Is Gentrification a Human-Rights Violation?

[88m3]

Which city? NYC & SF are expensive for a few reasons but the two biggest are the kinds of industries they are home to combined with geographic constraints. Charlotte has a strong banking sector (BoA and Wells Fargo are HQ'd here) and doesn't have those problems.

And the reason more and more people are slipping into poverty is due to a lack of opportunity and the shock of having to compete globally.

Is that a new thing?

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Is that a new thing?

Lack of opportunities? Yes and no. Today there are opportunities available, people just can't pursue them. Back in the day there just was not a lot of opportunity.

Compete globally? Yes, people still cite the mid 20th century as a period we can and should emulate.

 

[88m3]

Lack of opportunities? Yes and no. Today there are opportunities available, people just can't pursue them. Back in the day there just was not a lot of opportunity.

Compete globally? Yes, people still cite the mid 20th century as a period we can and should emulate.

How's that working out for Black Americans?

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

How's that working out for Black Americans?

How is what working out?

 

[AJaRuleStan]

I'm not fond of gentrification in NYC, because I love(used to) black NYC culture, but any idea that involves the gov't impeding on the rights of rental property owners from doing business to whoever they see fit is just asking for trouble. Any loop hole that allows landlords to weasel out of a lease contract needs to be fixed though.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

I'm not fond of gentrification in NYC, because I love(used to) black NYC culture, but any idea that involves the gov't impeding on the rights of rental property owners from doing business to whoever they see fit is just asking for trouble. Any loop hole that allows landlords to weasel out of a lease contract needs to be fixed though.

I mean a lot of NYC landlords are black.......................

U mite be talking to the wrong crowd though... capitalists, property owners, profiteers should not have any rights.

 

[AJaRuleStan]

U mite be talking to the wrong crowd though... capitalists, property owners, profiteers should not have any rights.

Yes, it does look like i'm talking to the wrong crowd. But what do you mean by they should have no rights? I might be presuming to much, but are you saying that those individuals should not have the right to control their owns transactions? Ex. they don't have the right to choose what parties they sell to, or price control?

At that point you have removed any incentives for a individual to invest in property, and if "demand" has been artificially altered like this than what incentives do builders have for supplying buildings/homes, or at-least supplying the right amount that matches the demand by the society at large. The whole point of "prices" is to signal to produces on how to manage our scarce resources.

Eventually this will just lead to lower standard of living for the population as a whole -- see Communist societies, such as the Soviet Union for proof.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Yes, it does look like i'm talking to the wrong crowd. But what do you mean by they should have no rights? I might be presuming to much, but are you saying that those individuals should not have the right to control their owns transactions? Ex. they don't have the right to choose what parties they sell to, or price control?

At that point you have removed any incentives for a individual to invest in property, and if "demand" has been artificially altered like this than what incentives do builders have for supplying buildings/homes, or at-least supplying the right amount that matches the demand by the society at large. The whole point of "prices" is to signal to produces on how to manage our scarce resources.

Eventually this will just lead to lower standard of living for the population as a whole -- see Communist societies, such as the Soviet Union for proof.

I was being sarcastic. There should definitely be incentive and freedom to invest and maximize returns. If landlords can't get the rates their properties command why own property at all? We should just turn over all rental property to the govt. (Again being sarcastic, there are people here who would seriously suggest such "solutions").

Ultimately cities like NYC and SF are severely damaged and uniquely constrained. They will need significant time and resources to unravel and benefit everybody. But elsewhere I don't think it's a big deal. Yes, $$$ will keep certain folks out of certain housing. No different than everyone not being able to afford a Benz or whatever.

 

[AJaRuleStan]

I was being sarcastic. There should definitely be incentive and freedom to invest and maximize returns. If landlords can't get the rates their properties command why own property at all? We should just turn over all rental property to the govt. (Again being sarcastic, there are people here who would seriously suggest such "solutions").

Ultimately cities like NYC and SF are severely damaged and uniquely constrained. They will need significant time and resources to unravel and benefit everybody. But elsewhere I don't think it's a big deal. Yes, $$$ will keep certain folks out of certain housing. No different than everyone not being able to afford a Benz or whatever.

Ha, it seems I was presuming to much, my fault. I kek'd at the bolded because I wouldn't put it past a Bernie Sanders to suggest that as viable solution.