Thomas Sowell is the man!

Nordberg said:
The best method, over time, to cut poverty is homeownership. The Dems have been fighting to help black ownership. Repubs fight it.The Dems have always fought for raising the min wage. Even rightys on this board can figure out how that will impact those at the bottom of the food chain. Rightys stop it from raising.Sowell is full of shit.
Click to expand...

Is this an example of Dems fighting for black home ownership? California has the highest minimum wage. Doesn't seem to be doing a whole lot. Don't call others full of sh*t and claim they don't understand economics when you don't understand it yourself.


The hidden toll of California’s Black exodus

https://calmatters.org/projects/california-black-population-exodus/?
 
cawacko said:
Quote Originally Posted by Nordberg View Post
The best method, over time, to cut poverty is homeownership. The Dems have been fighting to help black ownership. Repubs fight it.The Dems have always fought for raising the min wage. Even rightys on this board can figure out how that will impact those at the bottom of the food chain. Rightys stop it from raising.Sowell is full of shit.


Is this an example of Dems fighting for black home ownership? California has the highest minimum wage. Doesn't seem to be doing a whole lot. Don't call others full of sh*t and claim they don't understand economics when you don't understand it yourself.
Click to expand...


The hidden toll of California’s Black exodus

https://calmatters.org/projects/california-black-population-exodus/?
Click to expand...

Maybe this will further clarify the discussion:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/25/realestate/blacks-minorities-appraisals-discrimination.html
 
Last edited:
blackascoal said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Again, this is what I wrote, "Black ownership" incorporates business, homes, apartments. Minimum wage is part of the deal to a small extent, but not the WHOLE deal."

He just pointed to ONE aspect that keeps people from any type of savings or maintaining whatever rent/mortgage situation they have.

And again, the "crazy loans" were illegal acts by large banks....the CRA act just enforced the rule that THE SAME TYPES OF LOANS GIVEN TO WHITE FOLK MUST BE GIVEN TO ALL FOLK. What happened afterward was essentially bitter resentment by folks forced to stop their racists practices. That almost led to major an economic depression.
Click to expand...


From my perspective, this is exactly how I see it. The CRA mandates equality in the same TYPES of loans, not that people should be given loans they didn’t qualify for. No surprise that the banks would find a way to take advantage of that simple mandate.
Click to expand...

Well, Wack is saying he's not referring to this. I asked him to give me some search words for the articles he's referring to. Meanwhile, I gave him an article in his exchange with Nordberg that might clarify things.

As for the OP...I and others have put that BS to rest.
 
Nordberg said:
The best method, over time, to cut poverty is homeownership. The Dems have been fighting to help black ownership. Repubs fight it.The Dems have always fought for raising the min wage. Even rightys on this board can figure out how that will impact those at the bottom of the food chain. Rightys stop it from raising.Sowell is full of shit.
Click to expand...

And to piggyback on the previous post Nordberg (we'll stick with California here), for over three decades we haven't built enough housing to keep up with demand thus prices have skyrocketed. Therefore the biggest beneficiaries have been the home owners who purchased when it was more affordable (read: white people). And your answer to this is we should raise the minimum wage. Ok. We have the highest minimum wage in the country. As the previous article state that's not doing a lot. $15/hr minimum wage doesn't go real far with the average home price nears $1m. So is it just a matter of raising it even higher? What amount should we raise to that would allow (black) people who can't afford a home now to be able to afford one at current prices?
 
cawacko said:
And to piggyback on the previous post Nordberg (we'll stick with California here), for over three decades we haven't built enough housing to keep up with demand thus prices have skyrocketed. Therefore the biggest beneficiaries have been the home owners who purchased when it was more affordable (read: white people). And your answer to this is we should raise the minimum wage. Ok. We have the highest minimum wage in the country. As the previous article state that's not doing a lot. $15/hr minimum wage doesn't go real far with the average home price nears $1m. So is it just a matter of raising it even higher? What amount should we raise to that would allow (black) people who can't afford a home now to be able to afford one at current prices?
Click to expand...

Do you seriously expect to get any sense out of him?
 
Taichiliberal said:
https://www.vox.com/2017/2/17/14610126/republicans-obama-housing-legacy-affh-data

https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/these-five-facts-reveal-current-crisis-black-homeownership
Click to expand...

I'll repost what I posted for Nordberg and ask your opinion.


And to piggyback on the previous post Nordberg (we'll stick with California here), for over three decades we haven't built enough housing to keep up with demand thus prices have skyrocketed. Therefore the biggest beneficiaries have been the home owners who purchased when it was more affordable (read: white people). And your answer to this is we should raise the minimum wage. Ok. We have the highest minimum wage in the country. As the previous article state that's not doing a lot. $15/hr minimum wage doesn't go real far with the average home price nears $1m. So is it just a matter of raising it even higher? What amount should we raise to that would allow (black) people who can't afford a home now to be able to afford one at current prices?
 
cawacko said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
https://www.vox.com/2017/2/17/146101...gacy-affh-data

https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/the...-homeownership
Click to expand...


I'll repost what I posted for Nordberg and ask your opinion.


And to piggyback on the previous post Nordberg (we'll stick with California here), for over three decades we haven't built enough housing to keep up with demand thus prices have skyrocketed. Therefore the biggest beneficiaries have been the home owners who purchased when it was more affordable (read: white people). And your answer to this is we should raise the minimum wage. Ok. We have the highest minimum wage in the country. As the previous article state that's not doing a lot. $15/hr minimum wage doesn't go real far with the average home price nears $1m. So is it just a matter of raising it even higher? What amount should we raise to that would allow (black) people who can't afford a home now to be able to afford one at current prices?
Click to expand...

