New York’s Neoliberal and Real Estate Past

Richard Florida was a neoliberal who believed that the economic driving force in cities was the creative-class who craved technology, talent, and social tolerance (Tochterman 75).  This theory had many encouraging ideas such as that the creative working class was an important part of the economy and that whites, gays, minorities, and all other peoples should be integrated, not segregated.  However, his theory lacked a way to enhance the economic standing and workplace freedom of the people serving creative elites.  This was a major issue since the wealth gap was increasing during this time period and since the creative-class was obsessed with consumerism (Tochterman 78).  This obsession eventually translated into overpriced housing and rents in neighborhoods that eventually no one could afford.  Many of these neighborhoods began with urban renewal schemes that were created such that private companies took profits while the state took the risk.  These renewal programs increased the prices in the areas such that poor residents were displaced and lost both jobs and homes.  In the 1970s, the neoliberal real estate sector and state allowed for this abasement to occur to an extreme.  During the 1970s, the industrialization of Asia and Latin America drew money from the globalized New York City (Angotti 75).  This hurt the local economy, and people stopped paying their rents.  These rents were already very high because of New York’s grossly overdeveloped land, which already deprived people’s quality of life.  It was even worse since, unlike during the New Deal, the government did not want to help.  In fact, President Gerald Ford famously told the city to “drop dead”, implying that New York should go through a contraction phase regardless that its people were suffering.

The extent to which the people and their city suffered was great.  An uncaring government, a falling economy, and a lack of shelter can make a people hopeless.  In the 1970s, the number of murders, car thefts, and assaults over doubled; the number of burglaries and rapes had more than tripled; the number of robberies increased tenfold.  Roads were in bad conditions, bridges were rusted, and entire streets or neighborhoods were abandoned and vandalized.  New York City’s budget decreased caused it to lay off 20% of government employees including teachers, firefighters, police officers, and sanitation employees who retaliated with strikes under unions.  These strikes made things worse since the unemployment rate was already so high, but also because they became detrimental to everyday people.  For example, sanitation employees dumped garbage on the streets, police blocked intersections, and firefighters stopped answering calls for help (although many of these calls were staged by citizens who threw bricks or even shot at the firefighters).  However, these unions eventually joined and put their workers’ pension funds into city bonds which saved the city (Baker).

New York in the 1970s demonstrated the negatives of a neoliberal government, which was unequipped to help its people.  It shows that greed and overpricing in the lives of people and big corporation such as real estate can lead to economic downturn.  It suggests that a city’s planning should have the consent of the people because they have a more intimate knowledge of it than government workers.  It signifies that not just private corporations, or just the state, but private corporations, the state, and the people should be empowered to control a city’s future in relation to global economics, housing, and other aspects which affect local urban life.  If this is done, then a city is more likely to have a healthy, lively people, and a good economy to boast.

‘Welcome to Fear City’ – the inside story of New York’s civil war, 40 years on by Kevin Bake

New York for Sale: Community Planning Confronts Global Real Estate (Urban and Industrial Environments)

Theorizing Neoliberal Urban Development: A Genealogy from Richard Florida to Jane Jacobs