jersey_girl660 t1_izgzniz wrote
Reply to comment by AbsentEmpire in Fishtown, Point Breeze have become far wealthier in the last 10 years and other new Census findings by Dryheavemorning
“That reinforces previous research, also released by the Philadelphia Federal Reserve, that found that demographic change in gentrifying neighborhoods was a result of typical levels of population churn in lower-income neighborhood — but with existing residents more often replaced by higher-income people than by similarly situated poor people”
This is exactly what I’m saying . You literally just proved my point bud.
AbsentEmpire t1_izh04wx wrote
>In addition, the researchers found, many low-income “original residents” remained in the neighborhood and benefited from the changing characteristics of the community. Perhaps obviously, low-income homeowners experience significant increases in their home values, while Reed and Brummet found that children from low-income households were more likely to go to college if they lived in gentrifying neighborhoods.
>Their research finds that gentrification had no discernible effect on income, employment or commuting distance for lower-income original residents, both those who were displaced and those who remained. That finding undermines the most boosterish case for gentrification, while also showing that it doesn’t massively undercut the material quality of life for poorer residents.
Way to ignore the rest of the article bud, which disproves your notions.
>The paper shows that much of the neighborhood demographic change was generated by newer, better-educated residents moving in rather than lower-income residents being forced out. That reinforces previous research, also released by the Philadelphia Federal Reserve, that found that demographic change in gentrifying neighborhoods was a result of typical levels of population churn in lower-income neighborhood
And the first part of the paragraph you quoted. Which further undermines your position.
jersey_girl660 t1_izh0c4m wrote
No it doesn’t. I never once stated that no residents stayed behind. Again the quote I provided you literally says most are replaced.
Just because a small amount stay doesn’t disprove what I’m saying… at all.
“That reinforces previous research, also released by the Philadelphia Federal Reserve, that found that demographic change in gentrifying neighborhoods was a result of typical levels of population churn in lower-income neighborhood — but with existing residents more often replaced by higher-income people than by similarly situated poor people”
I never once stated every single resident get replaced. Most do. Gentrification has both pros and cons which is why it has to be done right.
Also if you had asked me I would’ve told you there are benefits for those that are able to stay in the neighborhood…:. But you didn’t even bother.
AbsentEmpire t1_izh2r6w wrote
>That reinforces previous research, also released by the Philadelphia Federal Reserve, that found that demographic change in gentrifying neighborhoods was a result of typical levels of population churn in lower-income neighborhood
>“That’s a reason we think you shouldn’t just design policy to protect people who are already there. If you are in a world where people just move a lot, and this change is happening through replacement effects, maybe you should make sure people can afford to move there in the future.”
They're not being displaced if the the change reflects normal population churn, they being excluded by lack of affordable options due to zone restrictions, there is a big fucking difference in the implication.
jersey_girl660 t1_izh3eqn wrote
They are being displaced. It doesn’t matter if it’s equal to normal levels of population change. That’s not the issue.
It’s being replaced by higher income residents and then having to move to an area with similar issues as the old one… and not being able to benefit from the positive changes to the neighborhood as a result of being displaced
Displaced : cause (something) to move from its proper or usual place.
They are literally being displaced.
“The Fair Housing Act can be used as litigation against gentrification because the urban development process of higher-income individuals into lower-income neighborhoods leads to displacement”
AbsentEmpire t1_izh7ovu wrote
>displaced; displacing; displaces
>transitive verb >1a: to remove from the usual or proper place >specifically : to expel or force to flee from home or homeland
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/displace
>that found that demographic change in gentrifying neighborhoods was a result of typical levels of population churn in lower-income neighborhood
No one is being expelled, or otherwise forced to flee a neighborhood because higher income people moved in, they are being excluded from continuing to move in due to lack of affordable options caused by exclusionary zoning policy.
Again there is a big difference in the implications between being displaced and being excluded. You should demand a refund from your school.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments