Proof that Racism is stil alive and well

a reply to: Vasa Croe

1945 is ancient history?

You ever heard of Levittown LI?

There is a lot you don't know, belive me!

History of housing discrimination

en.wikipedia.org...
The practice of informally segregating and discriminating based on race has always existed. However, in 1934 the practice of redlining neighborhoods came into existence through the National Housing Act of 1934.[3] This practice, also known as mortgage discrimination, began when the federal government and the newly formed Federal Housing Administration allowed the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation to create “residential security maps,” outlining the level of security for real-estate investments in 239 cities around the United States. On these maps, high-risk areas were outlined in red. Many minority neighborhoods were redlined in these maps, meaning that banks would deny all mortgage capital to people living within them. This contributed to the decay of many of these neighborhoods because the lack of loans for buying or making repairs on the homes made it difficult for these neighborhoods to attract and keep families. Many urban historians point to redlining as one of the main factors for urban disinvestment and the decline of central cities in the middle decades of the 20th century.[4]

The GI Bill[edit]

At the end of World War II, the GI Bill furthered segregation practices by keeping African Americans out of European American neighborhoods, showing another side to African American housing discrimination. When millions of GIs returned home from overseas, they took advantage of the “Servicemen’s Readjustment Act,” or the GI Bill.[5] This important document was signed in 1944 by Franklin D. Roosevelt, and gave veterans education and training opportunities, guaranteed loans for home, farm, or business, job finding assistance, and unemployment pay of $20 a week for up to 52 weeks if a veteran could not find a job.[6] This law allowed millions of U.S. soldiers to purchase their first homes with inexpensive mortgages, which meant the huge growth of suburbs and the birth of the ideal of a suburban lifestyle. Every soldier was excited to take advantage of the cheap mortgage rates that were guaranteed by the GI Bill, but some of the African American soldiers met with disappointing results when attempting to buy a house in the fast-growing and popular suburbs.

African Americans were met with discrimination when trying to purchase a home in the overwhelmingly European American neighborhoods. The Realtors would not show these houses to African Americans, and when they did, they would try and talk them out of buying the home. This discrimination was based on the fact that Realtors believed they would be losing future business by dealing or listing with African Americans, and that it would be unethical to sell a house in a European American neighborhood to African Americans because it would drive the property values of the surrounding houses down.[1] Even though the GI Bill was made available to all returning U.S. soldiers, preference was given to the whites for living out the American Dream of owning a home in suburban America.

en.wikipedia.org...

Both redlining and discrimination through the GI Bill relegated most African Americans to a concentrated area within the city, so the declining property values and the higher crime rates could be kept in a contained area. The relegation of African Americans to the neighborhoods that were receiving no support due to redlining practices was a self-fulfilling prophecy that created the high crime slums that the city was afraid of.[7]

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: Vasa Croe

1945 is ancient history?

You ever heard of Levittown LI?

There is a lot you don't know, belive me!

Nope, not ancient, but were you alive then?

Again, please reference this federal government order somewhere....

And yes, I have heard of Levittown....and his policies were his own. The US Courts killed his provision of not allowing blacks in a US court, though Levitt himself continued to use the practice even though deemed illegal.

So again, that is a private development, not federally mandated nor any federal provisions for not allowing blacks.

Try again please.....there is plenty I do know. Seems there is a lot YOU don't know with your references and non-references to back up your claims.

Oh, and even by 1948, just one year after Levitt broke ground, the courts ruled housing segregation was illegal.

