which is worse for poor people?

[dead0man]

I've heard both practices are horrible...so which is worse, white people leaving a neighborhood or white people moving into a neighborhood?  The suburbs are bad too.  Where should white people live?

[SingingAnalyst]

Right or wrong, I voted White flight. White flight in Detroit in the 1970s destroyed the tax base for the poor and often elderly people left behind. I suspect other cities have had, or are having, similar happenings.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Next time you make a thread like this, please tell us why these things are bad in your post so that we do not have to guess ourselves and possibly guess wrong.

[dead0man]

white flight is "bad" because it ruins neighborhoods

gentrification is "bad" because it makes neighborhoods too expensive for the people that lived there before

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

White flight was a historical phenomenon that got rid of the tax base and much of the money in wealthy neighborhoods, and was tied in with segregation(both by law and city code). Gentrification is a modern phenomena where poor neighborhoods with a rich and vibrant culture attract a bunch of wealthier people, and the people who used to live there are driven out by a sudden spike in housing demand without any supply increase.

[Lechasseur]

Right or wrong, I voted White flight. White flight in Detroit in the 1970s destroyed the tax base for the poor and often elderly people left behind. I suspect other cities have had, or are having, similar happenings.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

white flight is "bad" because it ruins neighborhoods

gentrification is "bad" because it makes neighborhoods too expensive for the people that lived there before

Gentrification is only a problem when sufficient housing isn't constructed.

[Storebought]

The effects of white flight are chronic, while gentrification is acute: Poor people having to leave the city immediately because (1) they were evicted due to imminent demolition of the housing projects, or (2) seen their rents jacked up sixfold is obviously worse for them than white flight. Places like Baltimore and Detroit still have populations over 500,000 despite sixty plus years of white flight for a reason.

[Cold War Liberal]

They're not mutually exclusive. Also, gentrification isn't defined as "white people moving into a neighborhood," it's defined as "wealthy people moving into a neighborhood." It's only bad when it evicts or otherwise pushes out the people who were already there. There's a section of Baltimore that they just renovated/gentrified. It used to be a bunch of abandoned warehouses. It's now restaurants. I think that's fine because it didn't push anyone out, I don't think.

Where should white people live?

To quote, well, you:

good job on the edge, you'll fit in well with the others

The effects of white flight are chronic, while gentrification is acute: Poor people having to leave the city immediately because (1) they were evicted due to imminent demolition of the housing projects, or (2) seen their rents jacked up sixfold is obviously worse for them than white flight. Places like Baltimore and Detroit still have populations over 500,000 despite sixty plus years of white flight for a reason.

^this^

[parochial boy]

I would say that "white flight" (which is a deeply simplistic and misleading term for a far more complex phenomenon of working class people leaving city centres) is far worse because every body loses.

As noted, those left behind are left in a city with a reduced tax base, weakened social housing and service provision. However, the people leaving also find themselves excluded from the most and prosperous areas of the country; and have their and their children's economic opportunities restricted as a result.

Of course, in the 21st Century, it is impossible to separate "white" flight from gentrification, as they are part of the same phenomenon, but the exclusion of the working classes from the big cities is a major driver of inequality in the western world.

[dead0man]

Gentrification is never started by rich people, it's started by poor people (usually young, often artsy fartsy) wanting a cheap place to live but don't use the things associated with poor neighborhoods (like crack dealers and crack whores).  Enough of those poor people in a neighborhood and eventually a fancy coffee shop will open.  THEN the hated rich people move in.  If the local poors fight hard enough, they can keep progress from happening.  As happens here in this Onion article.  sh**tty Neighborhood Rallies Against Asshole Developer  Or here, in this real life neighborhood.  Fearing gentrification, Black Portland neighborhood tells Trader Joe’s ‘no’ to new store  Thank Og those poor black people don't have another option for food, right?  Wait, isn't that one of the less consistent complaints?  Not enough food options?  "food deserts" I think we call them?

