Law of Racial Gap Closing

The Law is, the more the gap closes in racial disparity, the more what divisions remain are resented.

This from what I can tell these days.

starting this thread to prevent hijacking further the Coronovirus thread. For reference start at
http://diversitytomorrow.com/thread/3150/514/#post166978

Responding first to the Fauci article, which I had just browsed til now. 

objections: 

* The article relates how Fauci made his remarks at a graduation ceremony at Emory College. Honestly, do college students need to hear more about how our society is divided up into oppressors and victims? It'd be one thing to hear a bit about some of these ideas if they weren't already crammed down their throats 365/24/7. Fauci is just pandering.

* He maintains that "some people of color find themselves [at disadvantage] regarding the availability of an adequate diet, access to health care and the undeniable effects of racism in our society.” First two points are factual, but what's the last point about? Probably only about hiring a critical race theory speechwriter, who naturally can't avoid his favorite subject.

* "people should not forget that infectious disease has disproportionally hospitalized and killed people of color." I'm OK with remembering that if I don't have to be simultaneously told it's because of 'undeniable' racism. 

* “Societal divisiveness is counterproductive in a pandemic,” Fauci said. “We must not be at odds with each other since the virus is the enemy, not each other.” Well make up your mind! The irony of this last statement says it all for me

next, response to M146 points

Quote: Mission146

...

skipping to point 2 from 
http://diversitytomorrow.com/thread/3150/515/#post166994

Quote:

2.) Affordability:


-I grew up in one of three closely connected small towns in semi-rural Ohio; do you know what we didn't have?  A Porsche dealership.  Can you imagine them not putting a Porsche dealership in an area populated by some 4,000 individuals of generally below average income?  


-In fairness, a Porsche dealership isn't a nutritional disparity...but we are talking about the same concept.  


-The concept is affordability. 

OK, but you are factoring in low population. 

In poor *populous* neighborhoods you see more liquor stores, more payday loan stores, that sort of thing, and less good supermarkets too. Is it because KKK nightriders come through burning down the grocery stores? No, though the residents might. 

Used to be someone might say "he's telling it like it is!" about that last remark and get some admiration on all sides. A phrase from the past I think. Now it's unforgivably racist. 

but what do you say to that?

[skipping to conclusion]

Quote:

CONCLUSION


However, these things weren't the case due to racism---The three towns, combined, were more than 98% White (Non-Hispanic) and still are.  


The reason that all of this was the case is because that's how economics/business works.  You go where people can afford your products and you will make a profit.

You don't really think Fauci would accept these arguments, do you?

Quote: odiousgambit

skipping to point 2 from 
http://diversitytomorrow.com/thread/3150/515/#post166994


OK, but you are factoring in low population. 

In poor *populous* neighborhoods you see more liquor stores, more payday loan stores, that sort of thing, and less good supermarkets too. Is it because KKK nightriders come through burning down the grocery stores? No, though the residents might. 

Used to be someone might say "he's telling it like it is!" about that last remark and get some admiration on all sides. A phrase from the past I think. Now it's unforgivably racist. 

but what do you say to that?

The overall population of the area is actually not that low. These three towns were connected in the sense that one bled right into the next by way of one (or more) shared roads crossing the borders of one town into another. In other words, if you weren't from there and didn't notice the signs, then you'd have no reason to suspect that you had actually entered a different town.

Furthermore, I did factor in population. The more affluent neighborhood that we would drive to had three major grocery stores and (I just looked) a population of about 5,200 in 1990. The three towns I referenced combined for a population of about 3,250 during this time, so my estimate of this other town being 150% more populous was pretty close to spot on.

The next thing that we must consider is that yet another destitute nearby former steel town had a population of more than 11,000 in its own right, back in 1990. How many major grocery stores did that town have? One.

So, that's the reality. You have 1 per 11,000 residents, 0 per 3,250 residents and 3 per 5,200 (1 per 1,733.3) residents.

All for a few reasons:

1.) The stores are going to go where the money is because that is also where the bigger shoppers are going to be. The people with the most money spend the most money, so you make it a point to be as convenient as possible to those people.

2.) The non-destitute people from the destitute towns are going to come and find you anyway, because you can save them money (and on more than just produce) for all of the reasons mentioned in my previous post.

