4 ms·

An ethnically homogenous area doesn't always imply it's a ghetto though?

vorpalhex 8y ago
The original meaning of "ghetto" was to be ethnically homogenous, it gained the additional meaning of being ramshackle or of poor condition.
- weberc2 8y ago
  Why should it be the goal of the law to hinder prosperous but ethnically homogenous areas? Personally I like my diverse neighborhood, but I also like that Chinatown is just down the street.
  - SamReidHughes 8y ago
    The answer is obviously contingent on your values and maybe your prediction of sociological outcomes.
  - ABCLAW 8y ago
    Because the reality of racial restriction covenants and redlining practices is that they weren't used to develop great locales; they were used to systemically exclude people of undesired races who otherwise had the means to live in said area. This doesn't mean that ethic areas just melt away, though. Chinatown can remain Chinatown on the basis that they value being close to Chinese community centres and Chinese grocery stores more than the average resident, meaning they're willing to pay more and price out other people to live there. They can't remain Chinatown by literally refusing to rent to someone because they're black, though. This allows ethic areas to remain if they provide a benefit to their community, but melt away to redistribute real-estate resources more efficiently if they don't.
    - deadmik3 8y ago
      isn't the point of things like rent control and affordable housing to specifically prevent people from paying more and pricing out people who want to live there?
      - vorpalhex 8y ago
        It comes down to this issue of whether or not more housing is available. In New York, there's effectively a finite cap on housing, so you can't just say "well buy somewhere else". Pricing caps and assistance programs make sense there, but those also come with less ability to control your neighborhood. When there's tons of cheap housing available, then having small areas with expensive pricing isn't per se a problem (but could be an issue in context, say a small midwestern town excluding black people from buying houses by over-inflating prices.)
        x220 8y ago
        >you can't just say "well buy somewhere else" You can, for the most part, if you don't make it harder than it needs to be to build apartment complexes.
        vorpalhex 8y ago
        You can't put 256GB of ram in your desktop and expect it to run faster. You can't replace one house with 16 apartments and expect it to work as well. Parking, noise, litter, etc. It's not fair for a developer to push their direct costs onto the neighborhood instead of eating it themselves.

The original meaning of "ghetto" was to be ethnically homogenous, it gained the additional meaning of being ramshackle or of poor condition.

weberc2 8y ago
Why should it be the goal of the law to hinder prosperous but ethnically homogenous areas? Personally I like my diverse neighborhood, but I also like that Chinatown is just down the street.
- SamReidHughes 8y ago
  The answer is obviously contingent on your values and maybe your prediction of sociological outcomes.
- ABCLAW 8y ago
  Because the reality of racial restriction covenants and redlining practices is that they weren't used to develop great locales; they were used to systemically exclude people of undesired races who otherwise had the means to live in said area. This doesn't mean that ethic areas just melt away, though. Chinatown can remain Chinatown on the basis that they value being close to Chinese community centres and Chinese grocery stores more than the average resident, meaning they're willing to pay more and price out other people to live there. They can't remain Chinatown by literally refusing to rent to someone because they're black, though. This allows ethic areas to remain if they provide a benefit to their community, but melt away to redistribute real-estate resources more efficiently if they don't.
  - deadmik3 8y ago
    isn't the point of things like rent control and affordable housing to specifically prevent people from paying more and pricing out people who want to live there?
    - vorpalhex 8y ago
      It comes down to this issue of whether or not more housing is available. In New York, there's effectively a finite cap on housing, so you can't just say "well buy somewhere else". Pricing caps and assistance programs make sense there, but those also come with less ability to control your neighborhood. When there's tons of cheap housing available, then having small areas with expensive pricing isn't per se a problem (but could be an issue in context, say a small midwestern town excluding black people from buying houses by over-inflating prices.)
      - x220 8y ago
        >you can't just say "well buy somewhere else" You can, for the most part, if you don't make it harder than it needs to be to build apartment complexes.
        vorpalhex 8y ago
        You can't put 256GB of ram in your desktop and expect it to run faster. You can't replace one house with 16 apartments and expect it to work as well. Parking, noise, litter, etc. It's not fair for a developer to push their direct costs onto the neighborhood instead of eating it themselves.