I cannot disagree more with The Times Editorial Board's position. What has been done to our fellow citizens is wrong, but there is a solution that is likely to come from within the black community.
Much like a Tyler Perry emerged to make movies for an audience that was largely underserved, black owned banking/lending firms may emerge to offer the opportunity to those shunned to purchase a home.
We have an emerging generation of educated young black men and women (degreed professionals) who only seek the same opportunity to own a home as I did nearly four (4) decades ago.
Much like Barbara noted in her post, the allegedly more liberal locales hardly act in the expected manner. As one of my late African-American Clients often reminded me, "The only color that matters is green."
Just to add, not only blacks but Hispanics and other minorities too. I would like to note that Indians and most of the other Asians who came to the US from the educated elite class (at home) are treated as "white". I am from India in the US for almost 58 years and this has not changed even in the "liberal" Northeast.
5
Whenever the Times runs an opinion piece or an article on the effects of race in education, childbirth, housing, etc. out come the naysayers. Nope, there’s no racism just people who choose to live apart, make bad decisions and don’t make the gallant effort me and mine made clawing our way up. It gets boring. If you keep people down you have to believe they deserve to be down. Is this a great country or what?
9
I lived in Brooklyn for 60 of the last 61 years. Having recently bought a house in Savannah, GA, I am not at all shocked to find that NYC is high on the list of cities where real estate discrimination is pervasive. The discrimination in NYC has been made even more apparent to me here in Savannah where I have black neighbors living in single family homes, which would never happen in my old neighborhood on the southern coast of Brooklyn. There, black people are only "allowed" to live in apartment buildings. Anyone who thinks NYC - or the Northeast in general - is less racist than the South is misinformed or deliberately ingnorant.
11
Finding a black mortgage banker might be the important redline to cross toward home ownership. Once owning a home, the hidden problems of DIY maintaining of a residence by anyone, can be exponential as it becomes clear various local town agencies might as well be run by Benito Mussolini in cahoots with maintaining connections to the tradesmen that put them in office. Yes Trump is a fascist, but so is half of the population in small town America.
As a simple exercise, if you are white, casually tell someone on the "gossip scene" in your little white town that your great grandmother was Afro American. Watch what happens. Maybe prices at the dump suddenly double, and various town employees might even say you are the "white N."
1
Sad Truth: America doesn’t care anymore today than they did in the 50’s, 70’s, 90’s
4
The idea that all of white America has "amassed wealth" from their homes is so completely laughable. The great majority of all Americans buy homes which appreciate modestly - if at all - especially in inflation-adjusted dollars. There are many reasons for not accumulating wealth. This isn't one of them. But I guess it does give the NYT's editorial board one more chance to blame white people for everything.
21
Ah, yes, white America is lined up against black home ownership.....
Find another narrative NYT, this one is aged...
21
This opinion is nothing more than a history lesson, some of which he got wrong.
In the run up to the financial crisis which was caused by devalued mortgage backed securities the mortgage loans that were bundled and sold had nothing to do with race.
People of all races obtained cash out refinances of their homes underwritten by inflated appraisals. They took the money and walked away from their mortgages as the value of their homes slipped below that which they owed.
Those who walked away are still feeling the pinch of the foreclosures on their credit history.
What is true about this opinion is that whites fared better than blacks because of the disparity between incomes and social/economic security.
There is no "red line" today and for anyone to state otherwise does so in defiance of the facts and evidence.
People with stable incomes and credit are able to buy homes anywhere they choose. People with bad credit and unstable employment cannot buy homes at all.
The media should stop publishing false statements based upon the imagination of opinion writers. There will always be those of us armed with the facts that will put the lies to these imaginary racial injustices.
14
It had everything to do with race. As you said "whites fared better than blacks because of the disparity between incomes and social/economic security". That dispartity exists soley because of racism. People cannot buy homes wherever they want. Even if black overcome the racialized economic barrier, their families will be mistreated if they live in a predominantly white area.
10
How quickly people forget - when it's not "their people".
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1491897/Reve...
1990s/2000s: "Many boards on the old money, eastern side of Central Park rebuff Jews and other ethnic minorities in ways that would be illegal at a golf club or private school. 'This is the way it works... There is one Jewish person on the board, and that Jewish person is the one who vetoes all the other Jewish people.'"
1890s: "When America Despised The Irish" (article on the history.com site):
"No longer embedded on the lowest rung of American society, the Irish unfortunately gained acceptance in the mainstream by dishing out the same bigotry toward newcomers that they had experienced. County Cork native and Workingmen’s Party leader Denis Kearney, for example, closed his speeches to American laborers with his rhetorical signature: 'Whatever happens, the Chinese must go.'"
And what leaves can return again. 2018: White supremacist Richard Spencer to Haaretz:"Jews are vastly overrepresented in what you could call 'the establishment,' that is, Ivy League educated people who really determine policy, and white people are being dispossessed from this country...You could say that I am a white Zionist—in the sense that I care about my people, I want us to have a secure homeland for us and ourselves. Just like you want a secure homeland in Israel.' "
14
Add, “Waiting at a Table at Starbucks While Black” to the long list of racist encounters and indignities endured by Black people:
Business
Two black men were arrested waiting at a Starbucks. Now the company, police are on the defensive.
by Alex Horton by Alex Horton Email the author
Business
April 15 at 11:20 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/04/15/two-black-men...
“The two men were taken to a police station, where they were fingerprinted and photographed, their attorney Lauren Wimmer told The Washington Post on Saturday. Her clients, who declined to be identified, were released eight hours later because of lack of evidence of a crime, she said, adding that the Starbucks manager was white…
Wimmer said the man whom the two men were there to meet, Andrew Yaffe, runs a real estate development firm and said he wanted to meet the men to discuss business investment opportunities. In the video, he arrives to tell police that the two men were waiting for him.
“Why would they be asked to leave?” Yaffe says. “Does anybody else think this is ridiculous?” he asks people nearby. “It’s absolute discrimination.”
8
Selectively quoting the actual facts of the event.
Stores can limit washrooms to those who actually buy goods and limit 'hanging out' to those who buy something
Said "customers" were asked politely to leave three times - which is the purview of the company and the police and then to arrest them if they refuse to leave for the fourth time.
Listen - this was ham-fisted and stupid by Starbucks - but no one is served by perpetuating a false narrative.
4
Just when I start to gain a tiny bit of optimism about the American electorate, the NY Times publishes a story about racism, I read the comments, and I'm right back to hopeless.
11
But we have made so much progress. Just four generations ago, my ancestors were slaves in this country. We have come a long ways. So let's keep our hope and optimism. However we must know the truth in order to solve problems.
7
I live in the woods. Why dont more black people move to the woods? I am a transgender woman married to another transgender woman. I am openly queer and I dont see my situation as being much different than a black person in a rural area.
In fact, I wish there were more black people in a rural area because I'm tired of seeing white people. When you live in a rural area land and houses are cheap. My house is 3,000 square feet, I have my own well and septic system and gas tank, and 2 acres of land, and my mortgage is $700/month. I never have to worry about lead because my drinking water comes from 70 feet beneath my house and I live at 9,000 feet in the mountains. I could bottle my water and sell it to people in the city.
Why does it seem to me like it's the goal to cram as many black people as possible into every city? Why not give black people incentives like lower interest rates to take loans in rural areas? You can still work in a city and live in a rural area..I live in the mountains and my county has 4,000 people in it, but Denver is only an hour away. I was just partying in Denver last night and then drove home back to the mountains.
I never see black people skiing and there is no racist reason why black people dont seem to like skiing. Even rich black people dont ski. I worked at a ski area and I'd say 1 out of every 500 skiers is black. Black people, please move to the mountains and learn to ski! I'll teach you! Nederland Colorado would love some diversity.
7
Thanks! Answers to some of your questions: The difference is that people can't tell you are queer by looking at you as they can with race. The difference is queer people have had a different history. While they have had to hide who they are and they have been discriminated against and physically harmed. But they have not been slaves, they have not been subjected to Jim Crow, and lynching by the thousands, etc. So if blacks move to the country they risk being KKK'd out of there (burning crosses, kids being bullied in schools life threatened). That's why blacks (like everyone else) tend to go to areas where they know they will be accepted, areas where there are other blacks. Also history - most blacks live along the path of the Great Migration where blacks fled the oppression of the south for economic opportunities in the north. Why don't blacks ski - yes money and isolation. Even if we can find someone to teach us, we also have to make sure that the neighbors and schools and police force accept us and our families. Remember we cannot hide our ethnicity.
9
Would you guys ever consider doing articles on blacks that aren't pessimistic, bleak narratives and contribute to negative self-esteem or ambitions? Why do websites such as yours never talk about uplifting stories involving black people, just the bad ones?
I come across more positive-reinforcement stories about black Americans on neutral or even right-wing websites at times than sites like yours, stories that don't have to negatively portray other groups just to post uplifting stories about blacks, either.
Thank you for your time.
12
I shudder at reading some of these comments. Government programs may or may not be the solution. But the problem of racism continues to be The American Dilemma. Look at the photographs of the civil rights movement: rabid white people foaming at the mouth at young black people wearing suits and ties (the Greensboro Woolworth's) or dresses (Little Rock). And now comments about how "they" dress. Seriously? As long as some view the underlying "crime" as being black, the "evidence" will always be skewed to justify attitudes and actions that serve to keep "them" in their place...preferably at a distance.
If you combine "follow the money" with "follow the fear" you probably get a pretty good roadmap to American race relations. Massive incarceration, privatisation of prisons and unwarranted police killings are the current manifestations of this sordid history. The truly sick aspect of this is that the benefits accrue to a relative few, but we all pay in varying degrees.
10
Why would "predatory lenders," whatever that is supposed to mean, target lower-income borrowers of any race? Wouldn't it make more sense for the predators to go after richer prey?
Somehow the Times manages to find "racism" under every basket, yet ignores the real reform that has taken place in this country during my lifetime. The strictures of institutional racism were broken long ago by the triumph of the civil rights movements. Yet the seemingly constant charge of "racism" today tends to trivialize and ignore the real and lasting accomplishments of that movement, while ginning up a lot of misplaced anger. While there will always be some individuals with evil hearts and racial prejudices, the policies of institutional racism were terminated long ago.
13
This editorial is absolute bosh.
As a one-time mortgage broker in Atlanta, I was able to obtain mortgage funding for black applicants in both good areas and bad. All they needed were a job, reasonably good credit, and income that demonstrated they could afford the payment. There is no red line.
The other part of this woe-is-me narrative suggests white people who bought homes in decades past built wealth for their progeny by passing it on. Seriously? You mean parents who had a lot of kids and lived in Wonder Years houses? Tell that to their children and you’ll hear guffaws like you’ve never heard before. You will also inadvertently insult their children by refusing to acknowledge the struggles they endured to build lives for themselves, without help.
The fact of the matter is, with reverse migration, like there is in Atlanta, black homeowners in once depressed areas now have equity positions they never thought possible.
Essays like this hurt, rather than help, by putting forth a false narrative as fact, proving that the left has its own propaganda problems to sort out.
29
My parents bought their first home -- a plain little bungalow with 2 bedrooms and 1 bathroom -- in the Rustbelt Midwest, in 1952. For whatever reason, they did NOT use the GI Bill. They may not have been aware of it. The house cost $18,000 in 1952.
They lived there for over 33 years, until my mom passed away.
After many improvements and remodeling (all done by themselves), my dad sold the house after mom died for $51,000 in 1985 (minus realtor costs).
He took that money to Florida, at which time prices were dirt cheap and bought a nice little ranch house in a small town.
But when he died some years later….every nickel of equity in that second retirement home went to pay for his medical expenses (stage 4 colon cancer) and costs of a nursing home, and then a hospice. I think something like $4000 was left at the very end, and I split that "vast wealth" with my two brothers.
The idea that "all white people are rich" or "all white people have this fantastic amount of home equity because banks lent to them" is pure bunk and provably ridiculous.
25
"Under this system, a naïve buyer ..."
This statement and this entire editorial on blacks facing discrimination in housing is problematic on two fronts.
First, what is the proportion of white, Hispanic, Chinese and other buyers that faced similar hurdles in buying and being able to continue to stay in their home? Like so much in the "progressive" press these days, focusing on the racial aspect of "discrimination" distracts and divides Americans on from the real issue - that is economic discrimination. Poor whites and Hispanics in similar circumstances are going through the same travails as blacks.
Second, referencing the "naïve buyer" is a cop out. People across the racial spectrum should be educated and fully aware of what they are getting in to, especially the downside risk, when buying a home. Too many people, enamored by reality TV shows, see their home as an investment and a ladder to riches.
A home is a home, first, second and last. It should be ancillary as an investment since over 15 to 30 years there is no guarantee of a return. If you are over stretching your finances to afford buying a house and don't fully know the risk, you are headed for trouble. That is the type of basic common sense that is too often lacking in many home buyers - it doesn't matter if they're black, white, Hispanic, Chinese or whatever.
Caveat emptor - the government is not necessarily going to be there to save you from your own misguided and downright bad decisions.
10
It all boils down to money.There is no longer any red lining..at least here in Las Vegas. Either you have the down payment or credit score or you do not get the mortgage. If you have a bad credit history you are no going to get a mortgage whatever your skin or black or white or brown.
11
The divisive issue of almost any discussion involving race is captured in the lead sentence of this editorial.
While some white American families benefited from wealth created by 1 or 2 generations of home ownership, not all white Americans benefited. Probably not most white Americans.
There is zero data presented that a mean average, or a median average let alone a majority of whites accumulated wealth this way. Zero.
There is zero data presented that breaks such wealth accumulation down to individuals; eg, a white family of five children inheriting a $50k estate 50 yrs ago is very different than a single child inheriting same.
The editors do their readership a disservice by generalizing such assertions to span all of white American families.
The effort to ensure that African Americans are not discriminated against in matters of homeownership should not result in a "black v white" zero sum game. Society is far too complex for that simplistic posturing unless the objective is to pursue some other agenda dependent upon a divided people.
Yes, some black families were denied a fair opportunity to live in white neighborhoods. That's reprehensible and should not be permitted. Those who practice such discrimination should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.
Division based on race is something that conservative republicans have proven themselves quite adept. It's a shame that the NYT editors pursue the same goal from a different vantage point.
11
And if you have any doubts about the exclusionary policies for white communities outlined in this superb editorial, just ask Brenna Walker what happened when he tried t have a neighborly conversation in Rochester Hills, Michigan.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/14/us/michigan-teen-shot-directions.html
The racism persists all the way down to the white occupants.
"Oh," you say, "this was an exception."
NOT!
And not even in the Detroit area:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Renisha_McBride
Again, superb editorial, and so richly documented.
College students in need of an outline for a term paper? Take note!
4
Majority liberal, Democrat blue cities and states have as much a discriminatory behaviour but it is more subtle, hidden or unspoken. New England is the worst.
8
I understand there is evidence of private real estate brokers treating black and white prospective buyers differently. And landlords often discriminate against blacks in renting.
But this article is about the economic effect of blacks being prevented from enjoying the investment returns available for home ownership.
The problem is that home ownership is not an especially good investment. Robert Schiller said "from 1890 to 1990 the appreciation in US housing was just about zero."
https://www.citylab.com/equity/2013/09/why-us-needs-fall-out-love-homeow...
So from an investment portfolio point of view, you'd think that in general those who invested in more typical financial assets would have outperformed vs. investing the same money in a primary home.
So it would seem an open question whether home ownership could explain a significant portion of racial wealth disparity on the aggregate level. I'd like to see further analysis to separate correlation vs. causation.
Because more federal subsidies encouraging home ownership may be a waste of resources. We've already heard the criticism that federal law required Fannie and Freddie to buy up subprime loans and encouraged the housing bubble leading to the recession.
8
I agree. Outside of major cities with high-paying Industries, home prices typically have not risen as exponentially. And once you factor in the cost of living, property taxes, and the interest paid on a high mortgage, the profit margin at sale time rarely outperforms the market.
I think this idea of homeownership based wealth is overstated. In most areas of the country home prices have not risen as a dramatically as they have in major cities. I think that home ownership helps in the creation of wealth by allowing people to lock in their housing cost at lower percentages of their salary. If their income rises, they're in a better position to save and invest their additional income versus renters with consistently rising housing costs regardless of their income. Homeowners are also better position to handle times of economic stagnation. Even if you haven't had a raise in 5 years, you've likely face at least one increase as a renter. Homeowners have fixed rate mortgages.
6
wcdessertgirl: the only way to avoid housing costs entirel is to live in mom's basement -- or a cardboard box under a bridge. ANYWHERE you live, you will have to pay taxes -- your rent includes them -- and homeowners have to pay regular increases in property taxes and assessments. Your insurance goes up too. So your mortgage does not stay "fixed" even if your loan does not change.
1
Largely agree with your post with one huge caveat. It is much more difficult, if not impossible, to follow the orders of the hateful liberals* and "move to where the jobs are" if you are upside down in a mortgage.
The USA and Spain were both hammered badly by the housing debacle. Curiously, both had much higher than usual percentages of home ownership. As home ownership moved back down towards more historic levels so did unemployment. Not stating there is a definite correlation---but it is curious.
A home can be an anchor in a community. It can also be an albatross around ones neck. Furthermore, not everyone has a fixed rate mortgage.
The problem is that millions of people fell for the blatant lie that a "home is your best investment." No. A home is a building. A place to live. It should not be viewed as an investment.
*Most liberals (of which I am included) are not hateful. But I do hear a lot of hateful venom spewed at Trump voters in the hard hit heartland. It sickens me.
1
The two cities with the narrowest gap are both cities next to our largest Army bases. I wonder what the comparison in those 2 cities would be limiting it to black households with someone either active in military or retired from military. I would bet close to zero. Something else is going on here. Having worked for a large bank, I really find it hard to believe that a bank officer says don’t give this household a loan because someone is black. The risk/return for a low level functionary is all risk/no return for such a decision.
People may be getting the wrong products for various reasons, some self-serving, but I doubt race is the stand out. If you don’t work on the right causes, you will never solve the problem.
7
So true. Following a spate of stories about unfair housing practices in the late 90s, another piece came out, buried deep in the B-Section, that showed black borrowers were less likely than whites to have good credit. The statistics came from Freddie Mac.
5
First of all I agree there is discrimination in this area. What troubled me was that during the run up in housing prices I saw local minority realtors and mortgage brokers push homes and mortgages on their minority customers who did not understand and who often could not really afford the properties. These agents and brokers in some cases were making hundreds of thousand of dollars a year, by pretty much lying to their local customers and neighbors.
The next issue is that the government wanted to encourage home ownership, so they relaxed down payments and oversight of the appraisal process. So low income, at risk buyers, with no saving cushions were betting that home prices would rise and their interest rates (in the case of floating rate loans) would not increase. This is pretty much gambling that was promoted by our government. If banks and wall street had tried to demand 20% down payments and full documentation from all buyers they would have been accused of discrimination.
Unfortunately the same at risk, low income parties (of all ethnic backgrounds) are being shut out of our education system in a similar fashion and again the government really has not addressed the issue or really admitted the huge problem it is. We have almost one half of undergraduate students in community colleges and very few seem to graduate.
9
All of the assertions about the present state of African-American home ownership are wrong. It is not surprising considering the sources are all advocacy groups engaging in special pleading, but here are the facts: African-American home ownership is at record highs and is entirely the result of macro-economic conditions. If you want to pinpoint how African-American home ownership declined, do not look to the legacies of racism - anachronism at its finest - but to the OBAMA administration, which did not care about the people losing their homes due to predatory lending, only about the needs of the big banks. When did the editorial board of the NYT become SJWs - full of moral absolutism and devoid of facts and reason?
29
You mean the same President Obama who ushered in the programs that enabled millions of people to keep their homes. It was Dubya who caused the housing collapse.
11
African Americans were not only "eligible" under the Homestead Act of 1862 but the Act was designed to include them and eventually resulted in "one fourth or all Black farmers owing their land" (Homestead Acts, Wikipedia). Further, what does "the collapse of Reconstruction" have to do African Americans obtaining Homestead land? This land was in western territories and eventually states, not in the Confederate South.
24
I'm so tired of the constant victim-culture refrain of "predatory" conduct and "discrimination".
1. Predatory lending? False. Nobody forced anybody at gunpoint to sign a loan and take the loan proceeds. Many of us had many opportunities at many times to over-leverage our homes. Most of us chose not to do so.
2. "Predatory" pricing? Is Starbucks guilty of predatory pricing because they offer coffees at $4 per cup when you can get the same at McDonald's for $1 a cup?
3. Is it "discrimination" if an identifiable group tends to spend more at Starbucks than most financial advisors would recommend, with the result that some individuals in this group encounter financial difficulties?
Let's all grow up and recognize reality. The world offers us many choices. We have personal responsibility for the choices we make.
Sure, we can blame history. My ancestors include ethnic groups that suffered from widespread enslavement in the past. But I don't reach for that as an explanation for the results of my current choices.
59
The funny part is that, more often than not, it's not even black Americans who are writing these articles; it's white 'progressive' types who are (supposedly) speaking for blacks, but this does more harm than good.
Do not be fooled into thinking it is black writers putting these out, because even when it is, more often than not they are only doing so on the orders of another, usually a white person, higher up in the chain.
5
Here's the point you seem to be missing; this has nothing to do with your ancestors and other ethnic groups that suffered from widespread enslavement in the past. This has to do with the fact that Blacks have suffered disproportionately from racial discrimination in the past, as well as in the present.
And any cursory glance at American history will verify this.
14
Your post begs the question:were African-American discriminated in terms of the mortgages available to them compared to equally qualified Whites? The answer from numerous sources, both Federal and private,is a resounding YES! So basically, African-Americans didn't have a "choice" - a word that permeates your post.
16
And what exactly stops blacks from buying houses in neighborhoods where they live and working together to improve those neighborhoods?
Plenty of other ethnic groups in this country have lived and live clustered in neighborhoods, and enhance those neighborhoods' values.
The main challenge with black economics today isn't racism; it's how blacks are going to find, for themselves, effective ways to prosper and sustain that prosperity.
31
History has shown that groups excluded from the best neighborhoods, hospitals, universities, and clubs can by their own excellence turn their own into the best and most desired.
4
Wow! Do I sense here a resistance to incessant guilt tripping from NYT?
4
The whole idea put forth in some of the comments shows the depth of the racism that scapegoats Africans-Americans. Using claims that it was the loans to African-Americans that brought on the Great Recession go hand in hand with discriminatory statements such as- they bring down home values. Values are set more by Realtors and Banks than by who lives in these homes. Nourishment of a neighborhood comes more from the ability to get home improvement loans than it does from mowing the lawn. A nicely set table may get AH`S but it`s the meat on the table that nourishes.
6
actually, it all boils down to the character of those who write the laws or make determinations--the human flaw , if it is racist, is going to determine that we have a racist society. People like trump determine how our society moves forward or not. He is a racist, bigot and worse. The laws he creates determine how our future is. Blame the creators, not the papers on which things are written.That is why we don't ever move forward.
2
You don't have to be rich to have a well-kept house and yard. You need a culture that values such things.
6
I would argue that whites are usually the scapegoats. We are blamed for every social ill in the black community.
3
on one hand, the NYT decries excessive restrictive Federal regulations that restricted state and local governments from taking actions in their own communities. On the other, they complain about absence of Federal regulations that put the burden of solving problems on local and state governments. And within all this whining, not a single constructive solution is offered.
18
George W. Bush's 2002-2004 campaign to boost mortgage lending to blacks and Hispanics appears to be forgotten. At his 10/15/2002 White House Conference on Increasing Minority Homeownership, Bush demanded 5.5 million more minority homeowners by 2010, instructing his federal regulators, in the name of racial equality, to stop being fussy about old fashioned credit standards like down payments and documentation. You can read Bush's speech here:
http://www.unz.com/isteve/2002-bushs-speech-to-white-house/
Angelo Mozilo of Countrywide Financial seized on Bush's initiative in his Harvard speech in early 2003 to pledge $600 billion in minority and lower income lending by 2010 (which Mozilo upped to one trillion dollars in early 2005).
This war on racial gaps in home ownership helped lead to the Housing Bubble and subsequent Housing Bust.
But I guess nobody learned anything.
31
I don’t think that explanation is correct. The housing bubble was caused by lax lending across the board, risky loans being sold as good loans to institutional investors, and a Federal Reserve that failed to consider a brewing bubble in its interest-rate calculations, instead focusing strictly on inflation movements.
5
There's going to be a Red Line until African Americans own the ability to lend money. Economic power is the only thing that reduces bias in this country. It won't eliminate it but if you look at the multitude of immigrant groups that have come to this country in every case they had to overcome some sort of biased from those who where already here.
2
What is appalling and shameful is the ignorance many show of recent history and how some misinterpret the writers explaination of what caused the ownership gap between black and white Americans. First it is well known that numerous government programs were instituted to assist American homebuyers but African Americans were systematically excluded from these programs. The government took it upon itself to create policies which excluded prospective black homebuyers from programs which benefited whites. Discrimination and preditory lending practices simply made matters significantly worse and compounded over time. Wall Street and politicians did the rest. The 90's ushered in significant deregulation of banks and other financial institutions. Mortgage Backed Securities, Collateralized Mortgage Obligations, to name just two types of "products" offered by Wall Street created demand for high interest securities that were presumably safe investments. The linchpin in all this were the ratings agencies which stamped these "toxic" packages with the AAA seal of approval. All racial and ethnic groups were victimized by this Wall Street centered con game. Again, because preditory lending was allowed to flurish in minority communities the impact of the Great Recession was profoundly more negative than elsewhere. People did take out mortages they couldn't afford. Banks and regulators failed to do their jobs. But they were feeding the great greed machine of Wall Street.
9
Redlining isn't the issue. I live in a liberal city with a diverse population. African Americans are free to live anywhere they want. Yet many tend to self-segregate...living in predominately black residential areas. I also notice that other ethnicities Hispanics, Asians, etc. do the same thing. If you look closely you will find self-segregation by religion. Orthodox Jews often live in small self-contained communities. Anyone could live & be welcomed here but none choose to. Which is the crux of the "problem"....if there is indeed a problem. Left to our own devices we as Americans tend to self-segregate by race, religion, class, sexual orientation, & a host of other things. And here's the dirty little secret that no one wants to talk about. The FHA can't force us to start integrating...not if we freely choose not to...& clearly millions of us have chosen to live where we feel comfortable. The only way to change this is “mandated social engineering.” The current method of doing this is trying to disperse poor people to wealthier neighborhoods. Not surprisingly it was a disaster met with fierce opposition. People are starting to ask why should access to opportunity be defined by how many white neighbors you have? Moving around poor people doesn't begin to solve the problems related to disinvestment in communities of color. Forced integration isn't the answer. It goes against our nature & the way society is evolving. Is there a better way? Maybe not. Maybe it can'be fixed.
24
"Anyone could live & be welcomed here but none choose to."
That may or may not actually be true where you live, but it isn't in most places. Unfortunately, many neighborhoods aren't welcoming of people who look or live differently than they do. That's why people congregate: there's safety in numbers.
And to further complicate the picture, white people who move into neighborhoods that are primarily occupied by people of color risk inadvertently gentrifying it -- thus pushing longtime occupants out -- or being perceived as doing so. In my own neighborhood -- traditionally a mix of races and careers -- we're all getting pushed out by people in higher paying industries: (even us white people are getting pushed out by better looking white people.)
The reasons for continued housing segregation are many and complex, but I doubt "everybody likes it this way" is all that high on the list.
7
The Times also needs to remember that there is such a thing as freedom of association and people wanting to live where they want to live! At the same time this is not to justify the unenforcement of Federal Housing Laws! But, here again these are social issues which are very difficult to legislate. Additionally, there are many people I believe, who think the American Dream doesn't necessarily mean owning a home. Except for Real Estate agents! Finally, at times the Editorial folks need to leave your ivory towers! And there are instances when I get the feeling The Board likes to inflame racial hostilities, just like Fox News!!!
16
I still see differences in behavior and dress. Does that count?
4
Here in Madison, Wisconsin, when our clinic and myself hired a black medical assistant to work with me as my "nurse" in otolaryngology. I found out through her that the real estate agent only showed them homes in black neighborhoods. Her husband was a OTR truck driver. She asked the realtor why they were only shown homes in black neighborhoods. She received no answer from the realtor, but only then was taken to white neighborhoods. Hmmmm? 2018! She was an excellent medical assistant by the way, as I knew she would be.
9
This editorial argues that racism makes credit too tight for blacks (they can't get loans) and that racism makes credit too lax for blacks (they are offered loans that they can't repay). This kind of paradoxical thinking reminds me of the many NYT editorials about how blacks suffer from white flight and how they also suffer from "gentrification" of black neighborhoods. What gives?
In reality, assessing racism in the mortgage market is very hard. The acid test would be to compare total profitability of mortgages (including risk-adjusted default rates and post-foreclosure recovery rates) across races over the entire credit cycle, not just during booms or busts. It would require careful and unbiased statistical analysis over the 15-30 year lifetime of most mortgages. Because of the sheer complexity of the requisite data as well as the emotional and political fogbanks, objectively differentiating racist lending practices from lending patterns driven by true economic demographics is essentially impossible and certainly beyond the capabilities of the opinion pages.
12
After the financial crisis in 2008 and the absurd reflation of the housing market after that, we have to wonder whether the benefits of home ownership with little up front equity are in the best interests of the country. In a dynamic, rapidly changing economy, a long term mortgage obligation can be a gateway to indentured servitude and not to riches.
9
People can expect no help from the divisive Trump Administration, to be sure. But where was the help from the Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama Administrations that could have rectified this longstanding, pervasive and symptomatic problem?
This issue is more than a master's thesis. It's solid evidence of hardline white supremacist policies at the state and federal level for 400 years.
But the fix is not only in housing law. It is in health law and education law and employment law and credit law and banking law and voting law and immigration law and in the equal social and economic opportunities that every American deserves.
4
Google John F. Kennedy Executive Order 11063.
1
This is a valuable historical perspective of systematic discrimination against African Americans. It is the reason blacks cringe at slogans like” make America great again”. To return to this system of racial discrimination—that real estate developers like Donald Trump and his father supported and were sanctioned for— represents a grave threat to our country’s future and the recovery of failing minority communities. The big question is how to sensibly address these problems and there is no hope of doing that under this administration and republican controlled congress. Voting the republicans out of congress is the first step in recovering our country from incompetence and to improving the lives of millions of our fellow citizens.
10
Do "integrated" neighborhoods remain that way, or do they tend towards uniformity over time? What happens to the home values, and the savings of persons whose net worth is tied up in those homes, when neighborhoods either gentrify or undergo white flight? Also, what happens to home values in neighborhoods that become predominantly or significantly Asian, like Little Neck or Flushing in Queens?
9
Prior to this election I was largely ignorant of just how much we've discriminated against black Americans and have held them back. As a gen-xer I drank the kool aid that the civil rights movement had begun to level the playing field. Are we even capable of making things right with our black community.
Here in Portland our historically black neighborhood is being gentrified. For much of the city's history they were only allowed to live in a small sliver of Portland and now they're being shut out by rising home costs and rental prices. In addition the history of the community is being erased. Portland's right to return policy is a start but the funding is so limited that most who want to return to the neighborhood they've called home for generations aren't able to do so.
Slavery isn't as much a part of our past as we like to think. It's going to take a concentrated effort to ensure that every American regardless of race, religion, gender or sexual orientation is able to persue their right to live their best life. As MLK once said, we need to honor the words in our founding documents for all Americans not just white Americans.
10
Over 1,000 words and no mention of the role then Rep Barney Frank had in precipitating the housing market crash? A crash that disporportionately impacted people of color because Mr Frank chose political expedience over sound economics?
12
While it may be true that for all the reasons outlined here, Blacks find it difficult to gain access to home ownership, the awful truth is that it's no easier for Blacks to rent apartments in essentially non-Black areas and for the very same reasons.
Sadly no amount of legislation has ever been effective in allaying the practice of housing discrimination, regardless of if it is passed or not.
7
To the extent that such overt racism on the part of white Americans has resulted in extreme denial of fair opportunity for black Americans, and has been pervasively practiced over multiple generations, and hundreds and thousands of real estate companies, government agencies, legal entities, and financial transactions, it would seem that ultimately SOMEONE would own this blatant problem, and offer some solutions besides handwringing over the continuing racism, or the pitiful token gestures made toward assisting black homeownership that usually results in more exploitation and less progress.
After hundreds of years of documented government discrimination would not some type of reparations and help for obtaining real estate be in order? It could directly and immediately affect black home ownership.
Is America so married to racism and racial segregation in homeownership and opportunity that it cannot address or change such unjust practices?
To suggest that providing limited “affordable housing” in rich white neighborhoods is an answer is nothing but a joke.
3
The broad generalizations here are beneath the editorial standards of a high school newspaper.
The reality of the Housing crises is that the well-intentioned federal government set it in motion.
Federal housing programs de-collateralized a lending system creating great risk in the loan market.
Despite its best and creative efforts to mitigate that risk, the market collapsed.
Let’s not repeat history.
10
the people that benefit and profit will continue to do so they always have, those that see us less than will continue to and it's not simply generational racism is profitable and beneficial for some that is why it continues
3
It seems middle class americans have created wealth by investing in their community. Taxing themselves locally to build schools, recruit teachers, build hospitals, stock libraries, recruit employers. They realize their prudent investment when their home values appreciate. Capitalism is great !
9
The majority of white Americans don't understand the legacy of slavery and tell themselves that racism is a thing of the past as if the past didn't bring us to the present.
Slavery's descendants never really had their ball and chain removed and it has been passed on from generation to generation.
Every time I read of a recent study that shows that blacks with the same credit histories as whites are charged higher interest for the same types of loans- or serve longer prison sentences for same crimes as whites I'm reminded of the cumulative effect of racism in this country.
As the article points out, a great grandfather receiving a loan for a home 70 years ago can make a great difference in the financial standing of a great grandson now. Imagine the difference between that great grandfather going to prisons instead of being offered probation.
Until white Americans understand the legacy of their racism they can't understand it's devastating power today.
10
While many white Americans were against the institution of slavery preceding the Civil War, not even a majority of hard-core abolitionists were willing to work for black integration into government, our economic system or especially their neighborhoods and schools.
Later, the black middle class was set back immensely by the election and policies of Woodrow Wilson, who was the first Democrat elected president after the Civil War- back when Dems were still the party of the white south and segregation.
The progeny of all those black government workers who were demoted or let go, thanks to Wilson's hard-core racism, are still suffering the economic consequences.
While the south gets most of the condemnation for holding back blacks with Jim Crow right into the '60's, integration of state and local government jobs all over the country wasn't widely accomplished until just a decade before than the final Civil Rights Act.
The more I've learned the more the argument for reparations seems rational- although I don't believe that is the best solution. Whites should at least feel a sense of unpaid debt, and we need to find a practical way to pay it.
5
Everyone wants to live in my town. But the median price of a home is $800,000. Good luck.
4
My eyes begin to glaze over when someone starts citing events in the 1930's and 1960's as the explanation for current home ownership issues in the black community. Two issues glaringly absent from the editorial was the pressure put on banks and other lenders to increase loans to minority buyers regardless of whether they were credit-worthy and the conscious segregation of black upper & middle class residents into minority dominated suburban neighborhoods. The first issue had nothing to do with predatory lending and everything to do with avoiding the penalties of regulators if they did not meet minority lending quotas. The second caused black home owners to have a dearth of buyers once the market rebounded - see the black suburbs in places like Prince Georges County MD.
13
What a great piece to read...until it got to politics as usual. Here we have detailed a long history of housing discrimination that continues right into this moment. Housing discrimination and the intergenerational impact it has had is devastating. It occurred by law under both parties, and continues in practice, under both parties. The analysis made it clear that we all have tolerated and even promoted using housing to discriminat to protect white privilege. Then came the dig at the end that ignores the complicity of Democrats and Republicans, and makes this about someone who entered politics 15 months ago. This after noting that the biggest gaps persist and are worse in cites that have long been dominated by Democrats, even Chicago and New York where Democrat political machines have had the greatest influence. This problem is about us all, not Trump. Why punctuate a powerful exposition of injustice, a situation we all own and all have a moral obligation to address, with petty, tribal finger-pointing? I understand not liking Trump. But this makes it seems that your contempt for Trump is greater than your indignation for what has happened unjustly for generations. We did this. It was literally on the books and carefully maintained by the very people we all voted for years.
10
The analysis was did not at all make it clear to me that housing laws is solely to blame to for economic inequality. In fact, I found contrary evidence in Wiki article on the Homestead Act. This "we" you speak of does not include me.
3
This argument has been made repeatedly over the years. However, for it to be true there would have to be a conspiracy of racism across the entire banking sector, frankly to ridiculous to be believed. If what the editorial avers is true, then why did not other lending institutions come in and pick up the slack offering slightly less attractive rates than offered to whites but much better than the so-called predatory rates. The marketplace does not lie. If no other lender appeared, then all of your expert analyses are faulty and the loans made by Wells Fargo in Baltimore and similar lenders were what at a fair rate.
10
The article is condemning racially segregated neighborhoods and claiming that these have kept the property values, and as such the wealth of the residents, artificially low. All right, but can we then explain the spate of articles condemning the trend of white, higher income persons moving into traditionally black neighborhoods as gentrification? This trend would first, integrate the neighborhoods and second, increase the property values of the residents living therein, thereby increasing the wealth of those individuals. There seems to be a contradiction between these two trends in the Times and elsewhere.
Second, I notice an interesting correlation. The cities listed with the widest gaps all seem to be ones that vote Democratic. Albany, Buffalo, and New York, for example, are the some of the only parts of NY State to vote Democratic, while the rest of the state votes Republican almost exclusively. Does that mean that it is the Democratic party which is either sponsoring these policies or at least ignoring the problem?
28
David H. Kaplan, a geographer at Kent State University, has done superb, rigorous empirical work on predatory lending, and its pernicious effects. The evidence is there...will policy makers act?
4
"For generations of white American families, homeownership has been a fundamental means of accumulating wealth. Their homes have grown..."
I still own the Detroit property that my maternal grandfather purchased after the Depression. The assessed value of the land (30 by 110 ft) is $100.00. There's only one building on the entire block.
We moved out of the neighborhood in the late 1980's. It was essentially a war zone located on the near-east side of Detroit.
I graduated from a Detroit Public High School and attended a public commuter university after serving a tour in Vietnam.
Why move from Detroit? As I said my neighborhood had become a combat zone. In other neighborhoods residents no longer had control over which public school their children attended due to Federal Court ordered school bussing.
Prior to 1967 we had two major supermarkets (Kroger and A&P). During the 1967 riots both were looted and only one came back as a second-tire super market.
This was long before the mortgage meltdown or Betsy Devos.
The low property values were due mainly to the actions of the residents - crime and violence perpetrated by the residents made it unlivable. There's no dog whistle to it.
Contrary to the NYT's inflammatory and false dichotomy racial narrative my family has moved from the bottom 20% to the top 10% in terms of income and wealth with no help from "generations of accumulating wealth".
All I can do is shake my head at the degree of pandering by the NY Times.
66
Blacks simply have to learn how to invest in each other to build wealth than simply relying on just one thing - the roof over their heads. There are other ways to build wealth that don't involve such egregious racism.
4
It really is a shame. Obama had 8 years to fix it and rather than focus on this problem he wasted his time on destroying healthcare and keeping wages down. It is yet another mess left for Trump to clean up.
17
Being a Times editorial writer is a cushy job. All you have to do is follow the Script: Everything bad in the US is caused by racism (or sexism). When you know the Truth already, why bother with evidence? But the evidence won't go away. There has been a long debate over possible discrimination in mortgage lending. It is undisputed that blacks get denied loans more often than whites. The question is why. A lot of the difference can be explained by factors like creditworthiness or income (or lack of it). But it has often been pointed out that, if lenders turned down qualified loan applications because of racial animus, then we should expect to observe lower rates of delinquency or default among black borrowers (because they had to meet a higher standard to qualify). But that is not what happens. Blacks are in fact MORE likely to default or be delinquent. The natural conclusion, then, is that, on average, there is no discrimination -- or indeed that blacks are discriminated IN FAVOR OF. The Times has taken a complex reality and reduced it to a sound-bite.
57
Free market capitalism rewards decisions that are sound on a business basis and punishes those that are not.
9
These kinds of articles are long overdue and all too rare. But even giving credit where credit is due, this feels a little light.
What's missing is anything touching Los Angeles, CA. Especially the incredibly affluent West Side. Is California really so far away that what happens here can't be investigated and understood? Because the numbers, the scale, the clever implementation, the overall effect, combined with the political power of the affluent here, should make the story of housing discrimination against blacks as it is practiced in what is the most identity politics-correct region of the country worthy of a multi-part feature in your paper.
When blacks couldn't buy homes in Rancho Park, Beverlywood, Westwood, etc. 20 years ago they lost out on a fortune as home and property values boomed. How that impacted those families financially over time is incalculable.
Homeowner cabals. Ever heard of 'em? We got 'em. Investigate, please. Blow the roof of this massive story instead of calling out Buffalo and Albany. Quit picking on middle class cities when you have the most affluent perpetrators on the planet here.
And while you're at it, take on the proliferation of elite private schools in LA over the last 30 years. We probably have more elite private K-12 schools than anywhere in the country. Mostly filled with the children of white liberal progressive Democrats. Those private schools are all about one thing: white flight from forced segregation in the public schools.
14
don't knock the inflated appraised values of those elite neighborhoods. it's a progressive means of distributing the tax burden onto the guilt ridden wealthy. they pay 10-20x the taxes per square foot than the eastside. the trick is to get those tax revenues spent appropriately where they can benefit the wider community.
3
NYT, what a devastating story. Our original sin just doesn't stop. Someday it just might get better but the realtor in charge of the show won't help.
3
All of these circumstances and barriers may be true. But isn’t this all just symptomatic of how poor the average black American is? Isn’t the root problem here wealth inequality, education and job opportunities? What’s the racial breakdown on housing aid like section 8? If you get a community college degree or learn a trade, land a job with something close to the median salary , and save a little bit. You can probably buy a house in many markets in America... maybe not in Manhattan where the global elite noveau rich who subscribe and read this paper live... but in plenty of safe, liveable places.... granted, that doesn’t not go back and solve these injustices. But look to the future. Make things fair and look to the future. This groveling in the injustices of the past is a mental prison for progressives .
9
Why is it that blue areas of the country have the worst problem and red areas have the least problem? It seems blacks keep on voting for politicians that do nothing to address the problem. Blacks have to start holding Democrats accountable rather than keep on voting for Democrats blindly. In my experience the Northeast has the worst discrimination in modern times and the South actually has less. Another proof of this is the fact that cops who shoot blacks are much more likely to be fired or convicted in the South than in the Northeast.
11
Perhaps what America needs most is good low skilled wages and plenty of jobs. Both seem on the way. Lower corporate taxes should help bring existing jobs back as could a less regulated environment.
Hiding in plain sight.
Remember those WaMu or Washington Mutual ads where an attractive young black man acted as spokesman while a group of old white men bankers harrumphed nearby? Well guess who turned out to be one of the worse predatory lenders? WaMu, yea that sounds about right, a deceptive ad from a deceptive lender. We all saw it hiding in plain sight but did anyone investigate?
7
So when bank lending rules are overly lax it’s “predatory lending,” And when they’re tightened up “discriminatory.” Either way, the banks can’t seem to win. As usual, the Times Editorial Board takes a complex issue and makes it racial. Not accurate or helpful.
35
Banks can't seem to win? Really?
The editorial board didn't create racist real estate industry practices. Citizens, realtors, bankers, insurers and government did. It is a fact.
Banks still discriminate. Educate yourself.
3
Perhaps we need a new antonym for white flight to replace gentrification. Perhaps reintegration.
That’s what’s happening to some of the South Side Chicago neighborhoods inadvertently decimated by well intentioned reformers (Fritz et. al.) in the ‘60s.
The current residents of color are as committed to the status quo as their colorless predecessors were then.
Disruption of this sad cycle may be achieved by a novel yet time tested real estate approach: co-ops.
Socially purposeful developers can create them for current residents, allowing the community to control membership and security. These enclaves will anchor redevelopment of single family and condo housing stock and ultimately create economically sustainable, diverse neighborhoods.
2
This situation is one where the Federal Consumer Protection Agency made huge inroads. Thanks to Mulvaney, Trump and the Republican Congress this most effective agency could soon be dust.
Perhaps this is a case that the ACLU can take up. It is definitely Discrimination as practiced by Realtors, Banks and Mortgage companies. There was also a lot of fraud as well.
Mayors can do little as most of them do not have the authority to enforce State or Federal rules, regulations or laws governing banks. State Attorney Generals and State Banking Agencies on the other hand can step if they have the political will.
Obviously we cannot rely on the Trump Administration to do anything to help those who are not like them.
4
The African American heads of FNMA and Merrill Lynch -Franklin Raines and Stan O'Neal, respectively - grew rich as the black faces of white Wall Street greed during the subprime crisis. For us blacks, the enemy is often within.
8
Has the Editorial Board analyzed home ownership by Asian Americans? What differences between those data the data about African-American home,ownership? What might explain those differences?
25
Top down desegregation first--Greenwich, Scarsdale, Alpine, Saddle River, Park Slope, Upper West Side. Otherwise, pound sand.
16
An NYT article, " How Redlining's Racist Effects Lasted for Decades" (Aug. 24, 2017) shows how "loan to value" evaluations can become self-fulfilling prophecies and aren't as colorblind as they may appear. And from another angle, what happens with gentrification? Does the loan to value evaluation change because a white professional moves into a neighborhood, where it wouldn't if a black professional wanted to do so?
3
Lending is based on inncome and existing debt and credit. It was widely reported that the subprime crisis included most blacks who had been approved for mortgages under Clinton's policies to be "helpful" and increase black ownership. The financial system nearly collapsed, and the Times editorial board wannt to return to the same policies?
19
White America makes a lot of money from black poverty. They don't want to stop that money train any time soon.
6
Of course the NYT must bash President Trump and attempt to make it sound as if he is responsible for the red-lining and predatory lending problems.
Just over a year ago a black President, Barack Obama, ended 8 years in office with a majority Democrat Congress. Exactly hat was it Obama and Congress did to solve the red-lining problem and predatory lending practices?
Little or nothing, it seems.
17
A quick review of what Trump's plan to repeal Dodd-Frank would mean to millions of Americans might help to answer your question.
As well as this link:
www.slate.com/articles
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/02/how_the...
3
My mother worked for decades building an organization that sought to rehabilitate housing and poor neighborhoods, fought redlining and found ways to make it profitable for banks to invest in helping poorer people buy and rehab homes. It became the model for much of Northern and Central Westchester. Today, the successful organization she gave blood, sweat and tears to for over 30 years to build from the ground up doesn't even remember her name! But many of the young women she taught and worked with do, and I am still in contact with some who were teens then, and are in their 60's now. Proven local solutions are out there. You just need to find them, and they are as close as Westchester County.
5
This editorial is premised on the notion that the white middle class is passing wealth generation to generation and that all other things are equal black to white. The Editorial also applies a one size fits all and fits the narrative mortgage story; how many of those people, black and white, did cash out refinancing as property values rose into the early 2000’s – the cash out refinance didn’t qualify for the government deals.
But most importantly of all, Black out of wedlock birth rose from 20% to 72% in those same 50 years of the Fair Housing Act. It is remarkable how well African Americans have done in homeownership given the massive percentage that are single parent households, slipping only 5%. Overall home ownership is down to 63% from a peak of 69% in 2005 – according to the Commerce Department.
31
The system is rigged. We all know that.
First, minorities start off with less capital and income. Second, they have less access to fair credit (in part because of their lack of capital and income). Third, there is still discrimination in what they are offered. Finally, zoning effectively prices them out of many areas.
Indeed, we are now seeing the reversal of the "white flight" of the 60s and 70s, in which gentrification is pricing the minorities out of the cities and forcing them into declining inner-ring suburbs.
There are no easy solutions at this time (had there been fair housing laws during the post-World War II housing boom things would have been different). For example, as the article states, we must steer between the Scylla of discrimination against minorities with good credit and the Charybdis of "easy" predatory lending as seen in the housing bubble.
Recognizing that there is a problem, and that we have not yet addressed it, is a start.
9
The "affordable housing" programs typically include barriers to wealth accumulation by limiting real estate appreciation. The "affordable" housing stock is permanently depressed in these programs, ultimately at the expense of the at risk residential investor.
7
I think this problem is more prevalent in the cities like New York. We are black and most of our friends and family members who are homeowners had to move outside of New York to find reasonably priced homes in decent areas. As a result, everyone is spread out all over from New Jersey, to Delaware, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia. The issue is really when it comes down to building wealth. And most of the areas they have settled none of their home values have increased as significantly as our home in Queens New York. In the 18 years since my husband bought this home the value has nearly tripled. To contrast, his best friend, has a home in Woodbridge, NJ,. If he sold right now, he would barely break even with what he still owes.
It seems that outside of densely populated cities, home values in predominantly black neighborhoods tend to rise slowly. It's not until these areas become gentrified that property values start increasing steadily. And this occurrence of perceived value versus based upon the ethnic demographic of the neighborhood, cannot be changed by government programs. Look at what has happened to Harlem, Washington Heights , and many parts of Brooklyn as proof of how this process works.
47
I refer all to read the op ed recently contributed by Walter F. Mondale in the NYT on the 50th Anniversary of The Fair Housing Act, April 11th 2018.
He was the author of this historic legislation. His effort to get the bill passed was a great accomplishment that changed the terrible discrimination in housing. To get this legislation passed, amendments like Dirksen’s weakened the bill’s accountability. We need to insure that this historic legislation continues to strengthen so that integration is not denied by unequal practices in lending and unequal practices in the sale of residential housing.
Any attempt at weakening this legislation would be a major setback to the intent of this legislation.
The New York Times should conduct an extensive interview with Mr. Mondale because his leadership and knowledge on this issue is unique. The intent of this bill in its original bill should be a reminder so that we can improve today’s shortcomings to improve the opportunity for so many of our fellow citizens.
We must be ever vigil to protect the gains made and to seek new opportunities for improvement to fair integration in residential housing. We must insure this legislation has the necessary accountability for its intended purpose.
I think we can do this. We must do this.
11
The problem with the Fair Housing Act goes beyond the federal government’s pervasive enforcement failures. Courts take a large share of the blame. The FHA’s provisions are often construed narrowly (by a mostly white judiciary). With judicial interpretations so literal and dense, the FHA’s force is often limited to the kind of overt disparate treatment that rarely exists today. The more pervasive and pernicious discrimination is often explained away on the assumption that the baseline state is always good-faith equal treatment. With the recent crop of judicial nominees, the FHA will be marginalized for another generation (never mind the abysmal state and of HUD).
Quite frankly, compelling investigative reporting may do more to change the landscape. PR embarrassments and public pressure are powerful. The sad reality in housing and urban investment is that money follows white people. For now, those of us with privilege must leverage it by paying attention and taking direction from communities of color already working on these issues.
16
Some attention needs to be paid to the success rate of investing in real estate. It seems that the differentiator between success and failure is often found in the equity ratio, i.e. how much down payment. The predatory programs are those offering an untenable debt to equity ratio.
9
Yet more evidence of institutional racism in America.
These are not bad apples. This is systematic mistreatment of banking customers based on their race. The regulators have to be aware of wide spread systemic abuse, but do little about it. And many politicians on the right flip the responsibility on to the victims whose homes were stolen, while centrist Democrats ignore the issue.
Leading up to and during the Great Recession, millions of homes were stolen from people who had tied up their life savings in their homes.
The fiduciary responsibility for making sure good loans are made (not liar loans or inappropriate balloon mortgages, etc. ) resides with the expert, who is the lender, not the home buyer. Legal fiduciary responsibility is far more important than "buyer beware."
And of course the Trump administration will purposefully make this problem worse, from the top down.
Many police departments reward and promote racist compromise of official policy, promoting unofficial racial discrimination. That is obvious from their conduct. Read Obama Justice Department Consent Decrees (which should have resulted in racketeering charges, but instead have now been ignored by Sessions). Read the Mollen Commission reports in NYC.
Democrats who pretend that institutional racism does not exist are part of the problem. Institutions that have official and unofficial racist policies are creating, not routing out bad apples.
Exceptions for minorities will become exceptions for you.
17
Supply, Supply, Supply!
Accross America we need federal, state, and local government to work in harmony to increase the supply of affordable "for purchase" and "for rent" properties in ECONOMICALLY INTEGRATED NEIGHBORHOODS.
7
We're talking about institutionalized racism--a situation where, like a well-oiled machine, the whole American real estate industry, and the laws surrounding it, work perfectly to keep African Americans down. And yes, under Trump (whose family real estate empire was notorious for using discriminatory practices) and anti-federalist Republicans, the machine will only get more oiled.
Add to this that cities and states are strapped for cash, and things seem hopeless.
The good news is that younger Americans of all stripes are different--overall, more urban and culturally hip. They're in the cities, and in taste and habits, they want what cities offer--jobs, art, music, urban social life--not the sameness offered by the suburbs.
At this point, government at all levels is failing to grasp this unexpected change. But corporations see it.
What's needed is for corporations to create a super well-funded private organization dedicated to building integrated middle-class housing in major urban areas, with occupancy entirely based on a lottery system.
Amazon and Google, are you listening? You've already established a new corporate model for the 21st century. Now surprise us. Take on the established for-profit real estate industry, and shake them up with a new model for housing deliberately built on integrating different kinds of people in the same buildings.
I mean it, seriously, are you listening? Didn't we learn from Romney that corporations are people, too?
10
Oracle just finished a new campus in Austin and purchased the adjacent housing complex. I suspect they will leverage the housing for entry level employees.
4
So refreshing to see young people believing that the government is not the solution and that private industry can do a much better job.
2
It would appear self-evident that a just society affords all of its citizens equal opportunity. Not equal results. That cannot be assured. But equal opportunity can and should be assured. The history recounted in this Editorial, consistent with primary research, shows that there were times in our history when we clearly have not provided all of our citizens equal opportunity to buy a home. Shame on our grandparents.
But this editorial provides little evidence that we are not providing equal opportunity today. There are some allegations about Contract-for-deed arrangements, which can in fact be a great option for people with little savings and a long term commitment to a fixer-upper. There is also data that blacks may have been charged higher interest rates in Baltimore. But if you can afford the mortgage and make your payments, you will still have a home. Indeed, there is no evidence presented that we have a national problem with opportunity.
The home ownership gap, which the cited Urban Institute report notes is multifactorial (“Many factors contribute to the large homeownership gap in different regions, including the size of the city, economic and job opportunities, the makeup of the black population (native born versus foreign born), home prices, proximity to education centers and colleges, access to traditional financial services, type of housing stock, and affordability) must be addressed at the local level. That part of the solution the Editors got right.
43
To find direct evidence of racist theft of minority homes over the last two years, read the guilty pleas of the large mortgage companies and big banks that document how the lenders specifically sold minorities liar loans (with the lender encouraging the borrower to inflate their income, as the expert in the room) and balloon mortgages (which the lender knew were likely to double or triple payments in the future.
Since these lenders sold these mortgages, which were later mixed in with good mortgages, converted to collateralized debt, rated as AAA, and sold to unsuspecting buyers, they didn't care if the mortgages were ever repaid.
Unfortunately these lenders were allowed to pay slap-on-the-wrist fines that did not significantly affect their profits from these crimes, and almost no one went to jail, so they are probably still doing it. And the Federal Reserve bought many of the junk securities at face value as part of the Quantitative Easing II program, with money "printed" for that purpose, so that we all pay for it through the devaluation of our money
The evidence is all around for those that don't blind themselves to it.
8
On the "culture" issue that keeps getting brought up---on my middle-class street in the Central New York town where I grew up, we had an African-American family, Italian families (who weren't allowed to join the local country club), etc., all mutually helpful good neighbors. Meanwhile, the town's "elite" lived in one of the earliest gated communities on the edge of town. It was THEIR kids who were usually getting into trouble with drugs, drinking, etc. Perhaps it was better for the hardworking people on my quiet, integrated street that the "upper class" lived separately!
10
There is an implied dialogue that organizations and people target black people as opposed to market and other forces have an impact. What was not included in the Baltimore were a number of market factors. When underwriting loans, loan to value is one factor but underlying trends/market conditions, etc are also factored into the desirability of providing what were essentially asset based loans. The quality of portfolios is in no small part derived from the beliefs the market has in the quality of the assets. Would you provide the same terms, loan to value, etc to a portfolio of Detroit or Baltimore inner city loans that when the market goes bad, they go much worse and you can’t resell or San Fransisco? While you can argue this is a circular reference, the color blind nature of key components of the market were not factored in.
12
Sure. Article notes that minorities were treated differently at EVERY stage of the process. Not just in lending decisions. Perhaps you can ignore that brokers were involved in initial steering to such properties as opposed to others. Not buying this. If the initial steps aren't color blind, hardly surprising that the end result won't be.
4
KKW argument that real estate brokers steered minority buyers to certain neighborhoods with higher risk profiles exonerates the lenders. The difference in treatment is then not in the financial profile of a white or black applicant, but in the risk of the property backing up the mortgage.
1
An outstanding editorial. But why not two years ago when large private equity firms were amassing these homes only to push them back to the market with onerous terms and conditions to rent or buy them? Bloomberg and others reported on these PE firms as their investments were evolving. Obama was in office, and banks still under post housing crisis strict regulations, now being dismantled. I find the timing suspect, as now, many of the CEO and founders of these PE firms are tight with the current administration and so of course, no, its unlikely the housing market can be "normalized" for the benefit of the most vulnerable-- unless incentivized by government. Obama wasted so much time, so many social issues like this one took a back seat to other agendas and here we are with Trumps very best friends literally holding the collective keys to the housing kingdom. Good luck encouraging Black and Schwarztmen, among others, to do the right thing and end discriminatory and predatory housing practices. These firms paid pennies on the dollar, using Obama/Yellen accommodative no/low rate incentives, valuations are rising, their returns in sight. Sorry NYT, the lack of business acumen driving your business and economics focus has been lacking for some time... Even James Stewart is part of the reactive coalition of voices now.
1
Discriminatory housing practices are illegal and immoral. Realtors who engage in such practices should lose their licenses. Financial institutions who engage in such practices should be barred from the home mortgage markets.
That said, enforcing such penalties on both realtors and lending institutions will not result in a meaningful change in housing patterns in this country. Market prices reflect the incomes, balance sheets, civility, stability and lifestyles of those who live in the neighborhoods where they can afford to live. Clearly if African Americans or any other ethnicity have the wherewithal to afford to live in a "better opportunity" town, suburb, neighborhood or (in the case of such metros as NYC or SF) specific buildings, they should be able to do so.
Enforcing laws and morality to ensure equal opportunity is the obligation of all Americans. That includes no longer "winking" at transgressors.
But let's not conflate equal opportunity with social engineering to close housing gaps by mandating integration regardless of qualifications. Too often "equal opportunity housing" and "low income housing availability in middle / upper middle class areas" are conflated. They should not be.
Any efforts to introduce low income housing into "better opportunity" neighborhoods will always be resisted by those who live there. To argue for such, as the editors are wont to do in related opinions, only dilutes the argument for fair play.
17
Again, someone else who ignores that minorities were treated differently from the get go. And cannot read. Nothing in this article suggests mandating low income housing in particular areas. It says that equally qualified purchasers are treated differently at every stage. Read the article, please. And check your assumptions.
7
This discrimination has proceeded unbroken in our history.
Discriminatory housing practices have been central to the disparity in wealth, income, education, employment opportunities, mobility, health, services available, acculturalization, life expectancy, and achievement between whites and African Americans.
These practices have also been central to ghettoization, increased criminal activity, discriminatory laws and law enforcement, poverty, and mass incarceration.
As MLK emphasized, the defeat of poverty is fundamental to justice.
Jim Crow was one method of control. It has morphed into other strategies, but physical containment and separation have remained the essential component. Even when laws are passed, they are not resolutely enforced.
Nothing changes. Strong and persistent action is required. As Frederick Douglass said, power yields nothing without demand.
21
The #1 enemy of forced integration is upscale liberal Democrats. They have the most.to lose.
8
Housing increasingly is becoming a problem also for all Americans, of all races. Most middle-class people are increasingly becoming priced-out of US cities, the younger middle-class citizens do not even dream of buying in San Francisco, New York City, or Boston, just to name a few.
There are 3 major reasons for this:
1. A significant barrier to homeownership for younger middle-class Americans is that they have exorbitant college loans to pay back, which will compete with a potential housing loan for the younger generation people. These college loans have significantly increased from generations past and are definitely a burden on the younger generation. A younger person will most probably delay entering the housing market if they have an exorbitant college loan to contend with.
2. The simple law of supply and demand - there are too many people which have driven the price of housing up. The land is finite in the US. We can keep on building, but we cannot at all create more land,
3. Another factor is foreign speculators and investors, which buy into major US cities as investment opportunities. which the government at all levels, local, state and the Congress and Senate could quickly solve with legislation if they wanted too.
Middle-class people of all races either have to rent all of their lives in cities or else buy far out in the exurbs where the long commute to their city jobs will greatly impact their quality of life.
38
While they compare those of "equal income" factors but not of what it takes for them to reach equality of income. That and more background factors go overlooked but also tilt the scales. The GOP has always told the public what they wanted to hear, blamed the Democrats when they didn't deliver and used strictest application of the laws to keep anger and "rage" directed elsewhere.
10
There is plenty of land in the USA. There is plenty of land in most cities. What is often lacking are policies which allow people to build denser neighborhoods/taller buildings easily, as well as general rules which make it hard to "change the character" of neighborhoods. Obviously if you like where you live and are lucky enough to be there, you might like these laws.
Rent control laws are also fairly awful, but people often think they help, while not noticing the damage the laws do.
5
wealth inequality needs to be at the top of this list!
3
I've been following the articles and comments on this topic for quite a while now, and it seems that those who oppose government efforts to provide fairer access to home ownership keep repeating the same argument. They equate "fairer access" with offering subprime loans to people unable to repay them. However, what this article points out is that the problem to be addressed is that borrowers who are equally creditworthy and able to repay loans are offered different loans based on race, with black borrowers being required to pay higher interest rates. The solution proposed is not that loans be offered to people who can't repay them, but that black borrowers be offered the same loan terms as equally creditworthy white people. There may, indeed, be areas of the US where such equal treatment already exists, but the article provides evidence that there are still many areas where this is not the case.
105
Unfortunately your interpretation will turn out to be unacceptable to the race hustlers in America.
Re-read the comments and you will see some state that zoning laws must be changed while others state that minorities are prevented from accumulating wealth. Once these sort of items enter into the picture your rather straightforward interpretation of equal protection goes out the window.
With your approach a remedy would be to have all loan applications reviewed for fairness (e.g. someone isn't refused a mortgage while meeting the same criteria as others who were qualified for one).
In the world of US race hustling, things are never that simple.
2
In the late 1990s and early 2000s there was an aggressive push to increase mortgage lending to underserved minorities (Hispanics and African Americans). This over-lending without proper control on default risk led directly to the mortgage default tsunami of 2007-2009, which caused a worldwide recession called the Great Recession. It is not appropriate to repeat that mistake.
54
This argument has been debunked over and over again. It's a cynical argument intending to absolve the banks/perpetrators of their responsibility.
Loans were the financial instrument of the crash but it was the extreme leveraging (30 to 40x!)and obfuscation of risk that caused the economy to crash.
Think of it this way: If the banks had been leveraged at more like 5 to 10 X, the crash would have been 5 to 10X less severe.
26
We'll just relabel those mortgages as "predatory" and keep the racist gravy train rolling.
3
Your comment is a reiteration of the tired, old "blame the minorities meme" that was pushed by republicans/ conservatives to explain the great recession and to stear attention away from the GOP sponsored removal of the Glass-steagal constraints that kept the banks honest and kept them from acting as Casinos and two bit snakeoil salesmen.
The housing markets crashed in Miami, Las Vegas and a whole host of high priced areas that were selling outrageously priced condos and McMansions.
Those properties were not being sold to minorities. Minorities were not the real estate house flipping investors (speculators). And they certainly were not the ones selling worthless "derivatives" to our pension plans and 401ks.
Minorities were the victims not the cause. And today, they still are the victims where it is estimated that most minorities still have negative equity (which is actually getting worse) in their houses and have yet to recoup the wealth that was lost during the recession.
In fact, some economists are projecting that if the trends continue, in about 20 years the net worth of the average Black family will be $0.
Something needs to be done...what is seen in the minority communities will eventually affect poorer White communities...20-25 years or so in the future. And that is when the great social and economic upheavals start.
18
A reasonable person reading the history laid out in this editorial would have to conclude that every well-meaning program to end housing discrimination has utterly failed. Yes, some neighborhoods have become better integrated, but housing integration lags behind minority participation in the market in other areas that did not experience government intervention, and minority home ownership is no better than 50 years ago. Before government intervention in the 1960s we had a rising Black middle class. The full negative impact of government intervention is even worse than articulated here. Government policies actually encouraged the issuance of expensive loans to people who could not afford a house and contributed to the collapse of the housing market and the onset of the Great Recession. If the market had been allowed to work, over time the rationality of the market would have overcome prejudices. This is why large corporation today are among the most inclusive organizations in the world. But you say that allowing discrimination to be eradicated over time is not morally acceptable; that we must act to end it now. The argument is appealing, but it is completely undermined by experience. Advocates for government intervention have been making the same argument for 50 years, and their urgency has proven counterproductive. The history of the past 50 years has completely destroyed any moral basis for government intervention in the housing market.
24
Apparently you did not carefully read this article, which documents that racial minority buyers with equal or better qualifications for specific home purchases are in fact (as proven through testing by minority and white purchasers) being denied the right to buy homes where they choose because of their race. I am an 87-year-old white man who as a member of CORE in the 1960's participated in similar testing in Seattle, and proved that the same racial screening was being conducted by real estate companies at that time. Unfortunately, it appears that racial discrimination by private realtors is still occurring after all these years of supposed "progress." But of course my main point is that unqualified minority buyers did not in fact cause the nationwide collapse of the housing market in 2008, as you suggest. Race had nothing to do with that event.
46
Government is the problem when it places the interest of some above others. We need government with better representation. The belief that corporate America and the free market will fix discrimination and inequality is usually held by those positioned in privilege from the status quo, who often ignore how much of their own success was gained at the expense of others. Government intervention in the housing market has been quite successful for white America.
6
It is hard to understand how you can use the failure of government policy over the last 50 years to justify not doing anything now, or maybe for the next 50. If you fall down, do you stand up and maybe watch your step or just lay there?
Strict legal guidelines on blind lending practices will help. Strict licensing requirements in the real estate and banking industry, along with gathering relevant statistics to insure individual, institutional, and industry compliance will help. And building integrated communities with fair housing practices might prove as popular with white customers as with minority. Most of us raised in the 60s who have not been isolating themselves from other groups, whether minorities or immigrants, probably would be happy to have these kinds of communities available for retirement and while working. Children who grow up in integrated communities will be better citizens of what is already a multicultural, multiracial society.
4
One of the good things accruing to a Republican-led Justice Dept. and HUD is that “Disparate Impact” likely will be very narrowly interpreted, unlike in the case of Obama’s analogues, by which it was abused. One of the worst things about a Sessions Justice Dept. is that violations of equal-treatment laws such as those against red-lining and predatory lending as they apply to non-whites, as noted by the editors, likely will be ignored, unless their egregiousness is so evident that cases would easily be won in federal courts by appellants.
On balance, I don’t expect fairness doctrines and laws to materially improve the lives of non-whites in America while Jeff Sessions is our AG. This isn’t a justification for trashing the totality of Trump’s policies, because ours is not a one-issue governance; but it IS why I’ve consistently come out in favor of his cashiering of Sessions and replacing him with someone far more balanced on matters of race and ethnicity.
As to “mayors and governors” taking up the slack, I doubt that they can – we’ll likely see local prejudices predictably reflected at those levels. Effectively enforcing equality laws and calling out violative predatory lending really needs to be done at the federal level.
2
Jeff Sessions is against criminals and for protecting law abiding citizens. How does that make him racist?
4
me:
Get real. Jeff Sessions has spent his entire public life making it clear as glass that he has no sympathy whatsoever for non-white minorities in our country, and is very much in favor of keeping non-whites separate from whites. That may have flown fifty years ago and more in his native Alabama (and may still today), but in the 21st Century those convictions are just un-American, and extremely dangerous in a U.S. Attorney General.
3
First, doesn't Sessions have an Asian grandchild? Secondly, I still don't see how being tough on crime is separatist or racist. He is, or purports to be, tough on crime, but being a criminal is not a racial thing, it's a choice.
1
African Americans do not just face a "red line" in housing.
They are being prevented from accumulating wealth and are being exploited and preyed upon at an industrial scale.
The 14th Amendment (equal protection under the law) still does not apply to us.
79
The ability to buy real estate and begin to grow wealth is really the crucial part of racism. With owning a home comes wealth (slow but mostly steady), stability, the attractiveness that wealth confers, the ability to get a solid education, stable transportation, stable health care. So much is dependent on home ownership in the US.
16
I don't think the barriers to wealth accumulation are restricted to just African-Americans. The country has a significant "socialist" contingency advocating against the accumulation of wealth through government intervention.
7
Of course the NYT must bash President Trump and attempt to make it sound as if he is responsible for the red-lining and predatory lending problems facing not only blacks but other minorities and the poor.
Just over a year ago a black President, Barack Obama, ended 8 years in office with a majority Democrat Congress. What was it Obama and Congress did to solve the red-lining problem and predatory lending practices? Little or nothing.
8
If we listen to you, we'll make the same mistakes all over again. Remember that our national policy to expand home ownership by easy credit contributed to the housing boom and bust of last decade. A study by Bayer (cited below) raises concerns about using home-ownership as a mechanism for reducing racial disparities in wealth. Blacks had much higher rates of delinquency and default than whites with the similar credit scores and loan attributes. All the differences between blacks and whites were concentrated among "vulnerable" borrowers with subprime credit scores and high debt expense to income ratios. Significantly, there were no racial differences for black borrowers who did not have any of these risk factors. Bayer says: "To the extent that increases in home-ownership are driven by the entry of especially vulnerable households into the owner-occupied market, such a push may backfire, leaving vulnerable households in a difficult financial situation and adversely affecting their wealth and credit-worthiness for years." Patrick Bayer, Fernando Ferreira, and Stephen L. Ross, "The Vulnerability of Minority Homeowners in the Housing Boom and Bust." American Economic Journal: Economic Policy. Feb 2016, Vol. 8, No. 1: Pages 1-27
52
Peer-reviewed scholarship has repeatedly demonstrated that the foreclosure crisis was driven by risky products, not risky borrowers in communities of color.
29
This study that I linked to at the bottom, however, suggests that African Americans with equivalent incomes as whites were far more likely to be offered loans with high interest rates and predatory fees from a nationwide sample. This puts them in a much more vulnerable situation. African Americans with similar incomes are also far more likely to be denied loans in the first place. I think it's quite clear that institutional racism persists. The study you outlined discusses employment loss and how African American homeowners were most vulnerable in regions with higher levels of job loss and unemployment. That is not disconnected to housing. White people have been able to amass far more wealth through home equity than blacks. That wealth helps protect people from spouts of unemployment.
https://www.revealnews.org/article/for-people-of-color-banks-are-shuttin...
10
Paul:
Are you sure you read the same article. can't find a single reference to "predatory" anywhere in it. Nor is there any reference to "high interest rates" for African-Americans. Are you trying to pull a fast one?
1
So many forms of financial discrimination, and so little risk for those who perpetrate it. Small wonder indeed that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is in the crosshairs of the Drumpf administration.
America's promise of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" would be more accurate if it included the "right to obfuscate financial transactions to the economically naive." No other wealthy nation on earth allows the financial ignorance of a customer to be more thoroughly exploited with complete legal impunity than the U.S. If, for example, the U.S. automotive dealerships were under the direct oversight of the CFPB, most of these dealerships would go bankrupt. That's why automobile industry lobbyists poured millions of dollars into the fight against such regulation. Yes, it is the right of the informed to relentlessly exploit the naivete of the uninformed that drive more than 25% of the financial growth in the U.S.
34
To segregate housing by the color of our skin is shameful indeed, apparently not uncommon in today's American world. And it seems out of proportion of the ability to pay, hence, a discriminatory practice even when HUD is involved; ironic while a black secretary (Ben Carson) is in charge (although a rich guy, likely with a wide social distance from the poor). Housing is so precious for integrating our diverse society that it is a shame to persist in segregating each other, a persistent economic inequality seemingly reluctant or refractory to bend towards justice.
9
It was even more ironic that the practice persisted during the rule of our first black President.
3
More ironic is that this practice persisted in large cities which are controlled by the Democrats. And you should read about Dr. Carson background. He grew up poor, so I would not categorically state that he is rich and distanced from poor people’s issues.
1
I was hoping this editorial would mention how exclusionary zoning in major cities is locking in segregation and artificially inflating home prices. I am disappointed. Excessively restrictive zoning has entrenched segregation and driven up housing costs artificially. National zoning legislation might prevent the capture of zoning regulation by local property owners looking to increase their property values and decrease development around them. It would decrease housing prices and increase economic opportunity. Brookings has calculated liberalizing zoning laws could significantly increase our national GDP: https://www.brookings.edu/research/reforming-land-use-regulations/
17
What you ignore is that upper middle class whites, mostly Democrats, have no desire to solve thee problem.
6
Good point, also interesting that all major US cities are led by Democrats. The Democrats could solve this problem for their city-dwelling constitiuents if they wanted to.
9