origin of anyone who moves into my neighborhood so long as they paint and maintain their home, mow the lawn and tend to the garden and trees, make sure their kids are in school and don't let their kids run wild, don't deal drugs, and don't steal my stuff. Not all people behave the same.
I don't care about the color, religion or national origin of anyone who moves into my neighborhood so long as they paint and maintain their home, mow the lawn and tend to the garden and trees, make sure their kids are in school and don't let their kids run wild, don't deal drugs, and don't steal my stuff. Not all people behave the same.
114
Why do "Fair Housing" advocates assume Black people will be happier living in a White neighborhood. The same idea is the basis of school busing. How has that worked out? My neighborhood is mixed. We have Whites, Asian (lots of Indians), Hispanic and Black. What we share in common is that we all own our own homes. We all got here the same way. Busing has destroyed many public school systems. Why will this be different?
18
Why is this news to anyone? Where are all the prisons built? Where are all the sewage treatment plants built? Where are all the trash to steam incinerators built? Where were all the factories built in the cities when we had factories? In wealthy suburban neighborhoods? Where are the best funded school districts? Where are the worst funded school districts? Now here's where it gets uncomfortable. This is NOT about race, it's about poverty! When immigrant families lived in "those" neighborhoods it was the same story. The difference is that the Italians, Jews, Irish, Polish and more recently Korean and East Asians have accumulated enough education and wealth to move out of the (pick your choice): "slums", "ghettos", "tenements" etc. The fact is that the "minority" groups (which numerically are certainly no longer "minority") are still being forbidden full entry into American society as a result of a combination of racism, exploitation and sadly (don't go nuts on me now-remember I'm a liberal, but a realist) a lack of ability for the "minorities" to maintain enough social discipline. The "rough" neighborhoods will always be there, and be abused. It's the capitalist way! The only way out is OUT! Whoever can't get out, for any reason will be stuck. Again-It's capitalism and we own it!
12
This practice has been going on for years. Black and brown citizens in run down areas, white working class a little better, white middle class and upper middle class a lot better and the rich take the best...isn't America "great"?
2
It all comes down to money. Don't have enough money, then you have no choice but to live in a less desirable neighborhood. This is the way of life for all of us. We can't expect to be taken care of by the government cradle to grave AND expect to live in million-dollar areas.
Those who want this to happen, why don't you petition the government that you want public housing in the Hamptons or some ritzy area in California.
Those who want this to happen, why don't you petition the government that you want public housing in the Hamptons or some ritzy area in California.
4
Has Mitch McConnell used this article on the floor of the Senate as proof that attempts at desegregation and trying to help the poor are as pointless as they are meaningless?
After all he is Mitch "The Thief" McConnell!
After all he is Mitch "The Thief" McConnell!
2
People don't want people that shoot up their own neighborhoods, destroy their schools and create a general climate of incivility to move into their neighborhoods on the gov't dime. Evidently this is racism. Oh well I'm black, grew up poor and want little to do with Section 8, welfare etc. people.
Also now even a few Republican senators in addition to the usual social engineering Democrats not only think it's a great idea but want a law that outlaws community objection. Then folks wonder how we ended up with Twitterer in Chief, Trump.
Also now even a few Republican senators in addition to the usual social engineering Democrats not only think it's a great idea but want a law that outlaws community objection. Then folks wonder how we ended up with Twitterer in Chief, Trump.
26
It's not race, it's class! I spent many years living in a community that was both racially and economically diverse. An affordable housing organization started buying up houses there, with a plan of moving in people from the city.
They came to our neighborhood meetings and promised they wouldn't just plop the new folks in and disappear. They said they would train them on being responsible renters, teach them financial & life skills, and have a zero tolerance policy for criminal activity. Of course none of that happened.
These city transplants were indeed plopped into our neighborhood, bringing the ills of the city with them. Almost immediately there was an increase in crime, noise, trash, fighting and unattended children. Responsible longtime residents, both black and white, watched helplessly as our quality of life declined as a direct result of this subsidized housing.
So please spare me the racial guilt. I don't care what color you are, but if you don't have any skin in the game and you can't behave in a way that's not destructive and anti-social, I don't want you as a neighbor.
They came to our neighborhood meetings and promised they wouldn't just plop the new folks in and disappear. They said they would train them on being responsible renters, teach them financial & life skills, and have a zero tolerance policy for criminal activity. Of course none of that happened.
These city transplants were indeed plopped into our neighborhood, bringing the ills of the city with them. Almost immediately there was an increase in crime, noise, trash, fighting and unattended children. Responsible longtime residents, both black and white, watched helplessly as our quality of life declined as a direct result of this subsidized housing.
So please spare me the racial guilt. I don't care what color you are, but if you don't have any skin in the game and you can't behave in a way that's not destructive and anti-social, I don't want you as a neighbor.
50
I'm sure this is an issue the Trump Administration will hop right on.
2
What have liberals accomplished with these policies but a long history of failure?
19
The Central Government should do something about this.
The Central Government should do something about everything.
And we should submit.
And obey.
Joyfully.
All the most advanced people say so.
Look! It says so right here in the New York Times!
The Central Government should do something about everything.
And we should submit.
And obey.
Joyfully.
All the most advanced people say so.
Look! It says so right here in the New York Times!
8
I agree, it is a socioeconomic thing. The middle-class is materialistic, self-absorbed, entitled and scared.
3
Scared? I think we all have a natural human tendency to project on others what we know we would feel in a given circumstance. The middle class is materialistic, that's why they have the stuff that other people want. They are self-absorbed because that's what it takes to provide for one's family and have enough to pay taxes to pay for other people's stuff. They are "entitled" to what they have earned through their materialism and self-absorption, but not much else. But I've yet to meet a middle class person who I felt was "scared." So you might want to check whether you are projecting your own feelings on others.
3
The forced integration never worked in the past and never will because it's about values and way of life, not race. I live in NYC close to the biggest housing projects in US - the Queensbridge Houses - and 90% the neighborhood problems and crime emanate from that source. That's a fact and all of the commentators here that say otherwise are either hypocritical or plainly naive, and never lived close to one.
NYT should ask someone, preferably minority, that used to live in a project and have made it to a middle or a higher class neighborhood through hard work and sacrifice whether they would want the Section 8 or low income people moved into their new neighborhood, and I am 100% sure they will say no.
NYT should ask someone, preferably minority, that used to live in a project and have made it to a middle or a higher class neighborhood through hard work and sacrifice whether they would want the Section 8 or low income people moved into their new neighborhood, and I am 100% sure they will say no.
31
Why is low-income always a race issue? As soon as we talk about public housing, it is a black issue. There are more white people on the dole than black or Hispanic. It is a matter of economics. When people make enough money to move into a good neighborhood, they should not have to share their success with people who have not reached that economic level yet. It is always judges living in their pristine gated communities who want to force public housing on affluent neighborhoods, but not their own. The schools in poorer neighborhoods should be improved so the children do not have to waste hours every day being bused to a different area. There needs to be more of a police presence to come down hard on crime to make the poorer neighborhoods safer. It is not fair to foist public housing on wealthier neighborhoods just because some people think that is a just way to handle the problem. This is an economic, not a race issue.
14
"Why is low-income always a race issue?"
Because that's the best way to distract everyone from the real issue of income inequality and its causes.
Because that's the best way to distract everyone from the real issue of income inequality and its causes.
4
Here's a pie-in-the-sky wish:
In: guaranteed basic income for all; taxpayer-funded universal health care, free at the point of service; free community college tuition for four years that could be applied to tuition at any institution of higher learning, public or private.
Out: a whole bunch of stupid state and federal programs but particularly low-income and "affordable" housing. Let people use the above benefits, directly or indirectly, and their industry, to find their own housing. Anti-discrimination laws, of course, should be fully enforced.
In: guaranteed basic income for all; taxpayer-funded universal health care, free at the point of service; free community college tuition for four years that could be applied to tuition at any institution of higher learning, public or private.
Out: a whole bunch of stupid state and federal programs but particularly low-income and "affordable" housing. Let people use the above benefits, directly or indirectly, and their industry, to find their own housing. Anti-discrimination laws, of course, should be fully enforced.
4
Income inequality segregates people. If we treated all our citizens with respect and genuine care there would be fewer desperate or/and unbalanced people to fear; we might even let our hearts grow 3 sizes this day when we realize that our purpose here is to learn to love our neighbors as we love ourselves. (Its a problem if you hate yourself and project that hate onto others) Everyone is a potential neighbor. Deal with it like a compassionate human being not a like a thoughtless and selfish person. Take a look at Norways' healthy attitudes towards it's citizens as compared to ours: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbJaGIyM65k
2
Offering a Norwegian solution totally out of context is unconvincing. If you look at the socioeconomic conditions of Norwegian-Americans, they are as safe and healthy and affluent at Norwegians in Norway. Norway is largely financed by extraction industries: timber, fishing, and oil. A better example is Singapore, which is much closer in size to Norway, has a deeply multicultural, and socioeconomic outcomes are better than they are in Norway:
http://www.ifitweremyhome.com/compare/SG/NO
Norway's is a 20th century solution, Singapore's is a 21st Century solution.
http://www.ifitweremyhome.com/compare/SG/NO
Norway's is a 20th century solution, Singapore's is a 21st Century solution.
1
Oil rich Norway protected by American military. Spare me.
2
After living in NY the past seven years, I see low income projects as the only force keeping neighborhoods such as Harlem from becoming totally white. I'm thankful there are a few projects uptown, in Chelsea, and on the UWS, all places I've lived or worked. They are the only thing giving the neighborhoods any fair priced housing at all.
4
Seeing firsthand the disaster of NYC public housing in every neighborhood in Manhattan and Brooklyn- nobody gets out of the projects. They look like prisons and are run like prisons and are located in the most affluent neighborhoods in the WORLD with access to the best job market in the US. More folks get out of prison than the projects. Better off homeless than born in the projects. Wanna fix this? Stop building projects!
9
"but the Dems want to continue to wave in illegals and then demand the wealthy pay for it. it's unsustainable"
not exactly. they want the middle class to pay for it, particularly workers in private industry
you are right it's unsustainable. the middle class who work in private industry are clueless to how close the country is to bankruptcy. for the record Federal Workers and State workers don't care because their pensions are mostly guaranteed by law.
not exactly. they want the middle class to pay for it, particularly workers in private industry
you are right it's unsustainable. the middle class who work in private industry are clueless to how close the country is to bankruptcy. for the record Federal Workers and State workers don't care because their pensions are mostly guaranteed by law.
4
Knowing the Fountain View area very well, I think it would have been impossible to find in Houston a location for low-income housing that would have been more controversial. It's difficult not to believe that the choice was made on purpose to cause trouble; it's a statement from the Obama HUD, not something meant to improve integration or future income.
9
I lived in Houston in 2013 and can say it is one of the most segregated places I've ever been. It's ironic because they make a big deal over Houston being (by some questionable measures) the most diverse city in the U.S., but in reality, the 33% black population lives in one part, the 33% white population lives in another, and the 33% Latino population in yet another. I lived in an apartment complex in an area that is comparable to the Upper West Side in NYC, and it was 3 months before I saw a black or brown person that wasn't doing landscape work or cleaning the pool...
1
Indeed, for we are tribal at our very core. We tend to cling to each other based on race, skin color, religion, and political identity. When one group gets to the top of the hill they want to keep other groups at the bottom and at each other throats. Even the Egyptians realized that the view at the top of the pyramid is far more preferable than at the base with the unwashed masses. Its ingrained into us almost to the genetic level. Like others mentioned the wealthy and powerful will like to stay in their enclaves behind 'gated fortresses' than be forced to interact with those who are beneath them.
Most of the people who live in my upper-middle class neighborhood descend from grandparents or great grandparents who came here with the shirt on their backs and a few dollars in their pocket, lived in a heat-stifling tenements with not even a fan, and got horrible jobs with no worker protections. How in the world were they able to lift their kids out of poverty?
It's called hard work, stressing education, and not having children out of wedlock. This recipe works 95% of the time.
Giving someone an apartment in a nice neighborhood who does not work, does not stress education, and has children out of wedlock, does not change the cycle of poverty, which proponents of this housing thinks will happen like magic.
It's called hard work, stressing education, and not having children out of wedlock. This recipe works 95% of the time.
Giving someone an apartment in a nice neighborhood who does not work, does not stress education, and has children out of wedlock, does not change the cycle of poverty, which proponents of this housing thinks will happen like magic.
22
I love this. Nothing exposes the hypocrisy of the left more than when the "hood" comes knocking on the door. When this happens, the ideologies, hypotheticals and the soaring rhetoric succumb to harsh reality, kind of like when Trump crashes the self congratulatory hate-fests and psychobabble of main stream media and infotainment (no indictment intended to any organization in particular). We need more of this - much more - to shake certain folks out of their dream states, if nothing else.
9
Agreed. It is astonishing to see the aggressive NIMBY attitudes appear when the social engineering affects the liberals and no Trump supporters can be chastised.
1
Its easy to be a liberal or a conservative in a vacuum until the issue hits close to home.
3
Boston leads the way on segregation. Whole neighborhoods are reserved for people of color. Lines were drawn back in the 60s by Irish Politicians and they have managed to maintain the status quo. The neighborhoods of Roxbury, Mattapan and Dorchester are almost exclusively Black and Brown. While 54% of the population is of color only 25% of the Boston Police and Fire Departments are of color. The State Supreme Court have stated that Black men are totally justified in running away from Police as past bullying has demonstrate. Great article and very true.
5
What's interesting about our system is the direct correlation between structural race division and capitalism. The school issue is just a correlary to the upper middle and middle class housing hustle. They see non-owners i.e. Low income renters hurting their home values. Meanwhile, tax dollars are subsidizing both groups. Through direct low income housing or mortgage interest and property tax tax deductions. It just comes back to the money hustle. If property owners didn't receive so many federal kickbacks it would be a much more level playing field. The obsession with property - we can thank our the British partition-worldview of our nation's founding.
4
Why do you want to ruin neighborhoods? Do you realize that the property taxes pay for the schools and for the economy of the state?
8
One key fact is left out of this article - the cost of land in not included in the project's cost for the calculation of the low income housing tax credits. As an extreme example, that's why there are no tax credit projects in Greenwich - the land costs too much. Since the developer has to charge below market rents and can only accept tenants with low or very low incomes in order to get the tax credits (which they then sell to banks to fund the cost of building the project), they can never develop a feasible project if they spend too much on the land. Areas where the land has value for other market uses don't often see LIHTC projects developed for that reason.
1
Cheap housing is being opposed by people who worry that it might lower the value of their homes. Whether that's code for racism or not, it really cuts to the heart of the matter: housing in America is an investment first and a place to live second.
Homeowners and landlords both have a vested interest in seeing prices go up, up, up, even if that means pricing everyone else out of the market, and they have a whole lot more political power and influence than the poor people they're pricing out. Whether it's house-flipping or the "luxury" apartment craze, the homeownership culture in the US is all about raising the price by any means necessary so that you'll be able to sell it for a profit and use that money to buy an even more expensive house. People like to put the blame on restrictive zoning and land use regulations, but even those are largely the result of homeowners and developers seeking to keep prices high and neighborhoods exclusive. There's no cheap housing because everyone who already has a house wants home prices to go up, not down, and they do all they can to make sure it stays that way.
Homeowners and landlords both have a vested interest in seeing prices go up, up, up, even if that means pricing everyone else out of the market, and they have a whole lot more political power and influence than the poor people they're pricing out. Whether it's house-flipping or the "luxury" apartment craze, the homeownership culture in the US is all about raising the price by any means necessary so that you'll be able to sell it for a profit and use that money to buy an even more expensive house. People like to put the blame on restrictive zoning and land use regulations, but even those are largely the result of homeowners and developers seeking to keep prices high and neighborhoods exclusive. There's no cheap housing because everyone who already has a house wants home prices to go up, not down, and they do all they can to make sure it stays that way.
1
I'm white, barely middle class, and live in, according to most national stats, one of the most segregated cities in the US. Eight years ago, I moved into an old (just declared historic!) but lovely neighborhood that is about 70% black.
What I've discovered is that residents of our subdivision watch out for each other and the neighborhood. From time to time, a "drug house" emerges, but it's soon gone because residents watch and talk to each other and tip off police. Why? Not because we want to maintain property values, but because we LIVE here, have families, and want a safe and pleasant neighborhood.
A few miles away and adjacent is another area, same racial mix, that has been dangerous (drugs and bullets) because a small number of thugs got a toehold--it only takes a few well-armed bullies to trash a neighborhood. Yet in the past few years, residents have risked speaking out, developed community businesses/projects/associations. It takes a while to get rid of the bullies, but it is being done.
I'm pretty sure that residents (black and white) of neither of these areas would have any desire to move to a neighborhood like the one described in this article. I sure wouldn't. Safe, pleasant, neighborly--I think that's still the desire of most people, and that's what we have here.
I don't know the answer to affordable housing for everyone, but pursuing a solution using generalizations won't work. Let's back off of the categories--they're untrue.
What I've discovered is that residents of our subdivision watch out for each other and the neighborhood. From time to time, a "drug house" emerges, but it's soon gone because residents watch and talk to each other and tip off police. Why? Not because we want to maintain property values, but because we LIVE here, have families, and want a safe and pleasant neighborhood.
A few miles away and adjacent is another area, same racial mix, that has been dangerous (drugs and bullets) because a small number of thugs got a toehold--it only takes a few well-armed bullies to trash a neighborhood. Yet in the past few years, residents have risked speaking out, developed community businesses/projects/associations. It takes a while to get rid of the bullies, but it is being done.
I'm pretty sure that residents (black and white) of neither of these areas would have any desire to move to a neighborhood like the one described in this article. I sure wouldn't. Safe, pleasant, neighborly--I think that's still the desire of most people, and that's what we have here.
I don't know the answer to affordable housing for everyone, but pursuing a solution using generalizations won't work. Let's back off of the categories--they're untrue.
5
This is a great article which highlights the underlying issue when is comes to fair housing...race. Affordable housing in some form or another always had connotations to due with minorities and poverty. Also highlights the "not in my backyard" mentality. Plus identifies if one is as progressive or liberal as they claim to be. Its easier to parachute into poor minority communities to dole out aid and services while keeping 'those people' at an arm's length away. Once we put folks from different income and racial backgrounds as their neighbors then we start see protests. And if we want to prevent working class neighborhoods from turning into economic blights then we must invest jobs, well resourced public schools, and green spaces into these hard hit areas. Then folks will return or willing to stay.
2
When an affluent and highly democratic voting county north of Baltimore was presented with this same choice they reacted the exact same way. No one with a substantial investment (real estate or otherwise) will easily tolerate risk to that investment. Not a republican or democratic problem but basic human nature. Good luck trying to get government to change that.
Many people seem to think that we need to invest more money in poor neighborhoods. But what's the 50 year track record with that. Even our most liberal cities (like NYC and Wash. DC) haven't begun to put a dent in the problems of poor neighborhoods. With little to no return on investment why do we continue this behavior?
Many people seem to think that we need to invest more money in poor neighborhoods. But what's the 50 year track record with that. Even our most liberal cities (like NYC and Wash. DC) haven't begun to put a dent in the problems of poor neighborhoods. With little to no return on investment why do we continue this behavior?
6
What an awful idea. As a middle class progressive, I would fight this disastrous plan. This failed model of bringing about equality was tried with busing and schools. It doesn't work. All you do is ruin the places that are working, and fail to deliver improvement in the places that don't function. We have Section 8 housing here in Cincinnati, and it's resulted in the ruin of once stable and safe neighborhoods. It's interesting that the same bureaucrats that push this don't have to live next to a Section 8 house or project.
13
So the headline is "poor people live in poor neighborhoods"? The government has a moral obligation to put a roof over people's heads. It does not have an obligation to house them in Beverly Hills. And the government only has so much to spend on those services. Even if you forget about the crime and lower property values that projects bring -- there is still the basic math of real estate buying power. Doesn't the government have an obligation to buy real estate with our taxes in places where it can get the most value? Housing is a human right, but luxury housing is not. Why should people in public housing, who earn the least, live in better circumstances than the working poor, who earn more but can only afford lower-income areas?
7
I thought we figured out with projects, which were later torn down, that concentrating poverty doesn't help anyone. Spreading socioeconomically disadvantaged people around the wider population rather than herding them into projects can help.
1
Someone please show me one instance where NYC has built a low income housing "project" in a middle or upper class neighborhood. Having lived in the "city" for 60 or so of my 84 years. I've never seen it. [Don't tell me about Mitchell Lama subsidized middle class housing]. Or, in the words of my neighbors NIMBY!
4
10 yrs ago our middle class neighborhood was one of homeowners, tidy yards,unlocked doors,behaved children outside playing. Our new neighbors are subsidised renters. The afore mentioned neighborhood characteristics are no more.
13
The book "The Color of Law" lays out the argument for government obligation to promote integration extremely well. Cities across America were segregated explicitly along racial lines by government policy at the federal, state, and local levels. Through redlining, enforcement and support of restrictive covenants, and racially targeted zoning laws blacks were systematically restricted to certain areas of different cities, prohibited from taking advantage of the kind of federally insured mortgages that allowed the middle class in America to grow, and crowded into high density, high rent areas that hastened those areas turning into slums. Through these and other mechanisms racial segregation turned into racial/income segregation. We then turned our government policy to efforts to segregate along socioeconomic lines. So the case for the government's role in integration is that the situation is only the way it is due to government policy explicitly supporting racist ideals clearly against the post civil war constitutional amendments so they are obligated to rectify this harm although there may be some growing pains in the neighborhoods they seek to integrate (although many of those pains are overexaggerated). I understand the immediate knee jerk reaction to efforts like these but a more complete understanding of our history can change the way you see our current situation. Check the book out, it's a great read.
3
So we're are encouraged to work hard to move to safer neighborhoods only to have the very people we worked so hard to escape moved near by?
15
I have mixed feelings. We need to provide equal opportunity for the less fortunate to succeed. That includes reducing inequality by making massive social investments in schools, income maintenance, public works, child care, and universal health care, funded through increased marginal tax rates on the very rich. And here in California, it means repealing Prop 13 that benefits primarily corporations and older homeowners while pounding on young families, who pay two to three times the property tax of their next door neighbor. But the social engineering has to be done right. You start with helping people right where they live now. As their lives stabilize and they are able to amass some capital, they can eventually relocate. At that point, they have made an investment in themselves and will be a good neighbor
Those who fear that housing projects will bring crime and lowered housing values have valid concerns. I lived for four years in a "redevelopment" area of San Francisco (on Diamond Street in Glen Park). Our superficially lovely street included low income housing projects interspersed with middle class homes. The daily onslaught of crime was truly stunning: car theft, car vandalism, rape, armed robberies, car jacking, burglary, arson.... The day someone tried to break in while we were asleep was the last straw. Frightened, I almost bought a 357 magnum at a gun store - but thought better of it, and instead sold our home at a loss, and regained a life of peace and tranquility.
Those who fear that housing projects will bring crime and lowered housing values have valid concerns. I lived for four years in a "redevelopment" area of San Francisco (on Diamond Street in Glen Park). Our superficially lovely street included low income housing projects interspersed with middle class homes. The daily onslaught of crime was truly stunning: car theft, car vandalism, rape, armed robberies, car jacking, burglary, arson.... The day someone tried to break in while we were asleep was the last straw. Frightened, I almost bought a 357 magnum at a gun store - but thought better of it, and instead sold our home at a loss, and regained a life of peace and tranquility.
8
I live in a Houston suburb and agree with the thrust of this article. Still, there is some good news, e.g. the newly renovated Emancipation Park in a historically black neighborhood. The park was originally created in 1872 to commemorate the end of slavery. The park fell into disrepair in the 1970s after wealthier blacks left the Third Ward during the integration process. In 2017, $33.6 million worth of renovations and new developments were completed to modernize the park. It looks great now, search for pictures.
1
I have always wondered about the rationale behind forced integration. Although that might be true decades ago, I don't really see this as a race issue, but rather, more an economic issue. Liberal media like NYT or The Atlantic tend to have this knee-jerk reaction of injecting the race card into every and any ill in society, is simply wrong-headed.
Let's be honest with ourselves, and examine why we need forced integration like mixed income development in affluent neighborhood. If the goal is to encourage diversity, there are other means of doing so. But if the goal is about allowing the "lucky few" to have access to better public schools in affluent neighborhoods, then one has to ask this: (a) Programs like METCO already are doing that. (b) Why don't we target resources to develop poor neighborhood instead? Isn't this EXACTLY the reason so many liberals are so dead-set against school vouchers?
Our society has evolved so much since emancipation of slavery, and the days of redlining. Issues these days tend to be more socio-economical than purely racial in nature. There used to be working class neighborhoods that have neat white-picket fence and intact family structures, and these neighborhoods are far more harmonious and diverse than anyone can imagine. Over the years, they fell on the wayside when US manufacturing sector faltered. This is happening across the nation. I'm not white nor xenophobic, but would I be labeled racist for pointing that out?
Let's be honest with ourselves, and examine why we need forced integration like mixed income development in affluent neighborhood. If the goal is to encourage diversity, there are other means of doing so. But if the goal is about allowing the "lucky few" to have access to better public schools in affluent neighborhoods, then one has to ask this: (a) Programs like METCO already are doing that. (b) Why don't we target resources to develop poor neighborhood instead? Isn't this EXACTLY the reason so many liberals are so dead-set against school vouchers?
Our society has evolved so much since emancipation of slavery, and the days of redlining. Issues these days tend to be more socio-economical than purely racial in nature. There used to be working class neighborhoods that have neat white-picket fence and intact family structures, and these neighborhoods are far more harmonious and diverse than anyone can imagine. Over the years, they fell on the wayside when US manufacturing sector faltered. This is happening across the nation. I'm not white nor xenophobic, but would I be labeled racist for pointing that out?
37
In Columbus Ohio we do it better. The city is selling a public housing tower to be turned into a hotel...the neighborhood has become gentrified.
http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170612/council-oks-zoning-for-hotel-at-fo...
http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170612/council-oks-zoning-for-hotel-at-fo...
3
It's one of those things I get in theory but vehemently oppose in practice. I pay a huge amount to live in a nice area. But we are besieged by crime. Car break-ins, package theft, mail theft, garage/home break-ins, homeless attacks on passers by etc. These are not our neighbors committing these crimes, but people who follow the money and bother to take bridges and tunnels to where we are. So why help them out by making their commute shorter? Really, it's a battle to stay safe as it is. Besides my enormous taxes, I pay for an alarm system, a video surveillance system and a private security service. Short of becoming a vigilante, what more do you want of us?
46
Enormous taxes in NYC? Please document where this is. NYC property tax is drastically lower than neighboring Nassau and Westchester counties, sometimes by half.
I find it odd that you're 'besieged' by crime in NYC, where all statistics continue to point to historically low levels of crime. Perhaps you're exaggerating just a little?
I live in what was once an extremely high-crime area in Manhattan (I also grew up a few blocks north) and I don't worry about my wife coming home late at night, cars almost NEVER get broken into anymore and most stores operate late nightly without fear of armed robberies. This is all 2 blocks from one large housing project and 5 blocks from another. Most low income people want the same thing you do: a safe environment for their loved ones to exist in, good schools for their kids and services that are accessible.
I live in what was once an extremely high-crime area in Manhattan (I also grew up a few blocks north) and I don't worry about my wife coming home late at night, cars almost NEVER get broken into anymore and most stores operate late nightly without fear of armed robberies. This is all 2 blocks from one large housing project and 5 blocks from another. Most low income people want the same thing you do: a safe environment for their loved ones to exist in, good schools for their kids and services that are accessible.
3
this article like most on housing. makes assumption that are not necessarily true. e.g. integration is a good thing even if it is forced upon people, the government should not be in the housing business at all. zoning restrictions and rent regulations are the reason housing is not being built. get rid of them and housing will be built by the private sector. there was a time this country had sufficient housing for everybody. then the government came in and gummed up the market by among other things forcing banks to lend to low income minorities who could not pay their mortgages etc.
also forcing integration on people is not the American way. let those people who are proponents of forced integration show the way by not being hypocrites and by giving up living in their gated communities.
also forcing integration on people is not the American way. let those people who are proponents of forced integration show the way by not being hypocrites and by giving up living in their gated communities.
18
Neither is segregation the American way wither way. Plus your definition of 'sufficient' may differs from someone's else. Private housing market tends to the follow the money for they are a profit centric enterprise. They have no desire to build in poor or even working class neighborhoods. Before their was federally backed desegregation in the housing market, individuals and mortgage companies could discriminate against those on the basis of race. They would practice 'red lining' by forcing minorities even ones with money into poorer neighborhoods, charge higher interest rates, or give a simple flat out no. Yes, in a perfect world your comment and your underlying assumptions would be true hence the need for regulations. Also be glad they are certain zoning restrictions like you can't build a night club next to a school or a liquor store next door to your house. Which can affect property values.
2
sounds like a good solution would be to stop immigration for a while until we can properly house our existing citizens...
there are numerous articles about our infrastructure, especially in cities, being stretched to their limits, but the Dems want to continue to wave in illegals and then demand the wealthy pay for it. it's unsustainable.
there are numerous articles about our infrastructure, especially in cities, being stretched to their limits, but the Dems want to continue to wave in illegals and then demand the wealthy pay for it. it's unsustainable.
