Redevelopment vs Homelessness

In Architecture of the Evicted, Rosalyn Duetsche informs that " ...redevelopment is structured on relations of eviction by means of which its stability comes into existence" (160). I never fully thought about homelessness and how or why it happens before reading this article. One part of homelessness is a result of eviction from apartment buildings, parks, etc. A redevelopment of a particular area occurs and suddenly your precious home is taken over or you can no longer afford to pay rent to keep living there. I cannot seem to wrap my mind around how that can possibly be morally right.

A high prosperity or a new "hot-spot" area, results in an uneveness. Uneveness leads towards homelessness due to the influx in cost of living in that particular area or a new construction project where they can no longer stay due to safety hazards. Deutsche states in her article that " ...structuring does not represent a neutral solution to objective problems. The reverse is closer to the truth" (151). Restructuring helps homelessness in a negative view causing the high-end, luxury residents to bump the rest of the people in that area onto the street. I would think the government would be against this since it raises numbers of the homeless, but how is it avoidable or does the government really even care since the new "hot-spot" is bringing in more money? It is an endless cycle that is dominated by redevelopment.

Kocur, Zoya, and Simon Leung. Theory in Contemporary Art since 1985. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 151 & 160. Print.