Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright
Are you arguing that the effects of rolling price increases in Pilsen, for example, hasn't made hundreds of previously low or middle income Mexican families millionaires? No one living in Pilsen or Logan Square has benefited from improving schools or reduced crime? How many Latino teens that have grown up in Logan Square are NOT dead that would have been killed in gang activity that was disrupted merely by the introduction of Gentry which has zero fear of "snitches get stitches"?
The problem with your theory about gentrification simply pushing poverty around is that it's empirically wrong. Studies have shown over and over again that people aren't actually displaced very often by gentrification and that, by in large, outflows of one group or another do not happen at a faster rate in gentrifying areas than they do in any other area. Here's a massive decade long study from the Philly Fed of 100 metros backing exactly what I'm saying up:
https://www.city-journal.org/gentrif...social-justice
There's having an opinion and then there's spitting unthe face of science. I view the anti Gentrification crowd as science loving and climate denier or anti vaxers. They deny reality. We can and do measure the effects of development in the inner city. We've done it for 100 years and there are very few studies indicating that redevelopment does anything other than improve schools and reduce crime for EVERY resident of the area. |
Lol you're citing City Journal, which is funded by the Manhattan Institute?. Yea big shock a Federal Reserve study had that conclusion. As I said to begin with, gentrification favors big banks and capital first and foremost. Why would the biggest bank of all say anything different?
And here's a study with a totally different conclusion
http://maps.ncrc.org/gentrificationreport/index.html