The Making of Ferguson - The Impact of Public Policies

H

HorsieJuice

Guest
I've been making my way through this (very long) paper on the subject of the public policy origins of some of the racial distrust and segregation specifically in the St Louis area, but also across the country. It's interesting for anyone who wants to know a little more about "how Ferguson became Ferguson" (hint: it's not just about Michael Brown)

Most of the pieces deals with how throughout the early and mid 20th century, blacks were systematically barred from purchasing homes (one of the biggest wealth generators for the middle class), neighborhood segregation was encouraged and sometimes enforced by public policy, and black neighborhoods were left to turn into ghettos through racist zoning laws and inadequate public services.

The Making of Ferguson: Public Policies at the Root of its Troubles | Economic Policy Institute

In August 2014, a Ferguson, Missouri, policeman shot and killed an unarmed black teenager. Michael Brown’s death and the resulting protests and racial tension brought considerable attention to that town. Observers who had not been looking closely at our evolving demographic patterns were surprised to see ghetto conditions we had come to associate with inner cities now duplicated in a formerly white suburban community: racially segregated neighborhoods with high poverty and unemployment, poor student achievement in overwhelmingly black schools, oppressive policing, abandoned homes, and community powerlessness.

Media accounts of how Ferguson became Ferguson have typically explained that when African Americans moved to this suburb (and others like it), “white flight” followed, abandoning the town to African Americans who were trying to escape poor schools in the city. The conventional explanation adds that African Americans moved to a few places like Ferguson, not the suburbs generally, because prejudiced real estate agents steered black homebuyers away from other white suburbs. And in any event, those other suburbs were able to preserve their almost entirely white, upper-middle-class environments by enacting zoning rules that required only expensive single family homes, the thinking goes.

No doubt, private prejudice and suburbanites’ desire for homogenous affluent environments contributed to segregation in St. Louis and other metropolitan areas. But these explanations are too partial, and too conveniently excuse public policy from responsibility. A more powerful cause of metropolitan segregation in St. Louis and nationwide has been the explicit intents of federal, state, and local governments to create racially segregated metropolises.

Many of these explicitly segregationist governmental actions ended in the late 20th century but continue to determine today’s racial segregation patterns. In St. Louis these governmental policies included zoning rules that classified white neighborhoods as residential and black neighborhoods as commercial or industrial; segregated public housing projects that replaced integrated low-income areas; federal subsidies for suburban development conditioned on African American exclusion; federal and local requirements for, and enforcement of, property deeds and neighborhood agreements that prohibited resale of white-owned property to, or occupancy by, African Americans; tax favoritism for private institutions that practiced segregation; municipal boundary lines designed to separate black neighborhoods from white ones and to deny necessary services to the former; real estate, insurance, and banking regulators who tolerated and sometimes required racial segregation; and urban renewal plans whose purpose was to shift black populations from central cities like St. Louis to inner-ring suburbs like Ferguson.

Governmental actions in support of a segregated labor market supplemented these racial housing policies and prevented most African Americans from acquiring the economic strength to move to middle-class communities, even if they had been permitted to do so.

White flight certainly existed, and racial prejudice was certainly behind it, but not racial prejudice alone. Government policies turned black neighborhoods into overcrowded slums and white families came to associate African Americans with slum characteristics. White homeowners then fled when African Americans moved nearby, fearing their new neighbors would bring slum conditions with them.

That government, not mere private prejudice, was responsible for segregating greater St. Louis was once conventional informed opinion. A federal appeals court declared 40 years ago that “segregated housing in the St. Louis metropolitan area was … in large measure the result of deliberate racial discrimination in the housing market by the real estate industry and by agencies of the federal, state, and local governments.” Similar observations accurately describe every other large metropolitan area. This history, however, has now largely been forgotten.

When we blame private prejudice, suburban snobbishness, and black poverty for contemporary segregation, we not only whitewash our own history but avoid considering whether new policies might instead promote an integrated community. The federal government’s response to the Ferguson “Troubles” has been to treat the town as an isolated embarrassment, not a reflection of the nation in which it is embedded. The Department of Justice is investigating the killing of teenager Michael Brown and the practices of the Ferguson police department, but aside from the president’s concern that perhaps we have militarized all police forces too much, no broader inferences from the events of August 2014 are being drawn by policymakers.

The conditions that created Ferguson cannot be addressed without remedying a century of public policies that segregated our metropolitan landscape. Remedies are unlikely if we fail to recognize these policies and how their effects have endured.
 

