Increasing density drives low-income minorities out of DC, new study shows

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So move to loudon county if you don’t want density. The fact is, housing is unaffordable because there isn’t enough of it.

And that's OK.

People who can't afford close-in DC homes can live in affordable Loudon and Laurel and Laytonsville. There's nothing wrong with this.

All these discussions are premised on the fallacy that moderate and low-income people deserve to live in certain zip codes and that it's inherently 'wrong' when they can't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So move to loudon county if you don’t want density. The fact is, housing is unaffordable because there isn’t enough of it.

This is just wrong.

Increasing density drives housing prices up, not down.

If you have a bunch of people living in a small area, then businesses will want to be there too because they want foot traffic. As bars and grocery stores and restaurants and boutiques move in, then more people want to live there too. So more condos and apartments are built. That brings even more bars and grocery stores and restaurants to the area, which makes even more people want to live there, and housing prices go to the moon.

This has happened over and over and over in neighborhoods across DC. Look at Navy Yard (before that 14th Street, and before that U Street, and before that...)

A well-known phenomenon in economics - the price increases when the supply increases.

Wait, what?

Uh, well, I didnt make this up. Economists have talked about this for years. There's academic papers written about it.

There are academic papers written about economic models, which are based on assumptions (because that's how models work), which the academics themselves explicitly say do not reflect the actual real world we live in.

But if you want to test it out in real life, then you can go to McPherson, Kansas (for example) and start building housing. Let us know in a few years whether the housing has generated people to live in it.

You could also just walk over to Navy Yard.

There's way, way, way more housing there than there was ten years ago.

And it is way, way, way more expensive than it was ten years ago.

And this is how increasing density drives low-income minorities out of the city.

The recipe is to buy houses from black people who've been here forever, knock them down and replace them with million-dollar condos that will mostly be bought up by high-income white people.

This is what happened to black people on Hilton Head Island. They could not pay the real estate taxes for land and houses they had owned for forever and now they can't afford to live there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So move to loudon county if you don’t want density. The fact is, housing is unaffordable because there isn’t enough of it.

And that's OK.

People who can't afford close-in DC homes can live in affordable Loudon and Laurel and Laytonsville. There's nothing wrong with this.

All these discussions are premised on the fallacy that moderate and low-income people deserve to live in certain zip codes and that it's inherently 'wrong' when they can't.

I don't think it's ok.

The idea that only wealthy people get to have a secure home in a convenient location - that's not something I can get behind. Like saying that only wealthy people get to have secure access to nutritious food, or only wealthy people get to have assured access to good schools for their kids, or only wealthy people get to have health care when they need it. Nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

"In the Navy Yard neighborhood, about 77 percent of residents were identified as low income in 2000. Sixteen years later, that population dropped to 21 percent.

Most of the people pushed out of these economic hot spots are black and low income, according to the data."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/in-the-district-gentrification-means-widespread-displacement-report-says/2019/04/26/950a0c00-6775-11e9-8985-4cf30147bdca_story.html?outputType=amp

That doesn't answer the question. What if there were 100 residents in 2000, and now there are 10,000? So 77 low-income residents in 2000, compared to 2100 now? That wouldn't be evidence of low-income people getting pushed out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So move to loudon county if you don’t want density. The fact is, housing is unaffordable because there isn’t enough of it.

This is just wrong.

Increasing density drives housing prices up, not down.

If you have a bunch of people living in a small area, then businesses will want to be there too because they want foot traffic. As bars and grocery stores and restaurants and boutiques move in, then more people want to live there too. So more condos and apartments are built. That brings even more bars and grocery stores and restaurants to the area, which makes even more people want to live there, and housing prices go to the moon.

This has happened over and over and over in neighborhoods across DC. Look at Navy Yard (before that 14th Street, and before that U Street, and before that...)

A well-known phenomenon in economics - the price increases when the supply increases.

Wait, what?

Uh, well, I didnt make this up. Economists have talked about this for years. There's academic papers written about it.

There are academic papers written about economic models, which are based on assumptions (because that's how models work), which the academics themselves explicitly say do not reflect the actual real world we live in.

