Blockbusting does not have to be caused by white people being non-neutral towards blacks. It can also be caused by white people, perhaps accurately, believing t

Blockbusting does not have to be caused by white people being non-neutral towards blacks. It can also be caused by white people, perhaps accurately, believing that the neighborhood will change in other undesirable ways (e.g. higher crime). Similarly, while I'm well aware of (and have practiced in the past) living in black neighborhoods to save money, it was not obviously a racial-arbitrage strategy. The neighborhoods I lived in were undesirable and cheap for a variety of reasons (reduced amenities, higher crime), and it's far from clear how much of a racial delta there was. I don't have any reason to believe that a low amenity, high crime, entirely white neighborhood would have had a different price. I always viewed it as a crime arbitrage strategy; being 6'6", somewhat muscular and wearing shoes with holes in them, I don't view myself as much of a crime target. So yes, I'd like to see evidence of either a) whites being non-neutral towards blacks in the statistical algorithms era (e.g. 1995+) and b) a statistical default or prepayment model that incorporates network effects of this sort (or anything mathematically similar). And incidentally, I'm asking about the networking model because it sounds super interesting. Insofar as network models are reliable enough to use in lending, I'd love to know about it. This would directly affect some of my work if I could port such models into the tech space.