I grew up a block away from housing projects in Seattle, where many of my friends lived growing up. They were recently demolished, the majority of their residents sent packing (hello, homeless population!) and the developers who were granted the land sold most of the houses at market rate. Yeah, I'm familiar with what's been tried.
When a halfassed attempt fails, do not conclude that a full and honest effort would also fail.
So if I got you right, you are saying that not enough money had been spent on the government housing (after insisting it will cost mere pittance to build and maintain)? These programs were not cheap already so whatever you propose should cost even more.
> Maybe look at WHY government-built housing is always so lousy.
Thank you, this is a crucial aspect of Harlem that make it such a shining example in my mind. It was undertaken in a period when human dignity was given more weight. And while the apartments themselves seem stark to modern tastes, they were built about a century ago and in their time, contributed to a cultural renaissance.
A big problem is penny-pinching. You can sacrifice a ton of quality and end up only saving a few points on a total build cost, and paying way more in lifetime maintenance and replacement cost. Modern conservativism is penny wise, pound foolish, and that mindset is ever-present.
> Saying "We need to change the whole system" is just a cop-out.
Right on. But I didn't say that and I don't see anybody else saying that here.
When a halfassed attempt fails, do not conclude that a full and honest effort would also fail.