They do not guide them at all. They just flush them out. In Chicago there has been much work on tearing up former public housing and replacing it with mixed income communities. Oh and guess what, the former residents get allocated oh say between 25 and 50 percent of the new low income in the mixed thing. And then that slowly is reduced by the time of finishing to about 5 percent. Nobody gives a damn what happens to the former residents. Nobody. The local government only cares to help the rich class, the developers.
>>> LAz, you need to get rid of your blinkered worldview (dare I say Americanocentric?) or stop posting. Because you're NOT LISTENING. Two of the biggest redevelopments in my part of Toronto are owned by TCHC and are resettling all of the original RGI tenants back into new buildings. TCHC is an arm of the city government. Google Regent Park or Don Mount Court and read up. Or shut up.
Change has been for the most part the removel/obliteration of manufacturing from both country and city. This is the change that has damned cities and communities.
>>> Inner cities are not going to build new factories. The land is too valuable and there are too many people who would object to the pollution, power needs, noise, etc. What you need to figure out is what kind of job skills your underclass needs to garner jobs near home, if you don't want them to have to move. That'll be engineering, trades, services. Not manufacturing.
Sure. You're one of the gentrifiers. How can it possibly be wrong for you? You were not one who was not able to afford the rent and had to leave.
Arsons, intimidation and such things are very common in this. So that's why I said literally.
>>> In a Toronto context, this statement is RIDICULOUS.
Involuntary movement is not voluntary. People move because they can not afford it, not because they really want to move.
Oh I am very well aware of consumption explanations of gentrification. But it is big ignorance to avoid the production explanations.
Oh yeah? Looks like we have a wise guy here. We know what we do to them - beat them down into the ground by showing how wrong they are. Prepare to be shamed.
1) Your point here assumes that scholars are never opposed to gentrification. Have you ever looked into the actual literature of gentrification? You clearly have not. Most of the known scholars in this field are against gentrification. They are mainly geographers and sociologists.
>>> They are also mainly people who're looking for an axe to grind, and are opposed to gentrification before they get into the field. Rare is the sociology PHd who is going to side with developers.
2) I know Freeman very well. He wrote that book there goes the hood - and trust me, I do plan on buying it sooner or later. I am currently studying gentrification extensively, and after my current book I plan to read one by a well acclaimed Neil Smith. Smith tore Freeman and extra a$$#0|3 in his damning review of the there goes the hood book. Smith is one of the biggest experts on gentrification and is a big opponent of it. Similarly there are many scholars who are. Look into David Harvey, he might enlighten you a bit. There are so many people man. I believe that Hackworth down at UofT is into this, and that Lay at UBC is into the criticism of it too. You see, if you bothered to just look at the literature you would see that there is so much that criticizes gentrification and various aspects of it.
Here's a good start.
http://www.amazon.com/Gentrificatio...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1244508492&sr=8-1
Freshman approach? Hah, what a fool to throw such accusations when you do not even know the literature. Freshman yourself my boy. "facepalm"
Hold it. Stop right there. Most people who are getting displaced are renters, not owners.
>>> THAT is EXACTLY my point -- you're bringing your values to the conversation, and you're EXACTLY WRONG in the context of Toronto.
It's not always dumps. The media and developers sometimes portray certain places as dumps on purpose, in order to get support for their project.
>>> Whatever.
How far north? From what I know, there are quite a few highrise apartments, some 15 minutes walking north. It's hard to get into there. But, I have seen some condos start popping up north of pape.
>>> When were you North of Pape, Google Earth Guy? There's also a decent apartment on Broadview at Hogarth, south of Danforth. Google that, too, and tell me what the 'gentrification' level is, please.
Excellent question. This is where the whole problem lies... in manufacturing leaving the city in this era of neoliberal globalization. And hey, top experts in the field share this opinion, it is not me shitting out rants.
>>> No, it's you shitting out rants. Whether 'top experts' agree with you in some other context has nothing to do with your position on gentrification in Toronto.
An alternative idea is this - preventing neighborhoods from deteriorating by imposing rent control, so that former renters do not get flushed out. Furthermore, it really depends where one is. For example, in Chicago, there has been so much segregation... that is not helpful, as it often creates ghettos.
>>> OH. MY. GOD. Have you NEVER heard of the major issues with rent control Toronto faced in the eighties and nineties. When I first moved here in '91, there was NO PLACE TO RENT. Not for low income. Not for middle income. Not for high income. Why? Rent controls had stopped rental construction, full stop.
Gentrification usually deals with the displacement of the poor, not the displacement of the middle class. The questions we need to ask is why has a neighborhood been allowed to fall into the decay in order to allow gentrification to start later on.
Careful with your wording there, because phases of gentrification are actual terms. For example, phase 1 is called pioneer gentrification, where people move in and work to develop a place on their own. Later phases are more sophisticated. I recommend reading up on Clay's stuff from 1979. He was the first to talk about phases, and he identified four. Oh yeah baby I know my literature, unlike that other guy to whom I replied earlier.
>>> I don't need to be careful with my wording. You need to get your head out of your... literature.
Sure it is. Developers see no sin in that. Profit accumulation is all that matters.
My personal favourite cartoon on the matter is this one...
Come on, we need some humor/satire to be able to regurgitate this down.