Quote:
Originally Posted by Khantilever
In fact, the rate at which poor people leave gentrifying neighborhoods is *lower* than the rate at which they leave non-gentrifying neighborhoods. How do you reconcile this empirical fact with the poor being hurt by gentrification? https://www.researchgate.net/publica...y_in_the_1990s |
This is the biggest fact that detractors ignore: poverty is already a high displacement condition.
Think about the poor areas of Chicago, what is happening to the housing stock there? It is being left to rot and being destroyed. You don't think that is displacement? Every single vacant lot in Chicago where there used to be housing is displacement and I gurantee you there are more vacant lots than the total amount of housing in Pilsen and Logan Square combined.
Again, my own experience. I've now rehabbed 18 units on one block in LV. Every single one of them was in demo court or about to be. A grand total of three of those units had anyone living in them to begin with (and I now know all of those residents well because not a single one of them moved more than two blocks away, the horror!).
However the two featured in my video that was so contraversial were left to rot vacant for so long that they eventually caught fire after providing the community with a gang party house and squatter residence for 15 years. What happened when they caught fire? They ignited a perfectly serviceable 3 flat with 3 families living it next door displacing all three of them. The owner has been doing his best to repair the building, but it's still vacant two years later.
So you tell me, what caused displacement in my story VIA? Is it the big bad developer who saved and repaired 18 units of housing that were previously vacant on their way to being gone forever? Or is it the condition of poverty and disinvestment that caused continual rot of the housing stock spreading from one building to the next while encouraging crime and drug use?
Quote:
|
^ Also, as an economist who has worked with Fed researchers and presented my own research there, I have to say they definitely are not biased or have some kind of agenda.
|
Yeah anyone calling the fed biased is revealing their ignorance of economics. The Fed is possible the most empirical organization on the planet. Just look at their recent handling of monetary policy where they've basically ripped up the playbook of everything they were taught or learned about MMT. They are data dependant and just because they are "central bankers" doesn't mean they are die hard capitalists churning out propaganda...