The reality is, you don’t need to read Webster’s to see find
out how gentrification works – you can see the effects right here in Indianapolis. According to Governing: State & Localities, gentrification in Indianapolis
has quadrupled since 2000. Areas like
the Wholesale District which suffered from high unemployment rates, and abandoned
buildings during the Great Depression is now a premier entertainment and cultural
district, home to the Indianapolis Symphony Orchestra, Bankers Life Fieldhouse and Local
Oil Stadium. Gentrification of
Massachusetts Avenue in the 1990’s propelled the area from one of squalor to
one of the city’s most fashionable addresses.
It may seems as though gentrification creates more livable cities, safer
streets and more economic opportunities – and to a certain extent it does.
However, there is a downside to gentrification which
displaces poorer residents, usually to less hospitable neighborhoods. Oftentimes, large corporations inject large
amounts of financing into a city to refurbish an area for the affluent, while
neglecting the poorer resident’s needs. Property
taxes soar, the wealthy move in, and the poorer residents get pushed out to
neighborhoods that see more crime, with failing schools, and crumbling public
facilities.Many of you, like myself have enjoyed the effects of gentrification so I’m interested to know where you stand on the issue. My question to you this week is, “Do you think gentrification helps or hurts a city? Is it the government’s job to work to curb the effects of gentrification for poorer residents, or is it just an accepted result of being poor?” Answers are due no later than Wednesday, February 24th, 2015.
Gentrification both hurts and helps naptown. As it rebuilds and refurbishes the middle class it also displaces the lower class which in turn hurts them if they can't afford to live in these new building. I think it is the governments job to help those lower class citizens displaced by this by helping them live in these new buildings that are making it impossible for them to live there. It's not only on the government to help them, they need to also help themselves not being totally dependent on the government.
ReplyDeleteI believe it hurts a city. Mostly because the poorer families being pushed out of their homes feel like the government doesn't care about them. The feel pushed out of the community and so they will change their political views because the person who approved this basically threw them aside. So they won't vote for that person to stay in office. I think it is our government's job to do this for poorer people. It would save them so much money if they didn't make them move. In my small town of North Vernon, they wanted to build a SUPER Wal-Mart next to the fire station where there were small homes, maybe about 10 1000 square foot and less homes. our local gonvernment paid them to leave and now there is a super wal mart in our community where we already had a wal mart. (Makes no sense to me,the new one has a food area the old one didnt, wow, so different.) Now it's an accepted result by it, it's unfair,and we take it.
ReplyDeleteI personally think in some ways that gentrification does help the city, but then again I feel like it also hurts the people in that city. I think wealthy people moving into an urban area and basically "making things harder" for the middle-lower class people is not fair for the middle-lower class because they don't have money to blow like the wealthy and they are basically getting kicked to the curb and kicked out of their neighborhood. But when wealthy people move into an urban area they say that crime and poverty obviously goes down a little bit. When it comes to the government, I think it is their job to try to curb the effects of gentrification because if they don't at least try to then things will just get worse and poor people don't get the help that they need!
ReplyDeleteI think that overall... gentrification helps because it makes parts of the city more hospitable to people from the outside, bringing in revenue and tourism...in the end. But I do think that in some way the people who are displaced should be helped. It isn't beneficial to cities to push more people into poorer and more dangerous neighborhoods. In ways it makes them more cramped and more people could end up hurt, or victims of the same problem again. I think that they should try to help the people displaced find equally affordable places to live....at least...
ReplyDeleteIn all honesty i think that gentrification can go both ways. I highly disagree on how they treat people who are in poverty. It's really unfair to the people. Especially with the failing schooling facilities for the children now to me that's just plain wrong they should have the same like they have up in the suburbs. And job opportunities in the urban life seems very scares.
ReplyDeleteBut in the suburbs it's completely different, they have the best of the best. They have nice houses, good schools, five star restaurants etc. I've seen it every time i travel, there's a high class neighborhoods, and poor neighborhoods. The government needs to do something about it since it's there job to provide for the community. Making one side better then the other makes no sense. It seems like today's gentrification seems completely irrational, to me. It's seems to me like everything is half-baked. I mean nobody should live in poverty, while the other lives the good life.
