This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
It would be great to have some nuts-and-bolts information about how exactly public housing works in the US -- how does one qualify to live there? How are rents set? Do you have to move out if your income increases? This is all a total mystery to most people who have never lived in public housing and it would be interesting to have in this article, which seems to mostly consist of a discussion of the larger social implications. --Jfruh (talk) 21:21, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Because the 50 states and many municipalities create and operate public housing with funding and controls from the federal government, public housing works (or doesn't work) in a variety of ways in various places. You are correct that most people don't know how it works, but I am unprepared to look into details and prepare a reply, even for so limited a subject as the Philadelphia Housing Authority. --DThomsen8 (talk) 22:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
This article is currently extremely long because of the housing projects lists. Most of them are red links and have no information on them. I think it would be best to expand the other information and delete or move the list to a separate article. -- GateKeeper(talk) @ 06:53, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Eastlake Meadows, one of the most dangerous Public Housing Projects in Atlanta, often referred to as "Little Vietnam" or "Little Saigon" because of its high violence, demolished in 1996 before the Olympics. Over 70% of the families living there were victims of serious crimes, and the average age of a grandmother was 32.
Robert Taylor Homes, once the largest public housing development in the world: 28 buildings of 16 stories each, housed about 20,000 people. As of 2007, the Robert Taylor Homes have all been closed and have been demolished, due to the implementation of the Chicago Housing Authority's Plan for Transformation.
The Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh built some of the first public housing in the United States. It is being transformed by the HOPE VI program throughout the City. A report released on September 13, 2005 by the Brookings Institution deemed the HOPE VI program in the Manchester neighborhood of Pittsburgh a success in transforming the public housing there as well as being a catalyst for revitalizing the entire neighborhood.
Currently, the “Public Housing in the United States” article focuses heavily on policies and problems associated with highly concentrated public housing in low-income neighborhoods. There is a very brief description of current voucher programs, but the article lacks an in-depth analysis of other forms of public housing. Scattered-site housing is a form of public housing in which small groups of single or family units are interspersed throughout diverse, middle-class neighborhoods. While the benefits of this type of housing are disputed, they have been an important part of public housing initiatives since the 1970s and 1980s. Acernst08 (talk) 01:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
This section reads almost like a pamphlet against public housing in defense of the rich neighborhoods (e.g. "a healthy community became one of the most decayed and dangerous neighborhoods in the United States). I suggest that someone who knows about the topic re-writes this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 00:12, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
This article would benefit from a more complete historical account of public housing the US which stretches further into the current era. In addition, while the scattered site housing section is generally handled well, the balance of the article is now so heavily tipped in that direction that I think we're missing important conversations about either types of housing. In order to address both of those, I propose the following new structure for the article.
Early history (Progress Era, Settlement Houses, WWI housing, WPA, Housing Act of 1937)
Mid-century boom (Housing Act of 1949, Model Cities, 1968 Fair Housing Act)
Deterioration of Public Housing Projects (funding, white flight, management, vacancies, demolition)
New Models (more detail in below section)
Legacy (impact on neighborhoods, redlining, populations served, units still in service)
Policy Implications (current debates, potential approaches, current budget/prospects)
I believe that the work done by Sbrowndc on this article has been incredibly helpful, though there are still some specific edits that could be made to enhance the current Legacy section. This article section would benefit from many more academic references (currently there are a limited amount), especially references that describe general trends in public housing rather than specific case studies, which the current references seem to be over-saturated with. With this addition of references will come a more in-depth explanation of the current subsections (racial segregation, urban deterioration, and concentrated poverty), as well as the addition of a new education sub-section. Each of these subsection would benefit from the addition of different points of view (while maintaining NPOV). Finally, perhaps it would be beneficial to change the Legacy header to Social Issues to reflect the ongoing nature of these phenomena. Overall, I will be working to rewrite and revise this section with a greater breadth and depth of information over the next few weeks. Please feel free to comment on these revisions here, I am completely open to feedback! I will specifically enjoy input about potentially adding to other sections of this article given the changes that will occur in the Legacy section.
Note: This revision will be part of an assignment for the Poverty, Justice, and Human Capabilities Program at Rice University (Houston, TX).
Hey Derek, great job on this article so far! I'm really impressed by the comprehensiveness and level of detail that you've included. I also really like that you neutrally present studies with contrasting findings.
I think the article is in great shape, but if I had to pick two areas of improvement, they would be readability and formatting. I think the language could be simplified in some places to make it more accessible (e.g. different word for "incubated," explain what you mean by "social pathologies," etc.) For formatting, I found the author-year citations distracting, but that might just be a preference thing; I’m not positive on the exact Wikipedia policy. More links (slums, white flight, education attainment, urban renewal, etc.) and pictures would also be great! Sallyhc42 (talk) 03:47, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
The section of "Social issues" is comprehensive with major social concerns and includes different voices from the scholars. Especially the subsection of "Education" is well written and organized. I would like to see a further explanation of the three sources of concentrated poverty (Massey and Kanaiaupuni 1993). More staff on the issues of health (e.g. public health service availability) may be talked about. More supporting materials can be added to the subsection "Public perception" and more resources can be referred to other than one or two studies. The connection with each paragraph can be tighter so that the whole article flows more smoothly. Two paragraphs addressing opposite opinions can be put together. A leading sentence with clear phrases indicating the content below will be helpful (e.g. "Public housing units themselves offer very little to occupants", specify "little" and link the leading sentence with the content below, health and safety). In addition, some certain studies (or a single study) are used to demonstrate one point. If the result applied to most situations, there is no need to specify the study and nominate the scholars. If the scholars argue for the counterviews or hold views only shared among the minority, the in-text nomination will be needed. It is also important to add in-text links and in the article. It will be nice to have some pictures (e.g. about the living conditions discussed). (Feihuamengxue (talk) 04:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC))