A second, related problem is that poor people in neighborhoods with vanishingly few jobs need to move, and ideally they should be able to afford to move to areas within reasonable proximity to job centers. This means that prosperous suburban jurisdictions, which is where the service sector jobs largely are, must give some thought to affordable housing for working class families.
None of us want a gangbanger moving in next door. Unfortunately, however, NIMBY is not a substitute for good policy, and most poor people are not gangbangers.
As a thought experiment, I have always been partial to an absolute defense of private property rights as a good place to start the discussion. By all means, suburbanites are free to fortify their cul-de-sac castles as much as they want. Hip, hip, hooray for property rights, and if you want serious firepower covering all approaches, ok with me.
But respect for private property rights also means the guy across the street can sublet to 16 Mexican day laborers who want to bunk up in your neighborhood to be close to the construction job down the road. It means the little old lady down the block can let out rooms. You might not object to that ... but it also means that the working class guy can move onto your block, and afford the mortgage by taking half the house, and taking borders in the rest. And it means that a developer can put duplexes on the empty lot and a multi-family unit down on the corner.
This kind of thing sets off wars in the suburbs, and I understand why. But if these adaptations are ruled out of bounds, where do you want to house the poor? Don't zone them out of your neighborhood, expect the city to become a dumping ground, and call that a free market. Been there, done that, doesn't work. I don't want a Section 8 house on my block either. But if we give poor people a voucher and tell them to find their own apartments, I am willing to accept the probability that they will disperse into more prosperous areas. And dispersal is one of the keys to addressing the culture of poverty.
Moving to the suburbs won’t change anything. What you describe has already taken place in the northeast. The behavior remained the same. The good people in these suburbs just moved again. How about this? Why do we allow poor neighborhoods to be shooting galleries and drug infested? Shouldn’t the poor, regardless of where they live, be safe? Dysfunction doesn’t end because you are handed a Section 8 voucher in the suburbs. Trust me I know, I own several apartment buildings in the city and suburbs. The biggest problem is drugs. Period.
Really? I think most cities...even here where I live,,have ordinances against 16-18 people living in one house.
Nice post....but wrong headed.