The effects of white flight are chronic, while gentrification is acute: Poor people having to leave the city immediately because (1) they were evicted due to imminent demolition of the housing projects, or (2) seen their rents jacked up sixfold is obviously worse for them than white flight. Places like Baltimore and Detroit still have populations over 500,000 despite sixty plus years of white flight for a reason.

not only did the white people leave, they took any chance of a two party system functioning there and threw it out the window.  Reason number 27 why cities like Baltimore and Detroit suck, one party rule is never good.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Gentrification is never started by rich people, it's started by poor people (usually young, often artsy fartsy) wanting a cheap place to live but don't use the things associated with poor neighborhoods (like crack dealers and crack whores).  Enough of those poor people in a neighborhood and eventually a fancy coffee shop will open.  THEN the hated rich people move in.  If the local poors fight hard enough, they can keep progress from happening.  As happens here in this Onion article.  sh**tty Neighborhood Rallies Against Asshole Developer  Or here, in this real life neighborhood.  Fearing gentrification, Black Portland neighborhood tells Trader Joe’s ‘no’ to new store  Thank Og those poor black people don't have another option for food, right?  Wait, isn't that one of the less consistent complaints?  Not enough food options?  "food deserts" I think we call them?

The effects of white flight are chronic, while gentrification is acute: Poor people having to leave the city immediately because (1) they were evicted due to imminent demolition of the housing projects, or (2) seen their rents jacked up sixfold is obviously worse for them than white flight. Places like Baltimore and Detroit still have populations over 500,000 despite sixty plus years of white flight for a reason.

not only did the white people leave, they took any chance of a two party system functioning there and threw it out the window.  Reason number 27 why cities like Baltimore and Detroit suck, one party rule is never good.

That's not how things work in the bay area. There are areas that have crime and high housing values.

[dead0man]

I don't recall saying otherwise, but ok.  Not sure why a "regular" person would chose to live in such a place, but people should be free to spend way too much of their income on housing AND still be in constant fear of crime if they want to be.

[Storebought]

Gentrification is never started by rich people, it's started by poor people (usually young, often artsy fartsy) wanting a cheap place to live but don't use the things associated with poor neighborhoods (like crack dealers and crack whores).  Enough of those poor people in a neighborhood and eventually a fancy coffee shop will open.  THEN the hated rich people move in.  If the local poors fight hard enough, they can keep progress from happening.  As happens here in this Onion article.  sh**tty Neighborhood Rallies Against Asshole Developer  Or here, in this real life neighborhood.  Fearing gentrification, Black Portland neighborhood tells Trader Joe’s ‘no’ to new store  Thank Og those poor black people don't have another option for food, right?  Wait, isn't that one of the less consistent complaints?  Not enough food options?  "food deserts" I think we call them?

The effects of white flight are chronic, while gentrification is acute: Poor people having to leave the city immediately because (1) they were evicted due to imminent demolition of the housing projects, or (2) seen their rents jacked up sixfold is obviously worse for them than white flight. Places like Baltimore and Detroit still have populations over 500,000 despite sixty plus years of white flight for a reason.

not only did the white people leave, they took any chance of a two party system functioning there and threw it out the window.  Reason number 27 why cities like Baltimore and Detroit suck, one party rule is never good.

No. "Textbook gentrification" proceeds when municipal governments demolish housing projects (or sell off rent-stabilized units) and replace a few of the lost units with a lottery for rent-subsidized housing well outside city limits (and city services, and public transportation). The vacant property is then sold to professional property managers who then build luxury condos on it that strain the incomes of even the yuppies who move into them.

And your food desert example is just as bizarre. What has those Portland black people worried is not the fact that their liquor stores are being replaced with fresh produce options (as you imply) -- it's that the residential property owners can cite the presence of the new-and-improved Trader Joe's to legally raise rents on their current tenants without having to do anything messy things like actually renovating their slum properties to justify the rent hike. Commercial property gentrification is more subtle and legally opaque than the textbook variety, but it seems those Portland people know what's up.