I really want to see this evidence of the federal government stating it would not give builders a contract if they rented to blacks.....

originally posted by: Willtell
History of housing discrimination

en.wikipedia.org...
The practice of informally segregating and discriminating based on race has always existed. However, in 1934 the practice of redlining neighborhoods came into existence through the National Housing Act of 1934.[3] This practice, also known as mortgage discrimination, began when the federal government and the newly formed Federal Housing Administration allowed the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation to create “residential security maps,” outlining the level of security for real-estate investments in 239 cities around the United States. On these maps, high-risk areas were outlined in red. Many minority neighborhoods were redlined in these maps, meaning that banks would deny all mortgage capital to people living within them. This contributed to the decay of many of these neighborhoods because the lack of loans for buying or making repairs on the homes made it difficult for these neighborhoods to attract and keep families. Many urban historians point to redlining as one of the main factors for urban disinvestment and the decline of central cities in the middle decades of the 20th century.[4]

I am well aware of redlining, though that has nothing to do with builders not allowing blacks in their developments...that was a personal decision of the builder...not federal government. That has to do with property values in areas.

originally posted by: Willtell
The GI Bill[edit]

At the end of World War II, the GI Bill furthered segregation practices by keeping African Americans out of European American neighborhoods, showing another side to African American housing discrimination. When millions of GIs returned home from overseas, they took advantage of the “Servicemen’s Readjustment Act,” or the GI Bill.[5] This important document was signed in 1944 by Franklin D. Roosevelt, and gave veterans education and training opportunities, guaranteed loans for home, farm, or business, job finding assistance, and unemployment pay of $20 a week for up to 52 weeks if a veteran could not find a job.[6] This law allowed millions of U.S. soldiers to purchase their first homes with inexpensive mortgages, which meant the huge growth of suburbs and the birth of the ideal of a suburban lifestyle. Every soldier was excited to take advantage of the cheap mortgage rates that were guaranteed by the GI Bill, but some of the African American soldiers met with disappointing results when attempting to buy a house in the fast-growing and popular suburbs.

African Americans were met with discrimination when trying to purchase a home in the overwhelmingly European American neighborhoods. The Realtors would not show these houses to African Americans, and when they did, they would try and talk them out of buying the home. This discrimination was based on the fact that Realtors believed they would be losing future business by dealing or listing with African Americans, and that it would be unethical to sell a house in a European American neighborhood to African Americans because it would drive the property values of the surrounding houses down.[1] Even though the GI Bill was made available to all returning U.S. soldiers, preference was given to the whites for living out the American Dream of owning a home in suburban America.

en.wikipedia.org...

Both redlining and discrimination through the GI Bill relegated most African Americans to a concentrated area within the city, so the declining property values and the higher crime rates could be kept in a contained area. The relegation of African Americans to the neighborhoods that were receiving no support due to redlining practices was a self-fulfilling prophecy that created the high crime slums that the city was afraid of.[7]

Also well aware of the GI Bill, and again, that was not the federal government limiting anything. In fact it gave the SAME to both white and black. It was realtor associations that did the discrimination.

Why do you think there was a bill passed against housing segregation by the US government in 1948? They saw this was happening and did something about it....they realized it was happening and acted on it to make sure it did NOT happen. It was those OUTSIDE of the federal government that were using certain aspects of bills to their advantage, as well as using their own discrimination to further their agenda.....again, none of this is any documentation of the federal government doing anything like what you are claiming.

You've lost this argument bro, real bad!

originally posted by: Willtell
You've lost this argument bro, real bad!

Really? I believe I just pointed out, on all accounts and references you brought up, that the federal government had nothing to do with the housing racism, it was the proprietors that used certain federal policies at the time to their advantage that did.

Again, please point me to the documentation on the federal government regulating builders to only selling/renting to whites. So far you have only given examples of privatized individuals and companies doing so.

I have pointed to numerous occasions at this point where the federal government enacted policies and even held supreme court cases where they decided housing segregation was illegal.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: gorsestar
a reply to: xuenchen

Elongated skull DNA cuz...aliens

Or,

It was a fashion statement at the time.

I was pointing out your absurdity with my own absurdity.

Rupert Murdoch quoted saying:

"Of course Egyptians are Middle Eastern, but far from black. They treated blacks as slaves."
"Since when aren't Egyptians white?"

His old ass is willfully ignorant. He's made a lot of money doing things his way for a long time and that's fine, totally not racist.

I'm not going to see this movie because white people are playing the major roles, that's racist. So what? You think I want to see The Batman playing Moses, or Sigourney Weaver as an Egyptian queen.?!

I'm not spending $30 to support his nostalgia.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

That's just not true.

