22-07-2005 22:19									#1
	Shanty town demolitions Got spare money?

When Winston was over here visiting a couple of weeks ago, he, timexwatch, and I talked a little bit about shanty towns being torn down. This seems timely, given that the UN has just condemned Zimbabwe's program of tearing down shanty towns and its enforcement of rules against urban gardens (we were drinking a Zimbabwean beer at the time we discussed all of this stuff -- see the Washington Polymeet thread for pics).

Taking into account Zimbabwe's current state of affairs, especially with regard to famine, it seems crazy in a Pol Pot sort of way for the government to worry about shanty towns and urban gardens. However, are there circumstances where shanty towns should be demolished? It seems to me that allowing shanty towns to exist does nobody any good, least of all the inhabitants of the shanty towns. You have the public health issues. And then you have the fact that most of these shantys are on land that isn't theirs.

I know that Washington has demolished shanty towns at times in the past. And of course, there was the time during the Great Depression where the World War I veterans were evicted rather forcefully by the army from their shantys/protest headquarters.

Winston talked a little bit about a Danish commune that squatted on government land that has been tolerated by the government for a while. Eventually, the criminals took over and now the government is a little less sympathetic.

You could even argue that gentrification and redevlopment is in many respects just a form of tearing down shanty towns. Gentrification and redevelopment are processes that I support wholeheartedly. Winston thought it made sense for the government to help find shelter for the displaced people. I expressed the opinion that as adults they could take care of themselves and the government shouldn't be overly worried about the displaced.

	22-07-2005 22:23									#2
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

So, basically, because shantytowns are filled with crime, let's destroy shnatytowns. That way the poor that live in these shantys will be less protected from the elements and the criminals.

How about doing something to get the people out of the shanties and able to live somewhere else.

ACK!

	22-07-2005 22:25									#3
	Increase Your PM Length

The poor that live in these shantys will find other accomodations. Some better. Some worse. On balance, I expect these people to find better accomodations. But in no event would the shanty town status quo be accepted.

This line of argument would assume that the cause of shanty towns is in many respects inertia. Societal inertia. Individual inertia.

You could say that we have examples of this today. We have been tearing down 60s'-era public housing projects for a couple of decades.

	22-07-2005 22:27									#4
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by DanS The poor that live in these shantys will find other accomodations. Some better. Some worse. On balance, I expect these people to find better accomodations. But in no event would the shanty town status quo be accepted.

Better?

If they could find better, why would they live in shanties?

DanS'ed.

ACK!

	22-07-2005 22:30									#5
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: If they could find better, why would they live in shanties?

Many people accept bad situations all the time when they should expect better. They just don't know any better. It's inertia.

	22-07-2005 22:30									#6
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by DanS This line of argument would assume that the cause of shanty towns is in many respects inertia. Societal inertia. Individual inertia.

Individual inertia is one thing. People want to have to change.

Societal inertia? Let's destroy people's homes to make them get better housing.

ACK!

	22-07-2005 22:32									#7
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Let's destroy people's homes to make them get better housing.

I assume that you think this a crude tool. I agree, but perhaps it is effective, if a little coercive.

	22-07-2005 22:32									#8
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by DanS Many people accept bad situations all the time when they should expect better. They just don't know any better. It's inertia.

Sounds like a societal problem to me.

They should expect better, but life has taught them otherwise. Life has taught them that society doesn't give a damn.

ACK!

	22-07-2005 22:34									#9
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Rather, with regard to societal inertia, I was referring to ghettoization. The shanty towns are out of sight out of mind to society. You see this in the Southeast quadrant of Washington, for instance.

	22-07-2005 22:39									#10
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: They should expect better, but life has taught them otherwise. Life has taught them that society doesn't give a damn.

Apparently, I am much more cynical than you are. In my hometown area of backwoods appalachian Ohio there are just a lot of willfully ignorant people. They don't live in cities, so there aren't the big crime problems, however, besides MJ and some meth labs. They live in their rural shanties in peace, collecting whatever society will give them (sometimes a lot, sometimes not much). Almost all live in apalling conditions.

	22-07-2005 22:44									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by DanS Apparently, I am much more cynical than you are. In my hometown area of backwoods appalachian Ohio there are just a lot of willfully ignorant people. They don't live in cities, so there aren't the big crime problems, however, besides MJ and some meth labs. They live in their rural shanties in peace, collecting whatever society will give them (sometimes a lot, sometimes not much).

You aren't more cynical than I am, we are just cynical about different things.

ACK!

	22-07-2005 22:51									#12
	Put an end to popups!

OK, well apparently I am more cynical about personal inertia than you are. People will live in right awful conditions when a second of bubbling sentience would make clear to them that they could have better. I don't know why this is. I mark it up to the human condition.

Last edited by DanS on 22-07-2005 at 23:03

	22-07-2005 22:52									#13
	Get a bigger avatar today!

The reason people move into shanties is because there isn't enough housing that they can afford. Tearing down shanties without a replacement will only lead to an increase in homelessness.

	22-07-2005 23:00									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I agree, but it's not as simple as that statement makes it appear. People could double up in non-shanty living conditions, for instance. This is done in our society all the time -- especially effective for immigrants. Also, shanty towns just seem to mestasticize. Nobody is making any money off of these shanty inhabitants, so the potential builders of proper housing don't build anything to accomodate these folks.

