The Pros And Cons Of Public Housing

Every day men and women feared for their lives when they were walking home. They feared whether they were going to eat some food for dinner. They had to resort to crime, resort to forming gangs to be able to get money. Of course, they had enough on their hands. They didn't need people destroying their precious homes. They didn't ask for any of this. Unfortunately, their homes are very detrimental to them and their Mayor has decided to destroy the towers and high-rises they lived in. By choosing to demolish public housing, Mayor Daley took a stand which dispersed gangs and health issues in Chicago, and also forced individuals to find a job and live somewhere else despite a risk to his career because there was a lot of controversy on whether or not to keep public housing.
The idea of public housing came from the need of affordable housing options from low-income people. As a result of this, many indigenous people came to the high rises and public housing developments. They filled up very quickly because of their cheap prices and they generally had better conditions than low rent apartments. But nevertheless, the safety of people in public housing is definitely questionable.
Public housing was so cheap and because of this, the residents though that they would be okay if they were unemployed. The low rent exacerbated the already huge rates of unemployment sky-high. The indigent people also make bad decisions when buying necessities which can cause them to become more penurious. There is a large amount of unemployed and poor people concentrated in one place. A study in 2013 has shown that “Public housing residents in Chicago are marginally better off today than when they lived in the high-rise towers” (Olivo). Demolishing public housing in Chicago slightly reduced overall poverty rates and greatly reduced extreme concentrations of