# would american cities get city slums as econmy gets worse?



## Chicagoago

Right, people move into slums to be in a city with a lack of housing.

People in the US abandon the old housing to find better housing. There aren't thousands of people rushing into these areas to cram into the abandoned housing.


----------



## weava

I am seeing the exact opposite of the slums getting worse. As new home construction is slowing down I'm seeing more people are remodeling and fixing up old homes in the hood because its cheaper than the burbs.


----------



## snow is red

I don't think so. America is too developed to have slums.


----------



## Astralis

Then it's pretty clear that US can't get slums in the cities, at least not these ones like in Third World countries.


----------



## sebvill

Slums in Latin America were created due to a high economic and social difference between Cities and Countyrside. The only way USA will get slums is an economic crisis that affects agricuture and the rural areas. This will force people to move into cities, but the cities dont share this "rural crisis", in fact their are booming and housing prices increasing, then, the new migrants will have to improvise housing in areas around the cities. This could happen with migration, however foreign migrants will never invade State´s land because theyll be send away, but native Americans cannot be send away. 
Anyway this supposed crisis would have to be very severe, because Americans are already used to live good, they prefer to have huge debts but live in a nice house (subprime crisis).


----------



## SebaFun

Yes,very good explication.This is the true of the realy poor cityes.


----------



## Xusein

To be honest, there are plenty of Indian Reservations throughout the country that can classify in having "slums".


----------



## SIC

sebvill said:


> Slums in Latin America were created due to a high economic and social difference between Cities and Countyrside. The only way USA will get slums is an economic crisis that affects agricuture and the rural areas. This will force people to move into cities, but the cities dont share this "rural crisis", in fact their are booming and housing prices increasing, then, the new migrants will have to improvise housing in areas around the cities. This could happen with migration, however foreign migrants will never invade State´s land because theyll be send away, but native Americans cannot be send away.
> Anyway this supposed crisis would have to be very severe, because Americans are already used to live good, they prefer to have huge debts but live in a nice house (subprime crisis).


Except that agriculture makes up less than 2 percent of the workforce.

No, the trend has definitely been in the poor moving to outer suburbs and the ex-suburb people moving into the gentrified ghettos. US cities will resemble Paris more than say....Rio.

In Chicago at least, they've knocked down all the old Housing Blocks and turning them into housing for mainly-middle class people. Since they're so close to the CBD and transport. Instead they've given the people cash to move wherever they want. But it's been mainly to the same small suburbs close to the city who have been overwhelmed by low-skilled workers, criminals and don't really have the social services to help them. Those cities were never nice, but they werent total hellholes either. Well all those thousands of people moving together in a few years....well it's like adding gasoline to a small fire.

But then, it's not Chicago's problem anymore. Out of site, out of mind. At least before Chicagoans had to face the reality of our society every day to work. All those people living in tower blocks that were more like prisons.


----------



## karma police

plcmat said:


> I am remembering the picture of the housing project in Seville where a donkey was living inside one of the apartments.




You are not remembering that picture basically because that thing about the donkey it´s just an urban legend. Anyway, You are right about european slums, they may look different than northamerican slums, but that doesn´t mean that they aren´t there.


----------



## stockmarket

American cities will never get slums. THey are developed cities. They can get unpopulated and abandon but never slums. In fact the economy problem is a global one not one of american cities.


----------



## eklips

Chicagoago said:


> Right, people move into slums to be in a city with a lack of housing.
> 
> People in the US abandon the old housing to find better housing. There aren't thousands of people rushing into these areas to cram into the abandoned housing.


Actually people are leaving their homes right now because they are expelled.


----------



## OMH

karma police said:


> You are not remembering that picture basically because that thing about the donkey it´s just an urban legend. Anyway, You are right about european slums, they may look different than northamerican slums, but that doesn´t mean that they aren´t there.


Actually, Canadian "slums" (they obviously aren't slums, but just run-down districts), resemble European "slums" more than they do American slums (or ghettos or however you call them). 
This is because in Canada, most poor people live in apartment complexes (social housing) like this (St. Jamestown in Toronto):








, which are much more similar to this (public housing project in France) :








than to this (Camden, NJ, pic posted by Aurelis):









So, generally speaking you could say that Canadian and European ghettos look more similar than Canadian and American ghettos, because Canadian and European ghettos consist of Apartment towers, which often are subsidized by the state (public housing), but in the US there're only very few of these social housing complexes , and only NYC and Chicago really have social housing in apartment towers, , and usually those public housing projects in the US consist of low-rise housing, like seen on this pic: (Calliope Projects in New Orleans): 










Anyway regarding the question of this thread: I think that the situation will definetily worsen for many inner suburbs, and other districts that where already poor, in the US, and gentrification will probably be continuing, but in a slower pace because people are now less likely to invest in risky real estate properties, and the construction of new condo buildings, which esp. where constructed in the downtown areas of many U.S cities, will also slow down.