The government seriously needs to help the poor neighborhoods. It's very illogical
to me. In my opinion i think that poor environment should have the same equal rights as Suburban environment has. I know it's not only Indiana but it's other states too. We as a city and as a community and as hoosiers, should come together and help each other out making better environments for environment. Thats my opinion.
I think that gentrification helps a city. It brings more jobs and income to the city and lifts up these neighborhoods to be a nicer and more livable place. Although there is the downside of this which is the poor people who used to live in these neighborhoods are being pushed out of the area and that is not fair. Even though the government is flourishing these neighborhoods it creates another poor area somewhere else. Therefore the government should help the poor people by making these neighborhoods more affordable so they won’t necessary have to more out.
ReplyDeleteI think gentrification definitely helps a city. The majority of citizens in Indianapolis see all of the new areas and think the city is more prosperous. I do see how it could cause problems for the poor, but it seems that the areas that are being renovated were terrible places to live in the first place. I understand that the poor may have a struggle with moving and uprooting families, but they were not in a nice area from the beginning. The government should definitely help these families relocate or even create laws that keep the rent/mortgage at the same price as before for original residents.
ReplyDeleteIn the sense of bringing culture in and renewing an area it absolutely helps. However we cannot turn a blind eye to the consequences it has. Being poor does not mean someone deserves to have a less stable or safe environment. When poorer people are moved out of areas because of gentrification this is exactly what happens. And honestly planning to renew a part of a city without concern for where the current residents will end up shows a sickening lack or foresight or any in depth planning. If we just pick up poor people and put them somewhere else it just makes another poor area and thus solves nothing, we need to address the real issue at its heart which is: poverty and how capitalism is oppressive by nature. We cannot have areas free of poverty with a capitalist system, which is why gentrification just causes problems because it just moves poverty around rather than doing anything to fix it. We need to develop a system that balances out enhancing a neighborhood without removing the current residents.
ReplyDeleteI think it helps and hurts, for example I can remember when you couldn't walk the streets of downtown Indy due to the crime, gangs, etc. but now its welcoming and safe, but the outer areas have more crime and violence now since the poor, gangs, etc. were forced out. I do think the government and business should work together to help the poor when redevelopment happens. But it looks like its just a catch 22 in the long run when money is involved.
ReplyDeleteI think it does both, as stated above we can't ignore that most of us enjoy the effects of gentrification, but I think the consequences are worse than what comes out of it. When reading this blog I thought of the video we watched in class about the parents who struggle every day to properly take care of their kids and how unfair it must be for their lives to get harder just so we can gain some "culture and character". I think it's somewhat the governments responsibility and somewhat our responsibility, I mean if you choose to get yourself in credit card debt by buying all these nice things at age 20, sorry. But for those struggling parents that have to use credit cards to buy their kids dinner and clothes, I think it's the governments responsibility (to an extent) to make sure the citizens needs are met and fairly negotiated. I understand it's difficult to differentiate between those two types of people, there isn't really a way to, which is why this is such a grey area topic. I'm not sure how this would go about working, but I do think maybe the costs of the new places could differentiate based on a persons income? This could help the lower class stand better on the changes and improve living situations for everyone, and not just the wealthier.
ReplyDeleteI think that gentrification kind of both helps and hurts a city. It definitely helps cities become a safer and more prosperous place. However, it hurts when it comes to the poorer citizens. Like you said in your post, because of the influx of wealthy people, the poor people end up getting displaced. Personally, I think that it should be the government's job to help curb the effects of gentrification so the poorer residents won't be affected so negatively.
ReplyDeleteI also believe gentrification helps and hurt a city. As city expands and starts to be prosperous, the poor are sent to live elsewhere. I think the government needs to step in and fix the large gap between the poor and wealthy. Many families struggle to make ends meet daily. The poor become angry since they are forced to relocate to high crime areas. The government should not be responsible to help people who have spent their money irresponsibly yet should help people get back on their feet. Every person has the choice to be in any financial class. I don’t think no one that is currently poor has to be poor for life. I think we need more financial advising classes throughout school so people are given the knowledge to live within their means.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I know it's beneficial to the city to improve it and make it more hospitable for people who are not poor, I personally feel like it has hurt other areas of the city negatively. I have personally seen my own neighborhood in the suburbs deteriorate as lower-income families have been pushed out of downtown, and it has made the places I used to feel were safe become less and less so as shadier characters have moved in. I don't actually live in that neighborhood anymore, but I definitely noticed how much it was changing for the worse. So I feel like it has not only had an effect on the poorer classes, but it also has a negative impact on middle-class residents who are also coerced into relocating in order to keep themselves in a safe environment.
ReplyDeleteI think it hurts and helps a city because it helps the middle class by being moved into livable cities with safer streets and it hurts the poor since they are being forced to somewhere else making the streets unsafe. I also think that it's both the government's job to minimize the effects and that it's an accepted result of being poor. The government could help minimize the effects but if it chooses not to help then the poor would just have to accept that they are on their own,
ReplyDeleteI think it definitely hurts city, but it helps city grow. City must be transform how people in city wanted. Most of people want to live safe and beautiful. City's environment might be hurt, but that is what people want.
ReplyDeleteBut I don't think gentrification helps poor people. If the housing gentrificated, house's cost goes up. Can poor people afford that? I don't think so.
-Jaeyoung
It's both helpful and hurtful, obviously. Helps the city, hurts the residents. The poor can't help being poor, so instead of helping the middle class maybe big corporations should help the poor, build the up, thus attraction the attention of the middle class, who will move into any available spaces along with the once poor.
ReplyDeleteI am from the D.C Metropolitan area and have seen the effects of gentrification, second hand. It was an extreme shock once I returned to the area after having being gone over 5 years, to see neighborhoods that were once stained with poverty, were now paved with expensive restaurants, lavish residences, and flourishing businesses. This was initially refreshing to now be able to frequent these newly renovated areas of the city, but also disheartening when think of those families that had been in turn pushed out of the city. I look as gentrification as a bandaid for poverty issues. The poverty is in actuality just relocating. In the case of the DC area, these efforts just merely shift those poor individuals to relocate to the surrounding cities...
ReplyDeleteGentrification helps the city today but hurts it tomorrow. By having gentrification it limits opportunity for people to move up in there lives. If you start out poor you are going to have almost no chance to move up to the next level into days world.
ReplyDeleteCheck this out! Here is a map of the breakdown of gentrification in Indianapolis.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.governing.com/gov-data/indianapolis-gentrification-maps-demographic-data.html
Empirical research is increasing finding that a strong middle-class produces higher levels of growth. The larger the middle-class, the greater the constitution (as in health) of the State. A vibrant flourishing middle-class is the keystone upon which economic opportunity is built. The middle-class saves society.
ReplyDeleteAs Regan stated, “The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.” When the Fed govt. gets involved in gentrification, it enacts dastardly capacious “solutions” such as: making homelessness a crime and, as done in more than fifty cities, feeding the homeless a crime. It bulldozes entire neighborhoods in the name of “gentrification.”
Gentrification should be a gradual growth based upon free-market values. People are best suited when they have the means to choose where to work, live, and co-habituate. Poverty is when people are unable to have the freedom to choose due to the non-availability of means. Social justice is intertwined with income equality.
According to the Pew Research Center, the gap between the upper income and middle income families has reached its highest on record. Thus, there is an even wider gap between the uber-rich and impoverished. When the gap between the rich and the poor become so great that there is no distinguishable middle-class, history has shown that it is ripe for revolutionary movements and social upheaval.
Gentrification would end if society was based upon Maslow’s hierarchy of needs not a feudal caste system represented by a fiat financial paradigm.
I definitely believe it benefits the city, but could definitely cause troubles for the poor. I also firmly believe that it's the governments job to take care of lower class citizens! Especially low income families who have enough trouble making ends meet.
ReplyDelete