NightHawkeye

Work-in-progress
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2010
45,814
10,318
✟803,537.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
I've been making my way through this (very long) paper on the subject of the public policy origins of some of the racial distrust and segregation specifically in the St Louis area, but also across the country. It's interesting for anyone who wants to know a little more about "how Ferguson became Ferguson" (hint: it's not just about Michael Brown)

Most of the pieces deals with how throughout the early and mid 20th century, blacks were systematically barred from purchasing homes (one of the biggest wealth generators for the middle class), neighborhood segregation was encouraged and sometimes enforced by public policy, and black neighborhoods were left to turn into ghettos through racist zoning laws and inadequate public services.

The Making of Ferguson: Public Policies at the Root of its Troubles | Economic Policy Institute
OK. There are grievances.

That hardly justifies continued bad behavior. Don't you think at some point it's time to say, enough is enough?
 
Upvote 0
H

HorsieJuice

Guest
OK. There are grievances.

That hardly justifies continued bad behavior. Don't you think at some point it's time to say, enough is enough?

Of course it doesn't justify the bad behavior of an individual, but it does mean that poor blacks in high crime areas aren't solely to blame for their predicament. If poverty and crime go hand-in-hand (and afaik, they typically do), then if you force a bunch of people into poverty, you can't really blame them when their community develops a higher crime rate.

Mind you, this piece was only about racist housing policies which had mostly tapered off by the late 70's/early 80's (though their effects continue). It barely mentioned things like disproportionate educational funding and I don't recall it mentioning abusive policing at all - both of which contribute to the negative black experience and both of which continue today.
 
Upvote 0

NightHawkeye

Work-in-progress
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2010
45,814
10,318
✟803,537.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Of course it doesn't justify the bad behavior of an individual, but it does mean that poor blacks in high crime areas aren't solely to blame for their predicament. If poverty and crime go hand-in-hand (and afaik, they typically do), then if you force a bunch of people into poverty, you can't really blame them when their community develops a higher crime rate.
Forced? I think not.

Blacks migrated to the cities for various reasons and have come to dominate local politics. I would argue that any current grievances are with the elected politicians representing them.
Mind you, this piece was only about racist housing policies which had mostly tapered off by the late 70's/early 80's (though their effects continue). It barely mentioned things like disproportionate educational funding and I don't recall it mentioning abusive policing at all - both of which contribute to the negative black experience and both of which continue today.
Noting that inner cities schools receive an over-abundance of funding ... yet consistently fail to produce positive results. Wouldn't it be good to ask, why?
 
Upvote 0
H

HorsieJuice

Guest
Forced? I think not.

You didn't read the article, did you?

When policies are put in place to:

1.) Prohibit blacks from taking some jobs for which they are qualified
2.) Prohibit blacks from buying houses they can afford near jobs for which they are qualified
3.) Push blacks into lower-value industrial neighborhoods and out of higher-value residential neighborhoods
4.) Devalue property owned by blacks in residential neighborhoods
5.) Charge blacks more for housing and housing loans

then yes, "forced" is an appropriate description.
 
Upvote 0

NightHawkeye

Work-in-progress
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2010
45,814
10,318
✟803,537.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
You didn't read the article, did you?
Nope ... at least not any more than you posted. That was sufficient.
When policies are put in place to:

1.) Prohibit blacks from taking some jobs for which they are qualified
2.) Prohibit blacks from buying houses they can afford near jobs for which they are qualified
3.) Push blacks into lower-value industrial neighborhoods and out of higher-value residential neighborhoods
4.) Devalue property owned by blacks in residential neighborhoods
5.) Charge blacks more for housing and housing loans

then yes, "forced" is an appropriate description.
Ahh ... still working for that idyllic communist utopia which just magically appears one day where everyone from the inner city lives uptown. It doesn't work. It can't work.

Even if all the inner city poor were given keys to the richest suburbs around all the nation's cities ... would that resolve the grievances? One suspects that such a momentous event would be soon followed by a collapse similar to that seen in the USSR and China after their glorious revolutions when farmland was redistributed to people who had no idea what to do with the land. A hundred million people subsequently starved to death.

In truth, we've already begun to see the results of such actions under Obama where the redistribution has simply widened the gap between haves and have-nots. It was always a predictable result.

Noting, finally, that this nation has always been about people being allowed to pursue their dreams ... not about people being given stuff.
 