The declining real-estate prices though could have the opposite effect-more people will be able to afford their own property , which means that poorness won't hit them so hard because they will own their own properties which people with less income could sell when prices are high again, though i guess it'd be a better idea to keep those properties for many people until house prices reach the same levels like they did just a few years ago.


----------



## Xusein

I think the only city in Canada that has those project highrises at a large level is Toronto.


----------



## OMH

10ROT said:


> I think the only city in Canada that has those project highrises at a large level is Toronto.


Montreal has them too i believe, as well as Ottawa...though Toronto by far has the most of this apartment blocks from the 70's (I'm not sure if most of them are public housing, i believe only some are, and most are just rental apartments) , and it also has the largest-scale projects in comparison to other Canadian & North American cities ( I guess NYC might have bigger ones though, especially Co-Op-city in the Bronx ,which is huge).


----------



## bayviews

OMH said:


> Anyway regarding the question of this thread: I think that the situation will definetily worsen for many inner suburbs, and other districts that where already poor, in the US, and gentrification will probably be continuing, but in a slower pace because people are now less likely to invest in risky real estate properties, and the construction of new condo buildings, which esp. where constructed in the downtown areas of many U.S cities, will also slow down.
> 
> The declining real-estate prices though could have the opposite effect-more people will be able to afford their own property , which means that poorness won't hit them so hard because they will own their own properties which people with less income could sell when prices are high again, though i guess it'd be a better idea to keep those properties for many people until house prices reach the same levels like they did just a few years ago.


In the US, during the 1980s & 90s there was a lot of emphasis placed on tearing down high-rise projects (like Robert Taylor & Cabrini Green in Chicago) & moving their tenants into lower-density or suburban housing. 

Part of the idea was that crime would fall & that relocated public housing tenants would have better housing opportunities in the suburbs. Many cities embraced these cookie-cutter solutions. But often, crime simply moved to the outskirts & new homeowners unable to keep up with their payments ended up defaulting on their mortgages. 

In NYC, which didn't tear down many hi-rise projects & has retained a huge number of hi-rises, violent crime rates have remained exceptionally low. In fact, Hi-densities seem to act as a deterrent to crime.


----------



## Franky

02tonyl said:


> I don't think so. America is too developed to have slums.


That development is aging and often neglected. Some of these developments could eventually become homes for squatters if this continues. 
No country is too developed for slums!!!


----------



## sebvill

eklips said:


> Actually people are leaving their homes right now because they are expelled.


That is a problem too. In the news their was a report about people that were being expelled from their houses. Many of them are living in trailer camps. This are kind of "first World slums".


----------



## worldwide

10ROT said:


> I think the only city in Canada that has those project highrises at a large level is Toronto.


for its population, london ontario has quite a few. 

also vancouver has 3 large scale high rise public housing complexes that i can think of (stamp's place, skeena terrace, and jackson square) as well as some stand alone buildings (sunset towers...etc) and many midrises too (mole hill, little mountain...)

i think in most major canadian cities you will find some


----------



## techniques1200s

The US does have "slums" though not in the same sense as any 3rd world country. Rather than shanty towns, our "slums" consist of any combination of decaying and low-income neighborhoods, and public housing projects. The standard of living tends to be much, much higher than any shanty town (though still low for the US), but violent crime tends to be very high too.

Hunter's Point is San Francisco's biggest "slum" or ghetto, or whatever you wanna call it. You have SF's biggest concentration of housing projects on a hill sticking out into the bay (the tallest ones are maybe 4 or 5 stories, with most being in the 2-3 story range...I'm gonna take a guess, and say 5,000 to 10,000 people live in them. The whole neighborhood has 30,000 people), and it's surrounded by working class residential areas, semi abandoned industrial stuff, and a decommissioned navy shipyard. It's cut off from the rest of the city by elevated freeways and said industrial areas. There's one stagnant commercial strip slicing from the north end of the neighborhood to the south end, and gang/drug warfare is very common. It usually rakes up 20-30 murders a year.

