Gentrification

[traininthedistance]

God, this thread.  If I was feeling uncharitable I could deluge each and every post here.  Bedstuy's post is probably least awful but even it is really kind of simplistic and blinkered.  You can't disentangle active government policy from the housing market, no matter how hard you try, it's one of the least amenable segments of our economy to that approach.

Gentrification is a... terribly complex issue.  As far as it represents a retreat from, and attempt to repair the damage of, the racist and wasteful mid-century paradigm of white flight, suburban sprawl, and urban disinvestment, it is a Good Thing and these developments should be cheered by anybody and everybody everywhere.  But we shouldn't pretend that it's "just the market working" or that there isn't a real human cost that cries out for sympathy and mitigation, as well.

I will say that attempts to freeze neighborhoods in amber, and to pull up the drawbridges on anybody, is counterproductive and doomed to failure and really kind of an ugly impulse if you ask me.  The only acceptable solution is to make room for old-timers and newcomers alike, with a range of prices and housing styles and services for as many people as practicable. 

[traininthedistance]

God, this thread.  If I was feeling uncharitable I could deluge each and every post here.  Bedstuy's post is probably least awful but even it is really kind of simplistic and blinkered.  You can't disentangle active government policy from the housing market, no matter how hard you try, it's one of the least amenable segments of our economy to that approach.

Gentrification is a... terribly complex issue.  As far as it represents a retreat from, and attempt to repair the damage of, the racist and wasteful mid-century paradigm of white flight, suburban sprawl, and urban disinvestment, it is a Good Thing and these developments should be cheered by anybody and everybody everywhere.  But we shouldn't pretend that it's "just the market working" or that there isn't a real human cost that cries out for sympathy and mitigation, as well.

I will say that attempts to freeze neighborhoods in amber, and to pull up the drawbridges on anybody, is counterproductive and doomed to failure and really kind of an ugly impulse if you ask me.  The only acceptable solution is to make room for old-timers and newcomers alike, with a range of prices and housing styles and services for as many people as practicable.  

I think you missed my point.  As a matter of public policy, prices aren't the problem, they're the symptom of a variety of factors including government policy.  Complaining about the prices or attempting direct control of prices through things like rent control is thus pointless.  Price control is never going to work.  What should a house or apartment cost?  Who should be able to live where?  The government can never settle those questions better than a market.

Maybe the disconnect is just what we mean by gentrification.  Not enough supply in many urban areas?  Not enough middle class jobs in urban areas?  Racial disparities?  Urban planning/land use policy?  Those are some of the underlying issues that turn gentrification into an issue for people.  We ought to be talking about those issues.

I think you're trying to draw a distinction that doesn't actually exist here.  I mean, sure, price controls tend to be counterproductive and it's not like the government is directly setting rent levels for the most part.  But to set off "a market" as something distinct from government policy is pretty much just gibberish when it comes to housing– the whole system of deeds and titles, building codes, zoning, utilities and infrastructure, FHA loans, etc.– there simply wouldn't be a housing market in any recognizable way without government action and regulation.  Also, even if prices are a "symptom" that doesn't make them any less of a problem.  Obviously it would be preferable to deal with them through indirect measures such as increasing supply (and in some cases, perhaps subsidies), but where was I arguing otherwise?

Same with the issues you suggest as an alternative- they're the right issues to talk about, of course, and it's good to get specific with symptoms and remedies (as I said, things are terribly complex), but I'm not sure exactly what makes you think they're so qualitatively opposed to an approach that acknowledges the market-creating role that government necessarily has in real estate.  I mean, in particular what is land use policy if not that?

[traininthedistance]

I will say that attempts to freeze neighborhoods in amber, and to pull up the drawbridges on anybody, is counterproductive and doomed to failure and really kind of an ugly impulse if you ask me.  

You read far too much in between the lines.  I don't see any posts in this thread advocating frozen or amber-coated neighborhoods.  We're just discussing our observations.  Gentrification obviously has advantages and disadvantages, and the disadvantages are worth pointing out.  (Pointing out the advantages not being necessary, of course, because you can count on the building contractors to do that.)

Seems to me that's basically what Patrick's post two above yours is wishing for.  And it's a quite common- and quite ugly when you think about it long enough– sentiment out in the wild.

Yes, there are disadvantages.  I've been pretty careful to acknowledge as such.  However, the cranky-old-man hypocrisy that would bemoan the idea of a new and different generation* moving into "your" enclave is, I would submit, not a legitimate disadvantage.  (Obviously I know that this isn't the core of your concern in particular; I think it was a little silly to pin the desirability of Harlem on Bubba getting an office there but I can grok most else you've said here.)

*Oh no! Young people! Who look and act differently than I do!  They all look the same!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://fox4kc.com/2014/10/17/group-files-fair-housing-complaint-in-kansas-city/

Hopefully this fails and the hoodlums are removed with all possible. They've outlasted their welcome. We're turning this city around and they're not going to get in our way

I see you're living "up" to the "standards" of the D-MO avatar quite well.  Such humanity!  Much morality!

