Housing and Urban Regeneration Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Housing and Urban Regeneration - Essay ExampleHousing reforms were alike constant in the market as there was little dissemination of information to the public as Isobel Anderson ( 2010, p9) insinuates. In this paper, the main focus is on housing inequality in relation to the black nonage ethnic group and other related groups which Harrison Malcom( 2003, 128) bigheartedly explains. This has been largely contributed by factors such as socio-economic and installation groups that are in control in the market platform. Currently market dynamics have emerged providing assorted range of housing that has increased the consumption levels. In contrast there were few choices in the anterior past which limited the people from accessing housing. Huang and Clark (2002, p322) state that some housing units in countries such as china were set aside as welfare benefit especially on basis of non-monetary factors such as job rank, job seniority, marital location and household size. However, this situation is changing as privatization is taking earth in the market corridors. Public housing was previously meant for institution groups such as the political status and those working in government agencies. Individuals working in these sectors had an advantage over the migrants and farmers. They were allocated public houses that were subsidized. It did not affaire if they received humiliated incomes. On the other hand the governmental heads and the political elite accessed considerably large housing with the best facilities. This pattern is however changing as market forces are gradually ingesting ground. even out though this scenario is taking effect the black minority ethnic groups and asylum seekers cannot still afford meliorate housing (Finney & Peach, 2004, p302). Public housing was privatized through selling at subsidized prices. Privatization also led to modernistic private housing where real estate developers were constructing a wide range of housing to create res pective(a) preferences. Households living in public houses had an advantage over the migrants and farmers as they were equal to(p) to purchase public houses interchange off. They were able to obtain home ownership while the minority such as single women with children could all afford letting housing ( Harrison, 2004, p128). Those working in government and organization agencies earned low income and had retired they were able to purchase good and large housing. This was made possible by the housing policy reforms that were in place. On the contrary the minority could only enjoy poor housing as they were excluded from accessing these benefits. Therefore they were still confine to small and poor housing. The political status had considerably great advantages as they used their position to gain control by purchasing public housing and investing heavily in construction of rental housing. The educated and those who had occupations had access to good housing and better standards of living individuals. Housing inequality increased continually due to income inequality. Individuals at top levels such as managers and heads of governments enjoyed the top cream. They had huge incomes as compared to those at low levels. This gave them great access to a wide range of varied housing. They had an upper-hand as they could invest in rental housing and developing of real estates. Therefore, they continued to get richer as those at lower levels were subject to rental housing. This was