But if you want to test it out in real life, then you can go to McPherson, Kansas (for example) and start building housing. Let us know in a few years whether the housing has generated people to live in it.

You could also just walk over to Navy Yard.

There's way, way, way more housing there than there was ten years ago.

And it is way, way, way more expensive than it was ten years ago.

And this is how increasing density drives low-income minorities out of the city.

The recipe is to buy houses from black people who've been here forever, knock them down and replace them with million-dollar condos that will mostly be bought up by high-income white people.

This is what happened to black people on Hilton Head Island. They could not pay the real estate taxes for land and houses they had owned for forever and now they can't afford to live there.

If the question is taxes, DC has the homestead act and could expand programs like that. Building new high density housing in low density, thriving neighborhoods is not the answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If the question is taxes, DC has the homestead act and could expand programs like that. Building new high density housing in low density, thriving neighborhoods is not the answer.

Why isn't it? Other than that some of the people who already own property in the neighborhood don't want more neighbors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So move to loudon county if you don’t want density. The fact is, housing is unaffordable because there isn’t enough of it.

And that's OK.

People who can't afford close-in DC homes can live in affordable Loudon and Laurel and Laytonsville. There's nothing wrong with this.

All these discussions are premised on the fallacy that moderate and low-income people deserve to live in certain zip codes and that it's inherently 'wrong' when they can't.

I don't think it's ok.

The idea that only wealthy people get to have a secure home in a convenient location - that's not something I can get behind. Like saying that only wealthy people get to have secure access to nutritious food, or only wealthy people get to have assured access to good schools for their kids, or only wealthy people get to have health care when they need it. Nope.

Wrong. Housing may be a right, maaaybe, but housing at a given address is emphatically not a right or entitlement. To the victor go the spoils, and all. Well-resourced people have more options — such as options of where to call home — than lower-resourced people.

No one on this thread or in the WaPo article advocates that lower-resourced people get no home, or an unsafe shelter. They just don't get the best home and the best address.

And that's OK.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So move to loudon county if you don’t want density. The fact is, housing is unaffordable because there isn’t enough of it.

And that's OK.

People who can't afford close-in DC homes can live in affordable Loudon and Laurel and Laytonsville. There's nothing wrong with this.

All these discussions are premised on the fallacy that moderate and low-income people deserve to live in certain zip codes and that it's inherently 'wrong' when they can't.

I don't think it's ok.

The idea that only wealthy people get to have a secure home in a convenient location - that's not something I can get behind. Like saying that only wealthy people get to have secure access to nutritious food, or only wealthy people get to have assured access to good schools for their kids, or only wealthy people get to have health care when they need it. Nope.

Wrong. Housing may be a right, maaaybe, but housing at a given address is emphatically not a right or entitlement. To the victor go the spoils, and all. Well-resourced people have more options — such as options of where to call home — than lower-resourced people.

No one on this thread or in the WaPo article advocates that lower-resourced people get no home, or an unsafe shelter. They just don't get the best home and the best address.

And that's OK.

"Maaaybe" housing is a right? Seriously? Ick.

[Anonymous]

And this bad because ???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So move to loudon county if you don’t want density. The fact is, housing is unaffordable because there isn’t enough of it.

This is just wrong.

Increasing density drives housing prices up, not down.

If you have a bunch of people living in a small area, then businesses will want to be there too because they want foot traffic. As bars and grocery stores and restaurants and boutiques move in, then more people want to live there too. So more condos and apartments are built. That brings even more bars and grocery stores and restaurants to the area, which makes even more people want to live there, and housing prices go to the moon.

This has happened over and over and over in neighborhoods across DC. Look at Navy Yard (before that 14th Street, and before that U Street, and before that...)

A well-known phenomenon in economics - the price increases when the supply increases.

Wait, what?

Uh, well, I didnt make this up. Economists have talked about this for years. There's academic papers written about it.

There are academic papers written about economic models, which are based on assumptions (because that's how models work), which the academics themselves explicitly say do not reflect the actual real world we live in.

But if you want to test it out in real life, then you can go to McPherson, Kansas (for example) and start building housing. Let us know in a few years whether the housing has generated people to live in it.

You could also just walk over to Navy Yard.

There's way, way, way more housing there than there was ten years ago.