The only thing in San Francisco close to a 3rd world slum would be some industrial areas where homeless people have tent cities, and even some homemade plywood/scrap metal shacks. The best examples I've seen are along the train tracks leading into the city, and under some highway overpasses (all in Hunters Point). They tend to get cleaned out every now and then, but they always sprout up again either in the same spot or somewhere else (I've noticed the tent/shack concentrations along the railroad tracks have grown considerably recently...though it's still probably only a few dozen people at the most, spread for a couple blocks). We also have plenty of people who live in trailers or cars, who tend to concentrate in those same industrial parts of the city, where they won't be bothered. There are some families living like this too...I remember a news article on one such family a few years ago.


----------



## Kenwen

China is a developing country without slums, because it is illegal, the police would destroy those slums, but there are poor living area that looks very rundown, they are usually very old house where not being well maintain, but many old housing preservation programme are being launch, a example is the tradition house which occupied vast area of inner beijing is being renovating and use as shopping districts


----------



## lafayette

02tonyl said:


> I don't think so. America is too developed to have slums.


I agree but I would have taken this "being too developed" thing as being developed and at the same time having a well-planned urbanization. City slums are kind of associated with the term pseudo-urbanization. The U.S. has a great infrastructure which was built before all the urban sprawls were on the way. In a nutshell, U.S. cities are different and only a massive nuclear holocaust would ruin them.


----------



## Cosmonaut

I've seen a place in east El Paso known as Homestead Meadows, it sure isn't a slum but it's close to one.


----------



## bayviews

techniques1200s said:


> The US does have "slums" though not in the same sense as any 3rd world country. Rather than shanty towns, our "slums" consist of any combination of decaying and low-income neighborhoods, and public housing projects. The standard of living tends to be much, much higher than any shanty town (though still low for the US), but violent crime tends to be very high too.
> 
> Hunter's Point is San Francisco's biggest "slum" or ghetto, or whatever you wanna call it. You have SF's biggest concentration of housing projects on a hill sticking out into the bay (the tallest ones are maybe 4 or 5 stories, with most being in the 2-3 story range...I'm gonna take a guess, and say 5,000 to 10,000 people live in them. The whole neighborhood has 30,000 people), and it's surrounded by working class residential areas, semi abandoned industrial stuff, and a decommissioned navy shipyard. It's cut off from the rest of the city by elevated freeways and said industrial areas. There's one stagnant commercial strip slicing from the north end of the neighborhood to the south end, and gang/drug warfare is very common. It usually rakes up 20-30 murders a year.
> 
> The only thing in San Francisco close to a 3rd world slum would be some industrial areas where homeless people have tent cities, and even some homemade plywood/scrap metal shacks. The best examples I've seen are along the train tracks leading into the city, and under some highway overpasses (all in Hunters Point). They tend to get cleaned out every now and then, but they always sprout up again either in the same spot or somewhere else (I've noticed the tent/shack concentrations along the railroad tracks have grown considerably recently...though it's still probably only a few dozen people at the most, spread for a couple blocks). We also have plenty of people who live in trailers or cars, who tend to concentrate in those same industrial parts of the city, where they won't be bothered. There are some families living like this too...I remember a news article on one such family a few years ago.


The San Francisco Bay Area represents the emerging pattern in the largest US metro areas, where the slums are being pushed to the far fringes. Hunters Point-Bayview is on fringe of SF City. But the path of development & gentrification has been pushing relentlessly down Third Street. The residents of SE SF have been pushed up to the far north & NE fringes of the Bay Area, places like Richmond, Pittsburg, Antioch, Vallejo, Fairfield, 15-30 miles out, some as far as Stockton & Sacramento, 80-100 miles out, all areas with high rates of housing foreclusures. One of the pluses of the recession is that it may provide some breathing room.


----------



## jbkayaker12

^^^With the current economic situation in the USA there are lots of opportunities at the moment as far as real estate. As first time buyers my friend and I are in the process of buying a condo. It may not be brand new but we can fix it up and with prices plunging there are bargains out there. One man's loss is another man's gain.


----------



## bayviews

jbkayaker12 said:


> ^^^With the current economic situation in the USA there are lots of opportunities at the moment as far as real estate. As first time buyers my friend and I are in the process of buying a condo. It may not be brand new but we can fix it up and with prices plunging there are bargains out there. One man's loss is another man's gain.



For sure, for a change, there's a lot of great deals available in Vegas...at least when it comes to real estate!


----------



## jbkayaker12

^^^Yeah hehehe!


----------



## bigbossman

i swear i read somewhere that if mississippi wasn't a part of the USA that it would be a third world country...

and i have seen parts of the south where houses are just corrogated iron shacks with rabid dogs running about.


