PowerPoint PresentationSlide 2Slide 3Slide 4Slide 5Slide 6Slide 7Slide 8Slide 9Slide 10Slide 11Slide 12Slide 13Slide 14Slide 15Slide 16Slide 17Slide 18Slide 19Slide 20Slide 21Slide 22Slide 23Slide 24Slide 25Slide 26Rosemary Mellor: Revisiting Engels 150 Years Later•Mellor emphasizes that a number of reforms were made to housing regulations since the turn of the 20th Century, but that Engels’ critiques still hold a great deal of explanatory power.•The city center, which had for decades fallen into disrepair, has been revamped and thousands of well-off people have moved there. The city has overwhelmingly focused its attention on redeveloping this- the most visible area of the city•In the meantime, the area surrounding the city center-roughly the same area described by Engels- contains many of the poorest districts in Great Britain.Rosemary Mellor: Continued•Mellor notes the retreat of the state from attempting to alleviate poverty and build more appropriate housing for the working classes.•The income gap has been rising since the late 1970s, like in the United States. At the same time, in terms of shifting political agendas, focus has been placed on private enterprise as an economic generator. Social welfare has received less attention, with an expectation that wealth and opportunities will “trickle down.” Or in this case, out the the urban peripheries. •Overall, Mellor argues that policies since the 1980s have served to exclude the poor, both economically and spatially.Some responses from the discussion board: residentialdisplacement in Chinatown.I believe that the residents of Chinatown should have a right to stay. Why make such improvements in which the residents find unnecessary? …. It's where they grew up or where they call home. So why take that away from them? It is unfair to forced them to leave their homes and even their works. Paying rent is hard as it is already for them. If they are driven out there homes, the struggles becomes more and more difficult to maintain living. Some can't even afford the rent and are assisted the government. It's not easy for them. It's their homes and their rights.The residents of China Town do not own the property so therefore they have no say in the matter. This sounds harsh but that is what America is today. If you do not have the money to buy something, you can't have it…. If you really do not have the money to buy something then you really should not have it. If residents of China Town owned property then I strongly believe that it will be a totally different story from my viewpoint. Not only will having the upscale renovations bring money into the economy it will also follow the trend of what all cities are doing; making the actual city the wealthiest spot to be and everything else that is farther away from the city center the poorer areas.I think that renovating Chinatown for the people who already live there will be better for the city of Boston. While renovations will be expensive, I think I may be cheaper than building new housing, which would allow the current residents to stay. Also, renovations would improve living conditions and sanitation in the city. Knowing that Chinatown is a big Asian cultural center, renovating it may attract more tourists to the area who may have previously not visited because of the low standards of the community.The examples that the author uses talks about how horrible the living conditions were for the people who had to move and how many apartments had firecode violations. I think it is okay for them to leave because it is not safe for them to be living there. The city of Boston is not kicking people out of their homes who have good living conditions but they are removing people who are living in unsafe housing…. This new housing will be good for the city because it will attract more people and also people with a higher income which will make the city more money. Revenue will increase and these new developments can attract businesses from all over who want to invest in multi-family housing.Urbanization and GlobalizationUrbanization=population concentration. Often used as an index to describe the proportion of a particular society who live in urban areas. It also is used to describe the process of rising proportions of urban residents and, more generally, the process of becoming urban (socially, technologically, and politically). The growth of one particular city is not the same as urbanization! Urbanization refers to the proportion of urban dwellers in a larger geographical unit (a region, state, or nation).Two crucial factors to urbanization: migration, and immigration, to cities from rural areasnatural increase in the birthrate (rate of birth faster than rate of death) In nearly all cases, in developing industrial societies, urbanization can largely be attributed to people moving to cities from rural areas. This is often to seek economic opportunities, but also to escape conflict, famine, and various sorts of oppression.Urabanization in Poor/DevelopingCountriesUrbanization is happening at an extremely high rate in Africa- much faster than it ever did in Europe or North America Every year, 20-30 million people migrate from rural to urban areas.By the year 2030, the urban population is expected to DOUBLE, the vast majority of this growth occurring in the developing world.Three theories for why rapid urbanization is occurring in developing/poor countries:1)modernization- as traditional agrarian societies evolve, they will urbanize, and this should be encouraged.2) urban bias- some scholars and policymakers suggest that governments are encouraging too many people to move into cities through improving infrastructure and focusing economic development activities in cities. 3) economic dependence- urbanization is occurring to a large degree because it serves the interest of those more powerful countries, as multinational corporations have bought up much of developing countries’ rural lands for farming, mining, and dumping.Dependency Theory: Core world economic powers (western Europe, the US, Canada and Japan) have a great deal of economic power over the periphery (developing countries) through investment and financial lending. It is in the interest of the core countries to keep peripheral countries underdeveloped because they can keep labor cheap and control developing countries’ economies through financial institutions.Mega-cities: Cities with a