Upvote 0

praying

Snazzy Title Goes Here
Site Supporter
Jan 9, 2004
32,635
1,608
67
New Jersey
✟86,040.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Nope ... at least not any more than you posted. That was sufficient.
Ahh ... still working for that idyllic communist utopia which just magically appears one day where everyone from the inner city lives uptown. It doesn't work. It can't work.

Even if all the inner city poor were given keys to the richest suburbs around all the nation's cities ... would that resolve the grievances? One suspects that such a momentous event would be soon followed by a collapse similar to that seen in the USSR and China after their glorious revolutions when farmland was redistributed to people who had no idea what to do with the land. A hundred million people subsequently starved to death.

In truth, we've already begun to see the results of such actions under Obama where the redistribution has simply widened the gap between haves and have-nots. It was always a predictable result.

Noting, finally, that this nation has always been about people being allowed to pursue their dreams ... not about people being given stuff.


LOL ...

I don't want nobody
To give me nothing
Open up the door
I'll get it myself

James Brown -

true when he wrote it in the early seventies and true now.
 
Upvote 0
H

HorsieJuice

Guest
Nope ... at least not any more than you posted. That was sufficient.

No, as you've demonstrated, it really isn't sufficient.

Ahh ... still working for that idyllic communist utopia which just magically appears one day where everyone from the inner city lives uptown. It doesn't work. It can't work.

Even if all the inner city poor were given keys to the richest suburbs around all the nation's cities ... would that resolve the grievances?

Do me a favor - go read the article. It takes a while - it took me a couple days to get through reading it bits at a time. Once you read the article, you'll see what the point actually is.

It's not about reparations. Despite the mention of remedies at the end of the executive summary, the article doesn't really prescribe any. The only point is how we got here.

So please, take your nonsensical charges of communist idealism and leave them for another thread. They're so irrelevant here that they're off-topic.
 
Upvote 0

GODGOVERNS

Free Thinker
Jul 7, 2010
1
0
US
Visit site
✟15,111.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
If we get to understand God better and know as in Acts 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons. This should inspire everyman to seek their true heritage as a child of God ; deserving of all good and to forsake the false education that someone is better than you for whatever reason!! A change of consciousness that will result in right thinking, right acting can't but result in lasting better life experiences.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

NightHawkeye

Work-in-progress
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2010
45,814
10,318
✟803,537.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
No, as you've demonstrated, it really isn't sufficient.

Do me a favor - go read the article. It takes a while - it took me a couple days to get through reading it bits at a time. Once you read the article, you'll see what the point actually is.
OK ... because you asked, I did go to that website, HJ.

Because my age is several times yours, I've lived through and experienced first hand many of the issues raised in your link. I don't disagree that many bad public policy decisions were made. I didn't like many of them at the time and still don't. I don't disagree about the subtle issues of segregation in today's world. But the list of issues raised in that article are not the main problems faced by the black community, IMHO.

The disintegration of the family appears to have been far more devastating. How do kids raise kids? How do kids raise themselves? Somehow God and morality got lost.
It's not about reparations. Despite the mention of remedies at the end of the executive summary, the article doesn't really prescribe any. The only point is how we got here.
Yes, it does prescribe a few remedies: The Making of Ferguson: Public Policies at the Root of its Troubles | Economic Policy Institute
In conclusion: Understanding segregation’s causes suggests remedies

As the federal court observed more than 30 years ago, school desegregation requires housing desegregation. Several elementary schools in Ferguson today are 90 percent African American and no elementary school is less than 75 percent African American; educational performance in such racially isolated settings is inadequate. As the tragic death of Michael Brown shows, the interaction of black men and youths with police has much in common with Adel Allen’s experiences 50 years ago, and the reaction in Ferguson (though comparatively mild) is reminiscent of the 1967 race riots that the Kerner Commission investigated.

Litigation has revealed that in the 2000s, federally supervised banks marketed exploitative subprime loans to African American communities like Ferguson, expecting that African Americans (particularly the elderly) were too gullible to resist false promises. When the loans’ exploding interest rates combined with the collapse of the housing bubble, it compounded the devastation of black neighborhoods. Half of Ferguson homes today are underwater, with owners owing more than their homes are worth.

Many practical programs and regulatory strategies can address problems of Ferguson and similar communities nationwide. One example is to prohibit landlords from refusing to accept tenants whose rent is subsidized – a few states and municipalities currently do prohibit such refusal, but most do not. Another example is to require even outer-ring suburbs to repeal zoning ordinances that prohibit construction of housing that lower- or moderate-income residents – white or black – can afford. Going further, we could require every community to permit development of housing to accommodate a “fair share” of its region’s low-income and minority populations – New Jersey, for example, has taken a very modest step towards this requirement.