And it is way, way, way more expensive than it was ten years ago.

And this is how increasing density drives low-income minorities out of the city.

The recipe is to buy houses from black people who've been here forever, knock them down and replace them with million-dollar condos that will mostly be bought up by high-income white people.

It's not just navy Yard. this is happening across dc. people are going to be shocked out at white dc is becoming when the next census comes out.

[Anonymous]

DC has been historically an African American city going back to the times of the Civil War and post Civil War times.

The Federal Government brought a lot of jobs and African Americans came and stayed for the jobs.

It is only in about the last decade that DC is becoming white.

[Anonymous]

Grandma dies. No will. There are a number of heirs. Heirs don't have the money for a lawyer. Taxes on house do not get paid as none of the heirs can come up with the money or any money for a lawyer. House sold at auction. This happens all the time in poor areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC has been historically an African American city going back to the times of the Civil War and post Civil War times.

The Federal Government brought a lot of jobs and African Americans came and stayed for the jobs.

It is only in about the last decade that DC is becoming white.

This is not correct. DC has a long history of a strong African American middle class, which is a great thing. But DC also had nearly twice as many white residents as black residents as recently as the 1950 Census. Between 1950 and 1960, the District lost almost 175,000 white residents and gained about 130,000 black residents.

Source: https://matthewbgilmore.wordpress.com/district-of-columbia-population-history/

[Anonymous]

From the study:

"Since 2000, the city of Washington, D.C. has experienced the strongest gentrification and displacement of any city in the country.

Over 38 percent of its residents, and 35 percent of its low-income residents, live in an area that is strongly economically expanding. On net, there has been major displacement in those areas: their population in poverty has fallen by 28 percent, their non-college-educated population
has fallen 22 percent, and their black population has fallen 23 percent. Since 2000, the same neighborhoods have seen overall population growth of 19 percent, and white population growth of a staggering 202 percent."


https://www.law.umn.edu/sites/law.umn.edu/files/metro-files/washingtondc_incomechange_report.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So move to loudon county if you don’t want density. The fact is, housing is unaffordable because there isn’t enough of it.

This is just wrong.

Increasing density drives housing prices up, not down.

If you have a bunch of people living in a small area, then businesses will want to be there too because they want foot traffic. As bars and grocery stores and restaurants and boutiques move in, then more people want to live there too. So more condos and apartments are built. That brings even more bars and grocery stores and restaurants to the area, which makes even more people want to live there, and housing prices go to the moon.

This has happened over and over and over in neighborhoods across DC. Look at Navy Yard (before that 14th Street, and before that U Street, and before that...)

A well-known phenomenon in economics - the price increases when the supply increases.

Wait, what?

Uh, well, I didnt make this up. Economists have talked about this for years. There's academic papers written about it.

There are academic papers written about economic models, which are based on assumptions (because that's how models work), which the academics themselves explicitly say do not reflect the actual real world we live in.

But if you want to test it out in real life, then you can go to McPherson, Kansas (for example) and start building housing. Let us know in a few years whether the housing has generated people to live in it.

You could also just walk over to Navy Yard.

There's way, way, way more housing there than there was ten years ago.

And it is way, way, way more expensive than it was ten years ago.

And this is how increasing density drives low-income minorities out of the city.

The recipe is to buy houses from black people who've been here forever, knock them down and replace them with million-dollar condos that will mostly be bought up by high-income white people.

Did you ever visit the Navy Yard area before Nationals Park opened? There were very few housing units there - there was actually a Washington Post article about this around the time the stadium opened and I think you could count on 2 hands the number of housing units that were east of S.Capital Street.

NoMa is very similar - another neighborhood that used to be dominated by surface parking lots, abandoned buildings and some light industrial uses and now has thousands of new residents where there used to be literally almost no residents.

Now to be clear there are areas that are densifying (primarily along the green line but also H Street NE/Capital Hill) where rising prices are causing some long term residents to leave.

But the lack of supply has a big role in that as virtually all of the new supply has been built on what used to be parking lots but the demand has exceeded that and lots of row houses are being flipped, often to be subdivided into condos which would be better accommodated in larger multi unit buildings that we can't get because DC is not building enough supply.