Do Poor Neighborhoods Keep People Poor?
Studies tracking subjects in HUD's Moving to Opportunity program have shown surprising results. While girls thrive and adults feel safer after moving to more affluent neighborhoods, boys actually fare worse. And incomes don't rise.
"Beginning in 1994, the federal government offered a lottery for housing vouchers to families in five major cities. Families were randomly assigned to different groups. One group received vouchers to be used specifically to subsidize rents in neighborhoods where poverty was low. About 860 families eventually moved."
"Another group, of 1,440 families, wasn't offered vouchers and, initially at least, stayed in high-poverty neighborhoods. Researchers have since tracked and compared the fortunes of the two groups."
"The program, called Moving to Opportunity, was administered by HUD...When the program was launched, housing vouchers were seen as a promising antidote to urban poverty. Researchers had pinpointed ghettos as a culprit in the worsening fortunes of many poor, minority families. Free them from the poisonous cocktail of drugs and crime brewing in city ghettos, scholars reasoned, and the families would have a chance to leave poverty behind."
"But results show that may only partially be true...Boys whose families moved actually fared worse than boys who stayed in bad neighborhoods. Girls, however, fared significantly better. Adults felt better, physically and mentally, than those who stayed behind, but didn't do better financially."
[Editor's note: Although this article is only available to WSJ subscribers, it is available to Planetizen readers for free through the link below for a period of seven days.]
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
Related News Stories
Which Cities Stretch Dollars The Farthest? - Oct 18, 2008
Figures Say Things Look Good, But Don't Account For Slumping Economy - Aug 28, 2008
Black Flight or White Gentrification? - Jul 22, 2008
Bad Mortgages and Gas Prices = Good For Cities? - Jul 01, 2008
Gray Gold: Housing The Baby Boomers - Apr 21, 2008



Smaller House Equals Smaller Price
I have to agree with the first comment that the price per square foot is twice as high as the median, which does not make it affordable. According to the picture shown, the house is not attractive and seems to be out of character with the architecture surrounding it. At 800 SF, it is cramped, so what is the point? Could a family live in it? Seems doubtful. Squeezing this type of additional living space onto an existing lot is not the answer to affordable housing. I wouldn't want one in my back yard. A better answer would be to enlarge the existing house and create a separate living space (apartment).