Originally Posted by niwell
The area needs help for sure, but calling it a slum is more than a bit disingenuous. The big problem is that most of the rental apartments are independently owned (generally by small consortiums of lawyers who bought in the 60s) and it's financially advantageous to hold off on imrovements even if it means lower rental rates. But really, there's far worse in the city. And these sorts of areas exist all over Ontario. I've been in a few Ottawa towers that are on par with the worst of Toronto. And god forbid you go to rural Ontario or the North.
Some of these places are not well-kept that's for sure. But slum refers to neighbourhood, not specific buildings. These are spread all over cities, you find them in almost every neighbourhood in Ontario. Is every neighbourhood in Ontario a slum? C'mon. Some of these buildings are located in very wealthy areas.
And of course the actual condition vary from building to building. Some are actually not bad at all. Just my opinion, but perhaps it is because of these buildings and their locations that Toronto lacks any areas that might truly be called a slum. They are also part of the reason why suburban transit routes in the Toronto area have such high frequency that they are desireable for more than just the poor population.
So the residents of these buildings, whether they are actually poor or not, are integrated with the rest of the population, wealthy or not. They all use the same schools, the same buses, the same malls, shop at the same stores, etc. Just look the picture where the towers rise above the houses. C'mon, there is no great divide here. In fact these photos suggest the opposite.
These are actually interesting photos, but for the opposite
reasons that miketoronto suggest. These photos also show the real Toronto. This is what most of Toronto looks like. Most of the City of Toronto is post-war suburbia, and Scarborough Village is a typical example of it.