Quote:
Originally Posted by Alawen
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I'm not doubling down on the race of anyone. The race of the real estate agent or loan officer is irrelevant. Systemic racism is SYSTEMIC.
Here's another study that shows blacks paying higher interest rates AT ALL INCOME LEVELS: Minorities pay more.
Here's another study showing minorities getting jacked in New York.
Here's an academic paper from an older study.
This one is from Harvard.
Not to be outdone, Yale weighs in.
Do you have enough links yet? While we're at it, do you know that data and analysis are not synonyms? Will it confuse the issue if I also mention that women also receive fewer loan approvals with identical financial information, pay more for their homes, and pay higher interest rates? |
why would we delve into an avalanche of new links when you haven't satisfactorily demonstrated that your first referenced inequity is actually racist in nature? why do you preclude the possibility of non-racist causes for the systemic racial differences seen in the duke study? there is systemic racial inequity in standardized testing, but we generally don't ascribe it to racism. we're happy to explore cultural, historical, and educational trends that could account for such differences while acknowledging that there may not be a single, convenient catch-all explanation.
would it be unreasonable to believe white home buyers, on the aggregate, have more experience with the housing market, whether it be through education or a more robust family history of home owners?
i'm not necessarily suggesting that is the case -- i'm simply forwarding it as a reasonable interpretation of the data that does not require active forces of prejudice or racism within the housing market. that data could be a result of systemic racism, but it also could not be. if we are too hasty in our assessment of institutional racism, we risk undermining the consequence of the charge.