Poverty And Crime Analysis

For those only weakly committed to city living, particularly middle-class people who have serious difficulty with social diversity and who have clear housing alternatives, the "problem-free" suburbs become tempting. After an incident such as a car break-in or a bicycle theft, a "last straw" can make them leave. (249)

Living in communities that are run down, neglected and forgotten takes a toll on all members of the community. This is especially true when residents witness new properties being erected around the city as their own neighborhoods are deemed “ghettos” and not receiving the investment necessary for improvements. Many of the low income housing that is available to city residents aren’t the most desirable properties as they may have structural deficiencies, lead paint, rats and roaches running amuck. Many older properties also do not have adequately functioning heat or hot water availability. The housing projects also do not have air conditioning. On hot days, having no cool break in addition to all the other negative social factors, this can be a deadly combination that may perpetuate frustrations and ultimately lead to violence.

The author explained how the government established policies and initiatives that created ghettos and suburbs. The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) is a program that helped citizens become homeowners by lending loans. However, only certain neighborhoods qualified for those loans. Research and data were used to prove that certain areas were considered a loss of investment. The

Wilson (2011) research proves that the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), contributed to the early decay of inner city neighborhoods by withholding mortgage capital and making it difficult for these areas to retain or attract families who were able to purchase their own homes. As the federal government created this program it excluded certain inner city neighborhoods. This exclusion created “redlining” which assessed primarily on racial composition. People who wanted to get out of public housing and purchase a home in a redlined neighborhood were denied proper mortgages, even if they had sufficient funds. Wilson (2011) says that such restrictions such redlining restricted many opportunities for building or even maintaining quality housing in the inner city, which in many ways set the stage for urban blight that many Americans now associate with black neighborhoods. Policies like this one were created to make blacks stay in the inner city

Chicago’s Cabrini-Green public housing project is notorious in the United States for being the most impoverished and crime-ridden public housing development ever established. Originally established as inexpensive housing in the 1940’s, it soon became a vast complex of unsightly concrete low and high-rise apartment structures. Originally touted as a giant step forward in the development of public housing, it quickly changed from a racially and economically diverse housing complex to a predominantly black, extremely poor ghetto. As it was left to rot, so to speak, Cabrini-Green harbored drug dealers, gangs and prostitution. It continued its downward spiral of despair until the mid 1990’s when the Federal Government assumed control the

New York City had started to provide publicly funded housing before the act was created and was one of the programs that the government used as a model. According to Bauman, (1987)public housing was not originally created to help the “poorest of the poor,” it was created to house select segments of the working class, specifically the “submerged middle class,” who were temporarily outside the labor market during the depression. These benefits were targeted to whites and helped move them to suburbs but kept blacks concentrated in cities and inner suburbs. The distribution of federal benefits made it possible for mostly white working-class people to move out of public housing, and contributed to a downward income shift in the public housing population after the 1940’s. These discriminatory practices were documented by (Massey & Denton, 1993).

Race, income, and education have shifted the demographics of my community, Huntington Park, in the past years from 1990 to 2010. In the 1990’s there was no particular social class dominating my city; the median income was $62,500. In 2010 however, my city was made up of working class individuals whose median income was about $37,651. The departure of whites contributes to urban decay in my community just as Hunter’s observations showed, where low working class came and made up the majority of the population and lived in “extreme poverty and seemingly ever-present violence (Hunter). Education also affected the class shift in my community, there was less people graduating and pursuing higher education. The 1990 census shows that 14.48% attained

Low income housing areas, especially public ones, across the country are in very bad shape and are a hotbed of crime because of their design. In Knoxville, Tennessee, where I am a Patrol Lieutenant, half of the public housing was built after World War II for returning soldiers and is in very bad shape. The designed was closed in and packed as many residents in as possible, which attracts crime and prevents emergency personnel from entering in an efficient manner. Some have been torn down because of poor conditions, but many still remain. The Knoxville Community Development Corporation would like to replace all of the older design developments, but money is the issue as in many other cities.

neighborhoods decreased from 65% in 1970 to 40% in 2012. During this time, families living in

So far, both theories are able to explain the crime inequality observed insides neighbourhoods; however, when it comes to explaining the difference in crime rates between neighbourhoods with similarly low levels of poverty, social disorganization theory is not able to fully explain why such difference may occur, as it places a greater focus on the internal dynamics of the neighbourhoods than on the external contingencies (Peterson & Krivo, 2010, p. 92). Based on Table 4.5 of Divergent Social Worlds: Neighborhood Crime and the Racial-Spatial DivideI, minority low-poverty areas have roughly two and a half times more violence than their white counterparts (Peterson & Krivo, 2010, p. 88). Social disorganization theory insists that residential instability (percent of those who owns and percent of those who rent) , population heterogeneity (internal differences, including ethno-racial differences), poverty (percent of those who live in poverty), income, deteriorating neighbourhood, and population loss (percent of those who leave due to deterioration) are mechanisms that leads to the absence of informal social control and increases social disorganization, causing the loss of control over youths who then hang out at spontaneous playgrounds and form gangs with delinquent traditions that get passed down through cultural transmission. If such was the case, then one would expect neighbourhoods with similar and comparable local conditions to have similar average rates of crimes. However,

Crime and criminalization are dependent on social inequality Social inequality there are four major forms of inequality, class gender race and age, all of which influence crime. In looking at social classes and relationship to crime, studies have shown that citizens of the lower class are more likely to commit crimes of property and violence than upper-class citizens: who generally commit political and economic crimes. In 2007 the National Crime Victimization Survey showed that families with an income of $15000 or less had a greater chance of being victimized; recalling that lower classes commit a majority of those crimes. We can conclude that crime generally happens within classes.

Crime in this country is an everyday thing. Some people believe that crime is unnecessary. That people do it out of ignorance and that it really can be prevented. Honestly, since we live in a country where there is poverty, people living in the streets, or with people barely getting by, there will always be crime. Whether the crime is robbing food, money, or even hurting the people you love, your family. You will soon read about how being a criminal starts or even stops, where it begins, with whom it begins with and why crime seems to be the only way out sometimes for the poor.

A violent crime occurs every 23.5 seconds in the United States of America. Even though crime has been at a low during the past decade, violence is still prevalent in today’s society. Most of these crimes happen in places that are socio-economically disadvantaged. There then is the debate of whether violent crime is associated with environments struck with poverty. There is a correlation between violent crimes and poverty because of the unemployment rates in major cities, the culture of poor areas, and drugs.

Since the early 2000s, gentrification accelerated in various New York City neighborhoods. Data shown that about 29.8 percent of New York City has been affected by gentrification in low-income communities (Governing Data 1). This is over a 20 percent increased from the previous decade in New York City alone. Gentrification is a term used to describe displacement or renewal in urban neighborhoods as a result of increasing property values and rent prices. Gentrification has existed since the 1960s but has rapidly increased since then . Gentrification has now become a common and global controversial topic in many low-income neighborhood. Although, gentrification hasn’t always been bad from increasing job opportunities to lowering crime rates. Gentrification has impacted and transformed underprivileged districts in New York City. However, at the advantage of who ? Thus, gentrification has only increased average rates of poverty and infused neighborhoods with “white privilege”.

Many factors generate crime. That ‘inner morality’ necessary to resist the temptation to rape, rob, or kill weakens in an environment of broken homes, systemic poverty, ethical relativism, religious decline. Poverty ’causes’ crime in general in the same way that pornography causes sex crimes and television violence causes violence by children: it is a predispositive condition. If the family life could be strengthened, raise the living standard, instill character values this could have an impact on lowering the crime rate.