Better City = Displaced Populations?

[Eug]

Eug:

This really isn't about whether social housing is well run or not - but whether the "undesirable" poor really have that much impact on the process of gentrification itself - as cited, probably not.

AoD

The area immediately next to the housing I mentioned is unpopular because of poorly managed social housing.

Areas like Cabbagetown are a little different, because it got direct pressure from expansion of the city's core in relatively recent times. In areas more insulated from this (ie. further from downtown), the effect of poorly managed social housing is more significant. Further from downtown, gentrification is often slower, and even slower when there is poorly managed social housing next door.

 

[Felino]

...but hold on for a second. Let's challenge our conventional notion that the rich push out the poor and that this is a static one way phenomenon. I think if you look at the big picture you will find that the poor also push out the rich and that both benefit and loose from the cycles of investment and de-investment during phases over the long-run.

Thank you Tricky, hallelujah!

 

[Felino]

No it's not simple, but the problem is that TCHC does seem to turn a blind eye to these things.

With that in mind, it's easy to understand why gentrification advocates often hate subsidized housing. Hell, even the subsidized housing building managers hate subsidized housing, because they have no power to kick out the troublemakers.

Yes and no. When cops raided a home for drugs, they are normally given a written warning. The second time around, they could get kicked out. They typically appealed the decision and manage a stay for years.

 

[Felino]

How do the poor "push out" the rich? If anything, in the urban osmosis game, the poor are sort of like a low pressure system while the rich are a high pressure system. Rich people have the means to force existing poor residents out of a neighbourhood, but poor people cannot force rich residents out of theirs. Instead, rich people leave an area on their own accord and, if the result is a dramatic lowering in property values, poor people may have a chance to move in.

Why mention the rich? How about lower middle class who can barely afford a home?

 

[Felino]

Eug:

This really isn't about whether social housing is well run or not - but whether the "undesirable" poor really have that much impact on the process of gentrification itself - as cited, probably not.

AoD

Toronto is catering way too much to social housing. We're taking care of Canada's mentally ill and drug users (attempting to anyhow) and Torontonians whether they can afford to or not are paying for it.

The crime for me is by the federal government that ignores Toronto and the role we play in taking care of the above. Small towns have to stop issuing one-way tickets for their mentally ill and drug addicts to come to Toronto. If this continues, the federal government should come in and start funding the shelters and services that goes along with this.

 

[lordmandeep]

The poor do push out the rich...


See the rich push out the poor in the city.
The poor go to inner suburbs and they push out the rich their to the outer suburbs or back to Downtown.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Felino:

Toronto is catering way too much to social housing. We're taking care of Canada's mentally ill and drug users (attempting to anyhow) and Torontonians whether they can afford to or not are paying for it.

Whether we like it or not, these issues tend to focus in the urban core wherever you go. The question is whether the municipality should be the one bearing the brunt of those costs.

The crime for me is by the federal government that ignores Toronto and the role we play in taking care of the above. Small towns have to stop issuing one-way tickets for their mentally ill and drug addicts to come to Toronto. If this continues, the federal government should come in and start funding the shelters and services that goes along with this.

This is a provincial area of jurisdiction mostly. And historically, up until Harris - it is funded by the province.

lordmandeep:

The poor go to inner suburbs and they push out the rich their to the outer suburbs or back to Downtown.

How does the poor afford housing in an area with high rent and populated by the rich in the first place? I bet you it's the rich no longer considering the area as desirable that enabled it to happen. Thus the poor didn't push anyone out...

AoD

 

[GraphicMatt]

The initial movement of the wealthy out of downtowns and into the suburbs certainly wasn't because they were 'pushed out' by the poor. It was caused a mixture of factors, primarily the promotion of the suburbs as The Better Way to Live in media at the time, the development of commuter highway infrastructure and racism.

 

[lordmandeep]

When I mean the rich in the inner suburbs, I think I may have meant the middle class.

There are many inner city areas and areas in the outer fringes of Toronto that were once full of middle class families. Once poorer people moved in, many across Steeles into other areas...

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

lordmandeep:

Once poorer people moved in, many across Steeles into other areas...

You didn't get it - if the area is so solidly middle class and desirable, how did the poorer people get to "move in" in the first place? Or was it because the neighbourhood, which is middle class and based on family lifecycles, had aged physically and demographically such that it is not longer as desirable, thus enabling lower rent (aging housing stock, rental of homes, etc) that lead to a socioeconomic shift?

AoD

 

[lordmandeep]

That is right...

But there were instances like in my old area where like 2-3 poor families come together and get a house in a decent area.
Of course these poorer people make a ton of noise, don't cut their grass and don't paint thier garage doors. (not all poor people are like that, but I must admit they were trashy)

Most people do not really care however I think when about 4-5 such homes appeared on our street, I think about 10-12 families moved. 10 years latter the areas is much poorer and the only original people left are old couples.


In my newer neighborhood in North Brampton, I noticed in the first 2-3 years there were about 3-4 really rich families on my street. Then some poor families came together and bought a house, so you have like 10-15 people in a house. The richer people do not like it and they moved. My area has gotten poorer in ten years however many of those combined families have know moved on. A lot of those poorer families are now better off and I think my neighhourhood has stabilized.

 

[Hipster Duck]

lordmandeep,

The way people "push out" others in a neighbourhood, by definition, is when one group buys property in an area. If an area is rich*, how could poorer people afford to buy and displace richer people from a neighbourhood? They don't have any money to buy houses; let alone the money needed to buy houses in a wealthy area. Not having money relative to others is the definition of being poor.

What happened in the neighbourhood you're talking about was either a) that a richer person bought the house and is leasing it to poorer families who are tenants, or, b) 3 poor families pooled up their money, and bought the house together.

The case for a) is much more likely. In this case, the poorer families who moved there did not push out the rich, the rich person made the decision to buy the house and is profiting off of it. In many communities, there are regulations barring people - at least in theory - from buying houses and subdividing it into apartments, mostly to keep an area upscale.

I doubt it's case b). 3 families would have to trust each other with their money and enter a legally binding contract to own one house under one name. This is very risky. Even if this was the case, this is not an example of "the poor" pushing out the rich, because the rich people who were "displaced" have the means (money) to move to another, equally desirable part of town. This is a lateral move. Through gentrification, the poor (who don't usually own property but are tenants) must move to another area that is just as affordable, but is probably less desirable. It's a move down, in other words.

---

*(let's just use "rich" and "poor" in a relative sense to one another)