25
Not quite right - they want the poorest Americans to pay for it. It's the low income neighborhoods who get stuck with the tab for educating them and providing healthcare, along with lowered wages and higher rents. While the wealthy get the benefit of the cheap labor.
2
Thanks Dennis. It's baffling to some of us, why the left doesn't get that. The dems won't win unless they realize most of us think Americans are more important than: illegals, immigrants, refugees etc.
These public housing NIMBY projects always mention racism, but that's not quite right. I'm hispanic, I used to live in public housing for over a decade when I was young and I can tell you... of those that managed to succeed and move out of what we call 'the projects', they do not want public housing near them, not after all they've worked for to get away from it. We know what it brings.
63
NIMBYism isn't the only reason that tax credit developments cluster in low income areas. The cost of land is higher in affluent neighborhoods, thus driving up the cost of housing, even if it is subsidized by federal tax credits. You can build many more affordable units on relatively cheap land in the Bronx than you can in Westchester or on Long Island.
Fair housing arguments shouldn't be used to diminish the impact of the tax credit, which has spurred the creation of over 13 million homes for people of all races since its inception 30 years ago, during the Reagan administration. It leverages substantial private investment and creates almost 100,000 jobs annually. It needs to be expanded!
Fair housing arguments shouldn't be used to diminish the impact of the tax credit, which has spurred the creation of over 13 million homes for people of all races since its inception 30 years ago, during the Reagan administration. It leverages substantial private investment and creates almost 100,000 jobs annually. It needs to be expanded!
3
It's a bandaid. Instead of sticking poor people with rich people, they should try to develop attractive, affordable places for first-time buyers to live with a variety of walkable services, maintained infrastructure, and apartments, some of which could be public housing. There should be every social level in a community, but not too much of any one, and there should be money for infrastructure and walkable businesses.
6
In 1981 I worked briefly for the New Orleans PD. Few cities can claim as much proximity of rich and poor housing as New Orleans of that era.
Growing up, I lived in the poor part of a rich town. Other than my siblings and I, very few kids living on that street ever attended, never mind graduated from, college.
My father never finished high school; my mother never went to college. My first job was maintenance in a hospital at age 13. Our town had an excellent public school system; I got a scholarship to an elite private high school. Going through such a good public school system helped me get that opportunity.
As I have aged, I've noticed that most public school systems now have a fairly homogenous SES population. If I'd been born 50 years later, my parents wouldn't have been wealthy enough to live in that town with the good school district.
All the same, it's unclear to me that gov't-initiated social engineering is the answer. And stories like this one seem to come from a POV that is either hopelessly naive or hyper partisan. Elite universities have the means and opportunity to make a difference here. How about if Harvard spent some of their $30 billion endowment on 40 fully funded scholarships each year on applicants who contracted to work as teachers in poor school districts for four years after graduation. Multiply that by the number of other elite uni's willing to do the same. This would probably make more of a difference than affirmative action for 1st gen poor kids.
Growing up, I lived in the poor part of a rich town. Other than my siblings and I, very few kids living on that street ever attended, never mind graduated from, college.
My father never finished high school; my mother never went to college. My first job was maintenance in a hospital at age 13. Our town had an excellent public school system; I got a scholarship to an elite private high school. Going through such a good public school system helped me get that opportunity.
As I have aged, I've noticed that most public school systems now have a fairly homogenous SES population. If I'd been born 50 years later, my parents wouldn't have been wealthy enough to live in that town with the good school district.
All the same, it's unclear to me that gov't-initiated social engineering is the answer. And stories like this one seem to come from a POV that is either hopelessly naive or hyper partisan. Elite universities have the means and opportunity to make a difference here. How about if Harvard spent some of their $30 billion endowment on 40 fully funded scholarships each year on applicants who contracted to work as teachers in poor school districts for four years after graduation. Multiply that by the number of other elite uni's willing to do the same. This would probably make more of a difference than affirmative action for 1st gen poor kids.
11
The government will have to pay market value for lots in well-to-do areas. That means far fewer housing units than if the government instead purchased lots in low-income areas. Have those who advocate low-income housing in well-to-do areas figured out how we should decide which mothers and children will end up with no housing?
7
Plenty of seniors are winding up with no housing, because their needs are being completely ignored. And seniors do not mug their neighbors, break into neighbors' houses, or even play car stereos loudly enough to shake building foundations. But NYT never writes op-eds on their behalf.
8
Legal efforts to bring justice to people of color is important. But, in the long run, opportunities to get to know people of color without stereotypical thinking is the long-run solution. This can be done by connecting people over issues rather than living next door -- at least for the time being. I happen to live in an integrated, not just a desegregated community. But it is an ongoing effort. My husband worked as a social worker in public, largely black housing. He learned that the majority of folks living there upheld more "middle class" values than are portrayed in the media. This does not mean that we shouldn't learn to respect all people, but nothing will change unless multiple strategies are used.
2
The program is not adding to segregation. Prejudice, bigotry, and a government and media driven perpetuation of the denigration of the less advantaged are the causes of segregation. Same as it always was. This is the same mentality that caused Clinton to take away welfare for millions. It is not the insufficiently funded programs that cause poverty - it is the idolization of the rich and the greed driven trickle down economics we have suffered with ever since Reagan. Bad analysis Times
2
This isn't a white or black issue, it's an opportunity and wealth issue. I'm an African American, and I'm part of the meritocracy and the top 20% that Thomas Frank and Richard Reeves have so eloquently derided in their recent books ("Listen, Liberal" by Frank; "Dream Hoarders" by Reeves). I was lucky enough to be born at the right time (1959), and to the right parents who valued education, and who had the wherewithal to make sure that I would get started on the path in life that would lead to a college degree and military service. That path has allowed me to buy a house in a "good" neighborhood, which in today's America means a neighborhood with steadily increasing property values, good schools, farmers markets, parks, and ready access to public transportation and shopping. If those of us who have this life won't share with those who don't, we will continue to see growing inequality, and we will continue to see politicians like Trump taking advantage of the simmering rage from those who don't have access to the life that we're enjoying.
6
As I ‘ve been saying for awhile class, more than race, does a better job of explaining what is going on in a lot of the country. As many comments show people tend to accept others regardless of race as long as they appear to be of the same or a higher class, and they don’t even when it is people of their own race when they are of a lower class. Referring to another issue are the black mayors, police captains and officers in some cities racist because they have also shot black, unarmed suspects, or are they dealing with what has become and almost intractable problem of deep, sometimes multi-generational poverty?
If Democrats want to play the race card it is easy to hold up a mirror and show that the cities, school districts, etc., with the highest level of segregation are typically in Democratic strongholds, and have been for decades. The many comments indicate why this is the case.
We have a diverse neighborhood in my neighborhood in southern Washington state; condos, multi-family, rentals, apartments, middle class home owners, subsidized housing, and million dollar residences. There was a concern by many when subsidized housing was announced but the agencies have apparently done a good of screening people as there have been no problems. Real estate prices keep climbing, and the neighborhood is pretty diverse for the area. It can work.
If Democrats want to play the race card it is easy to hold up a mirror and show that the cities, school districts, etc., with the highest level of segregation are typically in Democratic strongholds, and have been for decades. The many comments indicate why this is the case.
We have a diverse neighborhood in my neighborhood in southern Washington state; condos, multi-family, rentals, apartments, middle class home owners, subsidized housing, and million dollar residences. There was a concern by many when subsidized housing was announced but the agencies have apparently done a good of screening people as there have been no problems. Real estate prices keep climbing, and the neighborhood is pretty diverse for the area. It can work.
5
I mostly agree, but I think you understate the role of race in economic class. Multiple studies have found that job applicants with names suggesting they belonged to a racial minority (or were female) were less likely to get responses for job applications and mentorship requests. Another study showed that resumes for STEM jobs with female or minority names yielded about 20% lower initial salary offers than similar resumes with white-names.
There are more subtle factors too. Growing up, how many times did you see a black or latino person represented on the TV in a succesful, professional career? Now, how many times did you see them as criminals? Those kind of subtle biases infect everyone, including the racial minorities themselves. Not only do minorities have to overcome this negative bias in other people, they have to overcome it in themselves first.
Race isn't the whole story, for sure. I know someone who grew up in extreme poverty and is white. But dropping the accent and moving away from impoverished town was enough to shed the stigma (though not the scars) of her upbringing. Someone named Martinez or De'shawn can come from a middle class backround and still face stigma from their race alone.
There are more subtle factors too. Growing up, how many times did you see a black or latino person represented on the TV in a succesful, professional career? Now, how many times did you see them as criminals? Those kind of subtle biases infect everyone, including the racial minorities themselves. Not only do minorities have to overcome this negative bias in other people, they have to overcome it in themselves first.
Race isn't the whole story, for sure. I know someone who grew up in extreme poverty and is white. But dropping the accent and moving away from impoverished town was enough to shed the stigma (though not the scars) of her upbringing. Someone named Martinez or De'shawn can come from a middle class backround and still face stigma from their race alone.
America isn't going to get better until we recognize the value we provide to corporate 'people' in granting them American personhood.
Here's a solution:
Building permits are valuable commodities (sort of like taxi medallions). For each building permit, the developer should have to accept tenants at 1/3rd of their income level into a percentage of the units.
This is how Canada does it. Plenty of low-income housing, with no segregation or ghettos.
Any issues that arise with tenants should be dealt with just as they are for other residents. But when you get to know 'them', it's funny how often they're just like 'us'.
Here's a solution:
Building permits are valuable commodities (sort of like taxi medallions). For each building permit, the developer should have to accept tenants at 1/3rd of their income level into a percentage of the units.
This is how Canada does it. Plenty of low-income housing, with no segregation or ghettos.
Any issues that arise with tenants should be dealt with just as they are for other residents. But when you get to know 'them', it's funny how often they're just like 'us'.
4
Communities are "built" by the people who live in them. They are a reflection of collective values.
It's really not enough to say you don't want to live in the "ghetto" anymore and you would like a "voucher" to move into a better neighborhood. You can't spend your life thinking you should be handed what other people have, you have to find the way to work towards your goal and earn it. I'm not saying it's easy, but it is actually achievable. I'm also not saying it always "fair" all I'm saying is better life is absolutely possible if you work for it.
It's really not enough to say you don't want to live in the "ghetto" anymore and you would like a "voucher" to move into a better neighborhood. You can't spend your life thinking you should be handed what other people have, you have to find the way to work towards your goal and earn it. I'm not saying it's easy, but it is actually achievable. I'm also not saying it always "fair" all I'm saying is better life is absolutely possible if you work for it.
15
It seems like we would take one giant leap for mankind if people of the same socio-economic level, of whatever race and religion, would be free to buy what they can afford. Then America would evolve naturally toward real integration based on acceptance and shared humanness. Separation just allows politicians to divide us (whites) with fear because we don't actually know any Muslims, blacks, Hispanics, etc. Second, the local government and police must be fair and unbiased to keep everyone safe at whatever level of housing they live in.
2
People are free to buy what they can afford. Here in Queens and the other boroughs of NYC, the nicely kept homes, condos and coops are occupied by people of all colors and religions. The thing they have in common is their education and willingness to work hard to earn enough money to live in them. Like George Jefferson and many others have said, the only color that matters is green.
2
As long as people are mobile and have money housing will be segregated. And today the only color that matters is green. Just think about the question: how many people are going to move to a town where MS-13 butchered 6 young adults in a year? I'll answer that: None, if you have money.
12
In New Jersey many of the communities that are subject to low income housing requirements are also Democratic strongholds. They have been resisting standalone and integrated low income housing projects for years. Defies logic that those who uphold liberal democratic principles are also against low income housing in their municipalities. Typical "not in my backyard" thinking.
7
An odd conclusion, ZBJ. I grew up in one of those New Jersey towns in the 1950’s, 60’s; Rumson, virtually 100% Republican then and to this day, enough to get gerrymandered into a Republican dominated congressional district in 2010. In the 1950’s a referendum was put before Rumson and the adjoining mostly Democratic borough to regionalize the public high school in Rumson. The adjoining town with a substantially less affluent population with minorities and no ability to build their own high school voted overwhelmingly for regionalization literally drowning the almost unanimous Rumson vote against. Again, in the 1960’s a motion to annex a small area sharing the Rumson Post Office in another township, firmly rejected because of low income residents. Be careful when you try to indict who uses certain civil actions, it’s an equal opportunity tool.
Good afternoon. I live in Houston. I am not aware of any "white only" or majority white neighborhoods inside Houston city limits. Houston doesn't have a majority group anymore, and hasn't for years. The largest minority group in Houston are Hispanics. The article cites a very expensive part of town, the Galleria area, as "87% white." - is this a zip code? No it isn't. Is it a residential neighborhood? No it is not. It is a couple of square miles of expensive shopping and businesses without a whole lot of housing and what there is of it is expensive for sure. But the suggestion to build low income housing there is about as sensical as building low rent housing on 5th avenue in NYC or in Chicago's the Golden Mile on Michigan Ave. It simply isn't going to happen nor is it even reasonable. Houston and surrounding areas have many housing options for lower monthly housing costs. I live in one. It is fine and I have no issue. My street is very mixed and we are all happy with the area and each other. Zero conflict and very low crime.
12
Why should middle class taxpayers subsidize housing for low income people who do not pay US income taxes to live in neighborhoods that they themselves could not afford, where the cost of the projects is increased due to the higher land values in those areas? Build affordable housing in affordable neighborhoods and make it nice enough and well designed enough that the residents will respect it. Moreover, it is more economical for those who need subsidized housing to live near public transportation, to be able to walk a few blocks to shop for necessities, than to drop them into a place where everyone has a car and uses it to buy a quart of milk. Here in NY by lottery some people get to live in high rise, tax abated, luxury buildings, where everything in the neighborhood is more expensive. In many cases the buildings are far from subways. That makes no sense. Moreover, it is unfair.
8
The solution is mixed use housing neighborhoods where you have both market rate bundles alongside low income. Aristocracy-minded folk will always segregate-no law is going to change that-no matter what. Who cares about them anyway - they are the smallest minority in the country....
"EVERYONE deserves a decent place to live."
If the government can build 100 units in a low-income area, or 50 units in a well-to-do area, which course of action is more likely to accomplish this goal?
If the government can build 100 units in a low-income area, or 50 units in a well-to-do area, which course of action is more likely to accomplish this goal?
9
Stop building prisons- sorry, projects. Folks need a hand, give them money. Stop giving food stamps - give them money. Let them live wherever they want and buy whatever they need and watch them break free of the shackles of poverty!
I would gladly change my opinion about public housing if someone could cite several successful examples where an influx of public housing into a regular middle or upper class neighborhood actually improved the quality of life for the middle and upper class residents.
In a photography accompanying this article, Ms. Rhodes, who is a resident in a public housing project, seems to be financially secure enough to purchase a leather couch. That's simply an observation. Draw your own conclusions.
In a photography accompanying this article, Ms. Rhodes, who is a resident in a public housing project, seems to be financially secure enough to purchase a leather couch. That's simply an observation. Draw your own conclusions.
14
You assume that she purchased it. It could just as well have been given to her.
How do you know she bought it? My neighbors gave one away when they moved because they couldn't take it with them. They just left it out by the curb for someone to get. Nice couch too--I would have snapped it up if I'd had the room.
It is incorrect to blame the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program for housing segregation, as the authors have done.
I find myself puzzled by a fundamental contradiction in this article--the headline blames LIHTC for housing segregation, but then demonstrates that local opposition is a critical determinant of what gets built and where. Furthermore, the article is devoid of historical context. Where is the discussion about redlining and the New Deal programs that created the high levels of segregation that we see today? The authors also fail to mention that the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule (HUD) they discuss indirectly was finalized in 2015, even though LIHTC has been around since 1986.
Finally, the record is clear that developing affordable housing in low-income communities is a critical if insufficient response on its own to countering poverty. Divestment has been the historical norm in these locales. Such investments provide for families who would otherwise live in substandard housing, and they can spur additional investment in these communities.
Kudos to the Times for tackling a difficult topic, but any discussion of housing segregation without historical context does us all a disservice.
I find myself puzzled by a fundamental contradiction in this article--the headline blames LIHTC for housing segregation, but then demonstrates that local opposition is a critical determinant of what gets built and where. Furthermore, the article is devoid of historical context. Where is the discussion about redlining and the New Deal programs that created the high levels of segregation that we see today? The authors also fail to mention that the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule (HUD) they discuss indirectly was finalized in 2015, even though LIHTC has been around since 1986.
Finally, the record is clear that developing affordable housing in low-income communities is a critical if insufficient response on its own to countering poverty. Divestment has been the historical norm in these locales. Such investments provide for families who would otherwise live in substandard housing, and they can spur additional investment in these communities.
Kudos to the Times for tackling a difficult topic, but any discussion of housing segregation without historical context does us all a disservice.
I have lived in a well maintained rental apartment complex on the Southwest side of Santa Fe, New Mexico for twenty years. It includes a community fitness center, pool shaded plazas with state of the art playground equipment. The rent is reasonable and reflects the low end of the market value for the city. Hence it attracts the working poor of all races.
I am Caucasian, but many of my neighbors are not. I can have a relaxed conversation in the common areas with persons not of my race whenever the occasion presents itself. Outside of an occasional vehicle break-ins' - crime has never been a problem.
I am Caucasian, but many of my neighbors are not. I can have a relaxed conversation in the common areas with persons not of my race whenever the occasion presents itself. Outside of an occasional vehicle break-ins' - crime has never been a problem.
Out here on Long Island, people complain about Section XIII housing being "put" in the poorer neighborhoods, but the real issue is that prices in wealthier parts of town are just too high, even with a housing subsidy. Some unscrupulous landlords still charge pretty high prices, knowing that they can rely on the subsidy and get even more money, but it still doesn't match the rent in wealthier areas, even if you can find a rental there.
1
To be sure, housing segregation remains a critical issue. But we can't afford to look at these challenges through the lens of one issue (housing, health care, education, voting rights, police brutality). We need to tackle these problems together, expose their interconnectedness and truly create the foundations for a multiracial democracy. It is time for a Third Reconstruction. It might very well be local communities and states that take the lead for now, but the federal government will have to join in. Everything is at stake.
why waste the limited dollars available to low income housing trying to build projects in the high property value centers of the country?
if the goal is to provide affordable housing, build it in affordable areas - you could then house double or triple the amount of people - otherwise it becomes a lottery where a lucky few get to "move on up".
the govt is overstepping, as usual, thinking it's mandate is to social engineer, when it's actual mandate is to provide affordable housing.
if the goal is to provide affordable housing, build it in affordable areas - you could then house double or triple the amount of people - otherwise it becomes a lottery where a lucky few get to "move on up".
the govt is overstepping, as usual, thinking it's mandate is to social engineer, when it's actual mandate is to provide affordable housing.
7
The first time I learned something about subsidized housing in the USA was when, fresh out of graduate school but with significant debts, I came to Houston to a good professional job. I went straight to a nice, brand new apartment complex where many units had even garages. No luck; I was told I didn't qualify in terms of income. Used to being a penniless foreign student, I protested that now I have a reasonable income, but that turned out to be exactly the problem: the place was only for low income people.
I went down the street to an identical apartment complex, unsubsidized this time, and the rent was four times higher, simply unaffordable with my salary and my student debt. I ended up living in a 30-year old complex, without even covered parking.
I got to learn that subsidized housing in the US means that after getting a Ph.D. I have to pay taxes so that high-school dropouts may live in housing that I can't afford. "Back to the USSR" for me !
I went down the street to an identical apartment complex, unsubsidized this time, and the rent was four times higher, simply unaffordable with my salary and my student debt. I ended up living in a 30-year old complex, without even covered parking.
I got to learn that subsidized housing in the US means that after getting a Ph.D. I have to pay taxes so that high-school dropouts may live in housing that I can't afford. "Back to the USSR" for me !
15
"I went down the street to an identical apartment complex, unsubsidized this time, and the rent was four times higher..." And how much rent do you suppose the landlord(s) who own these 2 buildings get? Most likely the same amount for each building, except for the affordable complex, the tenant pays 25% of the rent and the government pays the remaining 75%, while in your building, you paid 100% of the rent. That's how subsidies work, "the house never loses".
We are seeing this argument play out around the world. It is cast as a race issue, but is really more of a cultural issue. People are more comfortable around those whose culture is like their own. That is why there is a "Little Italy," "Little Saigon," "Harlem," "Barrio" in many cities. When it is done by other people it is called "cultural diversity" and celebrated. When it is done by rich whites, it is called "racism" and condemned.
People, world wide tend to reject "the other." It is part of the reason why there is so much strife in Europe with their massive flood of refugees, who have a very different culture than their host countries. It is why forced integration is so difficult here in the US. It is also part of the reason why Trump is having such a hard time in Washington. His culture is very different than the accepted norms. The body politic has recognized him as "Other" and is in the process of trying to expel him.
Perhaps part of a solution is to provide "Equal Opportunity" rather than trying to force "Equal Outcomes."
People, world wide tend to reject "the other." It is part of the reason why there is so much strife in Europe with their massive flood of refugees, who have a very different culture than their host countries. It is why forced integration is so difficult here in the US. It is also part of the reason why Trump is having such a hard time in Washington. His culture is very different than the accepted norms. The body politic has recognized him as "Other" and is in the process of trying to expel him.
Perhaps part of a solution is to provide "Equal Opportunity" rather than trying to force "Equal Outcomes."
3
Is it any surprise that a person who has worked hard to save up to own a home in a nice neighborhood would be upset that Section 8 or other low income people will be their new neighbors?
I didn't think so.
I didn't think so.
9
This whole process was described by Theodore J. Lowi in the book "The End of Liberalism", which was published in 1969. In the chapter titled, Federal Urban Policy--What Not to Do and What to Do About Apartheid, Housing Policy in Iron City, Have a Plan When you Plan, he described how federal housing funds were used to maintain segregated neighborhoods in Gadsden, Al. It was and is an excellent book on how federal funds are used for a variety of policy goals, some of which are unintended.
1
Doesn't it make more sense to reduce the number of our fellow citizens who are struggling in poverty? There's plenty we could do.
How about jobs that pay a living wage. Wow - less poverty! And the added benefit of reducing the corporate welfare cycle we are currently stuck in - employers paying poverty wages and getting away with it because social safety nets are "paying" the rest of the wages.
How about a social and corporate cultures and legal structure that do not financially reward owners and upper management for treating employees like chattel?
How about jobs that pay a living wage. Wow - less poverty! And the added benefit of reducing the corporate welfare cycle we are currently stuck in - employers paying poverty wages and getting away with it because social safety nets are "paying" the rest of the wages.
How about a social and corporate cultures and legal structure that do not financially reward owners and upper management for treating employees like chattel?
2
Building a few token drops of low-income housing on expensive land, in an endless sea of upper-income neighborhoods will not be solving poverty or racism any time soon. Pouring the extra money spent on this noble but failed idea into school districts and economic development programs would enrich far more poor lives.
6
Speaking as a veteran teacher, schools will improve when low-income families have stable housing situations where they are not overcrowded.
3
Affordable housing developments create segregation, along with other factors. Dispersed housing seems to be an obvious solution. What are the downsides? Can it create diverse neighborhoods and override the ingrained insularity and class structure that already contribute to our living in segregated communities?
Downsides? Come to NYC and see for yourself how the middle class no longer exists. Projects on one side of the street, billionaires on the other - the middle class moves to Jersey because there is no place to live or raise kids.
3
This is not about race, it is about economics. Warehousing a whole bunch of poor people in a project is not an effective way to fight segregation. People tend to self-segregate as is proven again and again. People live where they can afford to live. I grew up in a trailer park, my children have never even seen one and never will. I worked two sometimes three jobs to put myself through school. When I bought a house, I chose a single family neighborhood with good schools in a diverse city. There were people of all races in my neighborhood and the only criteria for living there was having enough money.
9
The affluent have the privilege of mobility. Eventually they will just move, won't they? Won't the problem just be re-created?
7
Here is some real life, honest perspective.
In 2013, me and my family moved to Belize. We all live side by side. Rich, middle, poor, black, white, Belizeans, Americans, Europeans, Canadians, etc.
We need each other for all services. We respect each other because working together keeps us fed, housed, transported on land and water. We bank together, dine out side by side. Half my Facebook friends are Belizeans. We share our cultural knowledge which allows us to save money and make plans for the future of the country. We influence each other consciously and unconsciously.
I suggest that segregation in the US is toxic to the present and future. When we look on each other in fear, nothing gets better. It's only through day to day contact where opinions change and life is peaceful. The US has been warned by other countries that our national direction is hypocritical. We talk about spreading democracy while we behave like frightened cavemen.
In 2013, me and my family moved to Belize. We all live side by side. Rich, middle, poor, black, white, Belizeans, Americans, Europeans, Canadians, etc.
We need each other for all services. We respect each other because working together keeps us fed, housed, transported on land and water. We bank together, dine out side by side. Half my Facebook friends are Belizeans. We share our cultural knowledge which allows us to save money and make plans for the future of the country. We influence each other consciously and unconsciously.
I suggest that segregation in the US is toxic to the present and future. When we look on each other in fear, nothing gets better. It's only through day to day contact where opinions change and life is peaceful. The US has been warned by other countries that our national direction is hypocritical. We talk about spreading democracy while we behave like frightened cavemen.
Low income people certainly are not my people. Different values, education, views. No thanks.
7
"Low income" doesn't mean one has no class.
Take a closer look at things going on outside your bubble; with all the wealth skewered to the top, and a middle-class barely hanging on, you'd be surprised at how many highly educated low income people there are out there.
Take a closer look at things going on outside your bubble; with all the wealth skewered to the top, and a middle-class barely hanging on, you'd be surprised at how many highly educated low income people there are out there.
1
Ms. McKinney doesn't work and apparently doesn't have a husband, but she does have three children and she wants other people to pay for their upbringing. Poverty is caused by bad choices, not racism. Studies have shown that following a simple formula - finish high school, get a job, get married, have children - in that order, dramatically increases outcomes. Gee, why wouldn't want people like McKinney to move into their neighborhood? It's not her race, it's her values.
9
"I think first we need to build people up in the communities where the poor live. They need affordable rents, in many instances lower crime rates, and jobs."
We've tried all of this. It hasn't worked. Further, we've been trying it for nearly 70 years now. The only thing it's accomplished is the ghettoization of America's urban poor, along with the racial segregation and extreme difficulty in escaping the ghetto that goes hand-in-hand with it.
What *has* worked, however, is integrating affordable housing into parts of a given city that are already economically mixed -- which is the case with Houston's Fountain View project, despite the article's inference to the contrary. (The area adjacent to the Galleria mall has mostly luxury housing, but it's a decidedly different story barely a mile away.) There's a mound of sociological research supporting the notion that families relocated to such areas do significantly better in terms of parents finding (and keeping) reasonably well-paying work, and children performing substantially better in school while also having a much lower propensity to engage in problematic behavior, e.g. truancy from school and petty crime.
Finally, I'm not at all surprised to read The Times's discovery that federal tax credits are disproportionately used for projects in nonwhite communities. America's NIMBY contingents get their way far too often, and it'd be foolish to take their claims that "it's not about race" at face value.
We've tried all of this. It hasn't worked. Further, we've been trying it for nearly 70 years now. The only thing it's accomplished is the ghettoization of America's urban poor, along with the racial segregation and extreme difficulty in escaping the ghetto that goes hand-in-hand with it.
What *has* worked, however, is integrating affordable housing into parts of a given city that are already economically mixed -- which is the case with Houston's Fountain View project, despite the article's inference to the contrary. (The area adjacent to the Galleria mall has mostly luxury housing, but it's a decidedly different story barely a mile away.) There's a mound of sociological research supporting the notion that families relocated to such areas do significantly better in terms of parents finding (and keeping) reasonably well-paying work, and children performing substantially better in school while also having a much lower propensity to engage in problematic behavior, e.g. truancy from school and petty crime.
Finally, I'm not at all surprised to read The Times's discovery that federal tax credits are disproportionately used for projects in nonwhite communities. America's NIMBY contingents get their way far too often, and it'd be foolish to take their claims that "it's not about race" at face value.
1
I'm a low-income young adult who moved to a high income neighborhood in my childhood due to section 8. My family is the scary boogie men so many of the commenters and the white/higher-income persons in the article are fearful of. We are not the ones you should fear.
these conversations are largely built on classism/racism. The belief that low income people equate to crime is highly suspect. Majority of "found" crime is racialized/classiest. Drug consumption is largely similar between races, but policing occurs differently in the third ward than it does in the galleria. Black people are over represented in jail because Johnny 5-0 didn't jail my white friends when they sold pot, but it made sure to make its way through Harlem/South Central/Oakland.
The fear around property value dropping when poor people move in is also built on this system. Why is it financially desirable to live in a racially/$ocially segregated community? You would think all these liberal people would be excited to live their beliefs but I guess not. I would love it if we could begin valuing diverse communities at the truly local level than just saying Houston's diverse as a city, but please don't look at each neighborhood. What if this community started marketing itself around this diversity? What if it shifted people's perception and their property value for the better.
My family did not ruin our neighborhood. We didn't bring crime, but we did play a part in making the US more equitable. You could too.
these conversations are largely built on classism/racism. The belief that low income people equate to crime is highly suspect. Majority of "found" crime is racialized/classiest. Drug consumption is largely similar between races, but policing occurs differently in the third ward than it does in the galleria. Black people are over represented in jail because Johnny 5-0 didn't jail my white friends when they sold pot, but it made sure to make its way through Harlem/South Central/Oakland.
The fear around property value dropping when poor people move in is also built on this system. Why is it financially desirable to live in a racially/$ocially segregated community? You would think all these liberal people would be excited to live their beliefs but I guess not. I would love it if we could begin valuing diverse communities at the truly local level than just saying Houston's diverse as a city, but please don't look at each neighborhood. What if this community started marketing itself around this diversity? What if it shifted people's perception and their property value for the better.
My family did not ruin our neighborhood. We didn't bring crime, but we did play a part in making the US more equitable. You could too.
2
Unfortunately, there will always be segements of the population that rely on the government to live. The federal government has no business bullying local communities to accept these places.
5
Commenters point to the fact that housing discrimination owes much more to class than race. They're right. Race obscures the real chimera of ever-more rigid class—and age— lines..
It's one thing to move upward from lower middle class. It's a completely different colored horse to move from lower-class entrenchment upwards. There is cultural blindness—the woman who wears an evening gown to a job interview, the disabled man whose obesity prevents him from walking, and when asked about a desk job— can only name being the person handing out the checks. Help is needed.
The key is size.
I sent my son to a majority minority private school; my friends were slightly shocked. A friend once asked for the name of my son's African-American piano teacher because she was afraid her son didn't know enough Black people. Exclusive private schools select a handful of minority students, but their number is never allowed to exceed about 10% of the student body. The kids are there so their children can claim to have a diverse background. They're almost like pets.
Take a clue. Size. One five-unit building every six miles might get something done. Two hundred thirty-three will happen. People are afraid of that massive a change. The acceptance of five families in a neighborhood might be possible. I'm not a fan of these massive warehousing projects like Pruitt -Igoe or even of four thousand-student high schools. Mellow out, feds. Incrementalism will get you farther, and last longer.
It's one thing to move upward from lower middle class. It's a completely different colored horse to move from lower-class entrenchment upwards. There is cultural blindness—the woman who wears an evening gown to a job interview, the disabled man whose obesity prevents him from walking, and when asked about a desk job— can only name being the person handing out the checks. Help is needed.
The key is size.
I sent my son to a majority minority private school; my friends were slightly shocked. A friend once asked for the name of my son's African-American piano teacher because she was afraid her son didn't know enough Black people. Exclusive private schools select a handful of minority students, but their number is never allowed to exceed about 10% of the student body. The kids are there so their children can claim to have a diverse background. They're almost like pets.
Take a clue. Size. One five-unit building every six miles might get something done. Two hundred thirty-three will happen. People are afraid of that massive a change. The acceptance of five families in a neighborhood might be possible. I'm not a fan of these massive warehousing projects like Pruitt -Igoe or even of four thousand-student high schools. Mellow out, feds. Incrementalism will get you farther, and last longer.
3
So they must be "wealthy" areas, places middle class whites could not live, once again implying that race automatically leads to wealth, rendering so many white people politically invisible.
6
The article implicitly argues that the tax credit program promotes segregation. This can't possibly be true. In the absence of government support, low-income housing will only appear in low-income neighborhoods. Basic economics dictates that result. The fact that tax credit projects are subject to these economic laws does not mean the production of low-income housing in low-income neighborhoods reinforces income and racial segregation. Yes, it would be nice if developers could promote more economic and racial integration by building more affordable housing in higher income communities. Still, the fact that they succeed at all in this effort means that, on the whole, communities are more integrated than they would have been without the program.
8
Short this! Long It! It's Sam Hill illegal 4 the so-called Treasury Dept- the IRS-2 "run" a housing program, public or private. Houston & the rest of Texas for Sam Hill Douglas truth know it! Race discrimination? What if a tenant or someone with a mortgage in a housing program or a Section 8 voucher program "run" by the Treasury Department- the IRS--has a problem with his, her or their taxes & is audited? What if he, she or they get audited by both the IRS and also Texas as a state. Will such a person or persons be able to claim, then, since they may have something resembling a valid Fair Housing Act of 1968 race discrimination claim, that such a claim or race discrimination also extends to such a person's or persons' tax audit? I.e. could the Lone Star Long Star state of Texas which shouldn't be a tea house or a tree house's revenue collecting entity for state purposes, i.e. Texas's state level IRS/Treasury Dept. analogue, be joined in a race discrimination tax suit with the feds owing to this sort of totally illegal "running" by what is supposed 2 be only a legally valid levying at the federal level entity? Or let's say that such a person or persons can't get a valid tax abstract to submit for Sally Mae or other school student loan financing--even private loans which sometimes require a tax filing. Could such a person or persons in the case of the student loan tax related document procurement bring a Title 9 or 11 education claim against the IRS? This's happened in TX.
As with so many other social issues, Canada seems to have figured this issue out long ago.
Instead of building entire 'low income housing' construction, they require developers to make available a certain percentage of square footage in new units to low income residents. This solves the issue of NIMBY and ghettos.
No one in the buildings has to know who the 'low income' residents are. As with most prejudices, when you get to know 'them', they tend to be just like 'us'.
Instead of building entire 'low income housing' construction, they require developers to make available a certain percentage of square footage in new units to low income residents. This solves the issue of NIMBY and ghettos.
No one in the buildings has to know who the 'low income' residents are. As with most prejudices, when you get to know 'them', they tend to be just like 'us'.
51
They do that here too. In theory. In actuality, many wealthy municipalities skirt or underfill the required low income percentage. Just for fun, here's a map for Massachusetts, where every city and town in MA is required by state law to have 10% of their housing stock as affordable.
http://www.massaffordablehomes.org/localrankings.aspx
http://www.massaffordablehomes.org/localrankings.aspx
Austin, TX has a similar program to what you describe:
http://www.austintexas.gov/news/austin-affordable-housing-development-re...
http://www.austintexas.gov/news/austin-affordable-housing-development-re...
Thank you for this important perspective, I just hope all those who blame the poor for their lack of initiative to "make it" will read this.
1
If housing aid is keeping cities segregated, it's because they are approaching it in the wrong way. Over seventy years, Public housing has built a horrible reputation for itself. Pruitt Igoe. Cabrini Green. Robert Taylor Homes. The projects in New York City that suffer from a lack of maintenance. While newer, low income tax credit housing doesn't meet any of these stereotypes, they still suffer from the bad reputation. You can hardly blame people in well off neighborhoods for opposing low income housing when those are the images it conjures up.
.
At the same time, poorer neighborhoods are just desperate for any sort of new investment. They are tired of the same old deterioration and neglect. They would happily accept low income housing based - because chances are it will be better than what is already there.
.
This is how it plays out in Houston, and I don't think it's the horrible thing that so many advocates make it out to be. Actually I think that Houston's approach is the future of affordable housing. Rather than trying to force affordable housing on so-called "high opportunity" neighborhoods, the goal should be to bring opportunity to the poorer neighborhoods.
.
More specifically, Cities should identify neighborhoods that are in the cusp of gentrification and use housing subsidies there, to help lock in affordable housing to fight displacement.
.
At the same time, poorer neighborhoods are just desperate for any sort of new investment. They are tired of the same old deterioration and neglect. They would happily accept low income housing based - because chances are it will be better than what is already there.
.
This is how it plays out in Houston, and I don't think it's the horrible thing that so many advocates make it out to be. Actually I think that Houston's approach is the future of affordable housing. Rather than trying to force affordable housing on so-called "high opportunity" neighborhoods, the goal should be to bring opportunity to the poorer neighborhoods.
.
More specifically, Cities should identify neighborhoods that are in the cusp of gentrification and use housing subsidies there, to help lock in affordable housing to fight displacement.
30
In January 1966 LBJ proposed fair housing legislation that went into a politically bipartisan black hole. Until April 4, 1968 when it came out of committee and was signed into law within a week of Dr. King's murder on April 11,1968. The law nominally forbids discrimination by any party to a housing choice. But with out testing and enforcement it is woefully weak.
See "A Raisin in the Sun' by Lorraine Hansberry and 'Clybourne Park' by Bruce Norris which provide theatrical context for the real world South Side Chicago housing struggles of the Hansberry family.
See "A Raisin in the Sun' by Lorraine Hansberry and 'Clybourne Park' by Bruce Norris which provide theatrical context for the real world South Side Chicago housing struggles of the Hansberry family.
1
There really doesn't seem to be much doubt that America's continuing failure to improve relations between the races is, to a significant degree, because we have failed to socially integrate. No wonder whites and blacks have such differences in the way they view the police in this country, to take but one example of how we lack an understanding of one another's viewpoint.
I understand that fear of the effect of low income housing in affluent neighborhoods is as much about class as it is race, more so perhaps. But we have to do a much better job in coming up with solutions to combat our social isolation from one another. Otherwise race in America will remain a festering sore even for our children and grandchildren.
I understand that fear of the effect of low income housing in affluent neighborhoods is as much about class as it is race, more so perhaps. But we have to do a much better job in coming up with solutions to combat our social isolation from one another. Otherwise race in America will remain a festering sore even for our children and grandchildren.
18
There is only one real multicolored biological DNA genetic evolutionary fit human race species that began dusky in Africa 250,000+ years ago.
Then there is the white supremacist socioeconomic political educational historical mythology of a black and white race that was used to justify African slavery and African Jim Crow.
In blacks color inextricably ties caste and class together.
What race does half-white by biological nature and all white by cultural nature does Barack Obama belong to?
Then there is the white supremacist socioeconomic political educational historical mythology of a black and white race that was used to justify African slavery and African Jim Crow.
In blacks color inextricably ties caste and class together.
What race does half-white by biological nature and all white by cultural nature does Barack Obama belong to?
1
Putting low income families in high income neighborhoods is not the only way to end the segregation. Alternatively, high and moderate income wage earners could move into the low income neighborhoods, demand better schools, better policing, etc. The fact that those moderate and high income wage earners who support low income housing in wealthy neighborhoods do not avail themselves of this alternative idea tells you all you need to know about hypocrisy and progressive thinking. This is not about race. It is about people's desire to escape poverty and a lower quality of life. But, to my mind, the only real solution is to upgrade poorer neighborhoods, not degrade wealthier ones.
35
I'm not sure what happens where you are, but the scenario you describe (high and moderate income earners moving into formerly low income neighborhoods and getting better schooling and more policing) has been happening throughout New York, and many other northeastern cities, for a few decades now.
It's called gentrification, and it is going on in cities across the country to one degree or another. But the problem with gentrification is that it also serves to displace poorer residents, minority residents, renters, and other lower income residents of the neighborhood. So the end result is generally the same, a lack of class and racial diversity, and a displacement of lower income residents from centrally located neighborhoods to the periphery.
It's called gentrification, and it is going on in cities across the country to one degree or another. But the problem with gentrification is that it also serves to displace poorer residents, minority residents, renters, and other lower income residents of the neighborhood. So the end result is generally the same, a lack of class and racial diversity, and a displacement of lower income residents from centrally located neighborhoods to the periphery.
It's Sam Hill illegal 4 the so-called Treasury Dept- the IRS-2 "run" a housing program, public or private. Houston & the rest of TX 4 Sam Hill Douglas truth know it! Race discrimination? What if a tenant or someone with a mortgage in a housing program or a Section 8 voucher program "run" by the Treasury Department- the IRS--has a problem with his, her or their taxes & is audited? What if he, she or they get audited by both the IRS and also Texas as a state. Will such a person or persons be able to claim, then, since they may have something resembling a valid Fair Housing Act of 1968 race discrimination claim, that such a claim or race discrimination also extends to such a person's or persons' tax audit? I.e. could the Lone Star Long Star state of Texas which shouldn't be a tea house or a tree house's revenue collecting entity w/o state purposes, i.e. Texas's state level IRS/Treasury Dept. analogue, be joined in a race discrimination tax suit with the feds owing to this sort of totally illegal "running" by what is supposed 2 be only a legally valid levying at the federal level entity? & let's say that such a person or persons can't get a valid tax abstract to submit for a Sally Mae or another student loan--even private student loans sometimes require a tax filing. Could such a person or persons in the case of the student loan tax related document procurement bring a Title 9 or 11 race discrimination in education claim against the IRS? This's happened in TX and elsewhere.
Your second paragraph undermines your response. Wealthier people living WITH poorer people is the Progressive goal. We are not talking about wealthier people driving out or displacing poorer people. The Progressive slogan is that we are all in it together. It is not: let me buy inexpensive housing and turn it into expensive housing poorer people can't live in.
Crime goes up, pupil achievement goes down - who wants them?
23
It's illegal 4 the Treasury Dept- the IRS-2 "run" a housing program & it leads to other claims of race discrimination. What if a tenant or a mortgage or a Section 8 voucher holder in a program "run" by the Treasury Department- the IRS--has a problem with his, her or their taxes & is audited? What if he, she or they get audited by each of the IRS & the state of TX as a state alone or as a federales-TX CAN BE SUED AS A FEDERAL ENTITY IN A JOINDER SUIT HERE. THIS HAS HAPPENED. Will such claims of discrimination if valid under the Fair Housing Act of 1968 extend to such a person's or persons' tax audit/s as what are known as attachment discrimination claims? Could the Lone Star Long Star state of Texas, c/shouldn't be a tea house or a tree house's revenue collecting entity w/o state purposes, i.e. Texas's state level IRS/Treasury Dept. analogue, be joined in a race discrimination tax suit with the feds owing to this sort of totally illegal "running" by what is supposed 2 be only a legally valid federal level levy entity? Let's say that such a person or persons can't get a valid tax abstract to submit for a Sally Mae or another student loan-private student loans may also require a parent's or parents' tax filing. Could such a person or persons in the case of the student loan tax related document procurement case bring a Title 9 or 11 race discrimination in education claim against the IRS? This's happened in TX, even when a parent in such a student loan/tax case was white.
I used to live in Houston, in the Fondren-Southwest -harpstown section, from 1991 - 95. This area is about four or so miles from the proposed site.
In the early 1990s, this neighborhood, which was a middle/upper class area, was transformed. A number of apartments were built in the area. The housing authority bought a number of them, and moved section 8 people to this area. Originally these were new apartments which were built before the oil boom crash and the S&Ll crash. Most of these apartments housed well paid oil company workers, now house all section 8.
The crime rate shot up, retail started pulling out, schools went from about 90% white, to 10% white over the past 20 years.
This area borders very heavy Jewish neighborhood (Meyerland). Including the Jewish Center, three temples (reformed, conservative and orthodox), and the city's main Jewish cemetery. The only stability to the area.
So, I am not all all surprised of the reaction of residents of the the Galleria/Memorial area. They have seen what has happened just a few miles south and north of them A similar transfromation was done at North Loop 610N and I45 N.
Sound racist? Maybe. But, in the few years, I lived in the area, and in subsequent visits, If you go west of Hillcrosft, south of US 59 and east of Beltway 8, you are taking your chances. Especially as you go west of Fondren. It changes quickly from safe to very unsafe. Almost as bad as the 3rd and 5th wards, unsafe.
In the early 1990s, this neighborhood, which was a middle/upper class area, was transformed. A number of apartments were built in the area. The housing authority bought a number of them, and moved section 8 people to this area. Originally these were new apartments which were built before the oil boom crash and the S&Ll crash. Most of these apartments housed well paid oil company workers, now house all section 8.
The crime rate shot up, retail started pulling out, schools went from about 90% white, to 10% white over the past 20 years.
This area borders very heavy Jewish neighborhood (Meyerland). Including the Jewish Center, three temples (reformed, conservative and orthodox), and the city's main Jewish cemetery. The only stability to the area.
So, I am not all all surprised of the reaction of residents of the the Galleria/Memorial area. They have seen what has happened just a few miles south and north of them A similar transfromation was done at North Loop 610N and I45 N.
Sound racist? Maybe. But, in the few years, I lived in the area, and in subsequent visits, If you go west of Hillcrosft, south of US 59 and east of Beltway 8, you are taking your chances. Especially as you go west of Fondren. It changes quickly from safe to very unsafe. Almost as bad as the 3rd and 5th wards, unsafe.
43
Nick's description is accurate. I do not live in any of these areas but know them well. His borders by street name comment is also spot on. It is exactly how he is saying. Excellent factual post.
So many problems - like affording housing or health care - come down to insufficient wages for working Americans. We have to structurally fix this with higher incomes for low earners, and moderately higher taxes for the higher earners.
The market will structurally provide products and services to those who can afford them - however, we must structure the market to provide the incomes to participate.
We are all being short changed when working Americans (when we supposedly have low unemployment rates) require subsidies to afford food, shelter, or health care.
Raise the wages and let's keep those subsidies for those who encounter challenges that truly require them.
The market will structurally provide products and services to those who can afford them - however, we must structure the market to provide the incomes to participate.
We are all being short changed when working Americans (when we supposedly have low unemployment rates) require subsidies to afford food, shelter, or health care.
Raise the wages and let's keep those subsidies for those who encounter challenges that truly require them.
11
No higher taxes for the higher "earners" please. They are at 40% PLUS social security on the first 127,200 of their earning and Medicare tax on all of the earnings. Then you can add state income tax on top of all that. The people that can afford a tax hike are those paying 15-20% on their "unearned" dividends and capital gains.
1
Sure. You can raise my taxes just as soon as you've also put concrete steps in place that will discourage illegitimacy. Until then, get lost.
It seems a strong-armed way to approach this - such a large, all-affordable project seems a difficult proposition. Does this Federal tax credit not allow "mixed-income" projects ? Why not seed such development monies for smaller, in-fil mixed income building that might meet less resistance ? Probably more compelling than trying to build housing would be to take steps to insure that public schools in poorer areas are on a par with wealthier districts - this is the most unjust thing of all.
5
There's alot of new middle class housing being built on what was formerly cow pastures in around Houston. My subdivision is segregated the subdivision adjacent to me with more expensive houses is mostly black another mostly Mexican is also near me. This is common so if real estate are steering people to segregated neighborhoods or people want to live that way. There's a wealthy indian enclave here so some people do chose to live with their own.
Wealthy mostly whites are moving into the center of the city. People buy a property with a 1200 square foot house and put in a 4000 square foot one in its place. This is occurring in the poorest neighborhoods and not just middle class ones. They are also tearing down middle class and poor apartment buildings and putting up luxury apartments. When the wealthy move into a poor neighbor the scream about the crime and homeless. Which is only natural if you bought a 750 thousand dollar condo next to a men's homeless shelter.
The middle class has a place to go there are plenty of middle apartments being built so much so there's a glut far away from the center of the like those recently built in my area. Alot of of apartments are empty. When is the city going to figure it's cheaper to house displaced poor in them?
Proving we aren't backward they are building a shelter for abused women and their kids they say. It's bigger than some hotels with no parking. We got a two day notice so there were no public hearings.
Wealthy mostly whites are moving into the center of the city. People buy a property with a 1200 square foot house and put in a 4000 square foot one in its place. This is occurring in the poorest neighborhoods and not just middle class ones. They are also tearing down middle class and poor apartment buildings and putting up luxury apartments. When the wealthy move into a poor neighbor the scream about the crime and homeless. Which is only natural if you bought a 750 thousand dollar condo next to a men's homeless shelter.
The middle class has a place to go there are plenty of middle apartments being built so much so there's a glut far away from the center of the like those recently built in my area. Alot of of apartments are empty. When is the city going to figure it's cheaper to house displaced poor in them?
Proving we aren't backward they are building a shelter for abused women and their kids they say. It's bigger than some hotels with no parking. We got a two day notice so there were no public hearings.
7
There is a lot of fact in Joe's post. My only offering would be that wealthy non-whites are also doing the same thing as moving "into the city" and building newer larger homes/townhomes in previously or currently poor areas. The issue is far less about white people than it is about middle class and wealthier people making choices and poorer people seeing rising rents or property taxes as a result of area development.
1
Housing projects that concentrate poverty in specific locations, whether in affluent neighbourhoods or not, are not really "integrated", and can have distorting effects on the surrounding areas. I'd rather see that federal money go to housing vouchers that can be used by low income residents to rent apartments on the open market. This will more evenly distribute them among our communities and not have specific instances of NIMBYism
8
We already have that program. It's called Section 8.
But the amount vouchered has to be sufficient to afford an apartment in that local area, and landlords have to take them. Here in NYC the average allowance for a 2 bedroom apartment is just over $1,000 per month. Clearly way too low to rent most 2 bedroom apartments in the city. And there is nothing that compels landlords to take Section 8 vouchers, so in a highly competitive rental market like the one in the NYC area, most landlords outside of the most depressed areas simply turn down any potential tenants who come to them with a Section 8 voucher.
But the amount vouchered has to be sufficient to afford an apartment in that local area, and landlords have to take them. Here in NYC the average allowance for a 2 bedroom apartment is just over $1,000 per month. Clearly way too low to rent most 2 bedroom apartments in the city. And there is nothing that compels landlords to take Section 8 vouchers, so in a highly competitive rental market like the one in the NYC area, most landlords outside of the most depressed areas simply turn down any potential tenants who come to them with a Section 8 voucher.
Housing in general and especially housing for lower income people should be focused in areas where there are jobs and/or good public transportation. Where I live most wealthy communities have neither. Color mix is secondary.
14
It is both social & racial. I live in Houston for about 40 years, and I know it.
I bought my first house about 35 years ago in a 95% white middle-low income neighborhood in Houston. Once Blacks moved in a bit, white began moving out gradually. Pretty soon, the house price became stagnant and the neighborhood became black dominant.
Now I live in a good neighborhood near Houston Medical Center, and my daughters live in adjacent neighborhood across the bayou. Although we have the same zip code, but their area has many rental apartments close to their subdivision. Their designated local elementary school are filled with minority students (black & Hispanic) with few white & Asian students. Although the subdivision are white dominated, but the Longfellow Elemental school was rated C in HISD scoreboard published by Houston Chronicle this year. Several adjacent elementary schools such as Horn, Roberts, West University, and Twain all rated A+.
The only logical conclusion is that the low-income apartment residents do bring down the school score and house valuation eventually. That is why white & upper income residents don't like apartment in the neighborhood.
I bought my first house about 35 years ago in a 95% white middle-low income neighborhood in Houston. Once Blacks moved in a bit, white began moving out gradually. Pretty soon, the house price became stagnant and the neighborhood became black dominant.
Now I live in a good neighborhood near Houston Medical Center, and my daughters live in adjacent neighborhood across the bayou. Although we have the same zip code, but their area has many rental apartments close to their subdivision. Their designated local elementary school are filled with minority students (black & Hispanic) with few white & Asian students. Although the subdivision are white dominated, but the Longfellow Elemental school was rated C in HISD scoreboard published by Houston Chronicle this year. Several adjacent elementary schools such as Horn, Roberts, West University, and Twain all rated A+.
The only logical conclusion is that the low-income apartment residents do bring down the school score and house valuation eventually. That is why white & upper income residents don't like apartment in the neighborhood.
15
Bellaire high school is considered to be very high quality. If you check its data, you will see that it doesn't support your conclusion. Majority Hispanic, equal white and black, and 46% on supplemental meal program.
This is like being "shocked" to find gambling at Rick's place in Casablanca, and it shows how little attention most people pay to public housing. Large public housing developments have pretty much always been ghettoized, with a resulting loss of value in adjacent areas. I don't know that housing experts have come up to any win-win solution to this problems -- although the often-vague idea of "scatter site housing" is sometimes put forth. Articles like this will have value if they encourage public discussion of what has for too long been an obscure area of public policy -- one that in its way is as toxic as school busing for integration.
3
Perhaps the government should concentrate on improving the poor areas schools, housing, crime instead of saying the answer is to move a few into better neighborhoods. The rationale from the advocates is not logical in that you save a few who are lucky enough to win the lottery and leave the rest and turn your back on the poor neighborhood. If we don't fix the poor neighborhoods with better housing, schools, etc. they will remain as they are, rescuing a few is not a solution.
12
This seems more of a class/socioeconomic status issue than a racial issue. The article did not provide any evidence to distinguish whether this is a story about "white" people not wanting "minority" people to move into their neighborhoods or about "affluent" people not wanting "poor" people to move into their neighborhoods. I sense that it is more likely that the latter is true.
When my parents and I moved to the US in the early 90s, we lived in poor neighborhoods because that's all we could afford. We were completely caught off guard that our neighbors had such bad habits--partying up until 2 or 3am on weekdays; the inside of their apartments looked like years of filth had built up because no one knew how to clean; letting their kids run wild and break not only thing things but other people's things without consequence; not caring that their kids did well in school or that education was even a priority, etc. The list goes on and on. Also, the neighborhood was predominantly white.
I don't blame people in affluent neighborhoods for not wanting poor people to move in. They have completely different lifestyles and values--that's not something that is going to change just by moving their zipcode by a few digits. Poor people who are poor because they uprooted their lives and moved to a new country for a better life won't be poor for long. They will move up the socioeconomic ladder. Poor people who are poor because they have made poor choices in life are likely to stay poor.
When my parents and I moved to the US in the early 90s, we lived in poor neighborhoods because that's all we could afford. We were completely caught off guard that our neighbors had such bad habits--partying up until 2 or 3am on weekdays; the inside of their apartments looked like years of filth had built up because no one knew how to clean; letting their kids run wild and break not only thing things but other people's things without consequence; not caring that their kids did well in school or that education was even a priority, etc. The list goes on and on. Also, the neighborhood was predominantly white.
I don't blame people in affluent neighborhoods for not wanting poor people to move in. They have completely different lifestyles and values--that's not something that is going to change just by moving their zipcode by a few digits. Poor people who are poor because they uprooted their lives and moved to a new country for a better life won't be poor for long. They will move up the socioeconomic ladder. Poor people who are poor because they have made poor choices in life are likely to stay poor.
46
You saved me a lot of typing; thank you. Having a recent experience with having to move into low-income housing because of a temporary chronic unemployment issue, I found all of what you said to be true, and I was shocked at the lack of basic and decent values displayed by "poor" people. I was also shocked by the sense of entitlement -- like better off people "owed" them something simply because they existed and others had means. I never want to be forced into a situation like that again. It is like a living hell putting up with that type of lifestyle forced upon you simply by unfortunate and unwelcome happenchance.
3
You hit the nail on the head.
When people from New Orleans were relocated to Houston immediately after
hurricane Katrina the crime rate markedly increased. I'm sure the "white" residents of the community who objected to a low income housing project
in their midst were mindful of that truth while they let their thoughts be known to the city government.
After Katrina the New Orleans government decided to not rebuild the many housing projects throughout the city. After the people who had been living in those projects were relocated throughout the city guess what happened? The crime spread like a red ant mound poked with a stick. New Orleans has a murder rate three times worse than Chicago, but it is no longer confined to a few well demarcated areas. The police only solve 20% of their murder cases.
I used to be a Realtor. I know fair housing laws. I met many people, white people, who had aspirations of living in a "nice" neighborhood for all of the same reasons, but they simply could not afford it. It's completely legal and acceptable to discriminate against people based upon their ability to pay for a property. Our system of property laws is what makes this country so strong. Those countries with weak property laws also have weak systems of government. Research what it takes to buy a house in Haiti, for an extreme example, or Egypt.
There is more than one source of misleading rhetoric on this issue of housing for the "disadvantaged".
hurricane Katrina the crime rate markedly increased. I'm sure the "white" residents of the community who objected to a low income housing project
in their midst were mindful of that truth while they let their thoughts be known to the city government.
After Katrina the New Orleans government decided to not rebuild the many housing projects throughout the city. After the people who had been living in those projects were relocated throughout the city guess what happened? The crime spread like a red ant mound poked with a stick. New Orleans has a murder rate three times worse than Chicago, but it is no longer confined to a few well demarcated areas. The police only solve 20% of their murder cases.
I used to be a Realtor. I know fair housing laws. I met many people, white people, who had aspirations of living in a "nice" neighborhood for all of the same reasons, but they simply could not afford it. It's completely legal and acceptable to discriminate against people based upon their ability to pay for a property. Our system of property laws is what makes this country so strong. Those countries with weak property laws also have weak systems of government. Research what it takes to buy a house in Haiti, for an extreme example, or Egypt.
There is more than one source of misleading rhetoric on this issue of housing for the "disadvantaged".
18
Culturally and sociologically, it's a great concept. However, property values take a huge hit, and people who paid hard-earned money for a home don't want to take a loss on their investment. It's harsh, but it's the reality.
17
This is what democrats lost the election. Giving goodies to low income, expansion of Medicaid to 20 million poor and focus on LGBT rights. Instead they should have focused on middle class job devestation by offshoring, outsourcing, illlegal allies and h1b visas. Democrats went too far when they distributed middle class jobs to others, not a way to win elections.
21
I agree 100%! Giving the poor handouts with the logic that it will make them into working class, while outsourcing the working class economy to China & Mexico is a sick and twisted joke. Imposing socialist principals into health care in a fully democratic marketplace and wondering why premiums have skyrocketed? That is just plain stupid. The theory that putting low class poor into rich neighborhoods will somehow make them working class is nothing short of home invasion.
1
There is an extensive and well researched group of studies led by Doug Massey of Princeton University that should be basis for this article.
Federal policy extending back to New Deal and its redlining maps remains at the core of race and real estate.
Federal policy extending back to New Deal and its redlining maps remains at the core of race and real estate.
1
If you can trust the reporting of The New York Times, and these days who doesn't, about 2/3 of census tracts in the nation's hundred largest metro areas have a majority white population. 46% of new tax-credit projects [low income housing] have been built in those tracts since 2000.
The Times might take a moment of two from its every-problem-is-racism/segregation to compare and contrast the socio-economic impacts of the placement of federally mandated housing in white and non-white census tracts.
The Times might also report how many individual housing UNITS have been built in the respective census tracts. Simply referring to PROJECTS as the unit of measurement is very low information. The Times might also include some solid numbers indicating the demand/supply for low income housing in the respective census tracts.
To its credit, The Times did refer to the Fountain View Drive project as a 233-unit building. It would have been helpful if the proposed number of occupants had been included. Does this particular project contribute anything to the Times' perceived housing problems in Houston, or does it just give fair housing advocates another excuse for existence?
The Times might take a moment of two from its every-problem-is-racism/segregation to compare and contrast the socio-economic impacts of the placement of federally mandated housing in white and non-white census tracts.
The Times might also report how many individual housing UNITS have been built in the respective census tracts. Simply referring to PROJECTS as the unit of measurement is very low information. The Times might also include some solid numbers indicating the demand/supply for low income housing in the respective census tracts.
To its credit, The Times did refer to the Fountain View Drive project as a 233-unit building. It would have been helpful if the proposed number of occupants had been included. Does this particular project contribute anything to the Times' perceived housing problems in Houston, or does it just give fair housing advocates another excuse for existence?
4
Why should it be public policy to insert clusters of low income people into affluent neighborhoods? It's one thing to use tax payers funds to help people acquire minimum standards of livability, but quite another to forcibly intrude into the hard earned ambiance of an affluent neighborhood by installing a high density housing project somewhere in it's midst.
24
I live in a suburban bubble of Houston. I lived within about 2 miles of this area for about 15 years. I think that building low income housing in this area is just fine. There is a bus line here that provides good transportation, stores are close by and prices are the same as out here in my bubble. Btw, I would welcome low income housing in my area. NPR and pbs just recently aired shows about how very difficult it is for folks with section 8 vouchers to find a decent place to live. They mentioned a similar situation near McKinney Texas where folks screamed real loud when they heard low income housing was coming to their neighborhood. Whites gentrifying low income neighborhoods can't be stopped and low income housing in high dollar neighborhoods should not be stopped either. We enslaved blacks horribly, affirmative action to help low income folks is the right thing to do. It's the right thing to do. It's the right thing to do.
3
I think every New York Times executive who lives in a nice Manhattan coop in mostly white neighborhoods, should urge their coop boards to purchase units in their buildings when they come on the market, and lease them to non-working heads of households through the Section 8 program. Fair is fair.
65
"People can make all the excuses in the world about why affordable housing should not be built in their communities, but it is essential to do so if we want to break the cycle of multi-generational poverty."
a writer offers the above hypothesis without offering one iota of proof. even if there was a grain of truth to it who cares. I do not want myself or my children be part of some grand social experiment foisted upon me by the elites on power.
just for the record the great proponent of public education and integration Al Sharpton send his children to private schools.
a writer offers the above hypothesis without offering one iota of proof. even if there was a grain of truth to it who cares. I do not want myself or my children be part of some grand social experiment foisted upon me by the elites on power.
just for the record the great proponent of public education and integration Al Sharpton send his children to private schools.
2
This is a slanted and structurally prejudiced article.
Historically, NY's minority communities, pre-public-housing, were pushed from one fringe neighborhood to the next.
The notorious "Five Points" where NYPD headquarters sits today, was the site of the open sewage collection pond and NY's most notorious slums. The Draft Riots of 1863 pushed many free-black out of NY altogether. The creation of Central Park, while glorious for Fifth Avenue, displaced a poor shanty town occupied by the lower classes and minority. Lincoln Center, and other Robert Moses directed "Urban Renewal" efforts displaced San Juan Hill and helped concentrate the poor in Harlem causing black and white middle class owners to feel overwhelmed and flee.
An argument can be just as easily advanced, in other words, that rich white developers looking for 'the next neighborhood opportunity' as speculators have been equally guilty of displacing the poor and cynically using housing programs to plot their next "thirty year buy and hold strategy."
Historically, NY's minority communities, pre-public-housing, were pushed from one fringe neighborhood to the next.
The notorious "Five Points" where NYPD headquarters sits today, was the site of the open sewage collection pond and NY's most notorious slums. The Draft Riots of 1863 pushed many free-black out of NY altogether. The creation of Central Park, while glorious for Fifth Avenue, displaced a poor shanty town occupied by the lower classes and minority. Lincoln Center, and other Robert Moses directed "Urban Renewal" efforts displaced San Juan Hill and helped concentrate the poor in Harlem causing black and white middle class owners to feel overwhelmed and flee.
An argument can be just as easily advanced, in other words, that rich white developers looking for 'the next neighborhood opportunity' as speculators have been equally guilty of displacing the poor and cynically using housing programs to plot their next "thirty year buy and hold strategy."
4
First government health care for all, next government housing for all, and pretty soon you'll find yourself in a Communist society. Good job Americans on this anniversary of your independence.
Demands that involve the labor of others (such as housing and health care) can never be natural rights.
Demands that involve the labor of others (such as housing and health care) can never be natural rights.
5
The article's premise is utter nonsense. The program isn't causing segregation. If it disappeared tomorrow, not a single eligible minority would have the means to move into a "wealthy" neighborhood, by definition. Let's take a deep breath and separate fact from progressive passion, shall we NY Times?
11
You need to get out more. It helps to move from places like Noo Yawk to a place like this, where it becomes manifestly clear that class, and not ethnicity ('cause we're scolded for using that bad old word "race") is the issue.
There's a big difference between initial states of poverty, and poverty as a way of life.
There's also a difference between people with middle-class values who happen to be without resources sufficient to their needs, and people whose values have been distorted over generations until one ends up with total and complete dysfunction.
Travel overseas for awhile; visit impoverished countries where "the poor" are not one lump stratus. There are very poor people with enormous dignity and self-respect, and then there are others, without it. The former invest in their children's education at enormous sacrifice; the latter want their kids to start bringing in cash as soon as they can stand upright.
Who would you want to live with?
There's a big difference between initial states of poverty, and poverty as a way of life.
There's also a difference between people with middle-class values who happen to be without resources sufficient to their needs, and people whose values have been distorted over generations until one ends up with total and complete dysfunction.
Travel overseas for awhile; visit impoverished countries where "the poor" are not one lump stratus. There are very poor people with enormous dignity and self-respect, and then there are others, without it. The former invest in their children's education at enormous sacrifice; the latter want their kids to start bringing in cash as soon as they can stand upright.
Who would you want to live with?
14
For some strange reason, Liberals and their cheerleaders at NYT believe that taking money from the rich and showering it over the poor is going to make the rich - or even just the middle class - think the poor earned the wealth Liberals handed over.
For some strange reason, Liberals and their cheerleaders at NYT believe that crowding poor non-whites into a neighborhood with richer whites is going to somehow convince the rich whites that the poor non-whites are their equals.
For some strange reason, Liberals and their cheerleaders at NYT believe that if they keep doing the same thing, it will somehow work out, this time.
The phrase "putting lipstick on a pig" comes to mind.
For some strange reason, Liberals and their cheerleaders at NYT believe that crowding poor non-whites into a neighborhood with richer whites is going to somehow convince the rich whites that the poor non-whites are their equals.
For some strange reason, Liberals and their cheerleaders at NYT believe that if they keep doing the same thing, it will somehow work out, this time.
The phrase "putting lipstick on a pig" comes to mind.
16
The real reason why affordable housing is where it is, it's because of available zoned land and land prices. And this issue is overrated: only 1/3rd of areas of big cities are predominantly nonewhite, and 54% of affordable housing projects are in those areas. That's actually not that bad. It means 46% of these developments are in white areas. In rural areas, the percentage is higher.
2
I would posit that Houston, with its huge metro footprint, is the wrong example. Segregation is greatest in cities with older and many suburbs, such as in the northeast, where boundary lines are drawn by political subdivisions. Those political units are like fortresses. When, after years of white flight, the Supreme Court, in the cowardly Milliken decision, exempted suburbs from central-city school desegregation orders, the hope of Brown v Bd of Ed to desegregate public schools was squashed. But a later decision came to the exactly opposite conclusion for public housing, permitting the Chicago housing authority to include suburbs in its plans for low-income housing. Maybe the die was cast with Milliken. Why, after all of these years since then (1976), the problem of housing desegregation persists, is a mystery. Clearly it's a case of enforcement, because the tools are available but apparently not being used. Politicians will respond to their constituents, but it shouldn't matter when it comes to enforcing constitutionally-protected rights. Perhaps those well-meaning bureaucrats who make these decisions about where to locate new housing live in the white-majority suburbs and, unwittingly or not, prefer to keep it that way?
It's not about race, it's about money and culture.
If you are skeptical of this, just consider why Ben Carson is so beloved by the right.
If you are skeptical of this, just consider why Ben Carson is so beloved by the right.
5
Gentrification of existing neighborhoods may provide some clues for ways to improve poor neighborhoods. Most people just want the best housing they can afford in a safe neighborhood. Outdated or dilapidated kitchens, bathrooms, electrical service or heating systems that decrease the value of one home on a street negatively affect the value of all the others. Conversely, renovating existing houses raises the value of those that have not been renovated.
Increased lighting, school improvements, seed money for individual home renovations, small scale development that does not funnel the money to giant complexes will help breathe new life into older neighborhoods.
The problem is not where the neighborhood is, but the condition the neighborhood has been allowed to deteriorate into. Allowing property owners to rent inferior units is a code enforcement problem-fix it, and they will come.
Increased lighting, school improvements, seed money for individual home renovations, small scale development that does not funnel the money to giant complexes will help breathe new life into older neighborhoods.
The problem is not where the neighborhood is, but the condition the neighborhood has been allowed to deteriorate into. Allowing property owners to rent inferior units is a code enforcement problem-fix it, and they will come.
3
It's not race. it's economics. My parents rented a two-bedroom, one bath house in the Park Cities, Dallas, Texas. While the schools in the Park Cities were excellent, I was pretty much excluded from social activities because I just couldn't afford to participate and our family lacked a car. The exclusions weren't on purpose, but when you can't be around the cool kids, you don't get invited. I often wished my parents had picked a more middle-class locale in which to live so we could have fit in better. The same will happen to the kids who wind up in this Galleria development. My mom thought that if I hung out with wealthy kids I would become wealthy some day, too. It only works that way in comic books.
11
This is exactly the issue that was addressed by the Westchester County housing settlement. Over the past few years 750 units of affordable housing have been built in very affluent towns (like Chappaqua, Rye and Mamaroneck) in Westchester County, NY. It hasn't been easy, but it worked. People can make all the excuses in the world about why affordable housing should not be built in their communities, but it is essential to do so if we want to break the cycle of multi-generational poverty.
1
Hard labor for low wages requires intense motivation. Before the welfare entitlements of the 1960s and better jobs for women, a father’s paycheck was necessary for his family to survive. Now - no longer necessary - millions of unmarried men need not work to feed, clothe or shelter families. They need never face their hungry child or suffer tender emotions. They need not be deterred by a prison term, nor fear the drug lifestyle - nor cling to a job.
If low-wage fathers stay inessential, we will continue routing whole communities of women and children into poverty - and great masses of unmarried, unmotivated men into rootless, antisocial, violent criminality.
If low-wage fathers stay inessential, we will continue routing whole communities of women and children into poverty - and great masses of unmarried, unmotivated men into rootless, antisocial, violent criminality.
10
There are more and more white, college-educated young people looking for affordable housing in big cities like New York. When you're paying off big student loans, you just can't afford middle-class housing at today's rents.
4
Reading the comments, I see little understanding of the tax credit program. This program houses people who have incomes of 50 - 80% area median income. In Houston this would be $27,000 - $43,350 for a family of 4. In New York City it means $47,700 - 76,300. These are hardly POOR families. They are working families like all of us - struggling to make it on minimum wage or slightly higher in communities that are gentrifying and leaving them out of the cold. EVERYONE deserves a decent place to live.
4
it's far cheaper and much more socially effective to use vouchers so people can rent homes in any neighborhood. if the city government supplied the vouchers, then poor families would be dispersed throughout the city and not concentrated in buildings that stigmatize them. these instant slums are, in effect, a paternalistic and racist approach akin to Indian reservations.
3
"Elected officials sided with the opposition"...You mean the elected officials sided with their constituents.
10
A confusing article. This doesn't seem to have anything to do with segregation. This is simply rich people not interested in mingling with poor people. The neighborhood is probably interesting in financing the housing, but tucking it away in an area that will not affect their environment. The article poorly justifies the benefits of placing these projects in particular locations. Seems to me, the poor tenants would simply be further isolated because they would be surrounded by amenities they would be able to afford (food, entertainment, etc.)
4
How is this fair for me, a middle class white man, for a poor family to have the chance to live in a wealthy white suburb, while i do not have that opportunity. I would like to live there too! I cant afford it but do i get assistance to live in a better community? No i don't. I'm educated, work hard, but again the white man is left out in the cold. This is why people like Trump get elected when we see this nonsense being perpetuated upon decent hard working people who served their country.
15
The more money spent on land, the less money that remains for construction of actual housing. As a taxpayer, it makes sense to me that tax dollars should serve as many needy people as possible in a way that will not reduce future public revenue sources. For all of the people who had no clue how middle America could vote for President Trump, this kind of stuff is exactly why he's in office. If keeping public housing in poor neighborhoods looks like racial segregation, perhaps more non-Latino and non- black working poor should have a section 8 grant. And before any of you label this writer a racist, let me assure you that my high melanin daughter and her higher melanin Cuban father would highly disagree that such a label applies to me. God bless America.
4
When Hillary allows low income housing next to her multi million dollar compound in upstate NY, then we can talk.
29
And when Donald Trump allows low income housing next to Mar-a-Lago, we can talk....which means it won't be anytime soon.
1
Trump is not the one putting forth dopey ideas like this one.
1
Urban housing segregation remains a persistent roadblock to equality for black Americans. It is a cause of poorer health, poorer schooling, higher unemployment. This was documented in the classic 1986 book by Douglas Massey and Nancy Denton, American Apartheid. they showed that even middle-class blacks are victims.
The 1968 Fair Housing Act, the last of the three major civil rights laws passed by President Lyndon Johnson and the Democratic Congress, has sadly been ignored and evaded by the fears of white Americans. America's original sin of racism and slavery continues to mar our search for "a more perfect union".
The 1968 Fair Housing Act, the last of the three major civil rights laws passed by President Lyndon Johnson and the Democratic Congress, has sadly been ignored and evaded by the fears of white Americans. America's original sin of racism and slavery continues to mar our search for "a more perfect union".
They NYT can take their "social justice" issues and put it where the sun doesn't shine. It is far more logical to build low income housing on less expensive land, where the money saved could be use to build better quality facilities.
This is not about race it's about folk who put a large chunk of their resources into a nice home in an area free of crime and violence why would you "social justice" folk insist that they give that up?
This is not about race it's about folk who put a large chunk of their resources into a nice home in an area free of crime and violence why would you "social justice" folk insist that they give that up?
12
Any city that bills itself as a Sanctuary City should have no problem providing low income housing in its wealthiest areas.
If the residents of those Sanctuary Cities truly want to show how kind, compassionate, and altruistic they are, they should welcome illegal alien criminals to live right beside and among them. Or at the VERY least, low income people.
Otherwise, I don't want to hear any more garbage from hypocrites about how we should have Sanctuary Cities.
If the residents of those Sanctuary Cities truly want to show how kind, compassionate, and altruistic they are, they should welcome illegal alien criminals to live right beside and among them. Or at the VERY least, low income people.
Otherwise, I don't want to hear any more garbage from hypocrites about how we should have Sanctuary Cities.
13
Why should the wealthy want or need to have the trashy poor any where near themselves; segregation will always exist, the lack of propriety, cleanliness, tidiness, civility, education, work ethic and drive exists as a forever wedge that can never be overcome! We waste many Tax Dollars on eternal losers!
9
What makes you think that poor Blacks and Hispanics have this burning desire to live in prosperous white neighborhoods where they are a tiny minority? I bet they probably would prefer this housing in their existing neighborhoods.
7
Blaming Federal housing programs for residential segregation is mistaken. Residential segregation persists because of political decisions made at the local, state and federal levels. Nothing in federal legislation inhibits local or state officials from building subsidized housing wherever they want. At the federal level, Congress could empower HUD to do what housing reformers many years ago suggested, build very large new communities on vacant land, communities that were integrated in terms of both income and identity. Anyone truly committed to integrated housing would support large new communities connected to job centers by new public transportation.
In the meantime, it is also mistaken to deny low income families decent affordable housing because their local government will build it only in low-income neighborhoods.Over the years, those who have attacked federal housing programs for not promoting integration have almost always been people who already have decent affordable housing. Those who need better housing have almost always welcomed it wherever it was built.
In the meantime, it is also mistaken to deny low income families decent affordable housing because their local government will build it only in low-income neighborhoods.Over the years, those who have attacked federal housing programs for not promoting integration have almost always been people who already have decent affordable housing. Those who need better housing have almost always welcomed it wherever it was built.
19
Integration is the brief period between the first black arrival and the last white flight.
1
People need affordable housing in areas that also offer relatively easy commuting to places where they can find paid employment. That is what matters most, not the ethnicity of near neighbors.
56
What matters most is not the ethnicity but the culture of the near neighbors. Are they from a noisy culture, do their children have a background where being cool is being a hoodlum?
1
Kudos for identifying the mass transit component. You could live only a mile or two away from the city center and have it seem insurmountable if you were transportationally challenged, or live ten miles away with a robust transit system and feel connected.
Except white people do not want to live near too many black African Americans even if they are named Obama, Jordan, Powell, Carter, Combs and Winfrey.
1
The disparity between "good" neighborhoods and "bad" neighborhoods comes down to the tax base, and how tax revenues are spent. Better neighborhoods produce more taxes, which in turn, are reinvested in the local area. If we really want to make all communities better, it seems we should rethink how we spend local tax revenue.
When wealth is in concentrated areas, it prevents states from fairly or equitability serving all its citizens...most glaring of which is our school system. Time and time again, studies have shown that good schools are a good predictor to a student's long term success. Yet we still don't try to change a system that is clearly skewed toward the wealthy. Until this tax-based funding system is changed, we will continue to have these circular conversations about who should, or should not be "allowed" to live where.
When wealth is in concentrated areas, it prevents states from fairly or equitability serving all its citizens...most glaring of which is our school system. Time and time again, studies have shown that good schools are a good predictor to a student's long term success. Yet we still don't try to change a system that is clearly skewed toward the wealthy. Until this tax-based funding system is changed, we will continue to have these circular conversations about who should, or should not be "allowed" to live where.
28
So many things here are factually wrong here.
1. The real estate in the Galleria area is obscenely expensive - really not a good place to waste public $.
2. The Gallaria area has terribly public schools. The only good school, TH Rogers, is a G&T Vanguard school that can only be entered through tests AND a lottery open to everyone living in Houston ISD.
3. The obscenely rich, living in multimillion dollar houses on acre lots nearby, mostly gave up on public schools they already pay for and send their kids to private schools.
4. Since Houston ISD is huge, you cannot blame location taxation and funding for poor public schools in the area. You cannot blame the teachers either since these schools are WELL FUNDED. It's the students and families that are detrimental to the school quality in the area.
1. The real estate in the Galleria area is obscenely expensive - really not a good place to waste public $.
2. The Gallaria area has terribly public schools. The only good school, TH Rogers, is a G&T Vanguard school that can only be entered through tests AND a lottery open to everyone living in Houston ISD.
3. The obscenely rich, living in multimillion dollar houses on acre lots nearby, mostly gave up on public schools they already pay for and send their kids to private schools.
4. Since Houston ISD is huge, you cannot blame location taxation and funding for poor public schools in the area. You cannot blame the teachers either since these schools are WELL FUNDED. It's the students and families that are detrimental to the school quality in the area.
I agree that all students should have equal access to quality public schools. That said, I'm not convinced that changing the funding system alone will magically fix the problems. Kids who go to well funded schools also have parents who have educations, can help with homework, can provide books and access to quality summer programs, etc. Kids in underfunded schools often (not always, of course) come from troubled homes, lack quality nutrition, have to work to help support their families, and sometimes have parents (or just one parent) who cannot give them the support they need to do well in school. I also don't agree that every student who has access to a good school is "wealthy," as you suggest. I am an educator and I know lots of low-to-middle-class students in my area who are getting perfectly fine educations in their public schools. Not elite, but perfectly good. I really don't like the way the middle-class is being vilified as "privileged" and "wealthy" these days--I thought a middle-class lifestyle was what we were all aspiring towards. Isn't it supposed to be a good thing? I'm not saying we don't need to do more to help underprivileged kids to get ahead. We definitely do. But I'm not sure your assessment of the problem is entirely right.
1
The federal government pours Title 1 money into low income area schools. Baltimore, for example, has one of the highest per pupil spending rates in the nation. It hasn't improved student outcomes. Throwing money at failing schools has never worked and it never will.
1
Social engineering doesn't do any good. It just causes middle class flight and leaves communities and schools more segregated than before, because behaviors common in the underclass are intolerable to middle class people.
We must never discriminate on the basis of ethnicity race, but there are large differences in behavior as a consequence of social class and culture, and these cannot be overlooked. As someone who lives in a mixed neighborhood, I'm personally tolerant, but most middle class people just wouldn't tolerate the shootings and stabbings, boom cars, trash, pit bulls, drug dealing, or the people who think it's OK to blast awful music outside their house.
There really has to be a live-and-let-live attitude if the melting pot is to work as it historically has. As offspring become more educated, they will leave the ghetto and assimilate, as my own immigrant ancestors did. Well-meaning but misguided attempts to hurry that process are doomed to failure and can in fact retard it.
We must never discriminate on the basis of ethnicity race, but there are large differences in behavior as a consequence of social class and culture, and these cannot be overlooked. As someone who lives in a mixed neighborhood, I'm personally tolerant, but most middle class people just wouldn't tolerate the shootings and stabbings, boom cars, trash, pit bulls, drug dealing, or the people who think it's OK to blast awful music outside their house.
There really has to be a live-and-let-live attitude if the melting pot is to work as it historically has. As offspring become more educated, they will leave the ghetto and assimilate, as my own immigrant ancestors did. Well-meaning but misguided attempts to hurry that process are doomed to failure and can in fact retard it.
21
Simple enough. It's called living in an era where the rich and the elitists reign supreme, so afraid someone else is getting something for "free". Welcome to our new age of politically motivated economic divide and conquer mindset where a new level of money centric arrogance rules all. Working poor and disabled get kicked to the curb in the rush to 'have it all' by smirky, self-satisfied frat boys and silver spooned real estate and media moguls egging on their dumb brethren to join in on the bullying.
New level of low for America.
New level of low for America.
6
Those with superior skills will always perform better and attain greater resources. It is nature's way, no way to beat Darwin any attempt is like trying to nullify gravity.
No one is "afraid" that someone is getting something for free. First, it's not free but paid for by the very people you condemn. Second, it is not fear but resentment from those who worked hard, often over generations, to pull themselves out of poverty and who now see that others need only wait for enough others to do the work for them and then pay their bills.
I've lived in poor white neighborhoods with all of the the social pathologies of black ghettos, and there is no way I'd ever want that put into my nice neighborhood, as it would introduce crime and all of the other associated problems, and so destroy my quality of life and my equity in my home.
79
A great description of your problem, and it always will be your problem so long as you assume the worst. I do agree that poverty introduces base social issues. The solution is to make sure additional social services follow the integration of low-income housing. e.g. high-quality free childcare for single parent minimum wage sector families that rely on two to four paychecks just to barely keep up and another school with great teachers with great afterschool programs.perhaps a new Boys and Girl club etc. The poor living within the middle to the upper middle will have a model of what it could be for them. Back in 1903 when cities were much smaller this was true. Out of this milieu emerged men like Andrew Carnegie - imagine if his vision of life was a dreary neighborhood set so far apart from what was better that he could not see anything better for himself beyond it.
Exactly-it's not a racial mentality it is a socio-economic reality. I have distant cousins who have lived in less than ideal conditions due to parental alcohol and drug abuse. When we would visit them when I was in my teens, these girls-all my age-were indulging in more promiscuity, drug abuse and crime than anything my middle class lifestyle had imagined. This was the reason my Dad so seldom wanted to visit, because he knew that they were heading for trouble. You can go to rural Florida, backwoods Arkanasa, Applalachia or even rural Utah and find the same mentality. Largely it comes down to these things: Failure to get an education, having children out of wedlock and/or too young, no goals. That's not a race thing-that's something that can be changed by having some standards. Frankly I have seen even upper class white kids heading down the skids through ignoring those barriers to success.
1
Yours is the first comment I've read so far, and if it's not a bad joke, it's a sad statement. I hope you don't call yourself a progressive. But unfortunately, classism is alive and well across the political spectrum. The reality is that making room for low-income residents in a high-income neighborhood does not create any of the problems you're worried about.
As more and more people can't afford to live close to their jobs we'll see some, and then more, beginning to refuse to do the commute. We'll also see more overcrowding and more homelessness, and more substandard housing. It's positively amazing how short sighted Americans have been. We've known for over 30 years that the baby boomers were going to retire, require Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, that more affordable housing would be needed and yet we did nothing to prepare for it.
Now we are seeing the results of trickle down economics, infrastructure neglect, and the neglect of the population. If we don't like the results we should have applied ourselves sooner. Yet we can still do something. Build affordable housing for working Americans. Improve how we fund local schools so that every district is excellent. Stop treating basic human rights like luxuries. Every citizen and resident should have access to a good education, affordable housing, medical care, food, etc. Both parties tell us America is a rich country. If we're so rich why can't we afford to provide every citizen with the basics? It's not as if people aren't willing to work, to take care of themselves, to learn, etc. If we're treated decently we may even, gasp, act like decent human beings.
Treating us like inconvenient and disposable widgets isn't going improve things. If businesses and government want healthy citizens they have to invest in us. Being miserly won't work.
Now we are seeing the results of trickle down economics, infrastructure neglect, and the neglect of the population. If we don't like the results we should have applied ourselves sooner. Yet we can still do something. Build affordable housing for working Americans. Improve how we fund local schools so that every district is excellent. Stop treating basic human rights like luxuries. Every citizen and resident should have access to a good education, affordable housing, medical care, food, etc. Both parties tell us America is a rich country. If we're so rich why can't we afford to provide every citizen with the basics? It's not as if people aren't willing to work, to take care of themselves, to learn, etc. If we're treated decently we may even, gasp, act like decent human beings.
Treating us like inconvenient and disposable widgets isn't going improve things. If businesses and government want healthy citizens they have to invest in us. Being miserly won't work.
18
I strongly agree with the excellent points made by Hen3ry.
The fundamental point here: if we are so rich as a nation as all the data suggest, it must be possible for us to ensure access for all citizens to affordable housing, education and health care. These are rights, not privileges accorded to those who can afford them.
Provision of these services must be done in a way that will connect, not segregate communities.
Such a task can also be achieved with a strong leadership and support of public institutions, i.e. governments at all levels. When they fail us, we are left with a society deeply divided where where someone is borne dictates what the person can achieve to flourish as a human being in the society.
This disconcerting trend is already manifesting itself in the declining inter-generational mobility index of the U.S. right now.
The fundamental point here: if we are so rich as a nation as all the data suggest, it must be possible for us to ensure access for all citizens to affordable housing, education and health care. These are rights, not privileges accorded to those who can afford them.
Provision of these services must be done in a way that will connect, not segregate communities.
Such a task can also be achieved with a strong leadership and support of public institutions, i.e. governments at all levels. When they fail us, we are left with a society deeply divided where where someone is borne dictates what the person can achieve to flourish as a human being in the society.
This disconcerting trend is already manifesting itself in the declining inter-generational mobility index of the U.S. right now.
1
"they have to invest in us"
Invest in you?
What have you invested in yourself?
Invest in you?
What have you invested in yourself?
I don't want to sound cruel, but I don't understand the concept of building low-income housing in wealthy areas.
The wealthy are entitled to live in the community they can afford, otherwise middle class people like myself and millions of others would love that same opportunity. Middle class areas, ie the outer boroughs of Manhattan, now have skyrocketed rents because Manhattan is too expensive, yet there is no relief for middle class.
I think first we need to build people up in the communities where the poor live. They need affordable rents, in many instances lower crime rates, and jobs. This is an social and economic issue---poverty which is never addressed properly. It even effects local schools. And just moving someone without addressing other needs doesn't solve problems.
It's time to start thinking outside the box.
The wealthy are entitled to live in the community they can afford, otherwise middle class people like myself and millions of others would love that same opportunity. Middle class areas, ie the outer boroughs of Manhattan, now have skyrocketed rents because Manhattan is too expensive, yet there is no relief for middle class.
I think first we need to build people up in the communities where the poor live. They need affordable rents, in many instances lower crime rates, and jobs. This is an social and economic issue---poverty which is never addressed properly. It even effects local schools. And just moving someone without addressing other needs doesn't solve problems.
It's time to start thinking outside the box.
87
But more and more Americans are being completely priced out of housing. It's not just a low income issue. It's also an issue of community because, if you have to drive two hours to get to work, how much time are you going to spend on your community, your neighbors, etc.? That two hour commute eats up a lot of personal time.
I think we need to stop catering to the very rich in America and start to build housing that is sturdy, affordable, attractive, and nearer to where we work. And it benefits all of us to see how the other half lives and to mingle. In other words, if I see that school custodian in my village with his children I can always say hello, ask him how he's doing, and see him as a person instead of a job. It's called community spirit.