But we won’t consider such remedies if we remain blind to how Ferguson became Ferguson. It is impractical to think that the public and policymakers will support remedies to problems whose causes they don’t understand. We flatter ourselves that the responsibility is only borne by rogue police officers, white flight, and suburbanites’ desire for economic homogeneity. Prosecuting the officer who shot Michael Brown, or investigating and integrating Ferguson’s police department, can’t address the deeper obstacles to racial progress.
So please, take your nonsensical charges of communist idealism and leave them for another thread. They're so irrelevant here that they're off-topic.
OK.

I don't disagree with the issue of zoning. I've personally never liked zoning. Did you know, as one illustrative example, that the huge city of Houston, Texas doesn't allow zoning. Whatever issues blacks might have with Houston, zoning is not one of them.

In regard to subsidies, I don't see how most landlords would have an issue with it. In my experience what landlords have issues with is destruction of property and crime. I don't see either of those listed in the remedies though. As an apartment dweller at one time in my youth I recall having to provide references about being a good tenant. It's not an unreasonable request.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
H

HorsieJuice

Guest
But the list of issues raised in that article are not the main problems faced by the black community, IMHO.

I don't recall the article claiming that they those are the main problems currently facing the black community. I know that I didn't make that claim.

The disintegration of the family appears to have been far more devastating. How do kids raise kids? How do kids raise themselves? Somehow God and morality got lost.

Funny you mention that - while it may not have been understood in the mid 1900's, many studies have since shown that economic stability shores up family stability and economic instability erodes family stability. I think there's a pretty straight line between the economic injustices suffered by blacks through the 20th century and the subsequent erosion of the family within their communities.

Yes, it does prescribe a few remedies:

Thank you; I somehow managed to miss those. Even still, the article doesn't spend much time on them. They're far from a central theme of the piece.

I don't disagree with the issue of zoning. I've personally never liked zoning. Did you know, as one illustrative example, that the huge city of Houston, Texas doesn't allow zoning. Whatever issues blacks might have with Houston, zoning is not one of them.

Well, officially, it's got a non-zoning policy, but that doesn't mean that Houston officials didn't find some workarounds in the past when ti suited their racist goals (pg 152)

The non-zoning policy has other problems, too, like making it virtually impossible to ever set up a real public transit system, which means that jobs in Houston are really only accessible to people who can afford a car.

In regard to subsidies, I don't see how most landlords would have an issue with it.

Maybe that's because you're not a racist.
 
Upvote 0

ThisBrotherOfHis

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2013
1,444
115
On the cusp of the Border War
✟2,181.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Of course it doesn't justify the bad behavior of an individual, but it does mean that poor blacks in high crime areas aren't solely to blame for their predicament.
Of course it does. Look, you can blame your addictions on bad parenting and the neighborhood you grew up in, but if you're calling them "addictions" then you are obviously aware of their negative impact on your life. You can't count on the neighborhood or the parenting to get you off drugs and alcohol, you can only depend on God and on yourself. Continuing in them becomes a choice, not a lot in life forced on you as "inevitable."

The same is true of poverty, living in crime-infested neighborhoods, and complete lack of family structure beneficial to the youth of the community.

People don't have to live poor. It is not something forced on anyone, as evidenced by the constant success stories of people of all ethnicities, nationalities, ages and genders who start with nothing and build a life. Vietnamese immigrants came here nearly two generations ago and almost universally carved a life out of what was available to them, and they had no "free pass" given their different appearance and strange culture. Dr. Ben Carson is an exceptional example, living in poverty, tenements, his mother working two jobs and, even though functionally illiterate, being smart enough to fool her kids into getting the kind of education she knew they would need to get out of that life. It is not "preordained" and there is no barrier to success, other than the one inside a person's own mind.

People don't have to live in crime-infested neighborhoods. It isn't necessary to move to get out of them, either. The attitude of the people in a community has as much, if not more, to do with whether or not crime is tolerated and flourishes, than does effective policing. A few years ago, there was a tragic story of a grandmother in Chicago who took on the drug trade on her corner. Every time there was an active dealer on the street, she called the police. They came by, if they caught the guy, they'd make an arrest. Despite the police using discretion in protecting the grandmother, everyone in the neighborhood knew who was informing. Instead of joining her in the fight, many of her neighbors either ignored the fact she was being threatened by the drug gangs, or they actively encouraged her to stop reporting drug activity for fear they would be caught in the eventual crossfire. After a three year battle, they firebombed her apartment at 3 a.m. The story would have been much different had the neighbors actively joined in the fight instead of actively working against her, and indirectly for the drug gangs.

