4 ms·
"Poor neighborhoods subsidize the affluent; it is a ubiquitous condition of the American development pattern" I don't really see that as a positive, more as an
by fallingfrog 8y ago
"Poor neighborhoods subsidize the affluent; it is a ubiquitous condition of the American development pattern"
I don't really see that as a positive, more as another symptom of the ongoing pillage and exploitation of America's working class.
- burlesona 8y agoBeing familiar with Strong Towns I would say the author agrees with you. In general Strong Towns tries to point out that the older and lower income parts of town typically produce a substantial tax surplus while the newer and higher income parts of town are a substantial tax drain. This is because, while each individual homeowner may pay more in property tax, they live in much less density and newer infrastructure is usually a lot more expensive (due to increased engineering requirements, ie. more pavement, fancy street lights, etc.) -- so there are fewer people paying for much more expensive infrastructure. This is obviously unjust, and the organization is trying to help bring awareness to the problem to help create a movement for change.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- TheCoelacanth 8y agoI would be surprised if the author didn't agree with you (though they might frame it in very different terms). The same blog recently published an article[1] explicitly advocating for more investment in poor neighborhoods. [1] https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/1/10/poor-neighborhoods-make-the-best-investment https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/1/10/poor-neighborh...