II. HISTORICAL SEGREGATION OF HOUSING IN AMERICA

B. The Role of Government in Creating Housing Segregation

The role of federal and state government in creating and maintaining residential racial segregation must be understood, without excuse, as a reality of American history. On the federal level, the United States government reinforced discriminatory norms through various public policies. The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) adopted the practice of "red-lining," a discriminatory rating system used by FHA to evaluate the risks associated with loans made to borrowers in specific urban neighborhoods.[14] The vast majority of the loans went to the two top categories of the rating system, the highest of which included areas that were "new, homogenous, and in demand in good times and bad."[15] The second highest category was comprised of mostly stable areas that were still desirable. The third category, and the level at which discriminatory "red-lining" began, consisted of working class neighborhoods near black residences that were "within such a low price or rent range as to attract an undesirable element."[16] Black areas were placed in the fourth cate gory. Mortgage funds were channeled away from fourth category African American neighborhoods and were typically redirected from communities that were located near a black settlement or an area expected to contain black residences in the future.[17] As a result of these policies, the vast majority of FHA mortgage loans went to borrowers in white middle-class neighborhoods, and very few were awarded to black neighborhoods in central cities.[18] Between 1930 and 1950, three out of five homes purchased in the United States were financed by FHA, yet less than two percent of the FHA loans were made to non-white home buyers.[19] The FHA thus became the first federal agency to openly counsel and support segregation.[20]

The FHA was operated in a racially discriminatory manner since its inception in 1937 and set itself up as the "protector of all white neighborhoods," using its field agents to "keep Negroes and other minorities from buying houses in white neighborhoods."[21] Evidence also indicates that the federal government used interstate highway and urban renewal programs to segregate those blacks that had previously lived in more racially diverse communities.[22] Conse quently, these schemes increased the concentration of poverty where it has festered ever since and has caused the federal government to be labeled as "most influential in creating and maintaining residential segregation."[23] Examples of discrimination in federal housing policy persist today, and they are as numerous as they are disturbing. For instance, most minorities in public housing live in communities largely popu lated by poor minorities; in contrast, public housing for elderly whites is typically situated in areas with large numbers of whites who are not poor.[24] The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has played a significant role in reinforcing the problems of housing segregation by allowing intentional discrimination and courts have found HUD liable on many occasions for their overt racist policies in site selection and tenant housing procedures.[25]

a reply to: Willtell

LOL...ok, so you are going to cite a FSU graduates JD thesis for your evidence? That is an opinion. I read it, and while very well written, there is no factual based evidence providea in the form of documentation of proof of federal involvement in racial housing segregation.

Like I stated before, show me a federal document that states what you claim they did....providing money only to the builders as long as they did not allow blacks....you can't provide it because it does not exist. The privatized companies used laws already in place to their advantage and their own discriminatory bias.

The federal government acted on this once they realized it and put a law into place in 1948 which did not allow for this discrimination.

Site something other than an opinion please.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Everything I bring up you’ll just deny. Wiki is wrong this researcher is wrong. Ther's loads of proof of this.

Just check out the sources...

Do your own research

They didn’t even integrate the army until after WWII, all this is common knowledge you are just stubborn and denying what is clear


They just caught the government torturing people do you think they would have that in law?

