« Monday Links Everybody Loves IKEA »

August 11, 2008

The Other Side of Demographic Inversion

publichousing_0808.jpg
Last week, we talked about what the 21st century city might look like if demographic inversion—the gentrification of the inner city—continues. This weekend, The Times had a piece on how 21st century suburbs are transforming due to the foreclosure crisis and the migration of public housing to the outskirts of town. "Law enforcement experts and housing researchers argue that rising crime rates follow Section 8 recipients to their new homes, while other experts discount any direct link," they reported. "But there is little doubt that cultural shock waves have followed the migration."
News Flash: Everyone Wants to Live in the City [Brownstoner]
Public Housing? Photo by Os Sutrisno.




Posted by lisa at 9:03 AM | Comments (52)
Categories: Quality of Life

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/5825

Comments

You used to be able to look into the windows of those apartments when you flew into Hong Kong using the old Kai Tak airport. Most interesting landing in the world!!!

Posted by: Bold type guest at August 11, 2008 9:34 AM

"Law enforcement experts and housing researchers argue that rising crime rates follow Section 8 recipients to their new homes, while other experts discount any direct link," they reported. "But there is little doubt that cultural shock waves have followed the migration." "

Ah Lisa, very subtile cover racism.. Nice with a hint of garlic. Smooth, goes down real nice. Finish up with a bottle of wine....

The What

Someday this war is gonna end..

Posted by: what at August 11, 2008 9:39 AM

Jesus, What...

Lisa is QUOTING ANOTHER WRITER!

By the way,the spelling is 'subtle'.

Asshat

Posted by: Prodigal_Son at August 11, 2008 9:44 AM

And I think the facts actually back them up. That's not racism DoWhat. Since when is there a new RACE called Section 8?

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 9:51 AM

Could someone please explain what Section 8 is referring to?

Posted by: slopedoglover at August 11, 2008 10:20 AM

A landlord's worst nightmare.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 10:22 AM

@slopedoglover, check out this article: "Why is crime rising in so many American cities? The answer implicates one of the most celebrated antipoverty programs of recent decades."

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/memphis-crime

Posted by: tscola at August 11, 2008 10:25 AM

the dowhat wouldn't recognize racism if it came up to him, slapped him around the face, gave him a haircut and pushed him off the end of canarise pier.

Posted by: dittoburg at August 11, 2008 10:30 AM

Thanks, tscola.

Posted by: slopedoglover at August 11, 2008 10:50 AM

Freakonomics, maybe. Common sense & logical, certainly.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 10:53 AM

"the dowhat wouldn't recognize racism if it came up to him, slapped him around the face, gave him a haircut and pushed him off the end of canarise pier."

Dittoburg I think the same can be said about you.


Posted by: 7andfive at August 11, 2008 10:57 AM

Dave- are you so ignorant not to understand code words that people use instead of race. You live in Bed Stuy for god sake!
I'm disappointed in you dave :)

You probably think when McCain uses the words "uppity and elitist" to describe Obama he just means that Mr. O is a little too reserved.

Posted by: 7andfive at August 11, 2008 11:02 AM

OK, sorry. I'll have to admit it then. All of the information in the two stories is just outright racist. Section 8 is a success for everyone involved. One must be PC for PCs sake.

If you want to argue about racial profiling do so but I'm talking about Section 8 with no regard towards the race of ant Section 8 recipients.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 11:08 AM

Did McCain actually say "uppity?"

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 11:09 AM

Way! This is my uncle's building in Wan Chai! I would recognize that underwear a mile away.

Posted by: WonTon at August 11, 2008 11:13 AM

7andfive - let me guess - you're racism-monomaniac who helps devalue the charge of racism by seeing it everywhere.

If you wear orange shades, guess what - everything appears to be a shade of orange.

Posted by: dittoburg at August 11, 2008 11:14 AM

Dave- I never said the stories were racists. I said, I was surprised you didn’t understand or recognize code words used in place of race. Instead of saying that a black man needs to come down a peg- you say he’s uppity. Instead of saying crime follows poor blacks- you generalize all section 8 recipients. Although your conscious may not be aware of this your sub-conscious understands loud and clear!

Posted by: 7andfive at August 11, 2008 11:15 AM

I believe that crime follows Section 8 as the stories are written. Whether or not it is black or white or brown or yellow or red or green Section 8 recipients.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 11:18 AM

By the way, interesting you should use a picture of Hong Kong in a post about demographic inversion. Because Hong Kong is the pioneer of demographic inversion! Most working and middle class Hong Kong people live in crowded high-rise tower blocks built in planned communities far from the center of the city. Kind of like super-sized Starrett Cities, except we also built the subway lines out at the same time, so there is convenient public transport, at least.

We've got demographic inversion, but we still got density. The best of both worlds!