Again, he clarified it was PART of the problem. "housing" also includes apartments....I already demonstrated the discrimination that goes on regardless of what you post here.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Again, he clarified it was PART of the problem. "housing" also includes apartments....I already demonstrated the discrimination that goes on regardless of what you post here.
Click to expand...

We don't build enough housing and we don't build enough apartments; it goes hand in hand. And once we make things political it turns into just partisan ranting but since we've somewhat gone down that road I'll say this. NIMBYism is practically a religion in California, especially the major urban areas. So politically these are the most progressive areas of the state (and country), yet the people that live there will fight tooth and nail against new development in their neighborhood's. It's the ultimate "fvck you, I've got mine" attitude. And they'll claim race has nothing to do with it but the majorities of the home owners are white and the biggest beneficiaries of the new development would likely be minorities.

And we've tried to pass statewide legislation several times taking away some of the local control and their ability to block new housing yet it can't pass in a state where Democrats have a super majority.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Again, he clarified it was PART of the problem. "housing" also includes apartments....I already demonstrated the discrimination that goes on regardless of what you post here.
Click to expand...

I'll add this as well (and I'll never say Republicans are the end all be all because they aren't) since Nordberg brought up Democrats. Another thing you'll see in the Bay Area (and LA). People will have 'immigrants welcome here' or '#blm' signs in their yard, and then you'll see those same people show up at Planning Commission meetings to fight new housing in their neighborhood. So they give this outward appearance of support but when it could affect where they live and their property values this is what they do.

We're all familiar with obvious racism. But this is a far more subtle form of discrimination yet it is very real and has real economic effects.
 
cawacko said:
I'll repost what I posted for Nordberg and ask your opinion.


And to piggyback on the previous post Nordberg (we'll stick with California here), for over three decades we haven't built enough housing to keep up with demand thus prices have skyrocketed. Therefore the biggest beneficiaries have been the home owners who purchased when it was more affordable (read: white people). And your answer to this is we should raise the minimum wage. Ok. We have the highest minimum wage in the country. As the previous article state that's not doing a lot. $15/hr minimum wage doesn't go real far with the average home price nears $1m. So is it just a matter of raising it even higher? What amount should we raise to that would allow (black) people who can't afford a home now to be able to afford one at current prices?
Click to expand...

Can I just say that this thread was started by me, in case you'd forgotten!
 
cawacko said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Again, he clarified it was PART of the problem. "housing" also includes apartments....I already demonstrated the discrimination that goes on regardless of what you post here.
Click to expand...



We don't build enough housing and we don't build enough apartments; it goes hand in hand. And once we make things political it turns into just partisan ranting but since we've somewhat gone down that road I'll say this. NIMBYism is practically a religion in California, especially the major urban areas. So politically these are the most progressive areas of the state (and country), yet the people that live there will fight tooth and nail against new development in their neighborhood's. It's the ultimate "fvck you, I've got mine" attitude. And they'll claim race has nothing to do with it but the majorities of the home owners are white and the biggest beneficiaries of the new development would likely be minorities.

And we've tried to pass statewide legislation several times taking away some of the local control and their ability to block new housing yet it can't pass in a state where Democrats have a super majority.
Click to expand...

Moot points, as California is NOT the rule for the other 49 states....as my links show. Like it or not, Nordberg's posts have merit to a degree, whether you agree with it or not.
 
cawacko said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Again, he clarified it was PART of the problem. "housing" also includes apartments....I already demonstrated the discrimination that goes on regardless of what you post here.
Click to expand...



I'll add this as well (and I'll never say Republicans are the end all be all because they aren't) since Nordberg brought up Democrats. Another thing you'll see in the Bay Area (and LA). People will have 'immigrants welcome here' or '#blm' signs in their yard, and then you'll see those same people show up at Planning Commission meetings to fight new housing in their neighborhood. So they give this outward appearance of support but when it could affect where they live and their property values this is what they do.

We're all familiar with obvious racism. But this is a far more subtle form of discrimination yet it is very real and has real economic effects.
Click to expand...

Not debating that, but again, California is not the rule for the rest of the country, as my links showed. Like it or not, Nordberg's point has merit to a significant degree.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Moot points, as California is NOT the rule for the other 49 states....as my links show. Like it or not, Nordberg's posts have merit to a degree, whether you agree with it or not.
Click to expand...

I’m not following how this is a mute point. If you’re arguing from a position of desiring more home ownership from black people this is very real. Nor is it unique to California. There is plenty of literature and research out there showing this exact same thing happening in other coastal cities.

And if you’re arguing the minimum wage increase increases black homeownership then California having the highest stage minimum wage and decreasing black home ownership certainly is relevant
 
cawacko said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Moot points, as California is NOT the rule for the other 49 states....as my links show. Like it or not, Nordberg's posts have merit to a degree, whether you agree with it or not
Click to expand...
.


I’m not following how this is a mute point. If you’re arguing from a position of desiring more home ownership from black people this is very real. Nor is it unique to California. There is plenty of literature and research out there showing this exact same thing happening in other coastal cities.

And if you’re arguing the minimum wage increase increases black homeownership then California having the highest stage minimum wage and decreasing black home ownership certainly is relevant
Click to expand...

Now you've created a narrative for me that I DID NOT allude to or insinuate....my previous links and responses sure as hell don't. C'mon Wack, you know this. All you're doing here is just reiterating a point that has already been addressed. Been there, done that. No point in repeating it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top