Cities

Even if you get into heavily populated cities, the general concept is not terribly different. Cities tend to be broken down into neighborhoods and these neighborhoods themselves often have populations separately tracked. Here's a Pittsburgh area neighborhood:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homewood_(Pittsburgh)

I've driven through this neighborhood any number of times and have even hung out there a bit. Let me tell you something: It's the exact same thing, except for two differences:

1.) This is about 98% black whereas the towns I grew up in were about 98% white.

2.) This is located near (and as part of) a major city.

Anyway, if you look at the condition of the private residences---it's a mix, same as ours. They actually have a MUCH bigger library than we did, so that's good. Only one of our three towns, as I recall, even had a library.

From there, you look at the demographics, median income, employment...etc. Compare it to the general area of each place...

Same, same, same, same and same.

Item #2 is actually both an advantage AND a disadvantage. It's an advantage in terms of access to employment, perhaps better schools, other neighborhoods are nearby and more stuff to do.

It's a DISADVANTAGE when we talk about the nutritional stuff. Why?

In my neighborhood, we could drive to the nearest major grocery store, which was fifteen miles away and be there within 25 minutes almost always.

While the nearest major grocery store (for those with their own transportation) for the people in the neighborhood above might only be nine miles away, it's probably going to take you about an hour to get there because the traffic is ridiculous.

So, from my neighborhood, we get there and back faster (which makes making the trip at all less undesirable) and use less gas/fuel costs.

Neighborhoods

There's no difference between that and the poor white neighborhoods, though the quantity of liquor stores might depend on state/county licensing regulations. You'd have a town in Ohio (though near larger towns) with a population of 1,600 that is 91% white and, at one point, THREE payday loan places all within the same two blocks before Ohio changed the laws on what they were allowed to do.

The same town has FIVE used car lots that all sell varying degrees of crap. There's only one that anyone with any amount of income would maybe recognize as a potentially legitimate car dealership.

Getting Back To...

My little area of three towns. There was one other difference: Crime rate, especially violent crime.

The area I grew up in consistently gets graded B or B+ on overall crime rate and either B+ or A- on violent crime rate.

The Pittsburgh neighborhood above...more than slightly worse on crime rate. Actually, Pittsburgh (as a whole) is much worse on crime rate.

I'm not going to speculate as to why that is. I certainly wish it wasn't that way, but it's not my job to find a way to fix it. Other than us kids getting into the (usually mutually agreed upon) occasional fistfight, we really weren't violent towards one another. Most people in the neighborhood all liked each other because we're not competing---we kind of saw ourselves as just trying to get through this thing together.

Some neighborhoods, you don't go out at night. Our neighborhood, you probably were out at night---usually either congregating on a neighbor's porch or yard playing cards or someone would come into a few extra bucks and decide to host a cookout for the block.

In fact, if you had a cookout and didn't invite at least everyone within five houses of you...you were kind of seen as a snob.

It's a shame that it's that way for some neighborhoods and not others, but I don't know what to propose be done about it and make no claims to know why it is.

I guess the saddest part of it is that I loved that town and the way I grew up, poor or not; I'd go hustle myself a few bucks mowing lawns, raking leaves, shoveling snow or washing cars...and generally just ran around and had a bunch of fun as a kid.

I can also tell you that we had one African-American kid and a half-Hispanic kid in town and their experiences were basically the exact same as mine. I should know because they were two of my four best friends!

Wish everyone could have that childhood experience. Don't know what I'm supposed to do about it, though.

Quote:

[skipping to conclusion]

You don't really think Fauci would accept these arguments, do you?

It would not be politically convenient for Fauci to do so and it would not be politically acceptable for anyone on the Far Left to even address them in any way other than as conclusive proof that, in their opinion, I must be a racist.

At ABSOLUTE best, you might get them to submit that certain major grocers should then put locations in these lesser-privileged communities, business interests be damned.

My suggestion to them would then be to organize a boycott, get some petitions signed in that vein and submit said signed petitions directly to some of the higher-ups of these major grocery corporations. That will not happen for a few reasons:

1.) It would take a non-zero amount of effort.