Posted by: WonTon at August 11, 2008 11:18 AM

7andfive: Please explain why comments about Section 8 are meant to be exclusively about black people.

Comparing comments by McCain have nothing to do with this article. Did you have a chance to read it?

The study was about all Section 8 recipients. The Times article itself did concentrate on blacks moving into a white area in Antioch (sp?) CA, but that was the Times' spin and not related to the overall study and results published.

Posted by: 11233 at August 11, 2008 11:19 AM

WonTon...you neeed to get back more often. You got to go way past Monkok to see buildings like that now. Wan Chai is all gentrified like Central was 10 years ago.

Gentrification in Hong Kong...wow...can we start a side thread about that!!!!

It is being gentrified with PRC money and guys walking around with the labels still on the sleeves of their sport coats. Aiiieeee yaaahhhhh

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 11:21 AM

subtile cover racism= an unpleasant, xenophobic masonry used commonly in bathrooms.

Posted by: wasder at August 11, 2008 11:22 AM

“Whether or not it is black or white or brown or yellow or red or green Section 8 recipients.”
Are you serious? And why do you believe the story? Have you reviewed the statistical data used? You probably believed the US case for going to war in Iraq, since after all it was reported in the Times using 'facts'.

There was just a story in LA times about the reverse migration of section 8 recipients (code word for poor people of color) many of whome have been harassed by the local police. The police department is now being sued- so who really is bringing crime? This is not about race people- just start thinking for yourself!

Posted by: 7andfive at August 11, 2008 11:25 AM

Can you keep your own racism out of this please, plenty of section 8 recipients are asian, hasidim, eastern european. Your race paranoia doesn't help you understand anything.

Posted by: dittoburg at August 11, 2008 11:29 AM

“7andfive: Please explain why comments about Section 8 are meant to be exclusively about black people.”
I never said that. I was talking about code words and the perception is that the majority of section 8 recipients are black. Code words are not based on fact but rather on perception.

“Comparing comments by McCain have nothing to do with this article. Did you have a chance to read it?”
Again, I was talking about code words and just using McCain as an example- making my reference very relevant.

Posted by: 7andfive at August 11, 2008 11:30 AM

Cool off 7andfive.

I'm sure the local police are harassing the Section 8ers.

I fear Godwin's Law will soon be invoked here.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 11:31 AM

or the converstaion will divert into conspiracy theories

Posted by: dittoburg at August 11, 2008 11:35 AM

7andfive: You lose the argument if you can't keep to the story being discussed. What does the war in Iraq have to to with this? Did you review the data? If so, tell us what it said. Otherwise, assuming all Section 8 - which now seems to include more people than just blacks as you mentioned before - means poor people "of color", you are making baseless assumptions.

Posted by: 11233 at August 11, 2008 11:35 AM

11233- not to get personal but did you go to college? Do you understand the the concepts of rhetorical writing?
Perhaps then, you would understand that my reference to the war was validating my point about questioning data.

I never made an false statement about section 8 recipients- I was merely talking about code words and perceptions.

Posted by: 7andfive at August 11, 2008 11:46 AM

"my reference to the war was validating my point about questioning data"

Oh dear. Nevermind.

Posted by: dittoburg at August 11, 2008 11:51 AM

7andfive: I did go to college. Did you? You don't get it. You assumed all people who receive section 8 are black. Then you backtrack and say all poor people of color. Of course, in your world, you don't mean Asian (east Asian or south Asian) and there can't possible be white people who are poor and on section 8.

Your writing was not rhetorical, it was an attempt to change the subject because you were being called out for your inability to seperate your own interpretation of the facts from the facts themselves. You want to see all section 8 recipients as black or poor people "of color", go to town. But that was not the point of the study.

And while we are at it, answer my questions: Did you see the data and did you read the article? Since you refuse to answer the questions I already posted, can we all acknowledge that your answer is no? (Rhetorical question.)

Posted by: 11233 at August 11, 2008 12:28 PM

Lets change the subject since some of my other Bed Stuy friends are here today...was Peaches still packed over the weekend??

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 12:39 PM

11233- could point me to where I said all section 8 recipients were black? I recall writing that Section 8 is often used as a code word- which was my only point. I'm more than willing to admit my mistake, if I indeed stated that Section 8 recipients were black.

And yes, I did read the article and the data. But there is no outline of how the data was collected and analyzed. Maybe you can provide that for me?

Posted by: 7andfive at August 11, 2008 12:54 PM

Can you really blame people for wanting to move back to the city? You can only take so many strip malls and applebee's. Suburbs...ugh...