----------



## Chicagoago

bigbossman said:


> i swear i read somewhere that if mississippi wasn't a part of the USA that it would be a third world country...
> 
> and i have seen parts of the south where houses are just corrogated iron shacks with rabid dogs running about.



That's pretty offensive to the hundreds of millions of people actually living in dire situations to compare Mississippi to a 3rd world country.

It has a per capita income level of around $27,000. It's towards the bottom as far as the US as a whole, but it's hardly impoverished. It has no large cities or concentrations of super rich. It's not wealthy, but it's certainly not 3rd world.

You can see cheap housing and run down conditions all over the world in rural settings. Most everyone in Mississippi are not living like this.


----------



## bigbossman

Chicagoago said:


> That's pretty offensive to the hundreds of millions of people actually living in dire situations to compare Mississippi to a 3rd world country.
> 
> It has a per capita income level of around $27,000. It's towards the bottom as far as the US as a whole, but it's hardly impoverished. It has no large cities or concentrations of super rich. It's not wealthy, but it's certainly not 3rd world.
> 
> You can see cheap housing and run down conditions all over the world in rural settings. Most everyone in Mississippi are not living like this.


if you read my post you would have seen that i said: "that i read somewhere". i don't know much about the place, but i recall reading that and it fealt it was worth an input in thread. If it or i is/was wrong i stand corrected, but i read what i read.


----------



## Skyline_FFM

Depends on your definition of a slum. If you mean something compareable to bustees in India, Bidonvilles in Africa, favellas in Brazil or Barrios in other Latin American cities, NO!!!
If you mean rundown neighbourhoods, YES! Since many people won't have the money to maintain their houses in a good state, some "poorer" neighbourhoods may run down and could be considered slums - in comparison with the "better" neighbourhoods. But for that to happen there would have to be at least a 5 year recession! And that is pretty unlikely!


----------



## Intru

Who ever thinks there aren't slum type neighborhoods in the USA is an idiot I could show you barrios in Puerto Rico that are not at the same level of favelas or latinamerican barrios but im pretty sure that if any mainlanders would go to this places they would be shocked. Remember when the rest of the USA gets a cold, Puerto Rico gets lung cancer. The economical crisis has been hitting PR way longer than in the USA and we may see alot of people will loose their homes and move to the barrios and caserios. The government employs 60% of the population and it only has enough money to run up to may of next year, and they are already talking about displacing alot of people. SO the future looks alot worse for alot of people, before the economy stabilizes.


----------



## SIC

We don't have this type of slums in American cities.









We have ghettos.










I think because Chicago had it's highest population 60-70 years ago. Theres still an excess of buildings in the ghettos, due to white flight. They're just run down but structurally most of them are fine.

With some care, they would all look like this.


----------



## Skyline_FFM

SIC said:


> We don't have this type of slums in American cities.


Definitely not!!! :lol: Neither in Europe or Japan you find such terrible settlemens!


----------



## DarkLite

Theres always a scale to the degree of poverty. Heres my take on it:
1-10, 10 being the best

Singapore would get a 10 but I dont think widescale poverty exists, im not an expert but heres my observations

10: Scandinavian Social Housing
9: Canadian Social Estates
8: Dutch and German Estates 
7: French, Spanish, and British ghettoes
6: Eastern European Housing Schemes, American suburban ghettoes (Compton)
5: American Innercity Ghettoes
4: Puerto Rican Ghettoes
3: Favelas or other brick structured ´´slums´´ (at least they have electricity and running water)
2: Slums with no running water, electricity or infrastructure
1: Slums that are made up entirely of cardboard and tin homes
0: Homelessness


----------



## Skyline_FFM

^^ This is more or less reasonable... Although German social housing isn't that bad, neither the Dutch:


----------



## Astralis

Skyline_FFM said:


> Definitely not!!! :lol: *Neither in Europe* or Japan you find such terrible settlemens!


I think you can find a few in countries like Albania, Kosovo, Romania or Serbia. For example here is Karton City, a poor neighborhood in Belgrade, Serbia:


----------



## RawLee

Astralis said:


> I think you can find a few in countries like Albania, Kosovo, Romania or Serbia. For example here is Karton City, a poor neighborhood in Belgrade, Serbia


Or Italy...


----------



## Skyline_FFM

Astralis said:


> I think you can find a few in countries like Albania, Kosovo, Romania or Serbia. For example here is Karton City, a poor neighborhood in Belgrade, Serbia:


But they aren't as extended! But still I have to say:  :eek2: to the Belgrade slum!


----------



## Skyline_FFM

RawLee said:


> Or Italy...