2.) And as an extension of #1---why not just get the Government to make them do it?

3.) College-educated Far Left white people REALLY love shopping at Whole Foods. Much better that they should consider me a racist than risk going a week without overpriced fine imported cheeses and organic, non-GMO, gluten-free, fair trade frozen foods.

Quote: Mission146

It would not be politically convenient for Fauci to do so and it would not be politically acceptable for anyone on the Far Left to even address them in any way other than as conclusive proof that, in their opinion, I must be a racist.

Is it possible that Fauci went through this thought process below?

* he is in a good position to see that minorities are the worst hit by the virus
* he asserts there is no racial component to this, but rather a general health component [and is probably right]
* the same people would be in good health if better health care and nutrition was available; they would benefit from and access these things [he must dig in here, the slope is getting slippery]
* he concludes that this is the situation is not as M146 outlines, but instead because US society wants it that way. [Rich people are hogging it? I'd hate to think he believes instead it's deliberate attempt to deprive]
* so he concludes it's because US society is racist [the word has largely lost its meaning and he doesn't realize he's saying it's a deliberate attempt to deprive]
* he wants to reinforce the teaching of this in school and lays it on thick at the graduation ceremony [the media loves him for it and he knows it]

I'm reminded of a phrase that my Economics professor used a lot, "Disingenuously Correct," which basically meant that someone could reasonably advance that a particular thing was one of many causes of another thing, but the someone wanted to advocate for that being the effect's main cause.

So, they would say, "It is this way because of X."

He would say, "That statement is disingenuously correct." That is one of the reasons it is that way, but you want it to be the principle reason when it isn't.

Fauci is disingenuously correct on this.

Quote: odiousgambit

Is it possible that Fauci went through this thought process below?

* he is in a good position to see that minorities are the worst hit by the virus

Yes, and if we read the CDC reports, we also see that the rural/urban divide was a factor in the early stages of the Coronavirus:

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6946a6.htm

I would hope that Fauci would also know that.

What we see is, in the early days of the Coronavirus (right about when we were starting to push masks and social distancing), densely populated areas tended to do worse in cases per 100,000 residents than did less densely-packed areas. That is also confirmed here:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7361905/

We can identify several reasons why that should be without even reading the report:

1.) Airports---lots of people coming in and out.

2.) It's a communicable illness, lots of people are near each other---simple enough.

3.) It's tougher to socially distance if you live in densely packed buildings, local businesses might not be as likely to enforce masks, distancing and occupancy restrictions...etc. etc.

What do many densely populated urban areas have in common? If you guessed a relatively high percentage of minorities in the populace, then you are today's winner!

Anyway, you simply have a disproportionate number of minority citizens who were not in a position to generally avoid the virus.

So, they were amongst the worst hit, but it's not because of racism.

Quote:

* he asserts there is no racial component to this, but rather a general health component [and is probably right]

I would think so; diabetes isn't racist. West Virginia has the highest diabetes rate in the country, and it's one of the whitest (92%+) states of the fifty. Only Vermont and Maine are whiter. (That's not why I am moving to Vermont something like ten years from now, for the record)

In any event, if you're poor or from an area of destitution, as we have discussed, there are indeed factors that might well lead to having poorer nutrition. Large swaths of extremely white West Virginia are such areas and, consequently, have higher rates of both obesity and diabetes. West Virginians are also the most likely in the entire country to smoke cigarettes, which is yet another Covid co-morbidity.

Another co-morbidity is just age, in general, and we find that West Virginia is fourth in that regard amongst U.S. States. (Oddly enough, Maine and Vermont beat them again!). I don't think age is racist.

While West Virginia appears to be only 41st in cases per 100,000 all-time:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/covid-cases.html

Mainly owing to the fact that the state is not a travel hub and, generally, is not densely populated.

We find that West Virginia is actually 28th in deaths to Covid-19 per 100,000 residents. Naturally, the disparity in cases per 100,000 and deaths per 100,000 (and that's before we directly index cases to deaths) has to do with the fact that residents of West Virginia are more likely to have co-morbidities that would increase the probability of death if they do indeed get infected.