	22-07-2005 23:03									#15
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

In Brazil the Favela's (shanty towns) aorund the mayor Cities have developed themselves into towns and such, theough they are still crime ridden and not served by most common public services like water mains.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Favela

	22-07-2005 23:06									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

No one's argueing they're a good thing, but if you demolish them without replacing them with something affordable, all you will see is a temprorary jump in homelessness (because many of these people are jobless) and then a relocation of the shantytowns as people move.

Government tenements are a better solution, at least in that they'll get clean water and a more secure building. Just pay the $2000 to Russia to get the subsidized apartments and tenements.

	22-07-2005 23:14									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Obviously, if you destroy the shanties in one fell swoop, you would have elevated homelessness. However, I can imagine a scenario where the government over time forces these people to move from the area or somehow to get into the functioning housing market. Building government projects doesn't force these folks into the functioning housing market. Now you may say that this payoff to the poor is worth it, at least from an expediency point of view, but I'm not so sure.

	22-07-2005 23:24									#18
	Suffering from ads?

Just to give an impression of what demolition of a shanty town means :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4706115.stm

Attachment: 1.jpg
This has been downloaded 91 time(s).

	22-07-2005 23:33									#19
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

It just occured to me that this thread and the unwanted houseguest thread are strongly related.

More unwanted houseguests! Fewer shanties!

	22-07-2005 23:39									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Kill kill kill kill kill the poor...

	22-07-2005 23:49									#21
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by DanS It just occured to me that this thread and the unwanted houseguest thread are strongly related. More unwanted houseguests! Fewer shanties!

Regarding social inertia - I've observed Africans have a somewhat fatalistic attitude toward life just as Oerdin observed Iraqis having same attitude (God Willing). In Kenya they often say "No worries" which basically means "Life sucks big time, we cannot change our living circumstances, it's all in hands of God or some other higher power, so why worry? Accept it." This is not limited to Kenya, I've seen it in other African countries as well. So I won't be surprised if Zimbabweans have similar views upon life.

	23-07-2005 00:42									#22
	Re: Shanty town demolitions Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by DanS And then you have the fact that most of these shantys are on land that isn't theirs.

Look, Dan. Private property is a convenient metaphor. It's useful and convenient, but it's not some sort of an intrinsic fact. Exceptional circumstances can exist.

In this case, pragmatically, the ownership of the land isn't relevant. Ethically, the shantytowns have long earned a right to continue existing. Just as a trademark can be diluted if not defended, so land that lies abandoned and fallow stops being controllable from the moral perspective.

	23-07-2005 00:43									#23
	Re: Shanty town demolitions Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by DanS And then you have the fact that most of these shantys are on land that isn't theirs.

Which I believe to be the basic problem. I think that it would make more sense and that it would be more humane to ensure the peope living in shanty towns can legally reside it.

	23-07-2005 00:53									#24
	Tired of ads?

quote: In this case, pragmatically, the ownership of the land isn't relevant.

It's quite relevant. Nobody is going to improve a shanty on land that isn't theirs. And no city is going to run utilities to an unimproved shanty. The investment from the city doesn't pay.

	23-07-2005 00:57									#25
	Re: Re: Shanty town demolitions Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by St Leo Just as a trademark can be diluted if not defended, so land that lies abandoned and fallow stops being controllable from the moral perspective.

I agree with this, but neither is the squatter's right absolute in the context of the government's use of eminent domain.

	23-07-2005 01:02									#26
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by DanS It's quite relevant. Nobody is going to improve a shanty on land that isn't theirs. And no city is going to run utilities to a shanty.

I think that you totally has misunderstood what a shanty town is. It is build by those that live there and they certainly tries to improve it - though, they don't have the resources to reach Kucistandard regarding bathrooms.

If cities don't run utilities to a shanty town, they are pretty stupid. If they don't do it, they just prolong the period they exist.

	23-07-2005 01:04									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

can you really compare shanty towns with the recent supreme court ruling (which I'm in total disagreement with)? One is on land they don't own. The other is the goverment forcing people off land they own. It's not the same.

	23-07-2005 01:05									#28
	Tired of ads?

If you want to remove shantitowns, just build public housing for the shanty's inhabitants. It has worked very well in France, as pretty much all shanties inherited from WW2 disappeared with the public housing programme.

(Now that we have stopped promoting public housing, shanties are slowly but surely reappearing)

	23-07-2005 01:12									#29
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Dis can you really compare shanty towns with the recent supreme court ruling (which I'm in total disagreement with)? One is on land they don't own. The other is the goverment forcing people off land they own. It's not the same.

I was merely pointing out to St. Leo that the land rights that a squatter acquires by virtue of living on abandoned land is not absolute, just as other forms of ownership aren't absolute. In fact, the government could come along, kick these squatters out, pay them a pittance for their property (it isn't worth much, after all), raze the structures, and that would be that.

	23-07-2005 01:17									#30
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

as for shanty towns, I'm not really qualified to say. I've never lived in one. And to be honest. I have never seen one first hand.

Unless you can count the homless setups we have here as shanty towns. We had one on D street I used to pass by everday going to work. It was basically set up with blankets and scrap wood. These weren't permanent structures. And it only ran along the sidewalk. the police eventually kicked them all out and tore the place down. there are a lot of homeless in my city. thousands of people.