[sliverstorm]

This is what always confuses me about gentrification. The core idea is that improving the neighborhood is a bad thing that should be prevented.

I mean, I understand the arguments. I just have a difficult time saying, "Yes, let's prevent these neighborhoods from being improved".

[busterarm]

But the neighborhood improves without its residents. The economic situation of those living there doesn't really change and they're forced to relocate to other neighborhoods with similar locations to where they were but much further away.

Bascially "we're going to make this a nice place to live, please gtfo".

It's not an argument against improving a space. It's one against improving a space at the expense of its residents.

[Retric]

This assumes everyone is renting which while probably true in NYC is far from universal. In other places people on fixed income have been forced out though propery taxes but it's closer to here is 100,000$ GTFO simply from the difference in propery values.

[Tiktaalik]

Neighbourhoods change over time and we have to be comfortable with that, but we also have to seriously consider what the long term effects of displacing residents are. If there are other obvious neighbourhoods people are able to easily move to, then that's the best case situation, but it's troubling if there aren't, and all too often I find that people hand wave at that problem and say that people will just go somewhere else, but don't seriously consider the effects of displacement.