Reddit reviews Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City
We found 15 Reddit comments about Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
BROADWAY
Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City
We (Milwaukee DSA) are currently reading it for our book club and it's a surprising but not too surprising look at poverty in the inner city not too far from where we live.
From Amazon.com:
In Evicted, Harvard sociologist and MacArthur “Genius” Matthew Desmond follows eight families in Milwaukee as they struggle to keep a roof over their heads. Hailed as “wrenching and revelatory” (The Nation), “vivid and unsettling” (New York Review of Books), Evicted transforms our understanding of poverty and economic exploitation while providing fresh ideas for solving one of 21st-century America’s most devastating problems. Its unforgettable scenes of hope and loss remind us of the centrality of home, without which nothing else is possible.
> I found nothing insightful in this article.
You misunderstand. Reporting isn't about providing insight. That's what books, analysis articles, editorial articles, op-eds, and think-tank white papers are for.
Want insight? Read a Pulitzer prize winning book. Or alternatively read an editorial article. You could also try a white paper from a professor at Harvard University. All of these three are from a guy named Matt Desmond. Maybe you should email him if you want insight.
Reporting is the documentation and dissemination of information. It does not include analysis of said information. I didn't know the eviction process very intimately, and I'm willing to bet that many people that read this article didn't know the eviction process either.
Does this article have a wide scope? Yes. So it's sweeping.
Does this article include in-depth interviews collected over the course of several months? Yes. So it's intimate.
Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City https://www.amazon.com/Evicted-Poverty-Profit-American-City/dp/0553447459/ref=nodl_
Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America https://www.amazon.com/Nickel-Dimed-Not-Getting-America/dp/0312626681/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=nickel+and+dimed&qid=1566530665&s=gateway&sprefix=nickel&sr=8-1
Arms and Dudes. The skies belong to us. One of us. And, though not really true crime in the sense of these others, I highly recommend Evicted.
If you are at all interested in the topic of housing, consider reading Evited by Matthew Desmond. The book chronicles the stories of people living in the poverty and their struggle to find housing, and it takes place in Milwaukee.
This?
>Weighing those results, Pastor says, is where the disagreements emerge. A housing advocate’s “stability” is an economist’s misallocation of resources, as regulation entrenches mismatches between apartments and renters (big families in small apartments, small families in big apartments, people not living where they otherwise would). But stability is also a primary focus of housing policy, prompted by work, like Matthew Desmond’s Evicted, that shows the devastating effects of housing uncertainty.
This is actually a good summary of the issue. If you don't have any rent control (even a tenancy-based one), you are essentially saying that an apartment ought to go to whomever can pay the most for it at any time. Basic economic models call that an efficient outcome, because they figure the people willing to pay more for the apartment get more utility from it. But anyone can understand that this is an absolutely brutal regime for low and middle-income workers, who risk losing their home due to factors totally beyond their control. Both the human and economic costs of housing instability are very real and important to voters, so I think this is why policymakers have been turning to rent controls. Admittedly, it's something of a second-best policy, but more fundamental reforms have proven to be a slow, difficult process. Economists would do well to look harder at how to make some of these stopgap measures work - well-designed rent controls can be fairly effective, while poorly designed ones can be disastrous.
I would also recommend Matthew Desmond's "Evicted." Harrowing stuff.
Not directly related, but a book was just written about families (and others) getting evicted ...
https://www.amazon.com/Evicted-Poverty-Profit-American-City/dp/0553447459
http://evictedbook.com/
Hey there! To be honest, I don't know a whole lot about this specific issue although Evicted is on my reading list.
I agree with you on the educational point. The Republicans have completely overhauled how education is done in North Carolina over the past 7 years, this is a great overview. I'm not convinced that "choice" is the solution to our education woes.
My high school's district is actually drawn like you're proposing -- it pulls from both country clubs and housing projects. It was a formative experience, to be sure.
If you're interested in this topic, I'd recommend taking a look at San Francisco's school assignment process which is the solution they've taken to solve this problem. They've seen interesting externalities when implementing this, such as wealthy families opting out of the public school system altogether. (As an aside, this is what happened in my hometown when they desegregated schools in my hometown -- the wealthy families founded a private school with tuition so high that no black families could afford it).
Don't know what you are specifically looking for, but I would venture into the area of sociology more if I was you since you are starting to see a pure financial/economic analysis of the world is incomplete:
Hottest book right now is Evicted:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0553447459/ref=tmm_pap_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=&sr=
Just won a Pulitzer.
More books focused on poverty and societal issues:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/054481195X/ref=tmm_pap_title_sr?ie=UTF8&qid=&sr=
The New Jim Crow, more focused on racial inequality:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1595586431/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1492095495&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=the+new+jim+crow&dpPl=1&dpID=51GxNVbFjCL&ref=plSrch
If you are looking for more historical stuff biographies are always good.
Did you know Amazon will donate a portion of every purchase if you shop by going to smile.amazon.com instead? Over $50,000,000 has been raised for charity - all you need to do is change the URL!
Here are your smile-ified links:
Arms and Dudes
The skies belong to us
One of us
https://smile.amazon.com/Evicted-Poverty-Profit-American-City/dp/0553447459/)..)
---
Never forget to smile again | ^^i'm ^^a ^^friendly bot
Evicted: Poverty & Profit in the American City
https://www.amazon.com/Evicted-Poverty-Profit-American-City/dp/0553447459
So, with car or appliance manufacturers, there is an incentive there to try to capture more of the market by making a bracket of cheaper car for people who don't have as much to spend. I'm not exactly sure that it works exactly the same way for housing, or at least, if there is a linear parallel. Often what happens is that lower quality housing is not necessarily more affordable housing, as the bottom of the market tends to stick closely to the top of the market. And perversely, because rental housing often relies heavily upon credit, low quality low-income housing is sometimes even more expensive than luxury housing.
I think of studies done on subprime and low-income (non-subsidized) housing in different real estate markets in the country, and I think particularly of some of the closer qualitative observations made by Matthew Desmond in his book, Evicted (https://www.amazon.com/Evicted-Poverty-Profit-American-City/dp/0553447459). Which, to me, is a starting point for any discussion about housing. What I've read has also been borne out in experience in LLT disputes and eviction proceedings in rural Indiana and also East Cleveland.
My understanding is that usually the business model that makes sense to property management companies looking to fill in that market is not to build solid but no frills housing, but to buy up older or not so well maintained houses or apartments which can be sold at a premium to people who might have worse credit or even a spotty eviction record.
And in some ways, housing is maybe a bit more like healthcare than it is like cars or appliances, such that while survival is possible without a car, everybody needs a roof over their heads. So the demand on housing is maybe stickier than it is on a car or appliance, because it is very difficult for a person to simply not have a place to live. This gives landlords a lot more leverage in charging more, as lots of people will pay over half their income just for a roof, even in lower-quality housing.
And whereas car and appliance manufacturers have a considerable interest in trying to tap a middle and working class market, it is actually probably more in the interest of landowners and landlords to push the landlord/tenant relationship further in the direction of effective serfdom, a situation under which simply having a place to get out of the rain is increasingly viewed as a privilege worth most of a person's useful talent and labor.
That's an arrangement that would probably suit landlords just fine.
sure!
The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness
Imbeciles: The Supreme Court, American Eugenics, and the Sterilization of Carrie Buck
Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City
Dreamland: The True Tale of America's Opiate Epidemic
Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right
Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the Radical Right's Stealth Plan for America
The Working Poor: Invisible in America
Another Day in the Death of America: A Chronicle of Ten Short Lives
Clothing Poverty: The Hidden World of Fast Fashion and Second-hand Clothes