M
Maxirad
Guest
Do CAF members agree with what this article says?
- Status
S
starshiptrooper
Guest
If the Latino and black families moving in are the socioeconomic equals of the white families moving out, this cycle should never start in the first place. Therefore, for this cycle to begin, they must be unequal. According to the Left, poverty causes crime. Therefore the whites are understandably trying to avoid victimization.
This has nothing to do with white racism and everything to do with Table 43 of the UCR.
Besides, white people supposedly inflict microaggressions and are unconsciously racist anyway according to the Left. So by leaving the neighborhoods, they are removing a negative influence from minorities and letting them succeed without white privilege getting in their way.
This has nothing to do with white racism and everything to do with Table 43 of the UCR.
Besides, white people supposedly inflict microaggressions and are unconsciously racist anyway according to the Left. So by leaving the neighborhoods, they are removing a negative influence from minorities and letting them succeed without white privilege getting in their way.
J
jeannetherese
Guest
The statistics which I recall, cite 12 % minority presence in a neighborhood as the tipping point for white flight (the statistics are about 15 years old, so comfort levels may have changed).
The part of the article which intrigued me was this assertion:
“Eventually, commercial investment falls off as well, and basic amenities like grocery stores and banks begin to disappear, leaving only predatory businesses like pawn shops and liquor stores.”
This caught my attention, as I wondered why grocery stores would leave? After all, everybody needs to eat, and, if the stores are in place, wouldn’t the demand for food remain to sustain a profit of some sort?
The other issue, of course, relates to supply an demand theory, and businesses relocating to serve demands.
There is also an assumption, inherent in the article, that poverty leads to crime. Catholics might be more inclined to associate crime with original sin and be able to cite a few wealthy criminals as evidence that one might be affluent and yet engage in behaivors which do not conform with the will of God.
P
pensmama87
Guest
Grocery stores leave because they cannot sell enough, they suffer from thieving, and the cost of security and insurance goes through the roof. I don’t know about the tipping points that lead to these, but yes, it’s been my observation that grocery stores are few and far between in poor neighborhoods.
In my husband’s last job he managed to convince two grocery stores to open in a low income area that hasn’t had access for decades. Both were discount chains with very low overhead. One already left (the whole chain went out of business) but the other is doing very well.
I know recently in our area we’ve heard from local police that in many unscrupulous bars any meat item ordered is likely to be stolen. Drug addicts steal the meat, get away with it because of a non-pursuit policy to protect employees, and then sell it to the bar. This happens everywhere because drugs are everywhere, but that affects a bottom line.
In my husband’s last job he managed to convince two grocery stores to open in a low income area that hasn’t had access for decades. Both were discount chains with very low overhead. One already left (the whole chain went out of business) but the other is doing very well.
I know recently in our area we’ve heard from local police that in many unscrupulous bars any meat item ordered is likely to be stolen. Drug addicts steal the meat, get away with it because of a non-pursuit policy to protect employees, and then sell it to the bar. This happens everywhere because drugs are everywhere, but that affects a bottom line.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
As any electrical engineer knows, whenever you have a closed-loop positive feedback situation, all elements of the feedback loop are equally “the cause” of the response. It makes no sense to label any one particular element in the loop as “the cause”. In other words, it’s a chicken and egg problem.
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
I DISAGREE with the article.
The MAJOR issue is crime.
When crime increases, people move out.
I have worked for decades with people from Haiti.
Black people.
The first thing they do when they get enough money to get plane fare IS TO LEAVE HAITI.
It is all about crime.
The MAJOR issue is crime.
When crime increases, people move out.
I have worked for decades with people from Haiti.
Black people.
The first thing they do when they get enough money to get plane fare IS TO LEAVE HAITI.
It is all about crime.
M
mikekle
Guest
IDK, I think it varies by location, look at Los Angeles, you can go from huge million dollar mansions to crime infested slums within a few blocks.
Where I live in northern KY, covington is one of the most crime ridden cities, but for the most part, they keep attracting large companies, small businesses, etc. While there is some black and white areas, from what Ive seen and heard the police tend to address it all, drugs are the main problem here (heroin is #1), but they do not discriminate, police around here will arrest white people for it too.
P
Peebo
Guest
Of course it’s the fault of us whiteys…shame on us for leaving our peaceful tree lined streets and allow less desirable minority elements of society move in…
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Don’t you think the grinding poverty and lack of opportunity have something to do with their wanting to leave too?
