Mar
10
Class 12 – Income Inequality and Housing – Mohd Sakib
March 10, 2015 | Leave a Comment
I was truly startled after reading the significant effects that housing, zoning, and other factors have on increasing income inequality, especially within metropolitan areas. After understanding these underlying drivers of income inequality, I am strongly against the regulatory initiatives that support restrictive zoning. I was sickened by the recent article regarding the “two cities in Manhattan”, with separate entrances for high and low-income residents. I do agree with the argument that the Inclusionary Housing Program makes about how these new divisive apartments allow families who normally cannot afford to live in NYC to have access to better schooling and communities. However, I still believe there will be a constant conflict between the residents, as they will always be treated as inferior residents. This will especially be true for the children who will be growing up without the same amenities that other children will have from high-income families.
I haven’t realized how much this discriminatory initiative has been silenced over the past few decades, and how zoning laws have been encouraging racial and economic segregation. After reading these articles, I have realized that I have seen and felt the consequences of these laws firsthand in my neighborhood of Jamaica, Queens. There would be limitations on low-cost, affordable housing development in certain parts of this town, and so, over the past decade, there has been a noticeable segregation of income classes. Affluent families have gradually moved to Jamaica Estates, developing very posh single-family homes, while low-income families would live in large apartment complexes. The resultant of this division would be a stark contrast between the two neighborhoods, which were juxtaposed against one another. It was two separate worlds; walking in a low class neighborhood, and then stepping into an upper class, Long Island-like area a few blocks away. This would also lead to major school district differences, as schooling in Jamaica Estates would usually be private and more well-funded, whereas southern Jamaica schools would be public. From my experiences, students from the private schools would traditionally excel better in their studies than students in public schools and therefore, have higher chances in being accepted to better high schools and so forth.
Another trend that arose from zoning were ethnic enclaves that gradually formed corresponding to the aforementioned economic segregation. Black and Hispanic immigrants have gradually moved down to southern Jamaica, where there are more cheaper apartment complexes, whereas Caucasians and Asians have moved more toward Jamaica Estates, and western Jamaica, where there are more businesses. This is blatantly noticeable in western Jamaica, where southeast Asians have taken over and dominated the small business scene; an area which used to be predominantly Hispanic and Black. Southern Queens in contrast, has seen a higher development of industrial facilities rather than small businesses. This leads to another separation of economic improvement between the two areas that are rather geographically close.
Moreover, I have issues with American Enterprise Institute article by James Pethokoukis that argues that cities with ‘smart or tech hubs’ historically have had the most migration from smarter, wealthier demographics. Indeed traditional product industries such as manufacturing have lost major ground to more service and technology oriented industries. This has also unfortunately led to education and income inequality as educated individuals would naturally move to these popular cities, with the poor also dragging along. The author’s suggestion is to therefore, draw in more innovative companies that hire more workers. I have issues with this because it is much easier said than done, and the article seems to create a sort of rosy or romanticized picture of these kinds of cities. Although highly educated workers do flock to these areas and lift up the economic standing, this only exacerbates income inequality and doesn’t necessarily curb it. I believe the poor and/or unemployed workers fair worse in these labor markets and suffer more to afford housing there.
Lastly, I was also partially dismayed by the “A happy tale of two cities” article by the Daily News. The author Ed Glaeser also painted a very rosy and romanticized picture of the coexistence of two largely separated income classes in New York City. Indeed cities do attract both rich and poor people alike due to various reasons such as economic opportunity, viable living spaces (relative to other counties), accessible transit systems, and more. However, I don’t believe that these opportunities are as accessible as they seem to be, and the rags to riches story are definitely not as prevalent. The argument that the poor will benefit from living side by side with the rich and middle-class, and may possible lever themselves by obtaining more jobs and education does not seem sound to me. I believe that there is more need of welfare rather than letting income inequality grow. Although New York City will always attract more poor people, there needs to be measures in place to make sure they are able to not only survive, but thrive in this city.
