In the reading, the Greenbelt Program was mentioned. In my opinion, the plan already seemed improbable because Tugwell said the community would have “decent housing” yet the land he would purchase to develop the community would be cheap. He also seems to disregard the people who are in the lower class (and some in the lower range of the middle class). Where does he expect them to live then–if he demolishes the cities to build parks? Furthermore, communities that Tugwell wants reminds me of those societies that you see on TV shows/movies such as “The Stepford Wives.” These “ideal” societies just do not work.
Furthermore, a general concept from the reading that I extracted was how the government plays a roll in aiding housing construction. They help with loans and mortgages, give building construction standards, etc. However, some people such as Senator Calder do not think the government should be involved with housing (specifically the construction and acquisition). I do think that the government should not be too involved, but if it sees that its people are in need of aid for shelter, it does have the duty to help its people. Although there was the HOLC and FHA, I still see housing as a problem. Perhaps it is the fact that I live in New York City, which is known for its high standard of living. We do have a lot of housing options, I think, but the prices are just too high.
An interesting quote by FHA is that “if a neighborhood is to retain stability, it is necessary that properties shall continue to be occupied by the same social and racial classes.” I agree with the fact that social classes in a neighborhood should be the same. It is just the fact that rich people only stay with people that are alike them, which is connected to the racial class. But I see this less so, because in a city that is said to be very diverse, there are different nationalities all living in one area. In my neighborhood in Queens, my neighbors are Chinese, Islamic, Jewish, Italian, German, Ecuadorian, and so on. However, our social standings are in the range of middle class. Therefore, racial class similarities in a neighborhood are not entirely true, but social class similarities are more so.
Continuing on, the FHA was said to not be created to help cities, however by reviving home buildings and supporting home ownership and trying to reduce poverty, FHA is helping to shape cities. The program is trying to make cities a better place that is not full of projects and crime. It is making cities a place that is desirable to live in. If the city becomes a stable place where people own houses, then it is like a chain, which attracts more people to own and have houses in the area as well. Although this is a beneficial part of the program, the reading is correct in saying that the downside of FHA is that it increases segregation among income and racial groups (though again, I do not think the racial part has much separation–but there are exceptions like East New York, Flushing, etc.).
Finally, I disagree with the statement at the end of the reading that said areas with heterogeneous population is terrible and risky because it will lead to “decline of both the human race and property values.” I think of New York City, and I see the opposite. Maybe it is because they are thinking about suburbs. However, New York as a whole seems to disprove it (especially the borough of Queens in my opinion). I believe the mentality of people, the way they were raised, and how they were educated affects how they see race. New York City does not show the decline of human race, but the expansion and growth and acceptance of differences among people. Also, the value of the land here is quite high. I wonder what makes NYC so special and prosperous and different than other cities.