People don't have to live in broken families. Young black men take no responsibility for making babies, the welfare system encourages their lack of involvement in their children's lives by refusing assistance to the women and their children if "Daddy" lives with them. Too many young black children are being raised by grandmothers, grandfathers, aunts, uncles, even great-grandmothers. Not because the babies' parents are dead. They just don't want to deal with the reality of their active hormones. As a result, entire generations of young people growing up without the influence of a responsible male role model who teaches young men how to be adult men, and young women how to make sure they have find a real man to spend their life with while getting an adequate education that assures they don't have to depend on a man for that life.

I'm licensed addictions counselor and marriage and family therapist. I see the tragedy of these broken lives every single day, through my contracts with Corrections, and with child and family services in two states. This is not a broad-based social issue with implications that massive amounts of money, time, personnel, and effort must be poured out of Washington, Jefferson City, or Topeka. It is an individual problem, with individual solutions.

Our mistake is making it a massive problem. It prevents us from seeing the simple answers: Personal responsibility, education, mentoring, counseling, and trust-building.

If we want to change people's attitudes, we need to change the people, one at a time. Giving them a preset list of excuses -- "I'm poor. I'm black. I'm uneduated. I have no choice but the gangs." -- does nothing more than perpetuate the problem. Stop telling them they can't, and start telling them they can, and they will.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,275
20,267
US
✟1,475,516.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
People don't have to live in crime-infested neighborhoods. It isn't necessary to move to get out of them, either. The attitude of the people in a community has as much, if not more, to do with whether or not crime is tolerated and flourishes, than does effective policing. A few years ago, there was a tragic story of a grandmother in Chicago who took on the drug trade on her corner. Every time there was an active dealer on the street, she called the police. They came by, if they caught the guy, they'd make an arrest. Despite the police using discretion in protecting the grandmother, everyone in the neighborhood knew who was informing. Instead of joining her in the fight, many of her neighbors either ignored the fact she was being threatened by the drug gangs, or they actively encouraged her to stop reporting drug activity for fear they would be caught in the eventual crossfire. After a three year battle, they firebombed her apartment at 3 a.m. The story would have been much different had the neighbors actively joined in the fight instead of actively working against her, and indirectly for the drug gangs.

You just proved that an individual does have to get out of such a neighborhood. If the rest of the neighborhod was willing to "join the fight," it wouldn't be that kind of neighborhood in the first place.

There is a term for such neighborhoods: Blackistan, coined by blacks ourselves--which is essentially an area that is beyond rehabilitation by any reasonable means and from which any given individual can only escape...not change. (And yes, there are also Redneckistans.)

People don't have to live in broken families. Young black men take no responsibility for making babies, the welfare system encourages their lack of involvement in their children's lives by refusing assistance to the women and their children if "Daddy" lives with them. Too many young black children are being raised by grandmothers, grandfathers, aunts, uncles, even great-grandmothers. Not because the babies' parents are dead. They just don't want to deal with the reality of their active hormones.

That baby, though, had no choice--he was born into a broken family and can't change that.

Moreover, "as the twig is bent, so grows the tree"...most of the time, and especially amidst a forest of bent trees.

I'm licensed addictions counselor and marriage and family therapist. I see the tragedy of these broken lives every single day, through my contracts with Corrections, and with child and family services in two states. This is not a broad-based social issue with implications that massive amounts of money, time, personnel, and effort must be poured out of Washington, Jefferson City, or Topeka. It is an individual problem, with individual solutions.

Our mistake is making it a massive problem. It prevents us from seeing the simple answers: Personal responsibility, education, mentoring, counseling, and trust-building.

If we want to change people's attitudes, we need to change the people, one at a time.

And yet, "one at a time" necessarily involves getting that particular person out of an environment in which one person doing "the right things" is in fact doing the wrong things to survive in that environment.

You ought to know that if the average middle-class 13-year-old was thrust into a Blackinstan environment, he would not survive long doing the same average middle-class 13-year-old things he did at in Morningside Heights gated subdivison going to Morningside Junior High.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
H

HorsieJuice

Guest
Aren't a lot of these cities that you guys are complaining about ran by Democrats and have been for decades?

Okay if there is a problem with policy why are people electing the same people into office and expecting different results?