[traininthedistance]

I prefaced my comments by saying my feelings are informed by emotion and yeah some sentimentality. Taking a more dispassionate view, there are many benefits to the influx of a highly educated group of young people from around the country. However, if I must, I will give voice and give a defense of some parochialism. Neighborhoods should be more than reasonable rents, trendy restaurants and good access to mass transit. Many people are tied to the areas where they grew up, went to school, went to church, had their first kiss, raised families etc.  So many have been priced out now and the dominoes of the wholesale neighborhood change have been falling one by one.  That is it for now, Im off to the new Tibetan-Polynesian fusion joint and Im a bit tuckered out from  long day of brunching..

I think a lot of what it is is that I have a special sympathy with the nomads, the immigrants, the newcomers of all sorts, who haven't yet been able to put down roots, or who for whatever reason feel they need to escape their hometown instead, find opportunity elsewhere, etc.  I understand and– yes, really– can feel the pull of neighborhood, but I think the young and unrooted (of all creeds, colors, and classes) get a raw deal from all sides and I want to in particular stick up for them.  Don't think there isn't some sentimentality on this end, too.

I could go deeper than that– perhaps after sleeping on it I will– but it was crappy of me to call you out specifically and with that in mind maybe it would be best to save that rant for a different occasion.  I've been on edge a bit lately and I think it's seeping into my posts here.  Sorry.

[traininthedistance]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If you're thinking about the Bertucci's in Kenmore, it's a reasonably priced chain in the Boston area, not a high-end restaurant.

I won't argue with you about whether it's high end, but any place where the cheapest entrée is 15 dollars and the prices range from there up to 80 dollars is higher end than the GAP and the $5.99 all-you-can-eat Indian Buffet that it displaced.  
 
Anyway, I've been to Bertucci's a couple of times.  Well, other ones, not that one because it wasn't there before.  I even have a Bertucci's coffee mug.  It's decent pizza, but overpriced.  
 

I don't see anything that costs $80 on this menu; looks like entrees top out just over $20 (and start at more like $10, not $15, if say you're getting a small pizza):

https://www.bertuccis.com/uploads/Main_Menu_Oct_2014.pdf

I mean, sure, it's well beyond the $6 Indian buffet, but this is very much "middle-class chain" prices and aesthetics, not "Super Trendy Expensive".  Let's get our facts right.

What might be most troubling about the ongoing gentrification of (some) American urban cores is that more people who cannot afford automobiles have been pushed out of the few places in this country where owning one is the only alternative to near-total isolation.

In short, the affluent have rediscovered the appeal of city living, forcing more of the poor out of places that, while often blighted, have clear advantages over the decaying, alienating, and dysfunctional built environment that we've erected over the past century. And, most damning of all, this built environment imperils the relationships and activities out of which new neighborhoods (and all of the good things that come with them - sense of place, social support, economic opportunity, etc.) could evolve.

The best policy response to this trend is both politically intractable and less than obvious , as this thread makes clear. There is no getting around the corrupt and dysfunctional institutions that lie at the heart of American government. I certainly wouldn't trust any major city or municipal authority in New York State to undergo a program of public housing.

Yes.  I would caution though that trying to keep the affluent (and, let's be perfectly clear here that a lot of the newcomers are contra stereotype NOT actually affluent) out of our cities is for many reasons pretty much the worst possible policy response.  Doing so would generally be impossible anyway, as supply-restricting efforts in that direction tend to only end up accelerating the rate at which the middle class get priced out.  In addition, the attempt to use immiseration as a perverse affordable housing policy and/or keep the rich in sprawlville lifestyles would be utterly disastrous for the environment, our social fabric, the fiscal health of our core cities, and a whole host of other things.

I prefaced my comments by saying my feelings are informed by emotion and yeah some sentimentality. Taking a more dispassionate view, there are many benefits to the influx of a highly educated group of young people from around the country. However, if I must, I will give voice and give a defense of some parochialism. Neighborhoods should be more than reasonable rents, trendy restaurants and good access to mass transit. Many people are tied to the areas where they grew up, went to school, went to church, had their first kiss, raised families etc.  So many have been priced out now and the dominoes of the wholesale neighborhood change have been falling one by one.  That is it for now, Im off to the new Tibetan-Polynesian fusion joint and Im a bit tuckered out from  long day of brunching..

I will add one little thing to my response earlier, in the hopes that maybe you can understand why I'm reacting so personally and poorly to your posts here.  Namely: some folks (hint: this guy) will sometimes go out for brunch because they can't afford to go out for nice dinner prices, and it's a relatively thrifty way of getting to eat out once in awhile.  Just sayin'.  Kinda like how everyone loves to go "LOL RICH TRENDY HIPSTERS AND THEIR PBR" when, in fact, PBR is/was popular because it's cheap (often cheaper than Bud in fact).  

There's obviously much more than that at play but I probably should step away for awhile now.