There are no such slums in Italy. Children of the poorer districts go to a normal school, they have all infrastructure needed and no such extreme violence.


----------



## ggonza

SIC said:


> We don't have this type of slums in American cities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> \


is that brazil?


----------



## kids

Lisbon










Madrid










Milan










Paris


----------



## Skyline_FFM

:lol: Do you want to compare two wooden shacks in Paris, Madrid or Milan to the slums of the 3rd World? :hilarious
Lisbon is another thing. Portugal has horrendous poverty for a EU country. And those slums are mostly built by illegal immigrants which have no chance to rent an apartment. You don't see any native people inside them since they have a right to get rent paid and an extra money for food and bills...


----------



## RawLee

Skyline_FFM said:


> There are no such slums in Italy. Children of the poorer districts go to a normal school, they have all infrastructure needed and no such extreme violence.


Yes there are. Havent you seen the pics about the police raid on a gypsy slum?


----------



## Skyline_FFM

Rubbish, there are no slums in Italy, made of wood and some red bricks, no infrastructure, housing tens of thousands of people!


----------



## kids

Skyline_FFM said:


> :lol: Do you want to compare two wooden shacks in Paris, Madrid or Milan to the slums of the 3rd World? :hilarious
> Lisbon is another thing. Portugal has horrendous poverty for a EU country. And those slums are mostly built by illegal immigrants which have no chance to rent an apartment. You don't see any native people inside them since they have a right to get rent paid and an extra money for food and bills...


Eh? I'm not comparing them at all. But undoubtedly, these are shanties/slums and they are in europe.


----------



## karim aboussir

real slums go to kenya india places like that 
these europens pics above is luxury compared to miserable slums in others parts of the world 
a good book to read planet of the slums big wake up call


----------



## kids

what, do you think i don't know? jesus. i'm just saying there are slums in europe. AND NO OF COURSE THEY'RE NOT AS BAD. ****.


----------



## SIC

Skyline_FFM said:


> :lol: Do you want to compare two wooden shacks in Paris, Madrid or Milan to the slums of the 3rd World? :hilarious
> Lisbon is another thing. Portugal has horrendous poverty for a EU country. *And those slums are mostly built by illegal immigrants which have no chance to rent an apartment. You don't see any native people inside them since they have a right to get rent paid and an extra money for food and bills...*


Oh well in that case..............they STILL count.
It's actually sadder, illegal immigrants in the US don't have to live in shacks.....yet the US is a capitalist country with hardly any welfare for legal citizens let alone illegal. I thought Europe was more enlightened not less, in that respect.
There is however a shocking amount of homelessness in the United States. Which is actually worse than having real slums but you don't see whole families that are homeless. Just your typical single males/junkies/alcoholics/metally ill, but I don't know if they're like that because they are homeless or they're homeless because they're addicts.


Oh that isn't Brazil, Mexico City also has people living on rickety cinder block homes in the hills around the city. They look just like favelas from the outside, I don't know how bad they actually are....compared to favelas. I don't think you see kids with AK's in broad daylight, not yet anyway.


----------



## UMSHK

Are there no slums in Moldova and parts of Romania? I think there is!


----------



## Skyline_FFM

SIC said:


> Oh well in that case..............they STILL count.
> It's actually sadder, illegal immigrants in the US don't have to live in shacks.....yet the US is a capitalist country with hardly any welfare for legal citizens let alone illegal. I thought Europe was more enlightened not less, in that respect.
> There is however a shocking amount of homelessness in the United States. Which is actually worse than having real slums but you don't see whole families that are homeless. Just your typical single males/junkies/alcoholics/metally ill, but I don't know if they're like that because they are homeless or they're homeless because they're addicts.
> 
> 
> Oh that isn't Brazil, Mexico City also has people living on rickety cinder block homes in the hills around the city. They look just like favelas from the outside, I don't know how bad they actually are....compared to favelas. I don't think you see kids with AK's in broad daylight, not yet anyway.


It isn't every illegal. And many of them just house there until social worker take care of them. Here in Germany you don't see a single illegal living in wooden shack. And it is funny to say EUROPE! EUROPE is from the North of Norway to the South of Italy. The countries in between are all very different. And to say Europe while there are countries that are just a little better than 3rd World like Romania, Albania or Bulgaria, you cannot mention them along with Germany, Netherlands or Sweden! :lol: 
And that cities like Paris or Madrid have such small slums is because the country with 40 million people has several millions of illegals. How should a country of that size build homes for all those people. I would rather say that who comes in illegally, should NO WAY be attended (only medical treatment to assure they will not die of any diseases they brought in). But there should remain a pressure on them to go back to where they came from. Refugees do not need to come in illegally, since there are asylum laws. And they get money each month to live with and don't pay rent nor do they pay for heating and water... But if a country is AS pressured as Spain, it is hard to get along with it. Same goes for Portugal and Italy who all have huge waves of illegal immigrants from Africa, Latin America and parts of Asia. And they still live better in those slums than inside the slums of their origin!