Posted by: KHuebbe at August 11, 2008 1:19 PM

KHuebbe...there's an Applebee's on Fulton near Nostrand for those that long for whatever it is they serve. However, when I lived on East 54th St in Manhattan there was an Outback Steakhouse on 55th St....I could always go over for that Bloomin Onion. The suburbs had nothing on me.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 1:38 PM

7andfive

You seem to be working very hard to make “section 8 recipients” a code word
What is it code word for?

Posted by: mark swiss at August 11, 2008 1:39 PM

"Dave- I never said the stories were racists. I said, I was surprised you didn’t understand or recognize code words used in place of race. Instead of saying that a black man needs to come down a peg- you say he’s uppity. Instead of saying crime follows poor blacks- you generalize all section 8 recipients. Although your conscious may not be aware of this your sub-conscious understands loud and clear!"

Feel free to apologize.

Posted by: 11233 at August 11, 2008 2:02 PM

"Can you really blame people for wanting to move back to the city? You can only take so many strip malls and applebee's. Suburbs...ugh..."

A. The article is about people staying in the city, not about people leaving the burbs. In fact the article states that that is not happening.

B. As much as I personaly dilike burbia, I hate when people make these absurd generalizations. Not all suburbs have strip malls and applebees. Ever been to Bedford, Katonah, and many other such towns? It's like saying I hate Brooklyn because of the identical brick houses with aluminum awnings.

Posted by: shillstoner at August 11, 2008 2:17 PM

Or like I hate Queens because of all the Fiberama awnings. Ridiculous.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 2:26 PM

Speaking of Section 8, what about the building in the picture? That place is straight nasty, I don't care where it is.

Posted by: East New York at August 11, 2008 2:32 PM

11233- Did you actually read the quote? For the final time,I was referencing the use of code words! "I said, I was surprised you didn’t understand or recognize code words used in place of race."

So let's just agree to disagree here- but I will apologize for not adequately getting my point across.

Posted by: 7andfive at August 11, 2008 2:50 PM

I did read your quote. Section 8 is not a code word for black or "people of color." You added race into the discussion, not me.

Are you going to apologize for questioning if I went to college?

Your response to criticism and failure to apologize for your behavior points to your level of maturity, or lack thereof.

Posted by: 11233 at August 11, 2008 2:58 PM

If it makes you feel better- I hereby apologize for questioning your education. But why do you care if some random person on the internet questions your education? You did graduate didn't you :) I'm only joking.

Posted by: 7andfive at August 11, 2008 3:18 PM

I hope I see you two sharing a meal at peaches sometime soon!!

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 3:20 PM

dave, stop using code words like "sharing a meal at peaches."

Posted by: z at August 11, 2008 3:25 PM

Ahhh Dave, your always the diplomat. I knew it was a matter of time before 11233 accused me of playing the race card. I’m a little disappointed I wasn’t accused of dealing from the bottom of the deck.

Posted by: 7andfive at August 11, 2008 3:26 PM

I'll invite newbie12222 from the Saul Restaurant review. Hopefully he won't feel "uneasy" I apologize to all of you who disapprove of cross-thread discussion.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 3:32 PM

7andfive, grow up and take the criticism. What used race and them you followed up with the whole stupid code word crap.

You even insulted Dave for properly summarizing the whole article with his post @ 1:18, but you didn't buy that based on your comments @ 11:25.

Thanks for trying to make nice, Dave, but 7andfive you need to pull your head out of your ass.

Posted by: 11233 at August 11, 2008 3:35 PM

boy, 11233 you sure are testy! Breathe it's only the internet.
And I was merely asking Dave why he believed the story. My point was not to believe everything you read

Did I not apologize to you? You seem a bit sensitive.
I don't think the 'code thing' is stupid. But I accept your criticism to disagree.

Posted by: 7andfive at August 11, 2008 3:54 PM

Your apology is accepted, even though you are not adult enough to admit you overstepped your bounds and are incapable of admitting a mistake.

As for sensitivity, I wouldn't get my panties in a bunch about "code words."

Posted by: 11233 at August 11, 2008 4:00 PM

I'm a bit late to this, had to actually do stuff today, but 7and5 is right on... are you guys actually reading the article? Of COURSE the article is about race, and of COURSE not all section 8 recips are Black, But this article IS about the ones that are, cuz hey, they stick out in the burbs, ya heard?

Here's a few quotes:
>>Ms. Payne, a 42-year-old African-American mother of five, moved to Antioch in 2006.>>

>

>


And finally,
>>
Many new residents are African-American; Antioch’s black population has grown to about 20 percent, from 3 percent in 1990.
<<

And that's what the whole article is about, not the few white and Asian folx on Section 8. Why is that so hard to understand?

Posted by: denton at August 11, 2008 5:38 PM

Denton: The article definitely has a racial/racist slant, but the actual study is about Section 8. There is a difference.

Posted by: 11233 at August 11, 2008 5:42 PM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions