To the Editor…

by on September 24, 2012

New Orleans/Public HousingI agree that the demolition of housing
projects for the poor is wrong if alternative housing is not provided for
those displaced. Future residents of subsidized housing should also be
accommodated.However, large housing projects inhabited almost solely by
desperately poor persons is usually a recipe for disaster — gang
control, crime, and drug-dealing/purchasing on a massive scale thrive in
these housing projects. The barely fictional series, The Wire, depicted
this. I lived next door to it for years in New Haven, CT. Living within
or down the street from a large public housing complex often means being
subjected to a great deal of violence, crime, and misery. All of it
concentrated in a deadly brew far from officials’ eyes. It’s meant to
be hidden.Remember how in “The Wire” it was much harder for the
Barksdale drug gang to deal its product once the housing project towers
were demolished? The towers had been the go-to place for suburban users
to score. The towers provided a commercial hub. The housing projects
became the community and the hell hole for the neighborhood and the
residents unable to live elsewhere cheaply.Neighborhoods and smaller
complexes that have a mix of renters and owners, a mix of incomes, work a
lot better for the people who matter most — the residents and neighbors.
It allows the long-time unemployed to have contact with working people
and those who know of jobs out there. It keeps the poor from getting
isolated from peers and near-peers who have a little bit more going on
economically. That’s the kind of housing we should be providing. I
think Section 8 housing vouchers that spread out poor residents among
many neighborhoods are part of that strategy to integrate the poorest
amongst the rest of us.

This feedback was sent by:voltaires mistress from san francisco, ca

Link to the article in question:

Filed under: Letters to the Editor