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
One of my friends went and got all of the education available to him.
He is now a multi-millionaire.
And he is black.
Get an education … it IS available but you have to make use of it.
His major complaint is that his cohorts refused to use what was available to them.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
One success story does not prove anything. “Your mileage may vary”
But tell me, where is your multi-millionaire friend living these days? The subject is flight from certain areas and the reasons for it.
P
PseuTonym
Guest
When property taxes increase, middle-class residents flee, but poor people move into the area? That doesn’t sound plausible.
If properties are assessed as having lower values for the purpose of property taxes, even while those properties are neither bought nor sold, but remain lived in by long-term residents of the community, then property tax rates might be increased to compensate. However, why would the amount of property taxes payable increase, if the time interval between consecutive property tax payments doesn’t change?
If this narrative were accurate, then politicians would be clever enough to do the opposite: tell people that their properties are increasing in value, and lower the tax rates, with no effect on the amount of property taxes payable. Are we to believe that is a recipe for motivating fewer homeowners to sell, and for properties to be sold at higher prices?
Q
Qoeleth
Guest
Interesting. I can share a personal experience. About a decade or so ago, most of the houses in my parents’ neighbourhood were bought up by the government, as low-rent government subsidized housing, mainly for non-whites. My parents stayed put, though, being old and having lived there for ages. In fact, on our family is somewhat mixed race.
In that decade, the value of their house dropped by about 70%. They sold up, though, loosing pretty most of their lives’ investment, cause they needed to move into care.
Obviously, the remnants of racism still exist. Even (especially) amongst so-called ‘liberals’.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Well, there is racism in this account, but it may not be where you think. Their house was probably the same house it always was. It lost nothing intrinsic. What it did lose was market value, which is not intrinsic to the house. Market value is very much influenced by the perception of the potential buyers. It is their perception of not wanting to live next to a public housing project that determines the drop in value. The perception could be driven by a racist orientation of the buyers. I don’t know if the potential buyers were liberals or conservatives. Probably a mixture of both. In any case, it is the perception of the value of the house by those potential buyers that is responsible for the drop in market value - not the “liberal government” that established low-rent housing.
So yes, there is racism. But everyone gets to share equally in the blame for that.
E
EIF5A
Guest
What if it’s not just perception but actual increase in crime and loss of upkeep of neighborhood?
S
SyroMalankara
Guest
Another aspect to consider. Schools. Many areas either don’t want to tax enough to keep up schools, or don’t have income enough to sustain good schools. I am looking at housing now. I have small children, I refuse to move into a terrible school district, and I cannot afford private school.
M
Maxirad
Guest
No offense, but when should one be concerned over the concentration of white Anglo students at an American public school falling drastically?
P
pensmama87
Guest
By itself, I don’t know that it would be any cause for concern at all. Demographics change in places over time.
If there are other concerns, like cultural or religious majorities that have values antithetical to Catholicism, or increases in neighborhood crime, then that’s something else. But that’s not based on race, though they may go together sometimes.
P
PseuTonym
Guest
You are absolutely right about that.
Here it is:
"For example, higher poverty means higher crime, which means higher costs for crime prevention.
Eventually, commercial investment falls off as well, and basic amenities like grocery stores and banks begin to disappear"
Combine that with a claim made near the beginning of the article:
“The nonwhite middle class is usually not large enough to sustain market demand. (If whites represent 80% of the housing market, then 80% of the potential demand is absent.)”
If not being large enough to “sustain market demand” implies having a higher poverty rate, then the article is implying that any given nonwhite category consists of people who are more likely than whites to be criminals. For example, Japanese-Americans …? I don’t think so. How about Chinatown? Surely there are a lot of Non-whites living in any given city’s Chinatown. However, if Non-whites are only 20% and that isn’t enough to sustain market demand, and the 20% includes not only Chinese-Americans, but all other Non-white Americans, then every Chinatown would be expected to become a zone without banks or grocery stores.
By throwing in enough distractions and code language, the article tricks people into not observing that it is itself a racist article.
Here is an example of code language: “Once residents begin to leave …”
Given the context, it is clear that “residents” is a code word for “white residents” and it is clear that “leaving” doesn’t occur if the white residents are replaced with other white residents.
- Status