The Rather Unhappy Result of ‘Gentrification’

Newton’s Third Law is that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Gentrification is of renovation and revival of deteriorated urban neighbourhoods resulting in an influx of more affluent residents.  This results in increased property values and the displacing of lower-income families and small businesses.

No one can argue against gentrification qua gentrification. No one supports the maintenance of shabby and collapsing structures, creating ghettos and ghost towns.  The question is, where do the residents of those once slums go?

From the mid 1800s to the early 1900s in New York City there was an influx of immigrants.  Some of the immigrants came from the Southern United States, some from other nations in the world.  They packed into neighbourhoods which had been single family housing.

Where this house had once been occupied by one family, it was now rented to a number of families; living and dining rooms were turned into bedrooms, and one old bathroom down the hall now had to facilitate a dozen people.

Rents were  low because they had to be, for no one who could afford a sensible rent would live there.

Residents would live there until they could afford something better and move, and others would take their place. The neighbourhood would become a slum for most of the property owners did no repairs or maintenance on the buildings.

They were ‘slum lords’  who made their money via rentals and the lack of expenditure.

This went on until crime was so high that trying to get rent was dangerous. Often the buildings would be condemned or abandoned.  As these places were of such low value, one could buy them for a few thousand dollars.  Buy them, repair them, upgrade them, and rent them at a much higher rate.

Beginning at the edges of a slum, the new Owners would do what they needed to so as to make the apartments enticing for the wealthier.  It was not only the flats which were upgraded, so was the neighbourhood.  Old businesses would be shut, new businesses  catering to those with deeper pockets would arrive.

Those who couldn’t afford the raised rentals would have to move out.   For some it was not a major dislocation, for others it was catastrophic, for there was no where in the City they could go.   Many went into homeless shelters, many left the city.

The rather positive action of gentrification has had an impact on homelessness as I mentioned in http://172.104.9.193/overlooked-reason-homelessness/    as public housing, that is rent controlled apartments maintained by the city, has not kept pace with the need.