I think we need to stop catering to the very rich in America and start to build housing that is sturdy, affordable, attractive, and nearer to where we work. And it benefits all of us to see how the other half lives and to mingle. In other words, if I see that school custodian in my village with his children I can always say hello, ask him how he's doing, and see him as a person instead of a job. It's called community spirit.
11
'Middle class areas, ie the outer boroughs of Manhattan, now have skyrocketed rents because Manhattan is too expensive, yet there is no relief for middle class.'
Linda, this what you don't understand about 'the concept of building low-income housing in wealthy areas'. Wealthy communities who gate out any and all more economically stratified structures and habitation result in artificially exorbitant real estate values. Which in turn automatically creates bubbles of RE unaffordability. Up until the last few years, the most livable communities in America were ones where a good mix of the middle, high and working class could co-habitate within same overall neighborhoods with dignity and respect, and most importantly, peace. Now? We are insular and narcissistic. I blame the elitists and I am not poor.
Linda, this what you don't understand about 'the concept of building low-income housing in wealthy areas'. Wealthy communities who gate out any and all more economically stratified structures and habitation result in artificially exorbitant real estate values. Which in turn automatically creates bubbles of RE unaffordability. Up until the last few years, the most livable communities in America were ones where a good mix of the middle, high and working class could co-habitate within same overall neighborhoods with dignity and respect, and most importantly, peace. Now? We are insular and narcissistic. I blame the elitists and I am not poor.
8
You don't sound cruel. You are reason itself.
3
Like a few other commentors, we're having the opposite problem- long term (twenty and thirty years!) federal and state subsidized low income apartments and townhouse communities being given carte blanche impunity to evict disabled and low wage workers in their rush to spend lavish sums on fancy renovations as an excuse to (and profit handsomely on) triple rent prices.
This, despite wage growth being either at historical lows, or worse, on the decline.
I see this as yet another Trump phenomenon being played out all over this country where Republican majority statehouses are rolling back or completely curtailing RE funding specifically dedicated to keeping housing costs for the working poor reasonable. Sadly, Republicans and elitists alike are joining up to flush everyone else down the proverbial drain. This isn't just a Republican issue anymore.
This, despite wage growth being either at historical lows, or worse, on the decline.
I see this as yet another Trump phenomenon being played out all over this country where Republican majority statehouses are rolling back or completely curtailing RE funding specifically dedicated to keeping housing costs for the working poor reasonable. Sadly, Republicans and elitists alike are joining up to flush everyone else down the proverbial drain. This isn't just a Republican issue anymore.
10
Instead of blaming Republicans, you might ask yourself how Valerie Jarrett and others in the "helping the poor" business amassed their millions.
Nothing new here. People who live in "good neighborhoods" do not want to open those neighborhoods to people who are considered threats to the "good neighborhoods". At stake, real or perceived, real estate value, school quality and crime. And if the outsiders move in, the residents flee, and has been seen across the country many times, the fears were often realized.
I am not sure there is a solution here other than time.
I am not sure there is a solution here other than time.
23
First let's look at the premise involved, that moving poor people from inner cities to suburban, upper class neighborhoods will benefit everyone. The fact is that the reason poor neighborhoods are in dire straits is not geographic, but cultural.
I have watched, for over 50 years, city neighborhoods of Black and Hispanic people suffer from economic blight, poverty and crime. Advocates claim that this is caused by poor schools, insufficient job opportunities, inadequate housing, etc. Short term I can sort of understand that, but long term, I believe it is caused by a culture that does not work for improvement. Instead, these people are waiting for a miracle that will give them more knowledge and the means to live a better life. I am sorry, but it doesn't work that way.
All the people I know who have the "better life" sacrificed greatly for it. They struggled through school (paying off their loans afterwards like I did), they take entry level jobs or create their own businesses, they give up seeing their families, all for obtaining the "better life". A successful life requires work and sacrifice, nobody gets anything for free.
So, living next to successful people and bringing the same cultural baggage to the show, will result in disappointment for the families moving and resentment from those they are invading.
I have watched, for over 50 years, city neighborhoods of Black and Hispanic people suffer from economic blight, poverty and crime. Advocates claim that this is caused by poor schools, insufficient job opportunities, inadequate housing, etc. Short term I can sort of understand that, but long term, I believe it is caused by a culture that does not work for improvement. Instead, these people are waiting for a miracle that will give them more knowledge and the means to live a better life. I am sorry, but it doesn't work that way.
All the people I know who have the "better life" sacrificed greatly for it. They struggled through school (paying off their loans afterwards like I did), they take entry level jobs or create their own businesses, they give up seeing their families, all for obtaining the "better life". A successful life requires work and sacrifice, nobody gets anything for free.
So, living next to successful people and bringing the same cultural baggage to the show, will result in disappointment for the families moving and resentment from those they are invading.
115
I completely agree here . . . you cannot change a "culture" by moving them into a better neighborhood. That mentality has to start where they presently live and that is where investment, not only in DOLLARS, but in PROGRAMS that address what these people do not understand. Everything counts - graffiti, crime, disrespecting property, each other - these are the behaviors that destroy all communities. Believe me this is not restricted to people of color. Take a look at the low income White neighborhoods (btw: most people on public assistance are WHITE). We have to look at the causes that create the ongoing cycles of poverty, INCLUDING POOR DECISION MAKING (teen pregnancies, drug addiction, violence in the home).
We have to give those who are willing to make a difference for their families the opportunity to climb out of poverty and bad neighborhoods.
We have to give those who are willing to make a difference for their families the opportunity to climb out of poverty and bad neighborhoods.
5
Ask yourself honestly: who has controlled the majority of large American cities which have become dangerous and poor in the last several decades? Who has principally been in control?
1
I think the problem could at least begin to be solved if exhaustive vetting of potential tenants were allowed, but the law makes that impossible by demanding that we suspend reason and view virtually all behavior as morally and socially equivalent. So the poor who have led responsible lives can't be chosen above those who haven't. The law also makes it virtually impossible to evict residents of public housing who make their neighbors' lives a misery.
Residents of more desirable towns simply are not willing to take such a big risk with their children's well being.
Residents of more desirable towns simply are not willing to take such a big risk with their children's well being.
47
The small city I live in is not segregated into ghettos. There are areas of poverty but nothing like large cities. White poverty is as prevalant as others.... .....I live in Hud housing which is integrated. While this might be true in some places...it is not true everywhere...We have low cost housing in middle class neighborhoods, thanks to a St Vincent de Paul program partnering with HUD
7
Children who overcome poverty rarely move back to their impoverished neighborhoods. That is happening both in poor city neighborhoods and in poor rural areas.
They leave the social ills behind as soon as they can, regardless of skin color or location.
They leave the social ills behind as soon as they can, regardless of skin color or location.
17
As a transplant to Texas, I can assure you that the wealthy here don't want to be anywhere near "the great unwashed", unless they need their homes landscaped, their houses built or inexpensive nannies for their children.
19
So, you are actively encouraging them to move in next to you, right?
4
We're not talking about the "wealthy," Sarah.
We're talking about the people who have worked to improve their living conditions.
It's in THEIR neighborhoods that the New York Times thinks no-income housing projects should be built.
We're talking about the people who have worked to improve their living conditions.
It's in THEIR neighborhoods that the New York Times thinks no-income housing projects should be built.
6
So, government social engineering programs actually perpetuate things like racial segregation? Say it isn't so!
I mean, it's not Republicans have been saying for years that government handouts and welfare just keep people down and perpetuate a never-ending cycle of dependence on the government.
Oh, wait -- You mean they have been saying that?
The so-called Great Society of Lyndon Johnson has done more to harm minority communities and promote segregation than many of the actively racist and segregationist policies that went before it. The Great Society was just more stealthy about it.
The current approach failed long ago. It's time to think of a better way.
I mean, it's not Republicans have been saying for years that government handouts and welfare just keep people down and perpetuate a never-ending cycle of dependence on the government.
Oh, wait -- You mean they have been saying that?
The so-called Great Society of Lyndon Johnson has done more to harm minority communities and promote segregation than many of the actively racist and segregationist policies that went before it. The Great Society was just more stealthy about it.
The current approach failed long ago. It's time to think of a better way.
22
Some of the most egregious crime is being committed every day by some of the wealthiest people in the toniest neighborhoods. But white collar crime doesn't appear to bother the neighbors, so it's all good.
And with a thug named Trump in the White House, who gets away regularly with fraud, extortion, blackmail, and money laundering, our own white collar criminals feel emboldened to condemn others for committing pathetically obvious crimes like burglary.
Why can't they be "smart" like Trump and his white collar crime buddies, and commit the crimes that can be covered up if you have enough money and power? You won't even have to pay taxes if you can elevate yourself to a high-enough level of criminality.
In the meantime, white collar criminals remain safe in their McMansions and gated communities, where they teach their kids how to keep despising the poor, so they can continue to exploit them inhumanely - but with a clear conscience. After all, their kind of crime doesn't get prosecuted.
And with a thug named Trump in the White House, who gets away regularly with fraud, extortion, blackmail, and money laundering, our own white collar criminals feel emboldened to condemn others for committing pathetically obvious crimes like burglary.
Why can't they be "smart" like Trump and his white collar crime buddies, and commit the crimes that can be covered up if you have enough money and power? You won't even have to pay taxes if you can elevate yourself to a high-enough level of criminality.
In the meantime, white collar criminals remain safe in their McMansions and gated communities, where they teach their kids how to keep despising the poor, so they can continue to exploit them inhumanely - but with a clear conscience. After all, their kind of crime doesn't get prosecuted.
31
This is a specious argument that is always trotted out. Really, the issue here is personal safety. The poor, by definition, have higher rates of crimes that affect people around them in a direct and visceral way. That is why so many want to leave their neighborhoods. Would you rather live next door to an embezzler or an armed robber?
There is no vetting allowed of residents in a project so again, by definition, you get a slice of the population at random. They don't become any more affluent by moving into a more affluent neighborhood. Take off your rose colored glasses. This has nothing to do with Trump buddies. The projects will not be built next to them.
There is no vetting allowed of residents in a project so again, by definition, you get a slice of the population at random. They don't become any more affluent by moving into a more affluent neighborhood. Take off your rose colored glasses. This has nothing to do with Trump buddies. The projects will not be built next to them.
1
Wow, it's almost like during the Obama administration wealthy bankers weren't prosecuted.
I'm betting you personally live in a gated community controlled by an HOA. The people getting slammed are not the wealthy, but instead the middle class,many of whom have worked like crazy to rise out of the poverty you claim. Much like Europeans of earlier ages and their legend of the Noble Savage, you want us to believe that there's some sort of moral superiority to the poor. In my experience, those who are poor who work hard, move out of poverty, but those who continue to make bad choices stay there. I've seen what imposing such housing developments on an area does to the crime stats. My formerly quiet neighborhood is now full of burglaries during the day while people are at work, car burglaries while people sleep and home invasions coordinated by groups from many of these same enclaves. So please,until you experience it yourself, save your posturing.
There's no easy solution to this enigma. If you build low-income housing in richer neighbourhoods, then the taxes will elevate the cost of the home or the rent. Also the cost of the land to build the houses or apartment buildings will be more expensive. So who is going to subsidize the costs to allow people of lesser means to buy in better-off neighbourhoods?
3
As opposed to just plunking down low income housing in affluent areas, I feel like cities might be better served by investing in "affordable" housing for more people in "livable" communities. Maybe if folks gave two cents worth of thought towards creating better educational and job training in low income areas - maybe even reimagining failed communities and making them functional -instead of figuring out ways to rip poor peoples healthcare and convert what little resources they have into tax breaks for folks who already have money than you or I will ever see, we could restore a bit of economic mobility, and people would have better housing choices.
18
That could (and should) be done through zoning laws. In many older inner ring suburbs, like Richardson, Garland, Irving and Carrollton TX, it's not uncommon for smaller, more affordable homes to be bought by developers, torn down and replaced with zero lot line monstrosities costing five times as much for rent or mortgage. My own kids, now grown, with good credit, struggled for months just to find a home they could afford and now with an exploding market home values are rising to the point that they may have to sell because their payments have gone up $200 a month every year. Frisco, McKinney, Allen, Prosper area all building homes starting at over $400K or apartments over $1500 a month for a one bedroom. That's ridiculous especially for young people starting out but also for working families. If the cities weren't so greedy for tax income and would restrain builders from creating these massive expensive communities, maybe we wouldn't be discussing the need for low income housing. So maybe it is time for all cities to require a portion of housing be more modestly priced.
So far, the familiar process of injecting richer people into poorer areas -- through the invasions and takeovers of gentrification -- usually hasn't worked very well for the poorer people.
So maybe it's time to try the reverse approach of injecting poorer people into richer areas.
However, if there are lots of existing businesses in the richer neighborhoods, the poorer people may find their prices prohibitive.
And if there aren't many businesses, the poorer people are going to need cars or very good public transportation to get to commercial areas where they can shop.
So maybe it's time to try the reverse approach of injecting poorer people into richer areas.
However, if there are lots of existing businesses in the richer neighborhoods, the poorer people may find their prices prohibitive.
And if there aren't many businesses, the poorer people are going to need cars or very good public transportation to get to commercial areas where they can shop.
10
The people living in middle-class neighborhoods earned their way there and pay higher real estate taxes to live there, which is why the schools and amenities are better - the properties generate more local tax revenue and parents can afford to donate to projects that support the schools. Section 8 housing is built in poorer neighborhoods because (1) the housing needs to be improved; (2) the areas do not generate the tax dollars; the schools are deprived because the people in the community do not have the money to donate to worthy community projects. With no buy-in (paying real estate taxes) the people living in Section 8 housing feel a lack of control over their situation, when in fact, they are the ones who can make a difference. If you don't trust the police, crime will continue; if you don't walk your child to school every day to ensure that she isn't picked on by older children, then her education will suffer. I work with people every day who are struggling to improve their lives for themselves and their children, not gazing longingly over the river of poverty hoping someone will build them a bridge.
19
Oddly framed narrative that low-income housing stock should not be built where low income people live? The school argument also has some problems based on education based on property taxes. Fix the distribution of education funding and this issue will change as well. The answer may be to fix in place and encourage the flow of talent and resources throughout our cities.
11
We are rapidly becoming two different species of human beings, almost. As education and technology transform our lives and our very mode of being. This has been going on for 50 years, and the process is only accelerating.
The poor live better now than middle class people did when I was born. Their opportunities are basically unlimited. But sadly, their ability to take advantage of opportunities is often missing. It is not income, it is mental, moral and family structure that is lacking.
Moving damaged and broken pieces around on a chessboard, like some grandmaster social engineer is not going to fix them.
The poor live better now than middle class people did when I was born. Their opportunities are basically unlimited. But sadly, their ability to take advantage of opportunities is often missing. It is not income, it is mental, moral and family structure that is lacking.
Moving damaged and broken pieces around on a chessboard, like some grandmaster social engineer is not going to fix them.
62
It's peer pressure, it's family pressure, it's the immediate examples all around us that shape what we do even more than income. It's crucially important but when those things are not present, it's excruciatingly hard to avoid the vicious cycle.
They tried housing equality in Reston, Virginia, a planned development where people of all income levels can live in the same community, blah, blah. The low income housing is still a locus of crime and the plentiful nature trails are dangerous to walk on because of the muggers and murderers. There will always be haves and have-nots and the have-nots will covet what they don't have or can earn for themselves.
There is housing equality in America but you must be able to pay for it. These so-called fair-housing advocates expect to be given a handout in terms of a free house.
There is housing equality in America but you must be able to pay for it. These so-called fair-housing advocates expect to be given a handout in terms of a free house.
28
When are we going to witness immigrant housing in affluent areas like Beverly Hills and the Hamptons?
Limousine liberals seek open borders but many also also want the people from the Third World who enter to live somewhere else — not in their neighborhoods.
This is part of the reason for the rage among those at the bottom of the Great Divide, be they black or white.
Limousine liberals seek open borders but many also also want the people from the Third World who enter to live somewhere else — not in their neighborhoods.
This is part of the reason for the rage among those at the bottom of the Great Divide, be they black or white.
28
The "immigrant housing" is in places like Hampton Bays. The Times did a story on it a few years ago. Long Island has a number of towns that are now mostly immigrant, ie, Hispanic, which house the people who work for those in the wealthy all white neighborhoods.
9
Michael--where is the immigrant integration here in the PAC NW??? Answer--in my neighborhood (Pakistani, Korean, African, Indian, Chinese, African American, Mexican) We have been working on a resolution in WA through funding schools in order to address the inequality issue there. I live in a solid middle class suburb and have an integrated neighborhood--my children are biracial. About a mile from us they built "low income" apartments. Surprise, surprise--property crimes are creeping into my neighborhood. It isn't a race issue--it's a socioeconomic one. Many poor folks bring these things with them and ITS NOT WELCOME.
Well, it is a fact that bringing low-income housing to an upscale neighborhood will devalue existing properties, and screw up the education system that was good in part because of those high property taxes. You can see why people are adverse to the idea, without bringing in the race card.
18
I lived in Houston for 5 years, and, in two of those, I worked on the west end of the Galleria area (for those unaware, Houston effectively has three downtown areas: regular downtown, The Galleria, and the Med Center).
Having traversed the area in question fairly thoroughly, I can tell you from first-hand experience that this article has the residents pegged. Take a walk through the mall there (or the numerous upscale shops in the adjacent blocks) and see the people and you'll get a sense real quick that, regardless of their specific reason, an upsetting of their lily-white, Mercedes-driven comfort zone would be a devastating blow to their fragile, oil&gas infused egos. Notice how the woman's letter in the article mentions the "sacrifices of (her) family"? Yeah, let me translate that for you: "I married rich, or my parents left me a lot of money, so, unless you're like me, you don't deserve to be here!"
However, as the article points out, not everything would be great for the new residents either. They would be thrown into a section of the city with a much higher cost of living than they would have been used to. Higher grocery bills, gas, clothing, etc. would all await them. Not to mention that traffic there is already a nightmare. I have a feeling this development is DOA.
Having traversed the area in question fairly thoroughly, I can tell you from first-hand experience that this article has the residents pegged. Take a walk through the mall there (or the numerous upscale shops in the adjacent blocks) and see the people and you'll get a sense real quick that, regardless of their specific reason, an upsetting of their lily-white, Mercedes-driven comfort zone would be a devastating blow to their fragile, oil&gas infused egos. Notice how the woman's letter in the article mentions the "sacrifices of (her) family"? Yeah, let me translate that for you: "I married rich, or my parents left me a lot of money, so, unless you're like me, you don't deserve to be here!"
However, as the article points out, not everything would be great for the new residents either. They would be thrown into a section of the city with a much higher cost of living than they would have been used to. Higher grocery bills, gas, clothing, etc. would all await them. Not to mention that traffic there is already a nightmare. I have a feeling this development is DOA.
18
People who work hard and save in order to afford living in better neighborhoods can hardly be blamed for resenting being forced to accept low-income housing projects in their midst. It flies in the face of the American dream, while simultaneously dragging down the value of the home you worked so hard to purchase. I do not want anyone living next door to me that needs government assistance to do so.
60
Gee Paul, I've worked hard and saved. But I can't afford to live in a better neighborhood. It's this little thing called rent, take home pay, all the luxury homes, condos, and apartments being built while the middle and working class is neglected. Oh, and as a woman, I've also been chronically underpaid but I guess I don't need affordable housing. All I need to do is marry the right man, right?
1
Well, the New York Times is blaming us.
3
So your american dream os based on not being near poor people? I would be more sympathetic is the upper quarter of our economy didn't depend on the bottom quarter being actually poor in order to function. If that's your goal, get a job that reduces systemic poverty, then the poor will be the lazy and disabled only, Or i hope you get section 8's on your block forever.
2
A different/better policy might be to give lower income families vouchers so they can purchase better housing wherever they choose. Rather than stigmatize a development as "low income" and concentrate people in one place, promote diversity and communiity by spreading people around and giving them choice. Developers can pay into the voucher fund or alternatively have the developer set aside a certain number of units in a market rate development. Then allocate by lottery for those that qualify by income and/or work in the community, but otherwise cannot afford to live there.
10
People want to live where they choose and with whom they choose. it is not the place of the people's government to tell people who they have to live with. Leave us alone.
30
And, then, there is the problem of gentrification, as in Harlem, NY, where only the wealthy can now afford to live. Every time something like this happens there should be a good quality residence where people can turn when they get pushed out of their homes by guys like tRump, who's claiming to be making decorative improvements to the city.
7
You can blame the idiot DeBlasio for that.
2
Wrong - that blame goes to Bloomberg! DeBlasio inherited all the approved permits for overbuilding in the city, though he may also be continuing the process of destroying the place as well.
As a minority who lives in a mixed working poor neighborhood, I can tell you that there are valid reasons for residents not wanting a housing project to be added to their residential area (that is not just based on racism).
My city recently destroyed a high-rise housing development and dispersed the residents within my neighborhood. The adding of the new residents have changed the tenor of the neighborhood. Kids now can be seen on the streets past 11 pm. Litter has increased, broken bottles are routinely seen on the roads and now sounds of gun shots serenade the night. This area never recovered from the housing bubble collapse and investors have been more than willing to turn the foreclosed houses into section 8 rental housing...further depressing property values for homeowners.
Though race is definitely a motivation in the segregation of housing in the USA, one cannot ignore the impact that differences in values and lifestyles can have on already destabilized communities.
Yes corralling poor people in projects was never moral, but placing these communities in existing neighborhoods without educational training for both communities and without concern for differences in social mores only leads to strife and resentment.
My city recently destroyed a high-rise housing development and dispersed the residents within my neighborhood. The adding of the new residents have changed the tenor of the neighborhood. Kids now can be seen on the streets past 11 pm. Litter has increased, broken bottles are routinely seen on the roads and now sounds of gun shots serenade the night. This area never recovered from the housing bubble collapse and investors have been more than willing to turn the foreclosed houses into section 8 rental housing...further depressing property values for homeowners.
Though race is definitely a motivation in the segregation of housing in the USA, one cannot ignore the impact that differences in values and lifestyles can have on already destabilized communities.
Yes corralling poor people in projects was never moral, but placing these communities in existing neighborhoods without educational training for both communities and without concern for differences in social mores only leads to strife and resentment.
51
@jauanno: “What is the rationale for providing subsidized housing in affluent areas?” Good question. The problem is there a huge subsidy of housing for the affluent. It’s the home mortgage tax deduction. And the more expensive the house, the greater the subsidy. It should be eliminated, but I doubt if Congress will do that in the upcoming tax reform.
8
But everybody gets that subsidy, not just the affluent. Besides, do you believe the really affluent will stop buying expensive real estate if they got rid of the mortgage deduction? I bet a lot of the really wealthy pay for homes outright and don't need the deduction in the first place!
2
I understand, in part, the natural inclination to oppose the construction of low-income housing complexes in affluent neighborhoods. However, this apprehension is premised on the fact that "others" are not worthy of assistance. If "they" cannot make it, tough.
That approach is not good enough! The tension surrounding class and race in this country will eventually subside once we start to recognize that we, as Americans, share the common goal of wanting to make positive contributions to society, to financially provide for our families, and to do both free from arbitrary discrimination. The goal of low-income Americans is NOT to try to improve their lot in life at the expense of their fellow Americans. I am not sure some affluent members of the American populace can say the same.
If you argue that state and local governments should not permit developers to construct low-income housing complexes in affluent areas, then those state and local governments (and the federal government where needed) should be prepared to pour more resources into low-income communities to improve their schools, infrastructure, and institutions, which will then lead to increased property values in those low-income communities. It is not fair to both i) prevent members of low-income communities from moving into affluent communities and ii) deprive those same communities from having the necessary resources to stimulate economic growth. You cannot have it both ways.
That approach is not good enough! The tension surrounding class and race in this country will eventually subside once we start to recognize that we, as Americans, share the common goal of wanting to make positive contributions to society, to financially provide for our families, and to do both free from arbitrary discrimination. The goal of low-income Americans is NOT to try to improve their lot in life at the expense of their fellow Americans. I am not sure some affluent members of the American populace can say the same.
If you argue that state and local governments should not permit developers to construct low-income housing complexes in affluent areas, then those state and local governments (and the federal government where needed) should be prepared to pour more resources into low-income communities to improve their schools, infrastructure, and institutions, which will then lead to increased property values in those low-income communities. It is not fair to both i) prevent members of low-income communities from moving into affluent communities and ii) deprive those same communities from having the necessary resources to stimulate economic growth. You cannot have it both ways.
One common misconception among the commenters on this thread is that tax credit apartments are public housing. They are two different things. Public housing still exists and those buildings are owned by local public housing authorities. In general that is where the poorest of the poor live. Tax credit apartment complexes are owned by private developers. They are subject to regulation and rent restrictions. But they are privately owned and managed. Some are 100% low income. But some are mixed use projects with some low income units and some market rate units. But all of these units must be the same and it is often difficult to tell which are the low income units.
The economic factors outweigh the considerations of integration and concern for the poor, as has been said here in many comments.
It's about what people are ready to do for others, how much we are willing to sacrifice, at this stage of our evolution. We are not yet at the point where the drive to help the less fortunate outweighs fear of economic loss and of crime. But articles like this help, bit by bit, to bring us there. Thank you. Gradually, over millennia we will come to realize that we are one, and that it is vitally more important to help others than to protect our material gains, as many wise people have always tried to teach.
It's about what people are ready to do for others, how much we are willing to sacrifice, at this stage of our evolution. We are not yet at the point where the drive to help the less fortunate outweighs fear of economic loss and of crime. But articles like this help, bit by bit, to bring us there. Thank you. Gradually, over millennia we will come to realize that we are one, and that it is vitally more important to help others than to protect our material gains, as many wise people have always tried to teach.
3
So, nearly half were built in non-white areas and half were built in white areas. Where's the beef? "54 percent of new tax-credit projects have been built in those tracts since 2000." Or rather 54/46 ratio.
7
So the same people who purport to demand diversity just don't want it near THEM!
Caring low-income families naturally want to send their kids to good schools but until now they were forced to send them to failed schools in terrible neighborhoods.
Obama encouraged public assistance in all its forms-food stamps, etc, but school choice--no way!
Trump wants you to have the option of sending your kids to any school.
The Left loves doling out welfare but is threatened by those who want to self improve.
Caring low-income families naturally want to send their kids to good schools but until now they were forced to send them to failed schools in terrible neighborhoods.
Obama encouraged public assistance in all its forms-food stamps, etc, but school choice--no way!
Trump wants you to have the option of sending your kids to any school.
The Left loves doling out welfare but is threatened by those who want to self improve.
8
Trump wants to funnel public money away from public schools and into religious charters schools. Don't for a second think that DeVoss cares about the underprivileged getting a leg up; it's about the weakening of the church/state divide and enriching herself and her friends
1
Yeah, it is subsidized housing that is keeping America segregated. Are you kidding me. Who is committing most of the killings in any major city? Minorities need to start taking responsibility for their actions, also. There has to be accountability, cities that are run by minorities are some of the worse. It may be everybody else's fault, but so what, who is being hurt?
13
I would encourage every commenter who opposed the project to spend time volunteering with the homeless community in their own city. Commenters equated public housing with crime, a lack of personal motivation, an affront on 'white community values,' and more. In reality, the vast majority of people—poor, rich, etc—want to work hard and provide for their families. Those forced to use public housing have often been through terrible circumstances that have forced their families to the very edge of homelessness. Despite the loud and repeated claims that their opposition is definitely NOT about race, the fear of racial mixing runs so deep in America that it blinds people to the suffering of their neighbors.
3
Not long ago a mayor from Marin County tried to build low-income housing for people who made between $45,000 to $75,000 a year in her town, and the residents went berserk. At a town hall meeting, people were shrieking, "You are bringing the ghetto to us!" These residents drove this mayor out of office because of this issue. I've lived in white affluent neighborhoods for much of my life, and the people who reside in theses places are nuts. I do not believe truly low income people would be safe living in a these neighborhoods. We all know affluent people are violent, routinely engage in criminal activity, and are not beyond going after [i.e. hurting] small children. Why on God's green earth would you want to subject poor people to this kind of environment? Moreover, any politician who tries will be summarily run out of town. Political careers have been ruined for a lot less.
8
The affluent don't mind helping the poor. But draw the line at living next door to poor.
They tried a version of this in the 70's by busing poor blacks from Compton into West Los Angeles. The result: anger, resentment, bullying, and fights. Plus many scarred young people who were used as pawns to solve an adult problem. This is not the solution. Economic mobility seems like a better solution. Additionally, a better approach would be to attract wealthy people to live in poorer communities. It's called gentrification, and it lifts all boats.
8
Except for the "boats" that are taxed out of communities where families have lived, worked and paid taxes for generations! This very thing is taking place here in Nashville and as a result, it is now hard to tell one part of town from the other, as gentrification erases the uniqueness and diversity of neighborhoods. Also, the mayor is trying to dump low-income housing in a predominately affluent African-American community which as existed for the past 50 years. God forbid if I were forced to move from my home, I could not afford to live in the city I grew up in.
1
I know what you mean. Retired soldier here in Clarksville, Tn. Have worked in Nashville and the landscape of Nashville is changing with condos going up everywhere with Nashville trying to maintain its IT City rep. Germantown is an example where it has been gentrified with a minor league baseball stadium recently put with adjoining restaurants and condos for affluent citizens moving into the area.
Sadly, I would bet this is a global problem of long standing class discrimination and the legacy of tribalism.
In other words, striving to improve oneself is deeply rooted in human nature and ought not to be thrown obstacles by elitist central governments.
I agree.
I agree.
4
It is socioeconomic, not race. Do you think the noblemen of old would erect a high density village in their courtyard for the serfs (of the same race)? Obviously this is an exaggeration but you get the point.
7
I live in public housing and I believe in public housing.
Public housing worked very well in New York City. It was middle-class housing, for policemen, teachers, shop workers, factory workers, repairmen, and a diversity representing the rest of the community. Many of the public housing projects were supported by unions as housing for their workers. The projects were capable of absorbing a small number of poor people, who benefitted from living among working, middle-class people who taught them to follow the social norms, the importance of education for their children, and how to get a better job.
What destroyed public housing as a popular institution in NYC was turning it into "welfare housing," by conservative politicians like Robert Moses. If you decide that public housing should only go to the "deserving poor," then you wind up with huge agglomerations of poor and unemployed people. I wouldn't want to live there either.
I want to live in integrated housing, with people of all races and income levels. America is the wealthiest country that ever existed in the world. We can afford it. You don't have to work 90 hours a week to afford housing.
Public housing worked very well in New York City. It was middle-class housing, for policemen, teachers, shop workers, factory workers, repairmen, and a diversity representing the rest of the community. Many of the public housing projects were supported by unions as housing for their workers. The projects were capable of absorbing a small number of poor people, who benefitted from living among working, middle-class people who taught them to follow the social norms, the importance of education for their children, and how to get a better job.
What destroyed public housing as a popular institution in NYC was turning it into "welfare housing," by conservative politicians like Robert Moses. If you decide that public housing should only go to the "deserving poor," then you wind up with huge agglomerations of poor and unemployed people. I wouldn't want to live there either.
I want to live in integrated housing, with people of all races and income levels. America is the wealthiest country that ever existed in the world. We can afford it. You don't have to work 90 hours a week to afford housing.
23
"We can afford it."
In other words, OTHER PEOPLE can pay for it.
In other words, OTHER PEOPLE can pay for it.
3
@Riot
No. That's not what it means -- unless you're a Republican, that is.
No. That's not what it means -- unless you're a Republican, that is.
1
"Ever since Texas made changes to its selection process four years ago, projects have increasingly gone into neighborhoods that are whiter and more affluent, according to a study by the Texas Low Income Housing Information Service, the fair-housing group that Ms. Palay works for."
So the author states the low-income housing site selection process issue is working in Texas. Why the Texas-bashing then? How is NYC or its affluent suburbs doing in this regard? I suggest its likely to be no better.
The Galleria certainly is an area of very expensive real estate. Our Federal dollars would be better spent on improving education rather than purchasing over-priced land. Education is an area where Texas, and many other states, can improve their performance. And approx 50% of TX property taxes in affluent areas are already redistrubited to low-income areas of the state via the Robin Hood taxes. Its a difficult situation nationwide, but IMO, Texas is no worse than many of States we have lived in.
So the author states the low-income housing site selection process issue is working in Texas. Why the Texas-bashing then? How is NYC or its affluent suburbs doing in this regard? I suggest its likely to be no better.
The Galleria certainly is an area of very expensive real estate. Our Federal dollars would be better spent on improving education rather than purchasing over-priced land. Education is an area where Texas, and many other states, can improve their performance. And approx 50% of TX property taxes in affluent areas are already redistrubited to low-income areas of the state via the Robin Hood taxes. Its a difficult situation nationwide, but IMO, Texas is no worse than many of States we have lived in.
9
Are these low income housing projects in wealthy neighborhoods worth the political price?
Not the objections from the wealthy residents, but rather from the non-poor who would also like the benefits of living in a well to do neighborhood, but who are passed over so the lucky poor can be given government help to get the advantages of a good neighborhood that they would like for themselves.
Such programs, real or perceived, is what drives a lot of the racial and class resentment of working class whites, i.e. Trump's people.
Not the objections from the wealthy residents, but rather from the non-poor who would also like the benefits of living in a well to do neighborhood, but who are passed over so the lucky poor can be given government help to get the advantages of a good neighborhood that they would like for themselves.
Such programs, real or perceived, is what drives a lot of the racial and class resentment of working class whites, i.e. Trump's people.
20
Grew up in a nice old neighborhood. The closest thing we had to crime was pranks by teenagers. When a section of subsidized housing was built nearby, crime immediately increased. Within a year 4 families, including mine, moved out.
The biggest issue is crime. The town was small enough that everyone knew people of all races and income levels and they could have lived together or at least nearby without problems if it hadn't been for the concentration of crime around the housing units.
The biggest issue is crime. The town was small enough that everyone knew people of all races and income levels and they could have lived together or at least nearby without problems if it hadn't been for the concentration of crime around the housing units.
41
I am white but from 1986 to 1990 I lived in a rundown, mostly Latino neighborhood very near the Galleria that is of course completely gone now. I visited there not long ago to find one fence post from my old chain link fence still standing near a row of fabulously expensive-looking condominiums so huge they block out the Houston sun, and I wondered where everyone had gone, since one thing about that level of wealth, it always manages to appear unoccupied. I was never much in love with Houston, but at this point I wonder why the sameness-in-luxury and its accompanying blandness that has overtaken many areas "inside the Loop" that used to be affordable for a diverse range of residents is so appealing to anyone. I'm sure the roach and rat and mold problems that plagued us all back in the day are much improved, but that has come at other costs. It seems that wealth and whiteness make everything dull, at least to my eye. Sameness is safety? Maybe sameness is dangerous itself.
3
You really can't force people of different cultures, values, etc. together. No one has a right to live in a tony neighborhood unless they can afford it. How many of us would love to move to a ritzy neighborhood but can't afford the high cost of a home there? Ditto for the underprivileged. Build this kind of housing where the people already live. Let them appreciate their neighborhood rather than tear it down. Why do you think some of these areas have become ghettoes? Because the residents have turned them into a ghetto. Relocating such residents to a well-to-do area does nothing for them nor for the well-to-do.
24
It costs much less public money to move rich people into poor neighborhood than the other way around. Gentrification is much more cost effective, refurbishes the neighborhood, and achieves the same goal.
12
That has happened in CA, NY and Seattle. Guess what??? The poor can no longer afford to live there.
Property values are important to property owners, who rely on high values to pay higher taxes to fund better schools in Houston - this is why families care so much about the neighborhood and buy the nicest home they can in the best area. Mayor Tuner may be a "Democrat", but all Houston politicians have to be nice to big business and cater to the affluent in the city, even if Turner is publicly opposed to the housing project, he knows his actions count and being seen to increase crime and lower property values would not look too good. Houston is a city about socioeconomic status, not race.
If you go to Sugarland, an affluent suburb on the lower west side of Houston, you will see many Asian, Indian and white families. They worked hard to be able to afford a house there so their kids can safely go to nice schools. The parents worked hard in school, many having grown up in poor areas as immigrant - they earned their right to a better life on their own. Would it be fair, or helpful for them to take on more crime to help out the children of the poor?
If you go to Sugarland, an affluent suburb on the lower west side of Houston, you will see many Asian, Indian and white families. They worked hard to be able to afford a house there so their kids can safely go to nice schools. The parents worked hard in school, many having grown up in poor areas as immigrant - they earned their right to a better life on their own. Would it be fair, or helpful for them to take on more crime to help out the children of the poor?
22
While emotionally debated, there is plenty of objective literature out there that has found little or no detriment to property values when low-income housing comes into middle- to upper-class neighborhoods (quick meta-analysis here: http://furmancenter.org/files/media/Dont_Put_It_Here.pdf )
The arguments made by others about the right to class-based segregation once you've 'made it' is deeply flawed and selfish besides. 'Separate but equal' has been rejected as a standard of social structure based on race, and we will eventually move past this in terms of isolating the poor into districts with few resources and a low tax base. To see ourselves as islands is the greatest travesty in terms of our culture. We are a community, and you see otherwise liberal minds at their most grotesque when you propose to move the poor next door. It is decades after the racist image of the welfare queen was disseminated, and it still abides--no surprise that it will take generations to educate away the fear and resentment of the poor in our middle- and upper-class neighborhoods. A step in the right direction might be to empathize with the struggling, not stereotype them as flawed & criminal human beings.
The arguments made by others about the right to class-based segregation once you've 'made it' is deeply flawed and selfish besides. 'Separate but equal' has been rejected as a standard of social structure based on race, and we will eventually move past this in terms of isolating the poor into districts with few resources and a low tax base. To see ourselves as islands is the greatest travesty in terms of our culture. We are a community, and you see otherwise liberal minds at their most grotesque when you propose to move the poor next door. It is decades after the racist image of the welfare queen was disseminated, and it still abides--no surprise that it will take generations to educate away the fear and resentment of the poor in our middle- and upper-class neighborhoods. A step in the right direction might be to empathize with the struggling, not stereotype them as flawed & criminal human beings.
6
Stop citing studies where a million factors may not have been controlled for in the almighty regression analyses.
I live in a middle class neighborhood, low crime, good schools, nice place, with community centers for swimming pools and basketball courts. Apartment buildings came up nearby - not even prop 8 housing. The teenagers from the apartments started to occupy the bball court. One day, shooting happened at the bball court. The court has been shut down for a year so far. Before re-opening, the HOA is now building a high fence with spear tops. It looks like a prison.
I grew up poor, I worked hard to get where I am. I didn't take government giveaways. Tell me again I am selfish not to want crime brought to my neighborhood.
I live in a middle class neighborhood, low crime, good schools, nice place, with community centers for swimming pools and basketball courts. Apartment buildings came up nearby - not even prop 8 housing. The teenagers from the apartments started to occupy the bball court. One day, shooting happened at the bball court. The court has been shut down for a year so far. Before re-opening, the HOA is now building a high fence with spear tops. It looks like a prison.
I grew up poor, I worked hard to get where I am. I didn't take government giveaways. Tell me again I am selfish not to want crime brought to my neighborhood.
4
Thank you, NYT, for this article. Marginalizing the poor is not just a Houston issue, but a national one, this situation reflective of many cities in our country. In the wake of Independence Day, I think it's important to remember that sharing is patriotic. Helping your neighbor and her family thrive through the support of policies that respect human dignity should be apart of every citizen's values. Having access to so much, while actively blocking others from benefiting from the same amenities, breeds resentment and distrust in communities. Crime spawns in this environment, when the bitterness of certain groups having so much while others suffer with less, spills over the boiling point.
How bad could it really be to allow poor children to attend school with more well-off ones? Show me the study that says that helping economically deprived students sabotaged richer students' chances of getting into Harvard. Nonsense. We need to adjust our national collective attitude and stop being so selfish.
How bad could it really be to allow poor children to attend school with more well-off ones? Show me the study that says that helping economically deprived students sabotaged richer students' chances of getting into Harvard. Nonsense. We need to adjust our national collective attitude and stop being so selfish.
2
I live in a city where there are daily shootings on the West side of town. Someone bumps you in the line of a neighborhood pot luck in the park? Pull out your gun and shoot him and then everyone else pulls out his gun and starts shooting. Yes, this DID happen on Thanksgiving Day! This West End neighborhood is both poor black and white - nicely integrated.
I think very few people today would be upset if someone of a different race moved into their neighborhood who was of similar socio-economic class. THey would want to protect their investment in their home just as much as anyone who buys in the neighborhood.
A neighborhood that mixes rentals - particularly Section 8 - and owner-occupied property is going to have problems. It appears that many, many tenants just do not feel any obligation to do the most simple caring of the property in which they are living. Heck, that occurs with extremely high priced rentals in fashionable vacations places! Just ask the owners how some renters leave a house for which they paid $25,000 a WEEK rent!
I find if interesting that for generations, poor people who worked hard did manage to come out of neighborhoods far poorer than anything that even exists today. How did the Jews on the Lower East Side manage? It sure wasn't Section 8 housing putting them in Scarsdale! They worked hard, and got an education. They moved to a nicer neighborhood.
I think very few people today would be upset if someone of a different race moved into their neighborhood who was of similar socio-economic class. THey would want to protect their investment in their home just as much as anyone who buys in the neighborhood.
A neighborhood that mixes rentals - particularly Section 8 - and owner-occupied property is going to have problems. It appears that many, many tenants just do not feel any obligation to do the most simple caring of the property in which they are living. Heck, that occurs with extremely high priced rentals in fashionable vacations places! Just ask the owners how some renters leave a house for which they paid $25,000 a WEEK rent!
I find if interesting that for generations, poor people who worked hard did manage to come out of neighborhoods far poorer than anything that even exists today. How did the Jews on the Lower East Side manage? It sure wasn't Section 8 housing putting them in Scarsdale! They worked hard, and got an education. They moved to a nicer neighborhood.
55
Integrated neighborhoods are not only good for minority kids, they are good for white kids who learn how to live in a diverse world. Institutional racism is deeply built into US society. If liberals think Trump is an aberration just study the history of race in America. As Malcolm said about racism, "it's as American as apple pie."
2
When my friend moved into a neighborhood with a subsidized housing unit, they saw several murdered bodies that year.
16
Several murdered bodies? Sure, lady. Stop spreading stories and focus on the facts:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/46506371/The_Impact_Of_Su...
http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/46506371/The_Impact_Of_Su...
Rosie, I'm a progressive and yes I am just stating the facts: Venice Beach, early 90's. The cops were too scared to go in the neighborhood. It's called gang violence and it's not a made up thing in LA. Just because the facts don't feed your narrative, doesn't mean they should be ignored or discounted. Same goes for those who discount climate change science for their narrative.
2
Houston....with disdain for diversity. Wonder how George W. Bush, the Texas exgovernor, feels about this. Surely Ted Cruz is happy, another Texan. And Rick Perry? He's forgotten about the people of Texas already.
Do Republicans think "minorities" which will soon in our lifetime not be "minorities" will just disappear? They sure are trying. Doing away with public education, doing away with healthcare, doing away with housing, doing away with safe water....maybe eventually minorities will just disappear, right, Republicans?
How they insult the integrity and values of this country.
And Ben Carson? He gives a whopping "No Comment" which tells us whose side he is on. Not much passion or commitment coming from him these days. No difference than his campaign. What could we expect?
Do Republicans think "minorities" which will soon in our lifetime not be "minorities" will just disappear? They sure are trying. Doing away with public education, doing away with healthcare, doing away with housing, doing away with safe water....maybe eventually minorities will just disappear, right, Republicans?
How they insult the integrity and values of this country.
And Ben Carson? He gives a whopping "No Comment" which tells us whose side he is on. Not much passion or commitment coming from him these days. No difference than his campaign. What could we expect?
2
One Houston resident in the article (rich I assume) seemed to suggest that if those"poor blacks" move into Galleria that they will not keep their properties tidy- I guess because he thinks the darker your skin is the lazier you are? Growing up in very segregated NJ I've seen how much black and Hispanic folks bend over backwards trying to prove to whites that they're clean, tidy, always keep up their yards, properties: it was never good enough and nothing will change whites attitudes.
America is so segregated because Americans WANT it to be that way, it is merely self-perpetuating. And I'm sure a lot of those rich Galleria residents are liberals who scream "I voted for Bernie, I voted for Obama!" People say they want racial harmony but only if someone else does it.
America is so segregated because Americans WANT it to be that way, it is merely self-perpetuating. And I'm sure a lot of those rich Galleria residents are liberals who scream "I voted for Bernie, I voted for Obama!" People say they want racial harmony but only if someone else does it.
3
I work in a health care environment in a very affluent area, I spend over half my salary on rent to live close to my workplace. Other employees, who make much less than I do, drive an hour or more (no public transportation here) to come to work. We are constantly understaffed due to this. EVERY retail establishment, restaurant, etc around us is as well. If we want to continue "growth", we really need to address this issue.
3
It has been shown in numerous studies on happiness that the level of personal contentment is relative to the surrounds. Thus a poor rural village can have a higher happiness quotient because most people are at the same level. Putting low income people who cannot afford what the wealthier neighbors take for granted leads to greater unhappiness and resentment.
5
Perhaps the entire model/approach needs to be reevaluated? Funding developers and landlords to build low income housing will inevitably lead to pockets of low income housing and concentrate those needing help in one area.
Perhaps funding those needing help and allowing them to select their housing would change the cycle. Of course developers and landlords might not like that model
Perhaps funding those needing help and allowing them to select their housing would change the cycle. Of course developers and landlords might not like that model
I gotta say, I always love seeing affluent, white liberals in major cities squirm at the prospect of minorities moving into their neighborhoods. It's just too rich. I thought you people adored blacks and Hispanics? Like Ms. Palay said, face your fears. Practice what you preach, or else stop lecturing the rest of us about the need for diversity.
7
How do you know they are "liberal" in the Galleria area??? Newsflash-I live there. Not too liberal.
There is an obvious solution ; Reparations.
You cannot download slavery, Jim Crow, racism, institutional racism and redlining over 4 or 5 centuries onto a certain group, and then expect them to suddenly act accordingly as to what the privileged ( white ) masses expect.
I can see the eye rolling, hear the deep heavy sighs and feel the blow black proclaiming we are all racially harmonious now that we have had a Black President that was filibustered and disrespected for eight years.
Of course, everything is fine now and all '' those '' people just have to get their act together. Otherwise '' Dey got ta go ! ''
Right,
You cannot download slavery, Jim Crow, racism, institutional racism and redlining over 4 or 5 centuries onto a certain group, and then expect them to suddenly act accordingly as to what the privileged ( white ) masses expect.
I can see the eye rolling, hear the deep heavy sighs and feel the blow black proclaiming we are all racially harmonious now that we have had a Black President that was filibustered and disrespected for eight years.
Of course, everything is fine now and all '' those '' people just have to get their act together. Otherwise '' Dey got ta go ! ''
Right,
2
What would reparations accomplish?
1
Reparations? Really? From the tribal owners who sold their own to the Brits and Americans? Those reparations? Right after my check clears from my selling of slaves I will let you know. My forbears came from Europe and didn't own slaves. When will this excuse be retired?
3
Non-profit developers build primarily low income housing for residents who make a certain percentage below the median income of the region. They rent out 80% of the units in a development to low income folks; recently, more of the tax credits, managed by local authorities, are being granted to private (not non-profit) developers who build primarily middle-income to upscale housing -- a lot less of their units are devoted to affordable housing, and the people that do move in to those affordable units are discriminated in their own complex.
Cities allow private developers to gentrify the neighborhood while preventing displaced residents from having affordable housing. They grant awards to private developers in lieu of non-profit developers. Well to do people who have no other reason to move to impoverished neighborhoods are continuously trapped there.
Building tax credit developments in areas to be gentrified raises the tax base. More millennials come flooding in. In the end, they, and we all want a thriving, vibrant, neighborhood. At the same time, Inclusionary Zoning authorities argue for a distribution of low-income housing units throughout the city, including developed areas, but many of those residents do not want to be discriminated against in their own neighborhoods.
I argue for a grade of housing, not too wealthy, and not impoverished at all, in an area between the well to do and the poor. Grant more tax credits to non-profits who have that interest in mind.
Cities allow private developers to gentrify the neighborhood while preventing displaced residents from having affordable housing. They grant awards to private developers in lieu of non-profit developers. Well to do people who have no other reason to move to impoverished neighborhoods are continuously trapped there.
Building tax credit developments in areas to be gentrified raises the tax base. More millennials come flooding in. In the end, they, and we all want a thriving, vibrant, neighborhood. At the same time, Inclusionary Zoning authorities argue for a distribution of low-income housing units throughout the city, including developed areas, but many of those residents do not want to be discriminated against in their own neighborhoods.
I argue for a grade of housing, not too wealthy, and not impoverished at all, in an area between the well to do and the poor. Grant more tax credits to non-profits who have that interest in mind.
1
Ironically, all the dire warnings will come true, as a sort of self-fulfilling prophesy. If low income housing comes into a wealthy white neighborhood, there will always be a handful of homeowners who will panic sell. Some of their neighbors, who may not be quite as panicky, will see the for-sale signs, which will be their cue to panic and get out before the property values drop too much. Then the next wave will actually have to sell at a discount, and suddenly it becomes a game of hot potato. Eventually the housing prices drop enough that retail starts to bail out to wherever the former residents decided was their new safe haven. The tax base goes down, the schools deteriorate due to lack of funding, and anyone left in the area who has the money to do so sends their kids to private schools. I'm not sure what could be done to stop such a process. Unless maybe we had one giant national school system, instead of all this "local control." But that's politically impossible.
1
Why in the world would day, the government, intentionally put a low income project in a wealthy area?
These people have worked hard to avoid living in or around places like this, it's a slap in the face to every American has made it and become successful. No one deserves to live in a wealthy area just because the race is on the represented, it's absolute insanity.
Money always wins so I expect this project to not go forward
These people have worked hard to avoid living in or around places like this, it's a slap in the face to every American has made it and become successful. No one deserves to live in a wealthy area just because the race is on the represented, it's absolute insanity.
Money always wins so I expect this project to not go forward
8
The comments below show that many Americans have no learning curve--no clue about what actually goes on in this country for low-income people of all races, nationalities and religions. In my small town, there is an absolute scarcity of affordable housing either to rent or buy because local politicians, realtors, developers and business people want only the high-end housing anywhere in the county. People of modest means or just starting out struggle to find housing that they can afford. It's an American problem coast to coast that we are refusing to deal with. And to top it off, we now have a political know-nothing with far-out ideas in charge of HUD. What could go wrong? They'll be no progress for years.
1
The U.S. has the greatest income inequality, and the most poverty, of any developed country in the word (except England, which is tied).
We're the wealthiest country in the world. We could eliminate poverty by taxing the rich at a fair rate and giving the money to the poor.
This story shows that our fundamental problem is poverty. In this case, when you have huge numbers of poor people, you can't have integrated housing, because they can overwhelm a neighborhood.
We're the wealthiest country in the world. We could eliminate poverty by taxing the rich at a fair rate and giving the money to the poor.
This story shows that our fundamental problem is poverty. In this case, when you have huge numbers of poor people, you can't have integrated housing, because they can overwhelm a neighborhood.
3
Where do you think James Harden lives? Where do you think Chris Paul is going to live? Not in the 5th Ward, a poor part of town. People in Houston are not segregated by race; they are separated by economics and comfort bias. Chinese poor live in Chinatown. Mexican poor live in the East End. Black poor live in the 5th Ward. There are cheap apartments available in other parts of town, but people tend to live where they feel comfortable. I personally don't think economic mixing has any place in town as a policy. James Harden and all the other minority rich will live in a rich part of town along with people of Asian, Indian, European, and African descent. That is not racism and if James Harden is not allowed to buy a house in River Oaks because of his race, that is a crime and should be prosecuted. But seriously, putting up a housing project in that area will hurt everyone.
11
Black people will need to find different ways to access credit. The story of who gets to access credit and how is a really important story about who gets to access upward mobility in America.
it’s harder to integrate than to segregate, and to do so the cities that practically invented modern segregation will have to reinvent themselves and that's not going to happen any time soon in racist America.
it’s harder to integrate than to segregate, and to do so the cities that practically invented modern segregation will have to reinvent themselves and that's not going to happen any time soon in racist America.
1
This isn't primarily about racism...
It's about paying one's way to live where one wants - and not having to pay the way of someone who can't or won't...
Without the personal investment of paying for their living space, people will fall back onto two behaviors...
Doing much less to keep their living spaces livable - on the average - than folks who pay their way...And blaming the "staff"...
Look the other way, as bad actors use public housing - and its law-abiding residents - the way ISIS uses civilian hostages...
All this crime - but nobody every sees anything...
Until a police officer pulls out a gun...
Then, several videos being recorded (often on the latest iPhone) - and edited and going viral...
It's about paying one's way to live where one wants - and not having to pay the way of someone who can't or won't...
Without the personal investment of paying for their living space, people will fall back onto two behaviors...
Doing much less to keep their living spaces livable - on the average - than folks who pay their way...And blaming the "staff"...
Look the other way, as bad actors use public housing - and its law-abiding residents - the way ISIS uses civilian hostages...
All this crime - but nobody every sees anything...
Until a police officer pulls out a gun...
Then, several videos being recorded (often on the latest iPhone) - and edited and going viral...
7
Hold the presses! You're telling me that affluent, educated, cultured families living in safe, desirable areas of the city aren't rolling out the welcome mat to invite the poverty-stricken masses into their neighborhoods, with all the attendant rises in crime, noise, intraneighborhood tension, miscreant behavior, and general thuggishness? Another stunning investigative reveal by the Paper of Record.
26
The primary "cultural" aspect that identifies the US, and has its entire history, is racism. Why anyone thinks our politicians -- who are nothing but lying thieves who work for the rich -- would behave as humane human beings, is simply beyond me.
1
This is not simply a racial problem, it is a class problem as well. Low class is low class, no matter the race, and those with enough on the ball to own a decent house in a decent neighborhood don't want trash living next door. That's been the case forever and forced housing integration will not change it, it will only intensify the animosity between the classes.
17
These stories are always written from the perspective at building low-income housing in wealthier areas is a universal good, and that people who oppose it are at best delusional / irrational.
Then come the comments where people talk about real problems with this housing in their real neighborhoods. The most liberal person I know recently told me Section 8 tenants had brought crime and chaos to his street.
If these people are not all crazy, why aren't those issues raised in stories like this.? Isn't that what journalism is supposed to do?
Then come the comments where people talk about real problems with this housing in their real neighborhoods. The most liberal person I know recently told me Section 8 tenants had brought crime and chaos to his street.
If these people are not all crazy, why aren't those issues raised in stories like this.? Isn't that what journalism is supposed to do?
95
So you think journalism is supposed to spread racism? Good luck with that.
Jeff, my friend's wife has been attacked. Their car was vandalized. He was chased. This is a Super-Dem. Unfair, knee jerk accusations of racism helped get us Trump.
11
"Unfair, knee jerk accusations of racism helped get us Trump."
I don't think you could explain that if you had to.
You wouldn't even know where to begin, would you?
You wish it were true.
But it isn't.
I don't think you could explain that if you had to.
You wouldn't even know where to begin, would you?
You wish it were true.
But it isn't.
The kind of social engineering described in this article is a mistake that only breeds more resentment on both sides and hardens the already polarized views. We need to make changes through education. Class size should be tied to measures of academic performance. Poor performance should mandate smaller class size.
14
This is impossible to do where you have classes exclusively of poor children, witness Washington D.C. where the school system did not lack for resources or money, but the results have always been terrible. Depending on schools to extricate us from the results of three centuries of slavery and jim crow will always fail.
1
Houston is the focus of this article, but my city -- San Francisco -- could just as easily have been. Whether they be white, black or green, homeowners don't want low-income housing built in their neighborhoods.
Many will argue that "low income" means "black," and so opposing government-funded low-income housing in one's neighborhood means one is a racist. That argument has always struck me as quite a stretch. No question that "low-income housing is coming to your neighborhood" translates to "expect more crime" for most existing residents, but that doesn't mean they're racists. It means simply that "low-income housing" means "expect more crime;" statistics show that that expectation turns into reality nearly every time.
I don't think any residents of established neighborhoods would feel better about being burglarized by a white burglar than by a black burglar. They just don't want to be burglarized, period, and they know that low-income housing in their neighborhood will mean more burglaries (and other crimes).
Regardless of the explanation, I can assure you that NIMBYism is just as alive and well in San Francisco as it is in Houston.
Many will argue that "low income" means "black," and so opposing government-funded low-income housing in one's neighborhood means one is a racist. That argument has always struck me as quite a stretch. No question that "low-income housing is coming to your neighborhood" translates to "expect more crime" for most existing residents, but that doesn't mean they're racists. It means simply that "low-income housing" means "expect more crime;" statistics show that that expectation turns into reality nearly every time.
I don't think any residents of established neighborhoods would feel better about being burglarized by a white burglar than by a black burglar. They just don't want to be burglarized, period, and they know that low-income housing in their neighborhood will mean more burglaries (and other crimes).
Regardless of the explanation, I can assure you that NIMBYism is just as alive and well in San Francisco as it is in Houston.
69
James Smith is right. Put low income housing in someone's backyard that doesn't want it there and they're going to find themselves a new backyard that doesn't have it.
39
There is only so much land and Houston's commute already sucks. I'm nit voting for my tax Dillard's to be spent for new roads and schools to help white flight. You can count on that.
If Sylvester Turner thinks this is the way to build a better Houston, the God Bless Him, but he is wrong and be re-elected by turning his back on his black and brown constituents. White folks never "reward" Black folks for doing the "right" thing. And it's always, but always our fault for not achieving the American dream. Because we are not, at the end of the day "American "!!!
If Sylvester Turner thinks this is the way to build a better Houston, the God Bless Him, but he is wrong and be re-elected by turning his back on his black and brown constituents. White folks never "reward" Black folks for doing the "right" thing. And it's always, but always our fault for not achieving the American dream. Because we are not, at the end of the day "American "!!!
