We all want the thieves to live somewhere else, but the previous strategy we had for isolating them also involved segregating millions of low-income people and trapping them in neighborhoods without opportunity, child care, safe schools, or, in some cases, even grocery stores.
This way is better for everyone.
The greatest irony now is that traditionally undesirable areas like Oakland are being reclaimed, further marginalizing those low-income people who are unable to adjust to the increased cost of living.
It's true we all want thieves to live elsewhere, but at some point elsewhere runs out, and you're left with a class of people that are permanently enserfed as the underclass.
I'm not sure which way is better.
This sort of makes sense when you realize that people who don't make much money aren't a different species, and like many of the same benefits and services as rich people: parks, grocery stores, schools accountable to active and engaged (busybody) parents, &c.