Gentrification

As the population of towns and cities expand, people need to find new areas to move into and gentrification is inevitable. Gentrification is beneficial because it means revitalisation of areas which were seen as problematic and facing economic decline, with little scope to attract investment. Neighbourhoods thrive when there is demand, and the type of thriving which occurs depends on the socio-economic make up of said area. What I mean to say is, areas could still be considered thriving regardless of where they might land on the income distribution; however, everyone enjoys neighbourhoods that are thriving and are at the top.

The consequence of gentrification is that the up and coming neighbourhoods become less and less affordable. For property owners pre-gentrification, it can be an economic lottery as their valuations increase because they happen to be in a location that people wanted to move to. Gentrification doesn't follow a deterministic rule, which is a factor that frustrates people in on non-gentrified areas. The similar sentiment of "why there but not here?". Understanding the underlying mechanism is what economics (or perhaps even the geographers) tries to do, and it is important because it affects outcomes and quality of life. Typically, people in all neighbourhoods want to enjoy similar standards of living and thus outcomes.

Is there a point where a neighbourhood/ area could be excessively gentrified? What does that even mean? My guess is that it implies a neighbourhood becomes so posh and expensive that none of the people who used to live there, cannot/ would not be able to afford to continue living in the same location. They essentially get priced out of areas they arrived at first, and do not get to enjoy the results of the economic revitalisation, which can be inferred as inequitable. Again, affordability seems to be the name of the game.