Posted on 01/26/2015 10:15:40 AM PST by reaganaut1
Local governments are increasingly promoting mixed-income housing as a tool for fighting poverty, on the assumption that economic integration gives low-income children a better chance at overcoming poverty. New York City Mayor Bill De Blasio, for instance, has set a target of building 200,000 affordable housing units in the city, and he wants them to be distributed throughout mixed-income and more affluent neighborhoods. “Our goal is really to foster more economically diverse neighborhoods,” Alicia Glen, Deputy Mayor for Housing and Economic Development, told the New York Times.
These programs rest on the assumption that mixed-income communities benefit low-income residents. Poorer children might profit from access to better neighborhood schools and facilities; the aspirations of their better-off, more future-oriented peers might rub off on them. Such a housing policy seems especially attractive when you consider that a child born into a low-income neighborhood has a 64 percent chance of moving down the socioeconomic ladder over the course of his life. Low-income neighborhoods suffer from higher crime rates, lower educational attainment, and poorer health; recent research even found a connection between growing up in a poor neighborhood and PTSD.
But a new paper in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry suggests that mixed-income housing has its own problems, too. A team of researchers at Duke University found that low-income boys in mixed-income communities are more likely than their peers in uniformly poor neighborhoods to engage in anti-social behavior such as fighting, lying, and stealing. The greater the economic inequality in the neighborhood, the worse the low-income boys in this study fared.
(Excerpt) Read more at newrepublic.com ...
Okay, so when do they get to live in Lower Manhattan?.......................
Then we should put them in ghettos, right? I’m just saying...
Poor boys are much more likely to be in a single mother home. When dad is missing to discipline them, boys will be boys.
Higher profit margin in redistributing stuff without the government middle man.
“A team of researchers at Duke University found that low-income boys in mixed-income communities are more likely than their peers in uniformly poor neighborhoods to engage in anti-social behavior such as fighting, lying, and stealing. The greater the economic inequality in the neighborhood, the worse the low-income boys in this study fared.”
and the end result will be the school districts in these areas will go down the crapper so the people paying taxes and their kids will suffer..
Do away with rent control, and watch the market sort itself out.
And yet, when Newt Gingrich suggested that low income kids get a job as a janitor at schools just to learn a work ethic, he was blasted for it.
I guess that only liberals are allowed to make suggestions like this.
-PJ
This idea will NEVER work.
The second the government starts placing poor people into rich neighborhoods. The rich will simply leave, since they wont tolerate their children being exposed to the goings on of feral children.
If you live in a wealthy neighborhood, you can afford to move when undesirables move in.
Going to be a law.
Social engineers are morons who feel the Middle Class should have the sole burden of supporting the lowest classes, not the elites.
“Mixed income neighborhoods” afford enhanced conditions of envy and enhanced temptations and opportunities to steal. Mixed income urban neighborhoods evolve quickly into homogenous welfare neighborhoods
The issue is not just “poor boys”, its boys without male role models in their homes that causes the problems.
Mixing races in poor neighborhoods does not work. By nature, people choose to move into areas where there are people of their own race. It has been tried all over this country and in the end, blacks move where blacks are, whites move where whites are, orientals move to where orientals live, etc.
I don’t buy into what the offer claims.
“If you live in a wealthy neighborhood, you can afford to move when undesirables move in.”
Exactly !
“Wealth Flight” ipo “White Flight”
This type of social engineering never works.
.
No, many of them will bring the ghetto with them to their new “free” house..
My question is, how will DeBlasio force the hard-working people to stay in the neighborhoods he plans on destroying?
People should live where they want to live - as long as they pay their own way.
Maybe the gubbmint should decide how much each family should earn, you know, to be fair.
I’m guessing you didn’t really read the article...
“”These programs rest on the assumption that mixed-income communities benefit low-income residents.”””
Sure they do. Just not in the way that is right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.