So, suggesting that the co-morbidities are largely owing to race is disingenuously somewhat correct. They are mostly owing to economic situations, which is to say that, in general, the poorer you are---the less healthy you live. Also, population density, as urban areas tend to be more diverse. Can race be a determinant in the economics of it? Yes, it can. At one point, it basically was. Again, we are in the period of that correcting, but it's a gradual process that stretches out over long periods of time. Just like there are no policies that could be put in place that would immediately make West Virginia one of the wealthiest states...at least, short of demanding that other states give some of their money and healthy people to West Virginia.

When we index cases per 100,000 to deaths per 100,000, we see that West Virginia (Population Density-29th), at 1.74%, is going to have more deaths per infected to Covid-19 than will most other states. I will pick ten states for a quick comparison, and also look at population density ranking:

Pennsylvania: 2.26% (Terrible nursing home responses, mainly)---Density 9th
New Jersey: 2.57%---Density 1st
Wisconsin: 1.15%---Density 24th
Vermont: 1.06%---Density 31st
Louisiana: 2.25% (Another great state for co-morbidities)---Density 23rd
Washington: 1.33%---Density 25th
North Carolina: 1.29%---Density 15th
Georgia: 1.82% (Atlanta doesn't help, here. Also, religious people who wanted to ignore social distancing)---Density 18th
Tennessee: 1.45%---Density 20th
Montana: 1.44%---Density 48th

Can you imagine if West Virginia had the same demographics and co-morbidities EXCEPT you also give them New Jersey's population density? It would have been an absolute bloodbath.

Quote:

* the same people would be in good health if better health care and nutrition was available; they would benefit from and access these things [he must dig in here, the slope is getting slippery]

I'd give it to him on nutrition, but I'm not sure what supporting argument can be made for lack of access to healthcare aside from maybe transportation slightly? Bigger cities tend to have the better hospitals, more doctors and many of these people so situated qualify for healthcare through the state. This:

https://www.thestreet.com/personal-finance/us-cities-best-healthcare#gid=ci0261a598a0002568&pid=30-st-cloud-minn-sh

Would have Philadelphia as the sixth-best city in the country for healthcare access and Allentown (!!??) 20th.

Might some such situated people avail themselves of easier and more affordable access to better nutrition? Sure, probably. Major grocers go where the money is located---which is generally not in destitute areas.

Quote:

* he concludes that this is the situation is not as M146 outlines, but instead because US society wants it that way. [Rich people are hogging it? I'd hate to think he believes instead it's deliberate attempt to deprive]

No, I'm definitely right on this one. There's one Porsche dealership in the entire State of West Virginia. Porsche dealerships generally don't go where people cannot afford Porsches. That's anything, including major grocery stores. You go where the money is at. Also, as much as I hate to say it, loss prevention and insurance rates.

Quote:

* so he concludes it's because US society is racist [the word has largely lost its meaning and he doesn't realize he's saying it's a deliberate attempt to deprive]
* he wants to reinforce the teaching of this in school and lays it on thick at the graduation ceremony [the media loves him for it and he knows it]

There was a time that society, on the whole, in many parts, was racist. The effects are still being felt, to some degree. Racism of the past is one of many causes of the current effect in question, but to call it THE cause is wrong and to call it a major cause is disingenuously correct.

The cause is largely money. One cause of income disparity can sometimes be the racism of the past in the sense that the wealth gap hasn't fully closed yet, but racism is hardly the sole indicator (or even the biggest indicator) of not having money.

More than that, a lack of upward mobility and societal self-replication tends to be the case, regardless of your race. If you're poor, then you're much more likely to stay that way than you are to be rich and become poor or come from poverty and become rich.

West Virginia, for example, is not sometimes the poorest and arguably the least healthy state because we, as a country, hate black people. West Virginia is almost as white as it gets.

Quote: Mission146

I'm reminded of a phrase that my Economics professor used a lot, "Disingenuously Correct," which basically meant that someone could reasonably advance that a particular thing was one of many causes of another thing, but the someone wanted to advocate for that being the effect's main cause.

So, they would say, "It is this way because of X."

He would say, "That statement is disingenuously correct." That is one of the reasons it is that way, but you want it to be the principle reason when it isn't.

Fauci is disingenuously correct on this. [minorities being worst hit]

good phrase from the prof

[snip]

Quote:

* he concludes that this is the situation is not as M146 outlines, but instead because US society wants it that way. [Rich people are hogging it? I'd hate to think he believes instead it's deliberate attempt to deprive]

Quote:

[replying] No, I'm definitely right on this one. There's one Porsche dealership in the entire State of West Virginia. Porsche dealerships generally don't go where people cannot afford Porsches. That's anything, including major grocery stores. You go where the money is at. Also, as much as I hate to say it, loss prevention and insurance rates.

there are lots of things to hate to say now, but when being called a racist, it's going to come out

Quote:

* so he concludes it's because US society is racist [the word has largely lost its meaning and he doesn't realize he's saying it's a deliberate attempt to deprive]
* he wants to reinforce the teaching of this in school and lays it on thick at the graduation ceremony [the media loves him for it and he knows it]

Quote:

[replying]There was a time that society, on the whole, in many parts, was racist. The effects are still being felt, to some degree. Racism of the past is one of many causes of the current effect in question, but to call it THE cause is wrong and to call it a major cause is disingenuously correct.

I don't even deny there is racism in the present. But society as a whole is not an oppressor society in the US. Just stop it with this, liberals, Fauci, ... you're going to get a backlash

Quote:

The cause is largely money. One cause of income disparity can sometimes be the racism of the past in the sense that the wealth gap hasn't fully closed yet, but racism is hardly the sole indicator (or even the biggest indicator) of not having money.

More than that, a lack of upward mobility and societal self-replication tends to be the case, regardless of your race. If you're poor, then you're much more likely to stay that way than you are to be rich and become poor or come from poverty and become rich.

West Virginia, for example, is not sometimes the poorest and arguably the least healthy state because we, as a country, hate black people. West Virginia is almost as white as it gets.

I intend to post more in this thread touching on this, after this particular conversation is ovr

Story in Usatoday

Quote:

INDIANAPOLIS – Carlette Duffy felt both vindicated and excited. Both relieved and angry.
For months, she suspected she had been low-balled on two home appraisals because she's Black. She decided to put that suspicion to the test and asked a white family friend to stand in for her during an appraisal. 

Her home's value suddenly shot up. A lot. 
During the early months of the coronavirus pandemic last year, the first two appraisers who visited her home just west of downtown Indianapolis, valued it at $125,000 and $110,000, respectively.
But that third appraisal went differently. 

To get that one, Duffy, who is African American, communicated with the appraiser strictly via email, stripped her home of all signs of her racial and cultural identity and had the white husband of a friend stand in for her during the appraiser's visit.
The home's new value: $259,000.

Quote: rxwine

Story in Usatoday

INDIANAPOLIS – Carlette Duffy felt both vindicated and excited. Both relieved and angry.
For months, she suspected she had been low-balled on two home appraisals because she's Black. She decided to put that suspicion to the test and asked a white family friend to stand in for her during an appraisal.

Her home's value suddenly shot up. A lot.
During the early months of the coronavirus pandemic last year, the first two appraisers who visited her home just west of downtown Indianapolis, valued it at $125,000 and $110,000, respectively.
But that third appraisal went differently.

To get that one, Duffy, who is African American, communicated with the appraiser strictly via email, stripped her home of all signs of her racial and cultural identity and had the white husband of a friend stand in for her during the appraiser's visit.
The home's new value: $259,000.

Carlette be lyin'.

Zillow estimates her home to be worth $133,870.

Quote:

House appraisers also do not look at the Zillow value of your home either! This is another home appraisal myth that seems to be making the rounds. Do you seriously believe a competent appraiser would ever look at what a computer thinks your home is worth? Believe it, or not some folks do.

Appraisers understand that Zillow’s home values are not accurate. In fact, in many markets, they are so far off you wonder why on earth Zillow would want to have such inaccurate information on an otherwise excellent site for providing real estate data.

https://www.maxrealestateexposure.com/appraisers-look-real-estate-appraisal/

Quote: rxwine

Story in Usatoday

I am so tired of crap like this from minorities. If any shit happens to them it is because they aren't white. I have news for them shit happens to you even when you are white. It is called life.