Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
An essay on gentrification
An essay on gentrification
An essay on gentrification
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
An essay on gentrification
An essay on gentrification
An essay on gentrification
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Gentrification is the process of improving a struggling neighborhood for affluent people. One of the main causes of this shown by Kelefa Sanneh’s article “Is Gentrification Really a Problem?” , is the real estate market. Things that affect the value of something in a certain neighborhood can end up having a direct influence in all of the neighborhood and can lead to gentrification. The construction of a luxury apartment building can attract more businesses and in turn, more high-quality living spaces which could eventually displace someone living three blocks away.
Throughout the book, tenants are exploited in the quality of shelter, rental cost, justice system, and discriminative segregation. The quality of shelter and rental costs are exploited issues which reappear. Since the tenants experienced a history of evictions, they are trapped in a system of housing inequality. Furthermore, the tenants settle for what they’re accepted to, and landlords are given no incentive to update the properties. As a result, housing is poor, and
The idea of equality for all people, regardless of their race, is instilled in the American society of today. Unfortunately, this idea has not always been present, which ultimately has caused many issues for America’s society in the past. As discussed in the book Our Town: Race, Housing, and the Soul of Suburbia, David L. Kirp focuses on the inequality that was found between the low-income blacks and the middle class whites in a South Jersey town, Mount Laurel. At the time, the whites had a goal of running the blacks out of the town by making the costs of housing expensive enough where blacks could not afford it. This lead to unequal treatment for the blacks who lived in Mount Laurel compared to the whites when it came to housing opportunities.
Charities as well as financial, housing provisions might not be the best solutions to the increase of crimes: the problem had to be solved where it rooted. As Jacob Riis suggested, the cause of it is most likely because of both legal and illegal immigration: “In New York, the youngest of the world’s great cities, that time came later than elsewhere, because the crowding had not been so great. There were those who believed that it would never come; but their hopes were vain” (365). Riis also implied that community gave those people - the “other half” no other choice; yet they had more choice than most: they were living in a city much younger than others, less crowded and many of them were immigrants who moved to New York by choice - conscious choice made rather recently, to say the least. Furthermore, Jacob Riis was quick to discard the fact that having this kind of agency may have been a spark to the riots - the unquenchable desire for better lives coupled with an unwillingness to accept reality as it is.
There has to be a realistic solution that can be put into motion to benefit everyone involved. Referring again to his article “Is Gentrification All Bad?” Davidson argues that urban renewal, if done right, is not a monstrous custom that it is painted to be; nevertheless, he reasons that gentrification depends on who does it, how they do it, and why they do it. As a resident in New York, a city where gentrification is as widespread as the common cold in winter, Davidson speculates that those who go into a neighborhood with the intention to renovate houses, or abandoned buildings ought to have a good reason for it. The author points out that “Gentrification does not have to be something that one group inflicts on another…” (Davidson 349), rather, he suggests that everyone, the gentrifiers and the locals, be on the same page when it comes to developing their
The relationship between society and the law is direct, and housing in America is a conclusive example of that. As argued by both authors, once society has made up its mind about a certain group of people or place such as the ghettos, even the law can’t change those facts. It often happens that people of color and minorities get overlooked and stereotyped into something that they are not due to the hierarchical and discriminatory principles of the law. It has been engrained into society to think that minorities are poor, lazy, and overall less productive in the public
Many proponents as well as advocates of gentrification like to use in many regard as code words to back up their claim that gentrification brings “revitalization” “urban renewal” and more importantly “enhances” the community. However, these are what many who are critical of gentrification deem to be “ code words”, because they appear to be ones that exude positivity when they are in fact not expressing the full story of the argument, because underneath this creeping positivity. There still exists this form of stereotyping that minorities, or those from lower socioeconomic means cannot create something that is unique or successful on their own. Furthermore, what existed in their communities before gentrification was one that brought little to no value to society.
In her essay, she points that an individual should not be tagged as a criminal to the society due to his or her poverty. She also points that the government should provide more shelters to homeless, and that the government should help them to find a job in order to have them enrolled back in society. Unfortunately, the public housing, which is a support for poor families provided by the government, has been becoming an easy target for law enforcers to fine people that is in need. As Ehrenreich says, “The public housing that remains has become more prisonlike, with residents subjected to drug testing and random police sweeps”. It demonstrates the elephant in the room that the government wants to avoid such reality meanwhile people is suffering in public houses filled of diseases and filth.
Blue collar crimes unique to low-income areas are remedied by the installation of high rises and a coffee shop or two; but if this seems, as the adage goes, pie in the sky, it wouldn’t be far from the truth. The effect gentrification has on a community’s safety is adversely shown through empirical evidence; yet, many privileged residents of metropolitan and even suburban areas find it difficult to find fault in the motivation behind gentrifying a neighborhood. Instead of improving living conditions and narrowing the gap between the rights to neighborhood safety, gentrification, in fact, does the opposite. Award winning Sociologist, Chris M. Smith, examined the correlation between gentrification and the rise in violence throughout Chicago and found that, “In 1994, gang homicides were 23% of Chicago’s total homicides while in 2005 gang homicides were 34% of Chicago’s total homicides.” This spike of situational homicides is closely related to the demolition of the Cabrini-Green housing projects on Chicago’s near north side.
One way in which this fear is implemented is by increasing the inequality between races. Urban planning, in particular, has played a large role in this as it has historically advantaged some people while putting others at a disadvantage. From gentrification and racial disparities in law enforcement to practices such as blockbusting and redlining, it is apparent that policies and decisions made by city planners were not designed to benefit everyone equally. Particularly the Housing Act of 1949 and the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956. Both of these policies displaced residents through the use of eminent domain and condemnation laws (Budds, “How Urban Design Perpetuates Racial Inequality – And What We Can Do About It”).
Public Policy on Housing Discrimination Executive Summary Housing discrimination and segregation have long been present in the American society (Lamb and Wilk). The ideals of public housing and home buying have always been intertwined with the social and political transformation of America, especially in terms of segregation and inequality of capital and race (Wyly, Ponder and Nettking). Nevertheless, the recent unrest in Ferguson, Missouri and in Baltimore due to alleged police misconduct resulting to deaths of black men brought light on the impoverished conditions in urban counties in America (Lemons). This brings questions to the effectiveness of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in devising more fair-housing facilities (Jost).
Neoliberalization’s propagation of health inequity in urban rebuilding processes and social movements against them: Baltimore’s story This essay will discuss how neoliberal processes during redevelopment sustain and increase health inequities. It will highlight key neoliberal processes in urban redevelopment and examples of their impact on economic, political, and institutional social capital and subsequent public health effects. Examples of social movements challenging several neoliberal processes will be provided as one path toward changing the roots of health inequities. Introduction Too often neighborhoods which have been historically disinvested and demonized become prime real estate targets for development with the expectation
In this speech, I will begin by explaining what gentrification is along with a short background on the Lincoln Park gentrification, then I will proceed to explain how the families in these areas fought for their homes, and finally I will be discussing the gentrification that is affecting citizens of Chicago today. Body I. Gentrification is the process of renovating an area to meet the standards of a different social class, typically the upper middle class. Throughout this process the price of renting and owning a home increases while family owned businesses become bankrupt. Low-income families are left homeless and without the support of a
Lance Freeman, an associate professor of urban planning in Columbia, wanted to investigate if there was any displacement going on in two predominantly black neighborhoods that was briskly gentrifying. Much to his dismay, he couldn’t find any correlation between gentrification and displacement. What was surprising to Freeman was his discovery, “poor residents and those without a college education were actually less likely to move if they resided in gentrifying neighborhoods”. (Sternbergh, 19) Freeman adds, “The discourse on gentrification, has tended to overlook the possibility that some of the neighborhood changes associated with gentrification might be appreciated by the prior residents.” (Sternbergh, 19)
The main cause of the crisis was that capitalism was no longer a self-regulating system. Another issue was the overproduction of goods that followed a period of prosperity and the growth of the national economy. The presence of large capital acted outside the framework of national regulation and the spontaneous development of the market led to the production of goods, including items that the market could not digest. The population’s purchasing power did not match the number of goods that were produced and presented on the market. As a result, the market collapsed.