Wealthy people moving to enclave-like areas are a big problem. Here in the suburbs, the subdivisions are developed to be suited to particular wealth-defined classes--your half-million dollar neighborhoods and your mid-$100,000 homes, etc. When we moved from the city to the burbs, we picked the lower end home subdivision, which the developer built immediately adjacent to the $500,000 neighborhood. Those wealthy people filed labs development objections because they, seriously, were concerned that motorcycle gangs and drug dealers were moving in. Instead, on our isolated "circle" we had 21 houses of approximately 1,700 sq ft surrounded by woods where our kids grew up outside with lots of playmates. When the developer began to develop a similar tract down the road, I recall one of my wealthy neighbors, a high school teacher, bemoan the fact (to my face), that the developer was putting up "glorified hunting cabins" down the street. I recall growing up in a town in south jersey, a Quaker community. It was, overall, quite affluent, but in the house by house development--the non-subdivision olde way, wealthy home owners often lived next to people of lesser means. Everyone got along. It is sad how fear stymies a return to a system where various social classes could live happily as neighbors.
14
I am skeptical that low income complexes plunked down in wealthy neighborhoods offer much hope of true integration. They always seem like isolated islands that non-residents don't visit much because of crime/drug activity. Better, I think, in terms of integration is when cities require x number of apartments in new developments (of equal size and amenity to the other apartments) to be part of an affordable housing program. This seems more likely to encourage actual integration.
20
I live next to public housing in this university town. The town owns the apartments, which are duplexes with open area around them for tricycles and car parking. Most important, the town makes sure the tenants abide by the law. I think the town has the discretion to evict a tenant for any reason. In any case, at first, maybe twenty years ago, drug dealers got started in the project, but that ended quickly. Since then, even loud music that might offend us middle-class neighbors is stopped if there is a complaint. I conclude that, as with any housing, housing for the poor is fine as long as the landlord has the right and carries out the right to enforce proper behavior among the tenants. They should behave as we do, respecting one another's rights, and then they are welcome. The question is, how will the Houston project be managed once it has been built? By the way, our middle-class houses, which are within sight of this public project of about 100 residences, sell just fine.
20
I am conflicted by your post. Who "enforces" how you live? Do you keep your yard up, keep your house freshly painted, with a new roof every 15-20 years?
Glad you are open, but I bet the people of that development are harassed by the police constantly to keep their music down...
Glad you are open, but I bet the people of that development are harassed by the police constantly to keep their music down...
1
I have not noted excessive presence of the police in the complex. Here are some requirements the town places on applicants for public housing:
i. Have not at any displayed abusive, harassing, or violent behavior towards any Town staff, and/or residents;
j. Whose past performance in meeting financial obligations, especially rent, is satisfactory;
k. Who has no record of neighborhood disturbances, destruction of property, living or housekeeping habits from prior residences that would adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of other tenants;
l. Who has no record of criminal activity involving crimes of physical violence to persons, property which would adversely affect the safety or welfare of other tenants;
m. Who has no record (in the past 15 years) of illegal drug activity except for Methamphetamine;
n. Who do not owe rent or other charges to any Public Housing Agency or to any Section 8 Program.
o. Were not previously evicted.
I would expect these requirements would be necessary to remain in the unit, as well. If I were renting to someone, this is what I would also require from them.
i. Have not at any displayed abusive, harassing, or violent behavior towards any Town staff, and/or residents;
j. Whose past performance in meeting financial obligations, especially rent, is satisfactory;
k. Who has no record of neighborhood disturbances, destruction of property, living or housekeeping habits from prior residences that would adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of other tenants;
l. Who has no record of criminal activity involving crimes of physical violence to persons, property which would adversely affect the safety or welfare of other tenants;
m. Who has no record (in the past 15 years) of illegal drug activity except for Methamphetamine;
n. Who do not owe rent or other charges to any Public Housing Agency or to any Section 8 Program.
o. Were not previously evicted.
I would expect these requirements would be necessary to remain in the unit, as well. If I were renting to someone, this is what I would also require from them.
It does make sense to improve the quality of housing, schools, transportation and shopping in the existing low income areas to help the residents and perhaps attract others to live there.
5
But it hasn't worked for 60 years. Time for a different approach. Or at least a multi-pronged approach. Wasn't that what Jack Kemp was trying to do?
First, I'm a huge supporter of affordable housing programs. But, I think that the fundamental flaw here is an outdated model that builds affordable units in large and yes, segregated, buildings. I believe that integrating low, moderate and market rate housing in every development is a far preferable model, albeit much harder to accomplish from a funding and policy perspective. I'm fortunate enough to live in just such a in a mixed income development in Boston of 184 units where roughly half are market rate and half are affordable. This means that on my building alone we have a wonderful mix of families that includes single moms, mixed generational families, young parents, medical students from BU, empty nesters, and just about every part of the rainbow of humans including gay couples, Dominicans, Asians, African-Americans, muslims, you name it and that's us. Many of us have lived here for the entire 14 years since the building was constructed simply because this is such a wonderful, vibrant community of everyone when the economic segregation is at least partly removed from who you have as a neighbor.
22
I live in a similar mixed-income development in New York City and my experience is exactly the same as Jim Smith's.
2
Jim, I agree. The large-unit "projects" are a bad and antiquated idea. Far, far better to spread those who need public housing around in a low, middle, high mix. It makes for better social integration and less crime vectors. As you point out, it's awfully hard to do though, even though it's by far the best solution.
2
So now housing, especially low income housing is responsible for segregated communities? I don't buy it. How about income, education, jobs, transportation and availability of government and commercial services including health care, public safety, parks and recreation and every other element that contributes to good and decent living? How do tax rates affect communities?
Poverty, segregation, race relations, better communities, access to education and other issues are not stand alone contributors to segregation or desegregation.
I live in a gated community in Florida. I'm a a retired senior. So are the 126,000 other residents of this 3 county area that includes Sumter, Lake and Marion counties. There is also low income housing here but it is outside the gates. Is that segregation? The Villages is also adding 14,000 more housing units for seniors in a new section across Route 44. That means more construction and maintenance jobs as well as retail stores, expansion of schools, more roads, health care services and much more. There is no sign that says "No Minorities".
There is however an economic/income standard within the gates that must be reached to live here. Is that discriminatory?
The African American residents are 1.8% of the population of The Villages. Should the private builder be compelled to build lower cost housing to accommodate thousands more people earning less? At what price to current residents?
How about job programs and education to end segregation.
Poverty, segregation, race relations, better communities, access to education and other issues are not stand alone contributors to segregation or desegregation.
I live in a gated community in Florida. I'm a a retired senior. So are the 126,000 other residents of this 3 county area that includes Sumter, Lake and Marion counties. There is also low income housing here but it is outside the gates. Is that segregation? The Villages is also adding 14,000 more housing units for seniors in a new section across Route 44. That means more construction and maintenance jobs as well as retail stores, expansion of schools, more roads, health care services and much more. There is no sign that says "No Minorities".
There is however an economic/income standard within the gates that must be reached to live here. Is that discriminatory?
The African American residents are 1.8% of the population of The Villages. Should the private builder be compelled to build lower cost housing to accommodate thousands more people earning less? At what price to current residents?
How about job programs and education to end segregation.
10
Yes, it is segregation. Policies in America prevent black and brown people from gaining the opportunity and wealth you take for granted but are too smug to see.
St. Peter will ask you a similar question at the Pearly Gates. Is that segregation? I believe Jesus had a soft spot for the poor and downtrodden. Or maybe you inked believe in the prosperity gospel.
St. Peter will ask you a similar question at the Pearly Gates. Is that segregation? I believe Jesus had a soft spot for the poor and downtrodden. Or maybe you inked believe in the prosperity gospel.
The developer builds the low income units and sells them at regulated lower price levels and increases the cost everyone else pays. It is another hidden tax the no one will readily tell you about. Or how much you are paying.
1
Whoa! Too smug to see! Hold on AFH! I come from poverty that you can't begin to imagine. I was born in the South Bronx. We had nothing! I don't take what I have for granted. I'm thankful everyday. I worked my tail off in school, then the service and finally from college, graduating with 2 master's degrees from Penn State with honors by the way. I worked. I painted dormitories to pay my way, drove cars at an auction, changed oil on cars, cut grass, sorted slides and mounted them in a photo lab and did every and any low level job I could find to pay my way. My parents lived through the Great Depression and had their college education cut short by World War II. My dad served in the Army Engineer Corps in the Pacific and my mom was a Navy petty officer.
We all learned long to work hard and appreciate what you've earned. We didn't ask for help. There were no food stamps, no housing subsidies, no welfare and no health insurance.
No AFH, it is not segregation. Its what you want to make of life. We sucked it up, didn't complain and worked to get where we are.
My wife and I are in 3% income bracket. We each worked more than 40 years to get here. We're not smug. Just very grateful to be here, be healthy and enjoy our retirement. We earned it.
We all learned long to work hard and appreciate what you've earned. We didn't ask for help. There were no food stamps, no housing subsidies, no welfare and no health insurance.
No AFH, it is not segregation. Its what you want to make of life. We sucked it up, didn't complain and worked to get where we are.
My wife and I are in 3% income bracket. We each worked more than 40 years to get here. We're not smug. Just very grateful to be here, be healthy and enjoy our retirement. We earned it.
2
A different way. This is a problem that has existed for the 50 years I have been developing affordable housing. There is no one answer but a 100% segregated project in the middle of an upper middle class neighborhood is not it. I am part of the experiment to truly integrate, by age race and income, a New Jersey neighborhood. We will build integrated housing with social services in the community that will serve all. I have tried inner city gentrification and it doesn't work if you don't raise the entire community up, improve schools and provide the same level of community services found in suburbia. unfortunately, Cities often don't have the funds. TIFs must be used to encourage developers to help, and enlightened government must start a real dialogue so that this kind of debate is meaningless. On this 4th of July seemed we should be talking about citizens, not poor or rich citizens. We must face this basic problem so that we can proudly say,"All people are created equal."
6
It may be very difficult for anybody to see but the unintended and invisible consequences of racism as public policy can have a more devastating effect on the white population than on Blacks and other minorities.
Forget the percentages but in sheer numbers, there are two and a half times as many poor whites as there are Blacks.
Let me cite two examples: Mayor Young in Detroit was one of the first big city mayors—outside California and New York—to set up public AIDS clinics. The immediate consequence was a sudden spike in Detroit’s white male population of IV drug users--a phenomenon defying Detroit's white flight. The data showed that white males were flocking to Detroit from surrounding white suburbs, readily admitting that they were drug users from Detroit rather than acknowledging that they were suburban and homosexuals.
A second observation resulted from the 2008 recession. A number of churches in Detroit’s Black communities had been operating food banks since the 1990’s. But, as the 2008 recession intensified, the majority of those lining up outside Detroit Black churches were suburban whites.
They were there for two reasons: 1) white suburbia refused to acknowledge
white poverty and 2) there were no food banks in white neighborhoods to serve the needy.
This continued belief that government assistance is only demanded by the “undeserving" Black poor is destroying the safety nets that 40% of American ought to expect and to have.
Trump calls it “mean.”
Forget the percentages but in sheer numbers, there are two and a half times as many poor whites as there are Blacks.
Let me cite two examples: Mayor Young in Detroit was one of the first big city mayors—outside California and New York—to set up public AIDS clinics. The immediate consequence was a sudden spike in Detroit’s white male population of IV drug users--a phenomenon defying Detroit's white flight. The data showed that white males were flocking to Detroit from surrounding white suburbs, readily admitting that they were drug users from Detroit rather than acknowledging that they were suburban and homosexuals.
A second observation resulted from the 2008 recession. A number of churches in Detroit’s Black communities had been operating food banks since the 1990’s. But, as the 2008 recession intensified, the majority of those lining up outside Detroit Black churches were suburban whites.
They were there for two reasons: 1) white suburbia refused to acknowledge
white poverty and 2) there were no food banks in white neighborhoods to serve the needy.
This continued belief that government assistance is only demanded by the “undeserving" Black poor is destroying the safety nets that 40% of American ought to expect and to have.
Trump calls it “mean.”
10
In the same building footprint you can put public housing, or high end condos.
In that zip code, which will bring in more tax dollars?
As for schools, people with money have the time and resources to be involved and complain very effectively. Their lawyers get their phone calls returned, and issues addressed.
Every remedial, needs teacher, or ESOL class takes a STEM or AP class away.
Negatively effecting people's perceived property value's and children's education are a sure way to commit political suicide.
And the poor don't vote as often, and don't make campaign contributions.
Arguments against this will die long before they hit the Supreme Court.
In that zip code, which will bring in more tax dollars?
As for schools, people with money have the time and resources to be involved and complain very effectively. Their lawyers get their phone calls returned, and issues addressed.
Every remedial, needs teacher, or ESOL class takes a STEM or AP class away.
Negatively effecting people's perceived property value's and children's education are a sure way to commit political suicide.
And the poor don't vote as often, and don't make campaign contributions.
Arguments against this will die long before they hit the Supreme Court.
1
I love how the NYT's tries to painted wealthy neighborhoods as full of these evil people who want to keep the Black man at bay. But realistically, does the NYT's know what happens when housing projects are built in high income neighborhoods? Housing values drop, cheapening the neighborhood, the wealthy residents move, and within 20-30 years, you have a low income neighborhood with dilapidated houses. Housing projects should be built with cost in mind so I congratulate Mayor Turner for his oppositions on those grounds.
39
Is it wrong for local government to use zoning ordinances and the like to exclude poor people? Yes. In a free country, you should not have a right to create laws to legislate what types of neighbors you have. Elected government should not be be in the business of exclusion. End Euclidean zoning now.
A biased and damaging headline...was there a point behind this language? It's not the program that causes the problem. But never mind it serves the new right wing agenda the NYT is getting comfortable with.
3
This article superficially assumes that all stigma associated with Section 8 housing are race based. That's the easy article to write - the one that doesn't require consideration of the other myriad failures of the subsidized housing system in our country. Slumlords do allow all manner of nonresidents to live and lurk on their properties. They do not secure their properties against crime, even when HUD earmarks for security are provided. They can fail REAC inspections endlessly, knowing that the government has nowhere else to place residents. Sympathies to the author, but this article reads like a typical white dude in an academic setting who assumes that not wanting Section 8 nearby is more the result of racism than anything else. For some that may be the case. But if you really want to know about the failures in Section 8 housing, read the pleadings in a negligent security lawsuit. Then read the depositions of the owners and managers. You will find there are other, "nonracist" reasons for not wanting Section 8 next door, at least until owners and managers of these properties are held to account so that the intended beneficiaries can live and raise families in the safe and dignified environment to which we are all entitled.
96
"You will find there are other, "nonracist" reasons for not wanting Section 8 next door, at least until owners and managers of these properties are held to account so that the intended beneficiaries can live and raise families in the safe and dignified environment to which we are all entitled."
What a relief to have the likes of Jared Kushner in the ear of POTUS 45, then? MAGAMAGAMGA!
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/23/magazine/jared-kushners-other-real-es...
What a relief to have the likes of Jared Kushner in the ear of POTUS 45, then? MAGAMAGAMGA!
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/23/magazine/jared-kushners-other-real-es...
"Sympathies to the author, but this article reads like a typical white dude in an academic setting who assumes that not wanting Section 8 nearby is more the result of racism than anything else."
Check the bylines (plural) before making that assumption.
Check the bylines (plural) before making that assumption.
1
That it reads a certain way is wholly separate from whatever the actual composition of contributing authors may be.
1
Liberals are for low income housing schemes because it keeps them away.
Helpifying poor communities has been a containment strategy by Democrats.
Decades and trillions later, and the help won't stop.
Helpifying poor communities has been a containment strategy by Democrats.
Decades and trillions later, and the help won't stop.
8
In India also politicians prefer that people remain illiterate and poor so that they can be exploited to the maximum for political gains.
7
I live in deep blue Massachusetts, chock full of smug and wealthy champagne liberals, and the Repubs have nothing on them for Nimbyism. Housing is not a Repub vs Dem conflict, it's a class conflict.
73
" Housing is not a Repub vs Dem conflict, it's a class conflict."
Exactly! Discussion of social class is the last taboo in this country. Everyone wants to pretend it doesn't exist.
Exactly! Discussion of social class is the last taboo in this country. Everyone wants to pretend it doesn't exist.
3
Many of the comments I've seen thus far have been appalling. What's with the "not in my neighborhood" and "those poor people are lazy" sentiment. Complaining that poor people are lazy is complete and utter phooey. I hope the supposedly sophisticated readers of the New York Times would agree. If I'm wrong and the NYT readers are not that sophisticated I hope they can start reading up on the vast (and I do mean vast) amounts of data that point to low income and laziness being two completely unrelated phenomenons. Also, how does offering low income housing in a more affluent area invite high levels of crime? That doesn't even make any sense. Crime is inseparably tied to poverty and the whole idea of bringing low income to more affluent areas is to remove poverty from the lives of people that currently live in those areas.
24
Low income housing is a very big issue in my town. Recently the city council has allowed developers in high end developments to buy their way out of providing affordable units in that development.
Studies show that the biggest determiner of intergenerational poverty is living in what people have described as ghettos. When a low income person lives in an affluent community, it breaks the cycle of poverty.
Santa Fe used to be such a town--wealthy living next to poor. Thanks to the current city administration and the two mayors before, we now have many gated communities and definitely an increasingly divisive "us v them" mentality depending on which side of town you live in. More housing in poor neighborhoods may relieve the housing problem. It will not eliminate poverty.
Studies show that the biggest determiner of intergenerational poverty is living in what people have described as ghettos. When a low income person lives in an affluent community, it breaks the cycle of poverty.
Santa Fe used to be such a town--wealthy living next to poor. Thanks to the current city administration and the two mayors before, we now have many gated communities and definitely an increasingly divisive "us v them" mentality depending on which side of town you live in. More housing in poor neighborhoods may relieve the housing problem. It will not eliminate poverty.
11
Rational behavior, and the pleasantries it brings, has nothing to do with wealth or education. There are billions of poor, uneducated people around the globe who do not partake in crime, drugs, or violence in any way. And while their dwellings may be modest, they live perfectly agreeable lives. The "blight" we see around low income housing is caused by personal behavior and poor character. Not lack of money.
22
Really, I live in what is considered a poor neighborhood and the blight I see is because the city can't afford to fix every sidewalk, and the 19th century school across the street was impossible to modernize so it closed down, and the 19th century mill buildings struggle to house new businesses because you buy products from China.
Yoo-hoo, Liberals, over here! It's not about race, it's not even about poverty; it's about crime. You lost and will keep losing until you see the difference and stop blaming people from wanting to protect their homes and families.
29
What about the need to increase revenues to accommodate the children of low income parents into wealthier local school systems? Who pays for that?
4
The writer neglected to mention the housing crisis faced by a huge subset of low income Americans - that is housing for low income seniors and the disabled. More affluent neighborhoods might not object to the introduction of attractive, innovative housing designed for and restricted to seniors and the disabled, because people in this demographic pose NO physical threat and are far less likely to be violent criminals than younger and non disabled people. In fact, seniors and the disabled are frequently preyed upon by violent criminals and desperately need safe housing solutions. Building more projects specifically for this endangered group, and locating these projects in safer neighborhoods should be the first priority.
16
I feel as though Houston was the wrong city to focus on. We have one of the only cities that lacks zoning ordinances, resulting in reinvestment in all sorts of areas. This article has failed to mention that EaDo, Midtown (formerly 4th Ward), Medical, Montrose, and even South Union all have reinvestment projects going on. I can understand why people in Uptown (Galleria) would oppose this project. I'm Black, and I don't think that race has much of anything to do with the opposition. It isn't like there aren't minorities living in Uptown, Rice Village, or Upper Kirby (affluent areas), they're there. They too, oppose this kind of forced integration because it doesn't work. If people want to see what reinvestment looks like, look no further than 2nd Ward or South Union. I've seen new libraries, schools, townhouses, and apartments go up in low income areas that have greatly improved the neighborhood. I enjoy living in 3rd Ward myself (historically crime-ridden) and I've been able to enjoy a lot of that same reinvestment. People forget that the community is responsible for the neighborhood, it shouldn't be the work of the Federal government to come in and tell people how they should appropriate funds. Houston is probably the most diverse city in the United States.
124
Racial segregation is different from income isolation; the feds are dealing with structural, intergenerational limitations in contrast to individual initiatives which are improving people's lives, so both ideas have merit, I do believe.
Great comment.
Sorry. Houston is not more diverse than New York City.
2
Where in the world where you'll find an entire specialized - permanent -department (PSA) created WITHIN the main Police Department in a large city DEDICATED JUST FOR HOUSING?! This are called Housing Cops. Yes, millions spent JUST to control crimes within housing. Rejoice. These cops are strictly for HOUSING ONLY. They do not go outside for normal patrol activities.
4
This is America, so of course there's always going to be a problem with race -- but more specifically, it's a problem of class.
Therefore it's no surprise that proposing to put a low-income housing project, no matter how nice and new it looked, in an all-white upper-income area, is going to meet with resistance.
Make no mistake about it; the problem is largely a socio-economical one, based on a system that continues to allow the unequal distribution of wealth in this society.
But of course, it's racism as well.
Therefore it's no surprise that proposing to put a low-income housing project, no matter how nice and new it looked, in an all-white upper-income area, is going to meet with resistance.
Make no mistake about it; the problem is largely a socio-economical one, based on a system that continues to allow the unequal distribution of wealth in this society.
But of course, it's racism as well.
13
The program to spur low-income housing isn't keeping cities segregated. Rather, it's giving people who can't afford acceptable housing a place to live.
The segregation to which the article refers is much more a result of economic than racial differences. There are many, I believe, even more poor white people across the country--than there are poor people of color--living in sub-standard housing in "segregated" neighborhoods. One difference, right or wrong, is that many of these "poor whites" detest government hand-outs and see them as "something for nothing," perhaps irrationally. They see housing subsidies for people of color as a form of discrimination against them.
I'm far from a right wing conservative, but I see their point of view. What is the rationale for providing subsidized housing in affluent areas? Wouldn't it be possible to create more capacity in less exclusive neighborhoods? And, what about the costs to those living in the affluent areas? Why should some receive a free ticket to something others have worked very hard to obtain? There is racial discrimination still today, but it is far from impossible to work yourself up the economic ladder; many have and are doing it today.
A better title for this article might be "American Generosity Continues to Provide Housing for a Lucky Few of the Less Fortunate."
The segregation to which the article refers is much more a result of economic than racial differences. There are many, I believe, even more poor white people across the country--than there are poor people of color--living in sub-standard housing in "segregated" neighborhoods. One difference, right or wrong, is that many of these "poor whites" detest government hand-outs and see them as "something for nothing," perhaps irrationally. They see housing subsidies for people of color as a form of discrimination against them.
I'm far from a right wing conservative, but I see their point of view. What is the rationale for providing subsidized housing in affluent areas? Wouldn't it be possible to create more capacity in less exclusive neighborhoods? And, what about the costs to those living in the affluent areas? Why should some receive a free ticket to something others have worked very hard to obtain? There is racial discrimination still today, but it is far from impossible to work yourself up the economic ladder; many have and are doing it today.
A better title for this article might be "American Generosity Continues to Provide Housing for a Lucky Few of the Less Fortunate."
106
Not only that, but how do the poor feel living in these areas? If they go to the grocery store, it is full of fancy organic food at high prices, nothing they've ever heard of. At least in the poor neighborhoods, the businesses cater to their needs and pocketbooks.
2
You don't have to eat organic to eat healthy. I won't go to Whole Foods (I can afford to) because it's a rip off. There are other ways to eat healthy.
You can't have this discussion without talking about income disparity. I spent a good part of my childhood growing up in what was then an all-white town in the Midwest.
Doctors with a lot of kids lived in the huge old Victorians, and kids whose dads did repairs for Sears lived in the 2-families on the sidestreets. Everybody went to the same schools. Were in choir together, played football together, worked on the school newpaper together. And were also in AP classes together. Kids went off to Ivies and state schools from up and down the social spectrum.
My sister still lives there. But her kids went to private schools. So do the kids of her neighbors, who bought the old Victorians and poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into landscaping and gates and security systems.
There are no groups of kids playing on the streets. Nobody goes to those gated mansions on Halloween. And those little houses that used to be owned by hardworking families are now mostly rentals.
The public schools, now integrated, have declined. Once among the best in the state, they are now shunned by families that can afford private schools.
The town is no longer all white, either. But that seems like only the smallest factor, if it had any impact at all. People sending their kids to private schools brag about the diversity--but it's mostly the children of highly paid professionals like themselves, just nonwhite.
This is much bigger than a couple hundred units of affordable housing.
Doctors with a lot of kids lived in the huge old Victorians, and kids whose dads did repairs for Sears lived in the 2-families on the sidestreets. Everybody went to the same schools. Were in choir together, played football together, worked on the school newpaper together. And were also in AP classes together. Kids went off to Ivies and state schools from up and down the social spectrum.
My sister still lives there. But her kids went to private schools. So do the kids of her neighbors, who bought the old Victorians and poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into landscaping and gates and security systems.
There are no groups of kids playing on the streets. Nobody goes to those gated mansions on Halloween. And those little houses that used to be owned by hardworking families are now mostly rentals.
The public schools, now integrated, have declined. Once among the best in the state, they are now shunned by families that can afford private schools.
The town is no longer all white, either. But that seems like only the smallest factor, if it had any impact at all. People sending their kids to private schools brag about the diversity--but it's mostly the children of highly paid professionals like themselves, just nonwhite.
This is much bigger than a couple hundred units of affordable housing.
104
I agree with you. I came from the South Bronx and lived in a 2 room apartment with my mom, dad and sister for almost 6 years. It had no AC, no micro-wave, one closet, one bath, and the living room/kitchen were one small room. We were dirt poor. Cypress Avenue was desegregated. It was comprised of Italian, Jewish, Catholic, Irish, and African Americans, not to forget the Puerto Rican kids. We all went to the same school and we all played in groups on the streets. The cost of rent for the apartment was $35 a month. Who would live like that today? No one! Imagine living in a mixed neighborhood with no gangs, no drugs, no shootings and kids drawing a potsy on the sidewalk with chalk while others played jump rope? No one does that anymore! No one! They all hate each other so much!
And there are no jobs! In 1952 PS 65 was an old building. My father went to school there. I had his 1st grade teacher from the Great Depression.
The issue is not just low-income housing. The issue is race relations, jobs, jobs, and more jobs and access to decent education, transportation and public safety among many other unsolved issues. Those are some of the problems but they are not stand alone causes of segregation.
Look for solutions not a way to place blame.
And there are no jobs! In 1952 PS 65 was an old building. My father went to school there. I had his 1st grade teacher from the Great Depression.
The issue is not just low-income housing. The issue is race relations, jobs, jobs, and more jobs and access to decent education, transportation and public safety among many other unsolved issues. Those are some of the problems but they are not stand alone causes of segregation.
Look for solutions not a way to place blame.
66
You've just described the small town in which I live. When there was work here, people of all social classes did well. The MD's lived next door to people who were working for the bridge company or other industrial job. All the children wen't to the same school. MD's kids went to the Ivies, other kids to SUNY. In the last 40 years, the town has slipped lower and lower, older people have died, their large 4-5 bedroom houses have been split into boarding houses or several apartments. The big employers are no longer here. Since 2008, more and more welfare people have moved here, encouraged by social workers who tell them the rent is cheaper here. Welfare will pay $1100 a month for a small apartment for these people. Working people can't afford that much and are shunted into old run down buildings. The staff at the school hasn't changed significantly since 2008, but the formerly mid to high ratings of the schools has dropped to the level of ghetto schools. Our town is 98% white. The problem is social class, not race.
11
grmadragon NY - I also lived in a small town, Glens Falls NY and had an 1200 sq. ft Cape Cod home, also, one bath, but 3 small bedrooms, and this time a kitchen separate from the living room. We all had very little or nothing at all. My dad left when I was about 7 or so and din't come back until I was almost 12. The winters in Glens Falls were brutal. I don't ever remember my mom complaining and certainly my sister and I asked for nothing. Plus in 1956 a new baby brother arrived. We were poorer than church mice! But, we all got along, Just because we were poor didn't mean we killed each other, or joined gangs and robbed grocery stores or gas stations. Didn't happen. There were no drive by killings.
There was also no welfare, no food stamps, no legal aid, no housing or heating oil subsidy. And no expectation of any help from anyone. No one ever complained. Ever!
My sister and I went to Big Cross Elementary school and worked hard just like the other kids. All us made it. My sister went to Harvard, Temple and graduated from American University. I went to Penn State. Our 2 brothers (another came along) also did just fine.
My sister and I are very comfortably retired she in Scottsdale AZ and me in The Villages. Our kids are all successful too. My son is a lawyer in intellectual property in pharmaceuticals. He graduated from the University of PA. Our other kids are college professors and other professionals.
Its about jobs, working hard, and being self-reliant. And moral.
There was also no welfare, no food stamps, no legal aid, no housing or heating oil subsidy. And no expectation of any help from anyone. No one ever complained. Ever!
My sister and I went to Big Cross Elementary school and worked hard just like the other kids. All us made it. My sister went to Harvard, Temple and graduated from American University. I went to Penn State. Our 2 brothers (another came along) also did just fine.
My sister and I are very comfortably retired she in Scottsdale AZ and me in The Villages. Our kids are all successful too. My son is a lawyer in intellectual property in pharmaceuticals. He graduated from the University of PA. Our other kids are college professors and other professionals.
Its about jobs, working hard, and being self-reliant. And moral.
4
There is a very good alternative. Habitat for Humanity, which builds neighborhoods as ordinary people volunteer to build houses which people buy with no interest. The buyers have to put in 500 hours of sweat equity (e.g., building, painting, etc.). They are encouraged to have friends and family buy into these neighborhoods. As homeowners, they have every incentive to keep up their places.
30
I live in a rapidly gentrifying area of downtown Phoenix. Entire affordable complexes have been built that blend very nicely with the recently renovated single family historic homes and newly built high-priced condos, townhomes, and apartments. The low-income residents' incentives to keep up their homes is little different from my own - pride in living in a desirable location with amenities like parks, the light rail, increasing retail, and services within walking distance. To think the somehow, low income residents don't place value in many of the same things that I do is absurd. Some of my worst neighbors have been "upscale" residents in my former high-priced building who partied until 2AM with their drunken friends at the pool, or left their dogs to bark nonstop throughout the day and night, or never took out their trash, or left the security gate wide open for their own convenience. Wealth does not guarantee shared values or a law-abiding lifestyle. Many of the residents of the low-income buildings are friendly, enjoy walking their little beloved dogs, and wave from their chairs amid their potted plant covered front stoops. They, in fact, make the neighborhood feel neighborly. If we need a good alternative, that would be more empathy and less selfishness from those who are doing well. And I don't want to hear about their hard work; if they are like me, they have had plenty of assistance from family who have provided all the advantages.
1
The title to this piece on the NYTimes.com frontpage, "Housing Aid Does Little to End America’s Racial Divide" is misleading in the extreme. This is a story of NIMBYism being employed by localities to prevent federal housing policy from taking effect - however, the title suggests the right wing canard that federal antipoverty are a boondogle that do nothing for the poor. If a ship were downed by a torpedo, would you title the article - "Vessel Fails to Carry Passengers to Destination"? I think not. So call this what it is - "Affluent White Neighborhoods Thwart Federal Housing Programs."
26
Or perhaps the title should be " Hard working homeowners fight government backed social engineering"
9
“They’re going to sublet it out, and you won’t have any control over it,”
there is fairly simple way to make this difficult: electronic locks at the building entrances, one key fob for every authorized resident. If you take in 3 more people they cannot get additional fobs, and would have to be let in by someone every time they re-enter the building.
there is fairly simple way to make this difficult: electronic locks at the building entrances, one key fob for every authorized resident. If you take in 3 more people they cannot get additional fobs, and would have to be let in by someone every time they re-enter the building.
4
Interesting how gentrification (whites moving into traditionally minority and often poor neighborhoods) is seen as destroying the 'culture' and vibrancy of an area and is viewed as a terrible wrong. However, we're being told that the opposite (minorities and often poor people) moving into established and traditionally white neighborhoods is necessary and good for us because, unlike the traditionally minority neighborhoods, we must have more diversity- but only in majority white areas. Quite hypocritical.
321
Nothing seems to be inhibiting gentrification, despite the postured hand-wringing.
1
If they are so concerned about the bad schools, crime, etc., why do they keep having children? It only makes it worse for all concerned.
9
Gentrification destroys neighborhoods because the people who are forced out have minimal control over their housing. Due to, most recently, redlining and racialized banking practices in American cities, poor folks of color were systematically denied the opportunity to own their own homes in neighborhoods of their own choosing on reasonable terms. All of a sudden their neighborhood becomes fashionable, rents soar, and they are forced to leave without even benefitting from the sale of a home. On the other hand, residents in the Galleria neighborhood surely have built up lots of equity in their homes, so even if they CHOOSE to leave due to their discomfort with low income people of color, they maintain their wealth. Finally, it seems like from these comments that the only 'culture' of segregated white neighborhoods is to exclude black folks.
2
Whatever happened to actually earning things for yourself? I would love to have a house in the mountains and one at the beach, can the government please subsidize that for me? This social engineering stuff is insane and does nothing but bring the "nicer" places down which will cause the folks that live there to ultimately move elsewhere. It has nothing to do with race, everything to do with values.
139
So do you live in a low income area? It has all to do with race and social inequality. Mr/Ms rich person.. why don't you read? white privilege is real. very real. why do rich people want to live with 'their own kind?" because they know their values.. so give a helping hand to those who work but don't really make enough. I am sick of republicans and libertarians and their 'just do it yourself', not everyone can.. HELP people.
7
Get your head out of the sand. The government subsidizes the road going past your house or business. Majority vote decides whether teen-agers receive sex education and whether married couples get tax credits. Social engineering was present long before you were, deciding who marries, who adopts, who rules and on and on. The church does it, your community does it. Have you not noticed this?
There is a thing called Black privilege too. Just ask the Obamas and see where they decided to live.
5
BYW, whatever happened to the massive public housing project proposed by George Lucas near his Skywalker Ranch for Marin County in California?
8
google is thy friend.
2
Houston is famous (infamous) for not having zoning. Without zoning laws to rely on, what kind of machinations does the city have to go through to stop a private developer from building low-income housing? That, in itself, might be a telling story
7
US policy has always been "not in my backyard" and will continue to be so until states force the issue with laws. We have spent billions building in areas where no human wants to live and by doing so indicate we don't care for their safety or quality of being. We must provide all with human respect and dignity. I live in a rural area where poor and rich have to live together and the world still turns. A great law to change is untying location with school taxes. This has been the easiest and cowardly way of keeping your neighborhood "nice."
5
"states force the issue with laws"
And who will vote for these laws?
And who will vote for these laws?
2
Interesting, Why not start in the backyard of the people running the country then?
5
The conclusion of this article is false, the conclusion that the program is keeping America segregated. The author reports that low income housing is being built with support of the federal dollars in minority neighborhoods. Housing is being built there based on economics.
10
I am disappointed that the Times did not fully report the situation with the schools in the area. The elementary school described at the beginning is already on a lottery where residents don't know if their children can attend. How would a new, low income resident feel about moving to the neighborhood, then not attending that school? With some exceptions, I have found Houston a diverse and welcoming city, which this article does not reflect. My personal research showed the project to be poorly planned and executed, which is why our mayor came out against it. The theme and facts in this story do not comport with those I experienced as a former resident and worker in the described neighborhood, literally one block away from the proposed site.
126
Don't worry...most readers of the NYT know they skew articles to fit their agendas. Most people reading this in NY probably send their kids to schools with less diversity than the one in this article. This was just an easy "case study" that was far enough away so the readers don't feel like it's about them.
15
Which party does Houston Mayor Turner belong to? Oh, he is a Democrat. If the program is such a manifest failure, then either radically alter it or simply abolish it and save the taxpayer some money. Programs should be evaluated on their effectiveness rather than how much "compassion" politicians show by spending the money of other people.
13
The plain fact is that overwhelmingly the biggest obstacle that poor minority kids have to face growing up is living with poor minority adults. And as soon as they succeed in life in any way, they move. Not surprisingly, people who are already successful do not want to live with poor minority adults either.
169
Funny that you mention that, because a black neighbor told me that he moved here for precisely that reason! It really is a class phenomenon, not a cultural one.
You could leave the word minority out. The biggest obstacle facing poor white kids is living with their poor white adults also. Basically, it's hard to get a decent start in life when the dice you rolled gave you poverty. How to get good schools - education is the way out - for kids who got born to poor parents? Birth control for everyone that you would have to actively opt out of would be a great start.
2
I think as a country we are quickly coming to realize that your argument is spot-on, but only IF you remove the word 'minority' and insert the word 'undereducated'. No white child in Appalachia is going to benefit in any upwardly mobile way by absorbing what that historically poor, white, ignorant region offers.
Could you really argue that the child would not be better off moving to the affluent and well educated black enclaves of Atlanta?
Could you really argue that the child would not be better off moving to the affluent and well educated black enclaves of Atlanta?
4
My first question is why is it the federal government's responsibility to build and manage housing? Shouldn't it be left to the states or better yet the local communities?
24
My next question is why aren't individual people responsible for keeping their own roofs over their own heads.
13
Objectively, it is not the governments domain to dictate real estate particulars especially when someone has worked there whole life, saved and put hard earned dollars into their nest egg home. Then next thing government dictates low income people can move in some (not all) with different socioeconomic behavior and reality is they lower the median value of the area home(s) they are moving into. Does not take a noble prize winner in economics to figure this out.
Who in their right mind would want their homes devalued or their homes' value not appreciating at the same rate as those homes or suburb/area not surrounded by low-income housing...
Who in their right mind would want their homes devalued or their homes' value not appreciating at the same rate as those homes or suburb/area not surrounded by low-income housing...
61
Yes, that's tough, but life is not fair, just because you also had to go to work your whole life too. All of us pay for segregation in other ways in the end.
Andy: Subsidized housing is usually a joint federal, state, and local effort.
All of our misconceptions about race come from white people escaping to their cushy lives in the suburbs and the country...which is understandable. But then they bad mouth the people that live in the poorer areas. I know because I moved to a poor, urban neighborhood in a coastal Massachusetts city, a far cry from the island I grew up on. It took me a long time to get used to it...but it's not that bad..and definitely doesn't deserve the reputation and the attitude it gets from people in the surrounding area.
Not exposing your self to others makes people irrational, selfish and fragile. There are tougher people who walk by our house, yet my white neighbors here leave their doors open too.
Andy: Subsidized housing is usually a joint federal, state, and local effort.
All of our misconceptions about race come from white people escaping to their cushy lives in the suburbs and the country...which is understandable. But then they bad mouth the people that live in the poorer areas. I know because I moved to a poor, urban neighborhood in a coastal Massachusetts city, a far cry from the island I grew up on. It took me a long time to get used to it...but it's not that bad..and definitely doesn't deserve the reputation and the attitude it gets from people in the surrounding area.
Not exposing your self to others makes people irrational, selfish and fragile. There are tougher people who walk by our house, yet my white neighbors here leave their doors open too.
1
People in the neighborhoods that fight tooth and nail to prevent low income housing from being built near them aren't against low income housing. They're fighting a defensive battle to prevent themselves from being victims of the people who will occupy that housing.
Having the government move a bunch of criminals with nothing but time on their hands and bad intentions into one's neighborhood is a disaster. It's not integration, it's destruction.
Look everywhere it's been done. Rarely does it turn out well for the residents in place before the low income housing went up. People have every right to fight plans by the government they fund that will result in their being victimized by the people they support.
Having the government move a bunch of criminals with nothing but time on their hands and bad intentions into one's neighborhood is a disaster. It's not integration, it's destruction.
Look everywhere it's been done. Rarely does it turn out well for the residents in place before the low income housing went up. People have every right to fight plans by the government they fund that will result in their being victimized by the people they support.
156
Some rental houses in a side street near me went Section 8 and now there is lots of litter, noise, cars actually parking on front lawns, screeching kids out at all hours, raucous fighting etc. all in a sedate, picturesque and relatively affluent neighborhood. I sure wouldn't want any more of that ilk around.
32
I lived in West Houston for 5 years. Many co workers and neighbors described what happened following Hurricane Katrina and the acceptance of some of New Orleans finest into luxury apartment rentals that were being used as "temporary rufugee housing ". Some of those areas are still in ruins and with high crime. It is a socioeconomic problem which is understandably upsetting to folks who worked hard and then are forced to absorb the problems that come with those individuals. Predictably--many of the former residents moved out. I understand why the people who live in the Galleria area aren't welcome those problems.
6
It sounds like you're describing a class-difference more than anything else -- But not all lower-income earners fall into the scenario which you've painted, especially in this day and age where there's barely a middle-class left anymore.
Studies also show that children do better in two parent families but government is not forcing that option. Why not? The government that is by and for the people has no business telling communities what housing projects belong in the neighborhoods they worked hard for. This insistence on equality of outcome will guarantee limousine Liberals are never back in power. There is a reason the 1% all send their children to private school.
56
There are a lot of statistics in this article. In June, 2015, the Supreme Court decided The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. v. The Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs which brought into fair housing law the disparate impact method of identifying discrimination. I gather the use of statistics is not all that easy. Can the legal system use statistics like those presented in this article?
Once again, however intrusive, the parental government thinks it knows what's best for everyone.
20
I agree with those who oppose public housing construction in their nice neighborhoods. I believe once the public housing tenants learn how to behave themselves and live like law abiding middle class Americans they maybe. I know the liberals believe that if public housing tenants live among people who behave themselves then that behavior will some how rub-off and they take on the characteristics of middle classness. Acquired characteristics. That nineteenth century Lamarckian evolutionary thinking, but what you expect from bleeding heart wealth off liberals who live in isolated communities that would not be affected by this social engineering scheme. Until the lower income Americans get off welfare, get middle class jobs, and start obeying the law, we don't need them in our 'hood. Thank you.
53
The best way to keep the most number of people living like law abiding middle class Americans is to keep most Americans in the middle class. Too many people worry about the poorest, and too few worry about the middle of the distribution, where it is all too easy to slide down with one setback - a health crisis or job loss.
Once again, I'll say it. There are too many people. The question of where to put them (and how much poorer the majority of them are going to be as a handful of people own all of the automated production) is not going away and will get much worse before it gets better. Move to the sticks; no jobs. Move to the cities; no housing or grocery stores. Move to the suburbs; no transportation. This pressure cooker is going to blow.
66
I completely agree and have been preaching that for years. There is a reason someone wrote "The Population Bomb" back in the day. People don't understand that just b/c we have open land doesn't mean we have plenty of anything. Another reason to promote birth control, but heaven forbid we do that. Too many people equate tax bracket with quality of human being, too. That doesn't help. And we now have a president whose most ardent supporters believe they all got where they are with no help from anyone.
13
The population bomb myth is a lot like armageddon. Every time someone predicts when it will be, it doesn't come to fruition. For anyone with a brain cell, this is evidence over and over again that the theorists are wrong and the theory untenable. For the theorists, the theory just updates itself. Thus it isn't a testable hypothesis.
Humans did not evolve and are not equipped to live like the ant piles our cities have become. If you want, in general, to have a pleasant interaction, meet some one out on a hiking trail. Meet the same person on a city street and it's completely different. Crocodile Dundee said it best when driving thru NYC. "8 million people all living together in one place. Must be the friendliest place in the world".
Despite our Independence Day rhetoric most Americans do not believe we are created equal. We are a society based on class where the categories are mostly defined by race and ethnicity. Moreover, we as a people stubbornly cling to those principles despite their obvious contradictions with anything resembling " life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Don't believe it? Really read and absorb this article then go to your local library and check out a history book.
14
'Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' is about freedom not entitlement.
30
Pursuit requires some effort.
5
You can pursue happiness, but there's absolutely no guarantee you'll catch it!
1
The concept of integrating housing to reduce income and social disparities is a noble idea. Like many Socialist concepts. The problem, like many Socialist concepts, is they are rooted in false science instead of reality. Those pushing these agendas think that because an idea pops into their head it will automagically come into fruition with the outcome they believe in. Nothing could be further from the truth. Look at the last 40 years and trillions of dollars spent to combat poverty, poor employment prospects, the list goes on.
They used racism in the name of fighting racism. If you believe the race baiters things have not gotten better over that time period and some claim it's even worse. Or poverty. These so called progressives claim that greedy businesses, run by white men of course, are the cause these economic disparities. That the government can better allocate resources to address these issues. Which it has and again the outcome has been questionable at best.
So the concept that the lot of poor people living amongst wealthier people will somehow improve their lot by rubbing shoulders together is marginal at best.
They used racism in the name of fighting racism. If you believe the race baiters things have not gotten better over that time period and some claim it's even worse. Or poverty. These so called progressives claim that greedy businesses, run by white men of course, are the cause these economic disparities. That the government can better allocate resources to address these issues. Which it has and again the outcome has been questionable at best.
So the concept that the lot of poor people living amongst wealthier people will somehow improve their lot by rubbing shoulders together is marginal at best.
49
The only thing that fights poverty is money. If poor people had money they would make better choices. The best way to get money to poor people is to support a strong middle class, which keeps most people from becoming poor. A straight wealth transfer is less effective than just keeping the middle up.
1
Maybe it's time to stop building "low income housing" and provide housing vouchers for those in need instead.
Recent studies have shown that low income students who have the opportunity to go to middle class schools before their teen years are much more successful in breaking the cycle of poverty.
Give people vouchers and encourage real diversity in American neighborhoods. More successful citizens (and fewer angry white people) Everybody wins!
Recent studies have shown that low income students who have the opportunity to go to middle class schools before their teen years are much more successful in breaking the cycle of poverty.
Give people vouchers and encourage real diversity in American neighborhoods. More successful citizens (and fewer angry white people) Everybody wins!
9
What's Section 8 then if it isn't subsidies? I ask that sincerely.
10
Unsavory behavior has nothing to do with housing or how one pays for it.
9
Unless one has taught public school, I am not sure that the disparity--and the attendant consequences-- can be fully understood. I live in a modest home in the midst of a very affluent area. Our high school is one of the few diverse secondary schools in the county. My county is under investigation because of disparity in our schools which is largely segregated due to housing choices --and low income housing. They no longer build small homes such as my 50s rancher--or affordable apartments- in this "desirable" area.
Like many complex issues, there is no one single, simple fix. However, schools which are filled with students who arrive at school with a variety of disadvantages do not provide the same opportunities to succeed as students who attend schools filled with "advantaged" children (I have taught in both types). I am not suggesting that busing is the answer, but gerrymandered attendance zones that allow schools to be racially segregated is certainly NOT the answer.
Like many complex issues, there is no one single, simple fix. However, schools which are filled with students who arrive at school with a variety of disadvantages do not provide the same opportunities to succeed as students who attend schools filled with "advantaged" children (I have taught in both types). I am not suggesting that busing is the answer, but gerrymandered attendance zones that allow schools to be racially segregated is certainly NOT the answer.
5
If opposition to low income housing is simply a matter of succumbing to unfounded fear, why is the low income neighborhood mentioned in the article described as "blighted"? Isn't the introduction of blight to an otherwise pleasant neighborhood a valid situation for home owners to fear?
151
Blight is a physical condition, not a social one. Buildings, roads, houses are blighted, not the people. The building pictured in this article looks rather nice, but it's not the appearance of the building the projects' opponents fear...
1
Leave NYC cocoon, live in section 8 housing for a week, and you'll get all your answers.
1
Most peoples largest asset is their home. They probably worked and saved and sacrificed for years to buy it in the best neighborhood they could. They are then told that people who did none of those things are equally entitled to live there. And that they need to build higher density housing in their single family home neighborhood to accommodate them. The current residents push back, what a surprise. But it seems more about economic class than race.
275
One reason people do not live in middle class or upper class housing is that they do not have the personal habits to support the lifestyle. You need to save, all in your family need to respect the property of others, you need to contain your trash and pick up what you see on the ground. You need to maintain you part of the commons. If you don't have these habits, you probably don't have enough money to buy your clothes or meals in the nearby restaurants and retail businesses.
1
Attempts at integration should be done in voluntary, non onerous ways.
As a white, I would never be the first person to leave an area because it is turning black (but also would not be the last).
Opposite races should have every right to move into area and be treated in a respectful way.
However, also, the majority race should not be forced to go out of their way to integrate thru onerous, burdensome tactics such as forced busing.
Ugly racist housing policies are just as bad as forced, extreme social engineering policies.
Voluntary integration, protected by law is the best way to go. If an area stays all one race, that is fine, if it mixes that good also.
As a white, I would never be the first person to leave an area because it is turning black (but also would not be the last).
Opposite races should have every right to move into area and be treated in a respectful way.
However, also, the majority race should not be forced to go out of their way to integrate thru onerous, burdensome tactics such as forced busing.
Ugly racist housing policies are just as bad as forced, extreme social engineering policies.
Voluntary integration, protected by law is the best way to go. If an area stays all one race, that is fine, if it mixes that good also.
9
That happens in cities already. Try it in a rural area.
How many middle and upper income people of ANY race want low income housing built in their neighborhoods? The answer is a number somewhere close to zero. We have all seen the impact of low income housing on a community. We have been burglarized, we have been robbed and mugged, we have removed our children from the violent schools where education is an afterthought and we have fled to other locations. Programs like the one featured in this article -- chasing down the middle and upper income people with the construction of low income housing which will create another cycle of flight -- are viewed as insane by everyone but the ideologically blinded social engineers who create them.
236
What if the low income housing was attractive to look at and restricted to seniors and/or the physically disabled? Seniors and disabled people pose no physical threat to their neighbors - they don't do home invasions or muggings, they don't steal cars, they don't run after women on the street to assault them or steal purses. And they need stable, safe housing.
2
Well said!
2
Those same negative outcomes would still exist, just not in your backyard. Is it really better for your city and broader community if one underserved and systematically marginalized area bears the continual brunt of all poverty?
More evidence to prove my theory of the cultural ringworm which leaves it's ugly scale in inner-city decay.
Acquiring enough land needed for a housing project costs too much in better neighborhoods so the cash-strapped cities build in areas that have a supply of derelict buildings or empty lots. Can you imagine the outcry if the cities would pay market rate for land in wealthier neighborhoods?
10
Your NYS left wing radical extremist Gov. Cuomo came down to Texas to put public housing in a rich neighborhood where there was no public transportation under Clinton.
I say you NYC people put up 250 apartment public housing projects filled with poor individuals in your tony neighborhoods and you have the best, well if it works lately under your sad Mayor, transportation system in area!
You put public housing where the land is cheap near work and public transportation.
Most are on welfare, some have drug and alcohol weaknesses, so when you build a new public housing project high rise in a rich NYC neighborhood, let America know!
I say you NYC people put up 250 apartment public housing projects filled with poor individuals in your tony neighborhoods and you have the best, well if it works lately under your sad Mayor, transportation system in area!
You put public housing where the land is cheap near work and public transportation.
Most are on welfare, some have drug and alcohol weaknesses, so when you build a new public housing project high rise in a rich NYC neighborhood, let America know!
13
At least this republican (I'm confident) said what she really thought. “I will fight very hard,” she continued, “before I give up that privilege and dignity to those who, either from lack of initiative or misfortune, don’t deserve to be there.” This tells me so much about her.
But Turner is the disappointment here. It can't just continue. It must change. He lacks vision and the courage to do the difficult thing to get to progress that he likely will not see in his lifetime. This type of change is hard. It has always been. And will always be. Where are the brave in this day and age?
But Turner is the disappointment here. It can't just continue. It must change. He lacks vision and the courage to do the difficult thing to get to progress that he likely will not see in his lifetime. This type of change is hard. It has always been. And will always be. Where are the brave in this day and age?
4
Here in New York City we got the opposite; whites are gentrifying poor neighborhoods pushing long time residents out. Rents increase in places like Bushwick, Brooklyn that, when I was growing up. was synonymous with crime. The funny thing is landlords are happy to accommodate and get rid of their long time tenants. Some even sell their buildings to developers who turn around and build expensive condos. I guess Houston is lucky to still have poor neighborhoods.
115
Houston is mostly gentrifying too. Relatively low housing prices are attractive to people from CA and NY, who are selling their $1 million 900 sq foot 2-bedroom apartments and buying $500K - $600K 4-bedroom homes.
I don't know the numbers, but we got both poor people being pushed out and poor people suddenly realizing they are not so poor as their homes triple in value over several years, and as neighborhoods that you were afraid to walk into during the day not so long ago, now have women jogging alone at night.
I don't know the numbers, but we got both poor people being pushed out and poor people suddenly realizing they are not so poor as their homes triple in value over several years, and as neighborhoods that you were afraid to walk into during the day not so long ago, now have women jogging alone at night.
That is happening in big Texas cities as well, which is part of the reason why developers are attempting to move affordable housing closer to affluent areas where there are jobs and grocery stores. One pattern in Texas cities is food deserts and education stagnation, where retail developers avoid neighborhoods without surrounding customers affluent enough to make them immediately popular and profitable. One of the worst problems is a lack of full-sized grocery stores and well-maintained schools in poor areas. Without some effort at economic integration, poor areas continue to decline and opportunities evaporate. FYI, there is also no public transportation in most large Texas cities, so people cannot get from the "poor" areas to jobs. What is needed is systematic change to address many needs.
2
That is occurring in Portland, Oregon as well. Tragic situation.
Why would anyone want this in their town, violence, crime, drugs and prostitution. People work hard to achieve a good life then the government wants to screw it all. Resist
146
You can add to that when such a facility is put on the border of a town-as Dallas has done-criminals frequently cross town lines to commit crimes then return to Dallas where the nearest police station is miles and minutes away. A friend of mine home sick one day called Dallas PD because she saw three guys with a truck pull up and empty out her neighbor's house and no, the neighbor wasn't moving. Due the thin staffing, driven by the anti-police bias-it took cops two hours to show up. By then the criminals were long gone. There have been a number of local crimes where events like gang fights will occur in my suburbs park and when cops arrive the gangs scuttle back through the wooded end of the park that is in Dallas. People know these criminals-they often allow them to couch surf if they can't be on the lease-yet nobody says a word.
1
Integration in the other direction might work better. It's called gentrification as a pejorative, but handled properly it can lead to the reintegration of close-in neighborhoods including reductions in crime, improvements in retail, and reintegration of schools.
61
I agree. I've seen this happen over and over again in Indianapolis. Where are poor people supposed to live? If anyone can't see the connection between this problem and the pitiful minimum wage in this country, they are blind.
2
I don't have time to think about where the pore will live.
I'm off to work to pay for and worry about where MY family is going to live.
Every man for himself.
I'm off to work to pay for and worry about where MY family is going to live.
Every man for himself.
Social engineering rarely works.
156
Indeed. Rational behavior cannot be engineered regardless of where housing is built.
3
Is it not "social engineering" to consolidate low-income federally subsidized housing units in mostly poor, nonwhite communities?
Was it not "social engineering" after World War II to introduce a federal loan program that basically created the middle class but was almost entirely unavailable to African Americans?
Was it not "social engineering" after World War II to introduce a federal loan program that basically created the middle class but was almost entirely unavailable to African Americans?
2
It worked pretty well in Singapore. But Singapore has a myriad of laws to ensure it works - and those laws are deemed as draconian in the US and clearly unconstitutional. So in a way, I agree with you, it doesn't work here.
1
Richard Reeves' new book Dream Hoarders addresses this problem head on. To put it simply, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. Supporting liberal candidates and causes with our checkbooks just isn't enough.
9
I work 80 hours per week and paid my way through college and graduate school. Why should someone without the same initiative get the same things I worked hard for? All I want is a safe and secure place for my kids.
253
Wouldn't you rather that our country was more like the other developed countries, where people don't have to work 80 hours a week to get through college and graduate school?
(In fact, during the 50s and 60s, we used to be. When Bernie Sanders says that state universities should be free, he's just saying that everybody else should have the free education he got at Brooklyn College.)
(In fact, during the 50s and 60s, we used to be. When Bernie Sanders says that state universities should be free, he's just saying that everybody else should have the free education he got at Brooklyn College.)
3
The vast majority of people—wealthy, poor, etc—want to work hard and provide for their families, and those in poverty often have to work even harder in order to make ends meet without any financial safety net and with diminished access to college, etc. Do you think people with public housing assistance don't want a safe and secure place to live? Why do you have any more of a right to it than they do?
4
When I drive past the public housing in my area I notice all of them have cable or dish TV, most of them drive newer cars than my 1999 CRV and many of the homes are larger than my own. There are times I feel my life would have been better served if I had not gone to college.
4
Aside from the segregation, there is little housing for anyone that anyone can afford. Neither party has identified this as a problem, which is one reason so many people hate politics. We need affordable housing, and yes, the federal government should help build it for the poor, working and middle class. The rich? They've been screwing the rest of us for so long; let them eat cake!
53
Sorry, but this type of clumsy social engineering just doesn't work. It's been proven over and over. There are better ways to bring about change.
212
"There are better ways to bring about change."
Specifically, what are these better ways? It is one thing to make "red lining" and other tactics illegal. The state and federal departments can even almost force people of diverse economic and social backgrounds, to share the same neighborhoods. What they cannot do, is force people to like each other.
Specifically, what are these better ways? It is one thing to make "red lining" and other tactics illegal. The state and federal departments can even almost force people of diverse economic and social backgrounds, to share the same neighborhoods. What they cannot do, is force people to like each other.
1
Allowing zoning that creates exclusive areas of rich people--single family homes on large lots--is also a form of social engineering. Once the Supreme Court reverses Euclid and bans local zoning we can see what the country will look like without social engineering.
1
It's never been proven - white people in the north have successfully prevented virtually all efforts at desegregation in housing and schooling. Not for nothing did MLK go to Chicago to fight this type of segregation and say, “I think the people from Mississippi ought to come to Chicago to learn how to hate”.
1
I bought a nice house in a nice subdivision and now Section 8 houses have made our lives a living nightmare. We have to use double dead bolt locks. We can't even sit outside to enjoy the house and neighborhood. We live in the hood. These people are not going to integrate and we can't sell. Not that I blame the city but the blame is on me. I did see it coming and did not move in time. So much for integration.
295
Completely understand and agree....we had a similar situation but were lucky enough to get out and rent it. Still can't sell it....
40
Same thing here. Nice subdivision near us, expensive houses for this area, and whole streets are now Section 8. If I had a $400,000 house, I would not want to live across the road from low-income housing. I hate to admit it, but it's the truth.
40
I am not familiar with the Louisville housing market, however where I live in a desirable suburb of Boston, there's established Section 8 housing within site of my house & never once have any of my neighbors said a word about it. Of the top of my head I can also think of several highly desirable Boston & NYC city neighborhoods where Section 8 housing lies immediately adjacent to $2 million condos, & private sector housing prices continue to rise.
It's ultimately to the benefit of rich & poor alike to live in economically integrated neighborhoods within close proximity of each other.
It's ultimately to the benefit of rich & poor alike to live in economically integrated neighborhoods within close proximity of each other.