[dead0man]

Gentrification is never started by rich people, it's started by poor people (usually young, often artsy fartsy) wanting a cheap place to live but don't use the things associated with poor neighborhoods (like crack dealers and crack whores).  Enough of those poor people in a neighborhood and eventually a fancy coffee shop will open.  THEN the hated rich people move in.  If the local poors fight hard enough, they can keep progress from happening.  As happens here in this Onion article.  sh**tty Neighborhood Rallies Against Asshole Developer  Or here, in this real life neighborhood.  Fearing gentrification, Black Portland neighborhood tells Trader Joe’s ‘no’ to new store  Thank Og those poor black people don't have another option for food, right?  Wait, isn't that one of the less consistent complaints?  Not enough food options?  "food deserts" I think we call them?

The effects of white flight are chronic, while gentrification is acute: Poor people having to leave the city immediately because (1) they were evicted due to imminent demolition of the housing projects, or (2) seen their rents jacked up sixfold is obviously worse for them than white flight. Places like Baltimore and Detroit still have populations over 500,000 despite sixty plus years of white flight for a reason.

not only did the white people leave, they took any chance of a two party system functioning there and threw it out the window.  Reason number 27 why cities like Baltimore and Detroit suck, one party rule is never good.

No. "Textbook gentrification" proceeds when municipal governments demolish housing projects (or sell off rent-stabilized units) and replace a few of the lost units with a lottery for rent-subsidized housing well outside city limits (and city services, and public transportation). The vacant property is then sold to professional property managers who then build luxury condos on it that strain the incomes of even the yuppies who move into them.

I agree that cities shouldn't play favorites (either way), but that's not how gentrification STARTS.  It almost always starts with poor young people, often artists or gay dudes, that can't afford anywhere else to live that's close to the action.  So they move into Bed Stuy, St Marks St or Hells Kitchen.  Soon followed by second hand clothing stores and coffee shops.  Only then can your "textbook gentrification" shenanigans pulled off by city councilmen (any guesses as to what political party they almost always belong to?) happen.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If they don't want their neighborhood getting better they can do what they did and bitch about it and Trader Joe's can build elsewhere.  I think it's a bad idea, but if you and the people that live there have a different opinion, that's cool too.  People should be free to attempt to keep their neighborhoods in squalor if they want to.  And other people should be free to attempt to make their neighborhoods better.

[MasterJedi]

Of the two options, White Flight. Decimated the tax base, re-segregated schools and denied millions in funding for minorities who were already inherently poorer.

[Boss_Rahm]

I'm going to make the case for gentrification. When poor people are concentrated within cities, there's usually still enough tax revenue from the central business district as well as wealthier neighborhoods to provide a basic level of public services.

But increasingly, as gentrification takes place without an increase in housing supply, poor people are ending up concentrated in certain inner ring suburbs, where the tax base is much less able to support public services than in cities.

[Boss_Rahm]

I also think the term "white flight" is disingenuous. Black people tried to move to the suburbs too, and were either explicitly not allowed or were met with state-sanctioned violence.

[Storebought]

Tax Overhaul a Blow to Affordable Housing Efforts

Textbook gentrification in action:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Please, explain to Ms Hernandez and the others in her apartment block how being evicted is better for her living standards than white flight.

[Cold War Liberal]

dead0man YaBB God ★★★★★ Posts: 28784

Re: which is worse for poor people? « Reply #20 on: January 19, 2018 at 12:37:14 pm » Tax Overhaul a Blow to Affordable Housing Efforts Textbook gentrification in action: You must be logged in to read this quote. You must be logged in to read this quote. Please, explain to Ms Hernandez and the others in her apartment block how being evicted is better for her living standards than white flight. Well if Ms Hernandez has an issue with these gay hipster artist (it's sf after all) landlords she should take it up with them. They just want to make her neighborhood better, she should be GLAD she's being evicted, she shouldn't be whiny. Obviously all the ONE PARTY CITY COUNCIL'S FAULT

[teafarm99]

Gentrification is good for people because it clears out the trash and run-down buildings

[All Along The Watchtower]

The fact that they're poor.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Also yes people how dare long-time residents refuse to make their neighborhood better by acquiescing to being priced out by gentrification. The nerve!

[Not a Partisan Hack ( ͡~ ͜ʖ ͡°)]

Also yes people how dare long-time residents refuse to make their neighborhood better by acquiescing to being priced out by gentrification. The nerve!

You can't if you have an RV

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

The fact that they're poor.