I guess its someone’s opinion that the government was torturing people

www.civilrights.org...
For many of the displaced, public housing became the only option. But as Commission Co-Chair Henry Cisneros testified before Congress in 1995, HUD had been "complicit in creating isolated, segregated, large-scale public housing" and "HUD has traditionally been part of the problem."[57] Most of the public housing built from the 1950s to the 1970s was comprised of large, densely populated "projects," often consisting of high-rise buildings located in poor, racially segregated communities.[58] Public housing became, in effect, a "second ghetto" subsidized by the federal government, where "government took an active hand not merely in reinforcing prevailing patterns of segregation, but in lending them a permanence never seen before."[59] Over time, the extent of segregation in public housing has only increased as the demographics of cities and public housing have changed, with fewer Whites and more African Americans living in public housing.[60] All this activity resulted in intensified residential segregation of African Americans. Between 1950 and 1970, the African-American population doubled in most large Northern cities, but residential segregation was maintained as White Americans put into effect a "policy of containment and tactical retreat before an advancing color line."[61] After the urban riots in the 1960s, the Kerner Commission Report famously noted that the United States was becoming "two nations — one White, one Black — separate and unequal."[62] The Fair Housing Act was passed in 1968 to address this continued segregation and prohibit discrimination in housing. It prohibited discrimination based on race, color, religion, and national origin. Importantly, Congress declared that "it is the policy of the United States to provide, within constitutional limitations, for fair housing throughout the United States."[63] The Fair Housing Act is rooted in both the 13th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution. It prohibits not only intentional discrimination, but also policies and practices that have a discriminatory effect or perpetuate segregation. It also includes a provision that is unique in civil rights laws – a requirement that HUD and other federal agencies and their grantees "affirmatively further" fair housing to assess and address the racial impacts of official actions and to affirmatively promote residential integration in federal policy.[64] In 1988, Congress amended the Fair Housing Act to add persons with disabilities and families with children to the list of protected classes. In addition, the enforcement mechanism of the Act was greatly strengthened by providing an administrative enforcement process at HUD in which HUD findings of reasonable cause and charges of discrimination could be heard by a HUD administrative law judge or in federal court. In addition, HUD and the Department of Justice were authorized for the first time to seek monetary damages for victims of discrimination and civil penalties.[65]

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Everything I bring up you’ll just deny. Wiki is wrong this researcher is wrong. Ther's loads of proof of this.

Just check out the sources...

Do your own research

They didn’t even integrate the army until after WWII, all this is common knowledge you are just stubborn and denying what is clear


They just caught the government torturing people do you think they would have that in law?

I guess its someone’s opinion that the government was torturing people

I did. I researched everything you posted and there are no actual links to any federal government program that dI'd what you claimed.

So far you have cited multiple things that were corrected by the federal government because of misuse by private sector.

The last thing you cited was a law school paper for a JD candidate.

Your citations are simply opinion, not based in fact.

I have proved all of them incorrect. You can believe whatever your skewed opinion would like to believe. Facts prove that your opinions are wrong but I can't change minds.

www.annefrankguide.net...
During the First World War and before that, the US military was segregated by race. Black units were often poorly trained and equipped. This racial policy continued into the Second World War. African American leaders at the time pointed to the contradiction of a country fighting Nazi racism while having a segregated military itself. Also, African-American military stationed in Europe encountered the racially integrated British armed forces. It was not uncommon for African-American military to be turned away from (mostly white) officer’s clubs by American MP’s, while their Black British peers could simply walk in without any problem. Second class citizens The segregation of the United States armed forces reflected widespread racial segregation practices in the US in general, especially towards African-Americans and especially in the South. Many African Americans at this time led a life of second class citizens. They had to attend separate and inferior schools, were banned from many white-only establishments and in many places African-Americans were prevented from voting. Lynching was commonplace throughout the South, and racist politicians and the Ku Klux Klan terrorized African-Americans who attempted to demand more rights. As such, the military’s segregation policies were simply an extension of a racist reality in US society at that time.

The GOVERNMENT officially segregated the armed forces not any private group of citizens

President Roosevelt initially did nothing to end the policy of racial segregation in the armed forces. He also did not publicly support civil rights for African-Americans during the first years of his administration. He was careful not to offend conservative Southern Democrats whose support he needed. These Southern Democrats, by and large, supported segregation in their states, a system known as "Jim Crow segregation." President Roosevelt was silent on the issue until the late 1930s, when his wife, Eleanor Roosevelt, began to speak in support of African-Americans.

In March 1943, after much discussion and pressure from Black leaders, the War Department ordered the desegregation of recreational facilities at military facilities. In mid-1944, the War Department ordered all buses to be operated in a non-discriminatory fashion.

Here is more proof of the reality of the Government complicity in racial discrimination
Of course its an opinion.

