Rejoinder: Alex Schwartz's critique of 'the end of public housing as we know it'

Alex Schwartz's response to my article, 'The End of Public Housing As We Know It', relies on a largely technical critique. He does not contest my contention that current US public housing policy is being used to reconfigure the racial and class structure of the inner city. Nor does he effectively challenge my argument that public housing policy is part of a broader effort to reconfigure urban labor markets. Instead of addressing these far reaching arguments, he bases his critique on technical grounds: Is there coercion or not? Is the number of public housing units significant or not? Although I do agree with Schwartz that more must be done to provide adequate and affordable housing for low-income residents of the inner city, I stand by my argument: public housing is being demolished; public housing residents are being made to work at low-wage jobs. The mixed-income model of housing redevelopment will result in a restructuring of the class and racial composition of many inner cities; there will be a net loss of housing for low-income residents. There are real questions about whether the former residents of public housing will actually benefit from current policy initiatives.