We’ve had a lot of old industrial areas rezoned to residential and lots of condos and fancy apartments build. They didn’t evict poor families from housing in those areas, but lots of homeless were living there and are now no longer welcome to camp in the parking lots or store their belongings in the buildings or alleys.
Yes, exactly. My husband before covid was doing some gratis work with the homeless population. It didn’t matter that they didn’t have a physical address or checking account or some of the other things mentioned. There are plenty of places that they are allowed to use as an address. He also helped prepare their tax returns so they could get the very first stimulus checks, even when they didn’t have checking accounts, because again, you don’t need those things. Tons of programs available for these people. Many just need a second chance, but many have too many mental health issues that are unaddressed or that they don’t want addressed which becomes a different kind of problem.
3 Likes
@JBStillFlying , @twoinanddone answered your question. So, yes it is possible. And even if their work falls into what’s considered part of the informal economy, it’s still some type of work, nonetheless. Terrible situation to be in, no doubt.
Edit: Sorry, just realized I never quoted you when replying to the respective paragraphs. Kind didn’t make much sense but glad you understood.
1 Like
The tent city sub conversation began as an offshoot from the gentrification issue. But it’s not the main point of this thread. The crime in Chicago is the worst it’s been in at least 10 years, possibly 20. 32 years ago Dana Feitler was robbed and murdered in the Gold Coast neighborhood the night before she was due to starting at Booth’s part-time program (then called the 190 Program). It shocked all of us. Is Chicago headed back to that level of violent crime once again? It’s a really scary thought. Totally agree that the university should be proactive in putting the pressure on city leaders and the criminal justice system. If a city can’t protect its citizens, those who can leave, will. That’s a death spiral. While lack of an industrial base is a potential factor, so is the lack of a stable two-parent household in many impoverished families. That just perpetuates the cycle of poverty and attraction to crime as a way out. We can talk about many reasons for the rise in crime it doesn’t change the responsibility of the city to protect its citizens.
4 Likes
Agreed, this is a long discussion. I am going to use a different analogy and widen the geographic scope: Gentrification, like immigration, is good or bad depending on the quantity and quality of the process. And if the movement of people is matched by movement of capital.
edit