----------



## Skyline_FFM

UMSHK said:


> Are there no slums in Moldova and parts of Romania? I think there is!


Yes, in the undedeveloped parts of Europe there are slums. But in countries like Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Finland etc. there are NO slums. And even the single small shacks of Paris or Milan are NOTHING compared to other places in the world!
Lisboa is another story. But Portugal is not that rich to get along with the flood of illegals pouring into the country...


----------



## karim aboussir

you do see very big differences of wealth in europe some nations are much richer than others


----------



## Ian

Skyline FFM i think you need to review your ideas of all that you put together everytime you said the third world, Europe, Asia or Latin America, different countries have very different realities and name together and generalizing a region of more than 500 million people like LA is plain ignorance, within that region you have places comparable to the worst places in Asia or Africa and you also have several countries with higher standards of living than most of the countries in eastern Europe... 

and remember eastern europe is still europe!!!! :nuts:

Back to the topic, i really don't think north american cities would get slums any time soon; like other people already said, slums in upper or upper middle income countries are beacause of massive immigration from poorer countries or from poorer regions within that country... and not because of economic crisis.


----------



## Skyline_FFM

Ian said:


> Skyline FFM i think you need to review your ideas of all that you put together everytime you said the third world, Europe, Asia or Latin America, different countries have very different realities and name together and generalizing a region of more than 500 million people like LA is plain ignorance, within that region you have places comparable to the worst places in Asia or Africa and you also have several countries with higher standards of living than most of the countries in eastern Europe...
> 
> and remember eastern europe is still europe!!!! :nuts:
> 
> Back to the topic, i really don't think north american cities would get slums any time soon; like other people already said, slums in upper or upper middle income countries are beacause of massive immigration from poorer countries or from poorer regions within that country... and not because of economic crisis.


Which countries are better than most of Eastern Europe? Panamá, Chile and Uruguay. And partly Costa Rica. Argentina is almost on Eastern European level. And when I say 3rd World I mean countires which have enormous slums, no social network and welfare system, bad infrastructure and lack of medical care and education and also some parts of the population even starving. And I never said all LA was 3rd World. Bolivia is, Peru is, Colombia is,... Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Costa Rica and Panamá are excluded, also Southern Brazil and a portion of Mexico. But the rest in my opinion is 3rd World as most of Africa and parts of Southern and South East Asia!


----------



## jtownman

Why would someone from America seriously ask this question?


----------



## jtownman

Thats not a slum, thats a empty neighborhood.


----------



## jtownman

Tent cities in America are NOT because of the current economic sitiation. Why do people just say stuff because it sounds good???? We have had tent cities just like countries like Japan forever. There was a tent city right outside city hall in New Orleans forever. Please don't say stuff you dont know to be true.


----------



## jtownman

You know what, im just done. Everyone on here LOOOOOOVES to bash America. You people need to get a life. You are envious(like all liberals) of our sucess. You hate it that we have guns. You hate it that we have low taxes. You hate our "cowboy" image. You think were dumb. Your above us. We know, so just let us be the biggest economy in the world(twice as large as the next country.....JAPAN) and we will continue to prosper. You poeple in Europe can just stay in your stagnant countries with high taxes and low work ethics and enjoy your welfare...just dont ask for our help when something happens to you.


----------



## Skyline_FFM

jtown said:


> You know what, im just done. Everyone on here LOOOOOOVES to bash America. You people need to get a life. You are envious(like all liberals) of our sucess. You hate it that we have guns. You hate it that we have low taxes. You hate our "cowboy" image. You think were dumb. Your above us. We know, so just let us be the biggest economy in the world(twice as large as the next country.....JAPAN) and we will continue to prosper.You people in Europe can just stay in your stagnant countries with high taxes and low work ethics and enjoy your welfare...just dont ask for our help when something happens to you.


NO European here is or was bashing the US - it is mostly those from poorer countries who do that! But thank you for being stupid and impolite. You jsut should know where those people come from before you state such things. And if you read everything more carefully, you would notice that most people around here are bashing Europe more than the US. Sorry mate, you're paranoid! hno:


----------



## jtownman

Skyline FFM, you may be right. And your deffinitly right about me being paranoid. Everyone seems to hate us.....so im sorry when I think of the worst first. I will look through the posts tho and see where everyones from, im sure your right.


