As a major proponent of gentrification, I feel obligated to put in a good word.
Compared to global cities, American cities are woefully under-built and underutilized. 70s white-flight, interstates and inner cities made cities the place for poor people. As things normalize and as young people return to cities, this anomaly is beginning to resolve itself.
This is a great thing for the poor who lived there. They can sell their suddenly expensive land make a big buck. Except, they never owned the land they lived on. They never purchased even so much as an apartment when the prices were rock bottom. Now they don't have any assets to liquidate.
This highlights the key enemies of poor people. Not yuppies or gentrification, but instead.
1. Slumlords - you couldn't have owned cuz they won't sell. You can't built because of horrible housing policy.
2. Bad education and cultural aversion to investing - you could have owned, but you never bought.
3. Bad Public transport - makes the inevitable displacement be a zero sum game.
Don't hate the yuppies who are being forced move to cities to work for companies there. Blame the city for limiting their local populations ability to make money of an a great opportunity.
What about neighborhood character though? Well, what about it. Every neighborhood's character has changed through the generation. The 'my suburb will be the same in 50 years' mentality is a uniquely recent take from American suburbia, and is already being proven wrong as the youth abandons them and maintenence costs are picking up.
1 - These are bad. But you can change slumlords to landlords and you would be making a more pertinent point. Because gentrification is really driven by the market making slumlords less relevant.
2 - Poor people can't invest because they have no wealth... But you are correct in that people are intentionally not taught to think this way. 'The poor' (people) generally aren't dumb enough that they wouldn't buy a house if they could. In other places where renting is more popular it's because renting is a safer bet.
3 - Good transport would be nice, but without solving underlying inequalities it may make the problem worse (yuppies can commute easier and outprice people)
Compared to global cities, American cities are woefully under-built and underutilized. 70s white-flight, interstates and inner cities made cities the place for poor people. As things normalize and as young people return to cities, this anomaly is beginning to resolve itself.
This is a great thing for the poor who lived there. They can sell their suddenly expensive land make a big buck. Except, they never owned the land they lived on. They never purchased even so much as an apartment when the prices were rock bottom. Now they don't have any assets to liquidate.
This highlights the key enemies of poor people. Not yuppies or gentrification, but instead.
1. Slumlords - you couldn't have owned cuz they won't sell. You can't built because of horrible housing policy.
2. Bad education and cultural aversion to investing - you could have owned, but you never bought.
3. Bad Public transport - makes the inevitable displacement be a zero sum game.
Don't hate the yuppies who are being forced move to cities to work for companies there. Blame the city for limiting their local populations ability to make money of an a great opportunity.
What about neighborhood character though? Well, what about it. Every neighborhood's character has changed through the generation. The 'my suburb will be the same in 50 years' mentality is a uniquely recent take from American suburbia, and is already being proven wrong as the youth abandons them and maintenence costs are picking up.