Pssst… we can write an original essay just for you.
Any subject. Any type of essay.
We’ll even meet a 3-hour deadline.Get your price
121 writers online
Due to the existence of many stereotypes in the world, individuals residing in the suburbs always have the mentality that if poor people move in the same neighborhood as the rich, they will bring in with them various issues like drugs, violence and gangs. Such fears are mere stereotypes and more often than not; they are mere false. Infarct, the issue of neighborhood segregation is another form of racial segregation that is exerting some sheathing pain into the heart of the community and the society in general. This has brought about issues where some people argue that the neighborhood determines the person that one is while others argue against this theory. This essay will try to explain reasons as to why some people support the claim and why others don’t. It will give examples of such cases where the life of the people has been influenced by their neighborhood. It will also try to explain how one would be the same or different if they grew somewhere else. It will then conclude with an argument supporting or opposing the idea of suburbs following laws that expect them to amendment the zoning decrees that govern them to create reasonably priced housing
In the article “Here Comes the Neighborhood,” Professor David L. Kirp argues that the neighborhood has the power to determine who a person is. He states that if the houses in the suburbs are subsidies, it means that their affordability is raised and this affects those at the top of the economic pyramid living in the same areas. In his article, professor Kirp narrates an incident in Mount Laurel where affordable houses were built. This gave an opportunity to the poor people to start over and build a life here which made several changes in their lives. Similar incidences were noted in the neighboring suburbs of the same town. He denotes that during this time, crime rate reduced, and the value of the property in this area rose. In another instance when the value of the houses was high, the complete antithesis of the situation was noticed where the value of the property subsided. The poor who took this opportunity were able to have their lives transformed thus the new environment that they lived in changed their lives and changed who they were.
Some people are forced to reside in the towns a neighborhood which is filled with various forms of crimes, violence, drugs and other moral issues. These people are extremely susceptible to these issues (Matthew, Reeves &Rodrigue, 2017). This, however, refers to the neighborhood that they live in and it can never be changed. It merely means that this neighborhood will have an impact on the people living in it which would be so different from an impact that a suburb area free from such issues would have on the same people if they switched positions. Several factors do exist to support the idea that the neighborhood determines who you are, the type of decisions that you make as well as the choices you make in the society. Professor Kip in his work states that those who secured houses in the subsidized suburb confessed that they were living in a peaceful world which was so silent while those who had no chance of securing a residence in these areas remained in areas that were invested with violence.
On the other hand, critics have arisen to argue against the notion that neighborhood can shape the person that one becomes. They argue that neighborhood does not solely possess this power. Despite the fact that it has some minute effect especially on the schools that children enroll to and the quality and amount of peace that a family gets, some people make a choice of living a high quality life but do not want to work hard enough to afford a residence in an exquisite neighborhood (Matthew, Reeves &Rodrigue, 2017). Other individuals are born in families that can never afford a residence in an expensive neighborhood but never let this case create a definition of who they are. It is possible for individuals to succeed if they work hard regardless of the areas they live in. Michael Gonchar in his article regarding how much the neighborhood affects someonesays that several people both poor and rich are moving towards suburb residences because the areas seem to have better schools, less violence as well as better jobs. In his work, Gonchar states that the article does not explicitly state what suburbs are. In his view, the article refers to suburbia as a place of residence for the fortunate which is not the case. A suburbia in his view is a place of mixed residences as a part of the city or urban centre or a detached inhabited community that sits at a commuting distance from the city. Golcher states that he believes that the area that one lives does not define who he or she is. As long as the resources that one needs to be successful are at his disposal, then the person that one becomes is defined by the people he associates himself with and how he carries you.
Similarly, the notion that where one lives defines who that person is seen as invalid because some individuals opt to spend their cash on experiences rather than large hypothecations which would allow them to afford a good house in a good neighborhood. In this sense, some people feel that they would preferably reside in a small house in a lesser ideal neighborhood than miss the opportunity to travel and explore the world. In this sense, the time that one spends exploring different cultures, watching the world from different perspectives and watching how other states work are the experiences that define a person.
Is it possible for individuals to be dissimilar if they are raised in a different place from which they were born? Well, every time a person moves in a different place, they tend to get a new and fresh start. Due to the skeptical nature of the people when it comes to new ventures, it is always necessary to try out something just to be sure of what it bears. Being in a different place might not change someone, but the element of a fresh start is always inevitable as illustrated in the case of Mount Laurel. The main issue is not the neighborhood nor the individuals but the dimension in which society views the poor people. These people are pressurized to act in specific ways which in return forces them to live by this pressure and believes. The poor people in the society do not move out and this might to some extent affect the people living in these areas.
The life that one leads is somewhat shaped by his neighborhood to a small degree. However, there are several other contributing factors that shape an individual rather than the mere thought of the neighborhood being the sole determinant of who a person is. Therefore, being born in a completely different area would mean that this new neighborhood would slightly define a person and then other factors such as; the people that one surrounds himself with, the existence of resources that one needs to be successful and the willingness to work hard come in to complement and cover the parts that the neighborhood would never have covered.
Should Suburbs be mandated to rewrite their zoning laws? Quite often than not, most of the people have moved to the suburbs since they view the place as an area where apart from affordable housing, their children can be able to attend better schools, get good jobs, acquire good healthcare services and be free from the crimes of the urban centers (Matthew, Reeves &Rodrigue, 2017). Both rich and poor have viewed these places as the best for settlement. However, there is the belief that these areas are meant for the economically stable people which in return bars the poor from residing in these areas.
In most areas where suburbs have been allowed to develop independently, exclusionary zoning methods have been used to keep away people with low incomes. This is because the rich people living in these areas fear that infrastructure and resources will be strained if the areas accommodate too many people and that their social class will be affected. Most of the people still associate the poor with several social problems which in return makes the rich fear that staying in the same neighborhood with the poor might drastically affect their lives. In return, they tend to bring in developers who erect structures that very few people can afford thus keeping away those with low income.
It is necessary to rewrite the laws governing the development of these areas. For example, making use of inclusionary zoning which results in affordable housing is not enough. Rather, these houses must be strategically located within the area they are built which in return bars segregation according to the levels of income.
Additionally, it would be detrimental to employ segregated affordable residence since this negatively affects the neighborhood as a whole. Inclusionary zoning, otherwise, works towards providing affordable residences in unaffordable areas. This helps in creating space thus benefiting the people as well as the environment. It also ensures that developers in these suburbs areas follow mandatory rules, for example, the rules to create mandatory structures that are affordable. Thus because of the status quo that the public living in these areas want to protect, it is better for these laws to be rewritten to force out some of these issues thus ensuring that all the people can acquire affordable houses and that social classes do not emerge within the suburb areas. The new laws must follow the constitution where all the mandatory programs are adopted to ensure that everyone benefits
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:
Sorry, copying is not allowed on our website. If you’d like this or any other sample, we’ll happily email it to you.
Your essay sample has been sent.
Want us to write one just for you? We can custom edit this essay into an original, 100% plagiarism free essay.Order now
Are you interested in getting a customized paper?Check it out!