----------



## Skyline_FFM

jtown said:


> Skyline FFM, you may be right. And your deffinitly right about me being paranoid. Everyone seems to hate us.....so im sorry when I think of the worst first. I will look through the posts tho and see where everyones from, im sure your right.


The US is envied a lot. And envy often causes hatred. You should know that. That is the reason why people from several places always look for the worst in US (and also Europe, Canada or Japan) and bashing them. But first thing most of them would do if they had the opportunity to leave their country: They would leave to US, Europe, Canada, Japan or Australia. hno:


----------



## kids

jtown said:


> You know what, im just done. Everyone on here LOOOOOOVES to bash America. You people need to get a life. You are envious(like all liberals) of our sucess. You hate it that we have guns. You hate it that we have low taxes. You hate our "cowboy" image. You think were dumb. Your above us. We know, so just let us be the biggest economy in the world(twice as large as the next country.....JAPAN) and we will continue to prosper. You poeple in Europe can just stay in your stagnant countries with high taxes and low work ethics and enjoy your welfare...just dont ask for our help when something happens to you.


Stating and discussing fact is not having a go. I certainly have nothing against the US.

No _you_. I think _you're_ dumb.


----------



## Tony Sebo

I haven't got a clue where to post this, so here must be as good as any other!
http://www.ted.com/index.php/themes/the_power_of_cities.html


----------



## SIC

jtown said:


> You know what, im just done. Everyone on here LOOOOOOVES to bash America. You people need to get a life. You are envious(like all liberals) of our sucess. You hate it that we have guns. You hate it that we have low taxes. You hate our "cowboy" image. You think were dumb. Your above us. We know, so just let us be the biggest economy in the world(twice as large as the next country.....JAPAN) and we will continue to prosper. You poeple in Europe can just stay in your stagnant countries with high taxes and low work ethics and enjoy your welfare...just dont ask for our help when something happens to you.


Oh shut up.
I'm super liberal and I own a gun.

Oh sorry, did I just blow your narrow little mind?

They don't hate us because we're rich. They hate us because of ignorant assholes like you who control the world's fate with their fury. But I also hate ignorance, does that make me "un-American". 
No wait...according to the declaration of independence and our founding fathers...that makes me super-American.


----------



## sicarim

I don't plan on living anywhere long term but america, and I like it here.

But you have to admit we have some serious issues that need to be addressed.


----------



## Republica

After watching something about phillie the other day take back my statement that US cities dont have slums... some places they showed were worse than i could imagine - so run down. Almost third world.


----------



## kids

Republica said:


> After watching something about phillie the other day take back my statement that US cities dont have slums... some places they showed were worse than i could imagine - so run down. Almost third world.


Slums and derelict (decayed) areas are completely different

Opposites in fact. 

Slums are alive with people, densely populated. They represent the birth of cities. Rapid urbanisation. Derelict areas in the west represent dying cities. Rapid de-urbanisation. It's very simple - 

Dharavi - Asia's largest slum. Has lots (and lots) of people.










Camden - Dying part of New Jersey. Few people on the fringes of society, wealth has left - significantly dead area.










City being born vs city dying. Opposites.

Babies are as vulnerable as the aged.


----------



## city_thing

Skyline_FFM said:


> The US is envied a lot. And envy often causes hatred. You should know that. That is the reason why people from several places always look for the worst in US (and also Europe, Canada or Japan) and bashing them. But first thing most of them would do if they had the opportunity to leave their country: They would leave to US, Europe, Canada, Japan or Australia. hno:


Um, no.


----------



## Eddard Stark

SIC said:


> Oh well in that case..............they STILL count.
> It's actually sadder, illegal immigrants in the US don't have to live in shacks.....yet the US is a capitalist country with hardly any welfare for legal citizens let alone illegal. I thought Europe was more enlightened not less, in that respect.
> There is however a shocking amount of homelessness in the United States. Which is actually worse than having real slums but you don't see whole families that are homeless. Just your typical single males/junkies/alcoholics/metally ill, but I don't know if they're like that because they are homeless or they're homeless because they're addicts.
> 
> 
> Oh that isn't Brazil, Mexico City also has people living on rickety cinder block homes in the hills around the city. They look just like favelas from the outside, I don't know how bad they actually are....compared to favelas. I don't think you see kids with AK's in broad daylight, not yet anyway.


