To keep a development related thread in another section of the forum on topic, I've started this thread to continue the discussion.

 

A forumer asked for more information about income/economic segregation and how impacts the socio-economic conditions of the metro area as a whole. Here's some information I was able to find. I'll look for more......

 

The U.S. Cities With the Highest Levels of Income Segregation (Part 1 of a series)

https://www.citylab.com/life/2014/03/us-cities-highest-levels-income-segregation/8632/

 

Citylab has numerous articles on the subject. Here's another how economic segregation leads to compounding effects, creating hyper-poverty. While a wealthy area of a metro area will undoubtedly perform better economically than a poor or middle-class area, the metro area as a whole doesn't perform better on socio-economic metrics when there are geographically large areas where poor people are concentrated. The reason is that the ladders of success (social/economic mobility) are physically less accessible to them, so their chances of improving their condition are made much more difficult. So when you mix low-, middle-and high-income people, low-income people have a greater access to opportunity. As I joked on the other thread, it's why the East Side of Cleveland experiences such hyperpoverty. All of the ladders of success are so far, making them geographically and financially difficult to reach. So the poverty compounds itself.

 

Here's another article......

https://www.citylab.com/equity/2015/08/americas-biggest-problem-is-concentrated-poverty-not-inequality/400892/

Edited January 18, 20196 yr by KJP

1 hour ago, KJP said:

To keep a development related thread in another section of the forum on topic, I've started this thread to continue the discussion.

 

A forumer asked for more information about income/economic segregation and how impacts the socio-economic conditions of the metro area as a whole. Here's some information I was able to find. I'll look for more......

 

The U.S. Cities With the Highest Levels of Income Segregation (Part 1 of a series)

https://www.citylab.com/life/2014/03/us-cities-highest-levels-income-segregation/8632/

 

Citylab has numerous articles on the subject. Here's another how economic segregation leads to compounding effects, creating hyper-poverty. While a wealthy area of a metro area will undoubtedly perform better economically than a poor or middle-class area, the metro area as a whole doesn't perform better on socio-economic metrics when there are geographically large areas where poor people are concentrated. The reason is that the ladders of success (social/economic mobility) are physically less accessible to them, so their chances of improving their condition are made much more difficult. So when you mix low-, middle-and high-income people, low-income people have a greater access to opportunity. As I joked on the other thread, it's why the East Side of Cleveland experiences such hyperpoverty. All of the ladders of success are so far, making them geographically and financially difficult to reach. So the poverty compounds itself.

 

Here's another article......

https://www.citylab.com/equity/2015/08/americas-biggest-problem-is-concentrated-poverty-not-inequality/400892/

 

I think income segregation is a bad thing, but I'm not sure any of this proves the direction of causation.  It's quite possible that hyper poverty drives income segregation, rather than the other way around, as people with the means flee neighborhoods that have an increasing crime rate.  I know there are other reasons people flee neighborhoods, especially racial, but I believe this is what we have seen in areas of the east and southeast sides of Cleveland, where people are still fleeing en masse what are already racially homogeneous neighborhoods.

Edited January 18, 20196 yr by jam40jeff

It's pretty clear the causation runs in both directions. At this point, there's pretty overwhelming evidence that segregation and isolation affect childhood outcomes. Also no surprise that the most comprehensive work on income mobility (the amazing Raj Chetty research) shows that Cleveland is an especially awful place to be poor, in terms of life prospects.

Edited January 18, 20196 yr by StapHanger

29 minutes ago, StapHanger said:

It's pretty clear the causation runs in both directions. At this point, there's pretty overwhelming evidence that segregation and isolation affect childhood outcomes. Also no surprise that the most comprehensive work on income mobility (the amazing Raj Chetty research) shows that Cleveland is an especially awful place to be poor, in terms of life prospects.

 

That comment hit home because it's so true. Cleveland is an awful place to be poor. That hurts to read and reiterate.

The city keeps blowing money on landscaping while its neighborhoods get worse every year.  That has got to change.  Direct investment is needed to rebuild the commercial corridors these neighborhoods were built around.  It should be priority #1, should have been for a long time.  But no, we'll end up building 3 more versions of the Q before we subsidize a single storefront.

1 hour ago, jam40jeff said:

 

I think income segregation is a bad thing, but I'm not sure any of this proves the direction of causation.  It's quite possible that hyper poverty drives income segregation, rather than the other way around, as people with the means flee neighborhoods that have an increasing crime rate.  I know there are other reasons people flee neighborhoods, especially racial, but I believe this is what we have seen in areas of the east and southeast sides of Cleveland, where people are still fleeing en masse what are already racially homogeneous neighborhoods.

 

It's more than simply "possible", when considered logically it's rather obviously what is taking place.   It can be taken another step:  behaviors which are related to poverty often cause those with options to be discomforted (or worse), and they exercise those options.   

 

Add in the fact that when people with options move into an area, they modify it to suit themselves.   People want to be comfortable where they live, and if they have the means to make it so, they will.   Sometimes this is called "gentrification", so objection to same also can cause income segregation.

 

Perhaps it can be called "values segregation" and that's inevitable.

Another problem with economic segregation is a lack of role models for the young. If all you see around you is poverty, low end or no jobs what kind of work are you going to look for? If everyone around you has limited or no exposure to education it is that more difficult to educate yourself. If your role models are those looking for crime or the dole what do you think you will gravitate too? 

 

There's an old saying that some of our parents used to hammer into us. Something about 'You are who you hang out with." In other words, if you hang with people going nowhere you'll probably go nowhere and if you hang with people getting ahead chances are you'll get ahead too. It's trite but still true.