By 1940, the isolation of blacks within segregated urban communities was greater than had ever been experienced by any other ethnic group in America. Following World War II, as white suburbs expanded and African Americans of all income levels were excluded from white domains, urban black ghettos increased in size and density, giving rise to a degree of uniquely concentrated isolation that sociologists have dubbed "hyper-segregation." Hyper-segregation persists partly because of the continuing exclusion of blacks from white communities, partly because federal fair housing legislation has not significantly been enforced, and partly because public policies can adversely affect an established black ghetto without hurting a significant number of whites.

Poverty in the United States is most concentrated in the black urban ghetto. Social contacts with whites are minimized by the isolation of the ghetto, as are job opportunities and access to business networking opportunities. Most importantly, residential segregation promotes the black-white wealth gap. Public policies such as redlining have reduced the opportunity for blacks to acquire, maintain, and improve homes. African Americans who could afford the higher interest rates they were charged on housing loans have paid more than whites for homes of similar value, which has reduced their available financial resources. In periods of economic hardship, such as the 1930s and 1970s, "demand density" dropped dramatically in the ghetto, commercial outlets and services withdrew, buildings fell into disrepair and were abandoned, and crime and disorder increased. These conditions caused housing values to appreciate at a lower rate in black than in white communities, adversely affecting blacks' net worth and their ability to borrow in order to invest in educational and business opportunities.

academic.udayton.edu...

The effects are transgenerational and profound. "Nearly three-quarters of all black children, 1.8 times the rate for whites, grow up in households possessing no financial assets. Nine in ten black children come of age in households that lack sufficient financial reserves to endure three months [without income, even at the poverty line], about four times the rate for whites." The life prospects of children depend more on parents' wealth than on their income. "Asset poverty is passed on from one generation to the next, no matter how much occupational attainment or mobility blacks achieve." As a result of the wealth gap, there is, between one generation and the next, both more downward mobility and less upward mobility for blacks than for whites. The policies that have promoted hyper-segregation have thus intensified the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow, and the results are not being challenged by public policies.

a reply to: Willtell

LOL...ok, so because housing was provided in this case free of charge or low rent, that makes it racially divided? This was provided for ANY race. Sorry, I don't have sympathy for those that can't fend for themselves.

If you want free stuff...go somewhere else. Otherwise, make it on your own. I am not here for a handout, and there have been PLENTY of handouts for "minorities".

If you can't make it with help then maybe you shouldn't make it.

It's not a haRd concept here. Racism is very few and far between these days, and many will say the same. The ones that claim it typically want something when their lives have NEVER been personally affected by it.

Get over the racial bias crap and move on with life. I would bet if all the race baiters and haters would put as much energy into making a better world as they do with racial BS, life would be a lot better for them.

Fact is, humans as a general rule, will ALWAYS follow the path of least resistance. For most blacks that is discrimination and they will follow like sheep. For most whites that is suburbanation and they will follow like sheep as well.

You know who will come out on top...those that move on and could give a crap less about what happened decades ago and be happy with what they CAN do now.

Your argument on this thread, and every other thread I have read your posts on, is the same. Deal with life and be a contributing member to society. Work on yourself and become what you want. Plenty will fall to the side and plent more will want handouts. I will say the same thing to all...work hard and live well.

Life is simple to me. I am neither rich nor poor. I know where I am going and what I am doing. I do not apologize for my thoughts or actions because I think them out as well as the consequences. Every human is capable of the same so quit making excuses and do something.

a reply to: Willtell

Yet again you quote irrelevant words:

"Hyper-segregation persists partly because of the continuing exclusion of blacks from white communities, partly because federal fair housing legislation has not significantly been enforced"

So...federal fair housing legislation was in place, but the laws by local communities were not enforced.

Please stop...i am getting tired of pointing out the flaws in your own citations and arguments.

NONE of this was federally mandated...it was all local state officials that did not enforce fedeal laws.

Again, you are wrong.

a reply to: Willtell

Oh, and I would like to also point out that you are citing FDR, a DEMOCRAT, and southern democrats, as being the ones that promoted racial segregation.

But alas, you still fail because your initial comment was "after WW2" and this was before WW2 ended.

I can seriously go on and on so fire away.