I'm talking about Italy...we have in the fringes of our cities (you saw a picture of Milan) acampments of Gypsies (mainly from Romania) who came over in the last years thanks to the opening of the borders. No other ethnic group has slums in Italy, not even the poorest. In the case of gypsies...sad to say...it's their style of life, they do not accept to live in apartments and they truly like to live like that. I know it may sound racist...but I have known Rom people for a very long time and I know it's true


----------



## jbkayaker12

Eddard Stark said:


> I'm talking about Italy...we have in the fringes of our cities (you saw a picture of Milan) acampments of Gypsies (mainly from Romania) who came over in the last years thanks to the opening of the borders. No other ethnic group has slums in Italy, not even the poorest. In the case of gypsies...sad to say...it's their style of life, they do not accept to live in apartments and they truly like to live like that. I know it may sound racist...but I have known Rom people for a very long time and I know it's true



I can relate to what you have posted, I work for a management company that handle rentals. Basing from my experience, in many occasions I have seen units left by Romas (Gypsies) in such disgusting state that I cannot comprehend people living in such a way. Yes, a clan will occupy a space meant for only one or two people.


----------



## accadacca

Man, they already have slums, not in strict sense of the word 'SLUM' but equally derelict and impoverished, judging by that picture of the dying part of New Jersey.


----------



## dösanhoro

jbkayaker12 said:


> I can relate to what you have posted, I work for a management company that handle rentals. Basing from my experience, in many occasions I have seen units left by Romas (Gypsies) in such disgusting state that I cannot comprehend people living in such a way. Yes, a clan will occupy a space meant for only one or two people.


 Gypsies/Roma are a very diverse group across the wrold, probably troubled one but that situation isn't true for all of them. I bet those people have never really lived in a house like most people do. In some unmentioned european countries there are real roma ghettos with make shift houses. The poverty was striking hno: Giving people apartments who are not used to living in apartments is areceipt for disaster. The neighbours will start a riot even if they were just renters. They get evicted after throwing rubbish out of the window and neighbours will remember them for years. 

I think people have to differentiate run down buildings and social problems. I have heard moving slum inhabitants into aparment blocks has had failures around the world. That is a social issue not a money issue.


----------



## koolkid

Actually some of those empty, dieing, decaying neighborhoods in our cities are being filled in thanks to immigrants. Detroit & Philly have some great examples, where Mexican/Middle eastern/asian immigrants have managed to fix up and give new life to some really drab neighbs over there.


----------



## Republica

kids said:


> Slums and derelict (decayed) areas are completely different
> 
> Opposites in fact.
> 
> Slums are alive with people, densely populated. They represent the birth of cities. Rapid urbanisation. Derelict areas in the west represent dying cities. Rapid de-urbanisation. It's very simple -
> 
> Dharavi - Asia's largest slum. Has lots (and lots) of people.
> 
> 
> Camden - Dying part of New Jersey. Few people on the fringes of society, wealth has left - significantly dead area.
> 
> 
> City being born vs city dying. Opposites.
> 
> Babies are as vulnerable as the aged.


*slum*

n.
A heavily populated urban area characterized by substandard housing and squalor. Often used in the plural.

This is exactly what i saw on TV in philadephia. Houses falling down, wastelands, people everywhere, rubbish all over the road, chaos. i know its only a small part of philly, but it was worse than i expected. It needs sorting out. The richest country in the world and there are places like that - shocking (and i'm not an anti american troll, but i was shocked at what i saw).


----------



## kids

"Heavily populated" - they mean heavy population density/overcrowded, and North Philadelphia is not overcrowded. You said it yourself - it is a wasteland.

Just read my post again; you can call it _anything_ but a slum, and that isn't being pedantic, they are literally exact opposites! You're barely alive when you've just been born, and you're barely alive when you're dying. etc etc etc.

Oh, and i'm not trying to defend Philadelphia. Just the incorrect usage of this word.


----------



## kids

Just another visual aid. Kibera in Nairobi (where the UN's slum division is HQed) People are rapidly _entering_ the area (i.e. rapid-urbanization), and as such are throwing up houses (not dilapidated - in fact generally shack dwellers take pride in their self-built homes).










N. Philadelphia. People rapidly left the area, leaving the houses dilapidated.


----------



## dösanhoro

What about using a the word ghetto for an area like that. Or is it already reserved for an area for isolated minorities of some sort. 

What about skid row?

Or just low population slum if it has social deprivation
Call population sprawinling slums something different?

If i Saw a dying neighbourhood with social problems I would call it a slum.


----------



## AcesHigh

crossing Rocinha favela by car





some panoramics showing the imensity of Rocinha


----------

