Talk:Residential segregation in the United States

Why do black people always blame their white counterparts for their poor living conditions. Just start to work together and clean up your neighborhoods. Do not litter. Maintenance of buildings are important. White neigboorhoods look good because a lot of work goes into them. Wake up.

Quote. According to Conley, “black housing may be worth less because the majority group (whites) controls the market” and inherently “segregation is in this group’s interest” to preserve this control

Shame don't the black people have control over their own neighborhoods.

Please African Americans are always playing the victims while the jail population show statistical irregularities regarding the amount of African Americans present.(Too many).

Redlining and steering are driven by white households' preferences to live in predominantly white neighborhoods. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Professorpat47 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

why did the article only mention a single type/reason of/for residential segregation?

It seems to me that any kind of residential sorting based on some criteria or other should be described. As I already tried to add to the main article, residential sorting based on political affiliation is already de rigoeur since the '70s or so. Uslaner traces it back to the rise of Evangelicalism/fundamentalism in the US, points out it happens more often in countries with a high gini coefficient (although I don't remember the connection he draws between the two, as fundies are generally not particularly rich), and suggests that the sorting leads to decreased exposure to members of different social groups, and thus a decrease in trust between subcultural/SES groups. Evangelicals were among those most likely to live together, but the phenomena is of course much broader than that. In any case, it hardly seems as though black/non-black sorting is the most important kind of sorting, even if the blacks are a very large subset of the bottom 2 SES quintiles. As such, shouldn't the article make more mention of these effects/reasons for sorting? boombaard (talk) 16:10, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Why are whites assuming that the article is created by blacks?

the reason for the disputes is not logical. it seems that the comments are all based on some notion that white people should not be questioned for actions that are obviously happening. I am talking about things that we have as a society, documented with test studies and legal cases. Steering, the reasons for white flight, etc. are not "blacks blaming whitey" as many whites like to say in any racial issue that shows the treatment of blacks at the hands of whites in the USA.In fact, the very notion that Blacks seem to be unable to state their case regardless of hark and obvious evidence without being called a "whiner" by the oppressor, is oppressive in itself. tell me something, to the men opposing the fairness of this article, exactly what would you have it state regarding the reasons for white people moving from blacks? it happened to my own family. we were the third black family in our area. Fore sale signs were popping up everywhere, and every single white that moved out had their home purchased by a black family. the people who i knew, moved to areas in further western suburbs of Chicago. Those areas were totally white. there are far too many things that have to be ignored and far too many experiences that we as a people are having, to be thwarted by whites that are simply able to say to us "stop whining" and in turn, shut us up by getting such obvious realities taken down off Wikipedia. your people white wash the news from truths of your own behaviors, and now you want to white wash the internet as well? it would seem you don't want an even playing field of open conversation anywhere. It seems you would rather live your lives and not worry about what that life or view does to others. but unfortunate for you, this is not Iraq, and you are not the US military. you cannot simply do whatever you feel to us and have no rebuttal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Themtb2007 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Biased?

The article makes it sound like there are no mixed areas at all, which is wrong. There are many mixed areas, with people of different backgrounds living next door to each other. The article also sounds slightly biased, and with not enough information. 4.168.0.145 (talk) 00:09, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

edits

I believe that the section of this article titled “White Flight and Its Consequences” should be deleted. The article in no other place talks about white flight, and though an argument can in fact be made that a link exists between white flight and residential segregation, it is not here made. For this reason it makes no sense to have a section talking about consequences have not been clearly defined, shown to exist, or shown to have relevance. There is a page here on Wikipedia about white flight and I think that this article would better serve its purposes if it gave a brief description of white flight, such as: white flight occurs in middle class and usually suburban neighborhoods which have been traditionally white when a few black families move in and many white families decided to move out. This definition should link to the white flight page that already exists. A brief paragraph could then follow explaining specifically how white flight can lead to or exacerbate residential segregation. This section could perhaps include the following points: that residential discrimination is most vividly seen in urban cities where minorities live in disproportionally large concentration in poor neighborhoods, but it also exists in middle class areas and in suburban regions. This middle class segregation may have been worsened by white flight.

In stead of a section about the consequences of white flight, I would rather see a section about the consequences of residential segregation. Some such consequences that the article should detail are: 1. higher dropout rate 2. higher rates of teen pregnancy 3. lower college attendance rates 4. higher unemployment 5. lower earnings All of these effects have actually been measured, and all these effects all serve to perpetuate the cycle of poverty within the United States, making it harder for some people to simply fix their neighborhoods and situations (as the first commenter of this section proposed people do). There are other things holding such neighborhoods from helping themselves such as the stigmatization of the whole neighborhood due to high criminal incarceration rates. Bruce Western and Becky Pettit talk about this in their article Beyond Crime and Punishment: Prisons and Inequality where they argue that when incarceration rates increase many businesses move out of the area which further hinders employment opportunities and perpetuates the cycle of unemployment. However, parts of this person’s arguments are valid, not for the complete deletion of this page, but for the need for added sections. This person talked about ways in which they believed housing situations could be improved, and though their solutions were based on opinion, they did point out a gap in the article in the proposed responses to residential segregation, which is why I added this section. One change that someone should consider doing is adding into this article more about residential segregation as it appears in other countries.