7 Cities That Are Playgrounds for the Rich and Terrors for the Poor

[xchrom]

http://www.alternet.org/7-cities-are-playgrounds-rich-and-terrors-poor



1. New York City

There are about 3,357 unsheltered people living on New York’s streets, a 6% rise from 2013 to 2014, continuing a trend that began a few years ago. But the vast majority of New York’s homeless live in shelters across the city, and at 53,615, there are more people living in shelters than ever before.

2. Los Angeles

Overall homelessness—including sheltered and otherwise—across Los Angeles County rose last year by nearly 8,000 people, bringing the total to 57,737. Concurrently, the price of luxury properties in the city rose 14%, and it’s population of UHNWI is expected to rise by the same percentage point by 2013.

4. Dublin

There has been little construction of new homes in Dublin since 2008. Austerity has ravaged public housing programs. As a result, many of the city’s properties are being bought up by private investors from around the globe, igniting a real estate boom even as the number of homeless reaches its highest point since the city began surveying.

5. London

London is a lot like New York City: a playground for the rich and a terror for the poor.

There were 57,350 Londoners without homes in 2013, an astounding 60% increase since 2011. At the same time, Knight Frank forecasts that 5,000 people worth over 30 million dollars will live in London by 2023.

[bmac19gg]

1. better to be homeless in a big city of small?

Yes the larger a city is the more homeless it will have but also consider that it can have far more places for homeless to seek refuge and nourishment as opposed to a small city.

And I would say the rich could have their playground anywhere they choose, couldn't they?

[JustAnotherGen]

2. Excellent article

Well worth it to take a deep dive at the link.