5 ms·
Took the words right out of my mouth. Assuming this is a race issue is basically meaningless political grandstanding. It's a class issue, and the issue is unive
by kryogen1c 8y ago
Took the words right out of my mouth. Assuming this is a race issue is basically meaningless political grandstanding. It's a class issue, and the issue is universal. Rich don't want to live around middle class, middle class don't want to live around the poor, and the poor don't want homeless people living in their front yard. Humans are simply tribal, and want to be with members of their tribe.
Landlords want to make money, and as the parent pointed out, low income housing is clearly not a priority in the area.
- rayiner 8y agoPeople are tribal about race and culture too, not just class. Redlining laws were aimed at minorities that could afford to live in the white neighborhoods they were moving into. We've made that illegal now, so people look for other ways to achieve the same effect.
- castlecrasher2 8y agoIf you double-down again you'll achieve the rare quadruple-down, and Mew will appear.
- zippy5 8y agoTo be fair, if I owned a home in silicon Valley, it would presumably be most of my net worth, not to mention a significant shift in housing prices could bankrupt me. I would likely vote to artificially limit supply in the interest of self preservation.
- teachrdan 8y agoThe argument that X group "want to make money" and therefore will never discriminate is provably false. Restaurant owners (and hotel owners, and gas station owners...) in the South refused to serve black patrons for a century after the end of slavery. What's your explanation for that behavior, if not racism? You might argue it's because their white customers would retaliate by not patronizing their business. But that just proves that businesses will discriminate based on race, even if it's not due to the owner's racism but their white customers'.