Go read the article and come back with something on topic instead of derailing the thread with your oversimplified partisanship.
 
Upvote 0

CaDan

I remember orange CF
Site Supporter
Jan 30, 2004
23,183
2,778
The Society of the Spectacle
✟71,545.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
*snippage*

People don't have to live in broken families. Young black men take no responsibility for making babies, the welfare system encourages their lack of involvement in their children's lives by refusing assistance to the women and their children if "Daddy" lives with them.

*snippage*

The statement in bold above is a prejudgement and not qualified. This post states a belief that the default position of the poster is to presume any black man he meets behaves in this manner.

This poster will come back and attempt to now qualify this statement. That's how the game works. But this "tell" is significant in that it reveals deep-seated beliefs expressed when people are not careful to phrase things in just the right way to avoid censure.
 
Upvote 0

NightHawkeye

Work-in-progress
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2010
45,814
10,318
✟803,537.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
I don't recall the article claiming that they those are the main problems currently facing the black community. I know that I didn't make that claim.
It seems we have some agreement then.
Funny you mention that - while it may not have been understood in the mid 1900's, many studies have since shown that economic stability shores up family stability and economic instability erodes family stability. I think there's a pretty straight line between the economic injustices suffered by blacks through the 20th century and the subsequent erosion of the family within their communities.
Yet, the erosion of black families occurred simultaneously with black endorsement of the political left. Prior to that time, black family bonds were stronger than those in white homes. Breakdown of the black family and its consequences
As late as 1950, black women nationwide were more likely to be married than white women, and only 9 percent of black families with children were headed by a single parent. In the 1950s, black children had a 52 percent chance of living with both their biological parents until age seventeen; by the 1980s those odds had dwindled to a mere 6 percent. In 1959, only 2 percent of black children were reared in households in which the mother never married; today that figure approaches 60 percent.
Thank you; I somehow managed to miss those.
Glad to help.
Even still, the article doesn't spend much time on them. They're far from a central theme of the piece.
Granted.
Well, officially, it's got a non-zoning policy, but that doesn't mean that Houston officials didn't find some workarounds in the past when ti suited their racist goals (pg 152)
Their "racist goals" might be a bit much to say about a city which welcomed large numbers of black refugees in recent years.
The non-zoning policy has other problems, too, like making it virtually impossible to ever set up a real public transit system, which means that jobs in Houston are really only accessible to people who can afford a car.
It's called urban sprawl. Embrace it. Houston's economy still works.
 
Upvote 0
H

HorsieJuice

Guest
Yet, the erosion of black families occurred simultaneously with black endorsement of the political left. Prior to that time, black family bonds were stronger than those in white homes. Breakdown of the black family and its consequences
As late as 1950, black women nationwide were more likely to be married than white women, and only 9 percent of black families with children were headed by a single parent. In the 1950s, black children had a 52 percent chance of living with both their biological parents until age seventeen; by the 1980s those odds had dwindled to a mere 6 percent. In 1959, only 2 percent of black children were reared in households in which the mother never married; today that figure approaches 60 percent.


You ignored my point about the negative impacts of poverty on the family structure. Poverty causes people to be less likely to marry and more likely to divorce if they do marry. By forcing blacks towards poverty, whites in power in this country effectively accelerated the disintegration of the black family.

Their "racist goals" might be a bit much to say about a city which welcomed large numbers of black refugees in recent years.

The book I linked to was talking about events in the 50's & 60's, not recent events.

It's called urban sprawl. Embrace it. Houston's economy still works.

I know what it's called; and it's ugly and wasteful. Even if you don't care about global warming, having millions of people drive all those extra miles every day still causes other pollution and health problems and is a giant waste of money and space.​
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

NightHawkeye

Work-in-progress
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2010
45,814
10,318
✟803,537.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
You ignored my point about the negative impacts of poverty on the family structure. Poverty causes people to be less likely to marry and more likely to divorce if they do marry. By forcing blacks towards poverty, whites in power in this country effectively accelerated the disintegration of the black family.
I thought you understood that blacks were more impoverished in 1950 than since then.

Hence, poverty is not what caused disintegration of black families.
The book I linked to was talking about events in the 50's & 60's, not recent events.
Noting again that the disintegration of black families began with the wholesale endorsement of the political left.
I know what it's called; and it's ugly and wasteful. Even if you don't care about global warming, having millions of people drive all those extra miles every day still causes other pollution and health problems and is a giant waste of money and space.
Another issue of great concern to the political left.
 
Upvote 0