4 ms·

This will now be my favorite example of anyone who says people are not affected by racism in the US anymore.

teakettle42 4y ago
Home appraisal is arbitrary and subjective — ridiculously so. All this particular stunt shows is that two appraisers can and will appraise a home wildly differently — which anyone who has their home appraised already knew.
- dontreact 4y ago
  It would be nice if more of the burden of proof were on subjective systems that historically have been full of racial bias, rather than on the communities that have historically suffered from the effects of the discrimination. This is not an isolated incident, there are dozens of lawsuits and the study from the Brookings institute linked elsewhere in this thread.
  - teakettle42 4y ago
    I don’t think it would actually be nice if the burden of proof rested on the accused. This example isn’t a study of systemic bias, and is both individually and statistically meaningless. It would be nice, however, if the paper of record didn’t call out a home appraiser, by name, in front of a national audience, with no evidence, as being a racist.
    - dontreact 4y ago
      I think you’ve totally ignored A) the historical evidence about discrimination at every level in the housing system B) the study from the brookings institute showing bias with housing appraisal I’m also not claiming all of the burden of proof should lie with the accused. What I am saying is given the anecdotes, lawsuits, and retrospective analysis, I think it’s fair to put more pressure on the system to help with investigating the issue more systematically. Getting the type of statistical evidence you are talking about is expensive and I think there are enough indications that 0% of the cost seems like too low of a cost to expect a huge industry to cover.
      - teakettle42 4y ago
        I haven’t ignored any of that; I simply don’t believe that it is ethical to use the state’s monopoly on violence to punish individual actors (including said industry) without due process. If you want the state to fund systematic investigation of systemic crimes, then fine. > I’m also not claiming all of the burden of proof should lie with the accused. None of the burden of proof should lie with the accused.
        dontreact 4y ago
        There isn't really always a clean separation between private and state actors when it comes to housing (i.e. Fannie Mae has appraisers https://singlefamily.fanniemae.com/learning-center/applications/appraisers-property-underwriting https://singlefamily.fanniemae.com/learning-center/applicati...) So I think we are probably aligned that Government Sponsored Enterprises should be spending some time looking into this given the (weaker) evidence that's already there. If systemic issues with appraisal are found there, it seems fair to me that there should be some regulation and/or state-sponsored investigation of whether the same systemic issues are happening with purely private appraisal.
  - origin_path 4y ago
    So, guilty until proven innocent, but where the standards of innocence are undefined statistical measures that nobody will commit to up front? Sounds mediaeval.
Beltalowda 4y ago
To be honest I think this is a very bad example to demonstrate that point. Nothing is proven here except that two different appraisals from two different companies/people months apart came up with wildly different numbers. Is it possible racism played a factor? Maybe, but who can tell? Maybe the first guy was just a hack, or was having a bad day, or just made some mistake, or ... I don't know. The article itself mentions (at the end) that appraisals in general are a shitshow with wildly differing figures. People do a bad job all the time, and people are assholes all the time. This is what makes the entire thing so tricky: if we could clearly identify what is or isn't racism then we could simply investigate allegations, fine people, and the problem would be solved in a year. But we can't; all we can do is do some sort of broad study and say that in general there may be some racism at play, and even doing that well is hard because there's loads of factors to control for. If he had done ten of these appraisals and the "black family" ones consistently came out lower than the "white family" ones then yeah, that's pretty clear-cut. But two? It doesn't prove anything.
rayiner 4y ago
You’re going to run around talking about whether racism exists or not based on an article that’s literally “anecdata?” This will persuade nobody who doesn’t already agree with you, and will make legitimate efforts to reduce discrimination look bad.

Home appraisal is arbitrary and subjective — ridiculously so. All this particular stunt shows is that two appraisers can and will appraise a home wildly differently — which anyone who has their home appraised already knew.

dontreact 4y ago
It would be nice if more of the burden of proof were on subjective systems that historically have been full of racial bias, rather than on the communities that have historically suffered from the effects of the discrimination. This is not an isolated incident, there are dozens of lawsuits and the study from the Brookings institute linked elsewhere in this thread.
- teakettle42 4y ago
  I don’t think it would actually be nice if the burden of proof rested on the accused. This example isn’t a study of systemic bias, and is both individually and statistically meaningless. It would be nice, however, if the paper of record didn’t call out a home appraiser, by name, in front of a national audience, with no evidence, as being a racist.
  - dontreact 4y ago
    I think you’ve totally ignored A) the historical evidence about discrimination at every level in the housing system B) the study from the brookings institute showing bias with housing appraisal I’m also not claiming all of the burden of proof should lie with the accused. What I am saying is given the anecdotes, lawsuits, and retrospective analysis, I think it’s fair to put more pressure on the system to help with investigating the issue more systematically. Getting the type of statistical evidence you are talking about is expensive and I think there are enough indications that 0% of the cost seems like too low of a cost to expect a huge industry to cover.
    - teakettle42 4y ago
      I haven’t ignored any of that; I simply don’t believe that it is ethical to use the state’s monopoly on violence to punish individual actors (including said industry) without due process. If you want the state to fund systematic investigation of systemic crimes, then fine. > I’m also not claiming all of the burden of proof should lie with the accused. None of the burden of proof should lie with the accused.
      - dontreact 4y ago
        There isn't really always a clean separation between private and state actors when it comes to housing (i.e. Fannie Mae has appraisers https://singlefamily.fanniemae.com/learning-center/applications/appraisers-property-underwriting https://singlefamily.fanniemae.com/learning-center/applicati...) So I think we are probably aligned that Government Sponsored Enterprises should be spending some time looking into this given the (weaker) evidence that's already there. If systemic issues with appraisal are found there, it seems fair to me that there should be some regulation and/or state-sponsored investigation of whether the same systemic issues are happening with purely private appraisal.
- origin_path 4y ago
  So, guilty until proven innocent, but where the standards of innocence are undefined statistical measures that nobody will commit to up front? Sounds mediaeval.

Beltalowda 4y ago

To be honest I think this is a very bad example to demonstrate that point. Nothing is proven here except that two different appraisals from two different companies/people months apart came up with wildly different numbers. Is it possible racism played a factor? Maybe, but who can tell? Maybe the first guy was just a hack, or was having a bad day, or just made some mistake, or ... I don't know. The article itself mentions (at the end) that appraisals in general are a shitshow with wildly differing figures. People do a bad job all the time, and people are assholes all the time. This is what makes the entire thing so tricky: if we could clearly identify what is or isn't racism then we could simply investigate allegations, fine people, and the problem would be solved in a year. But we can't; all we can do is do some sort of broad study and say that in general there may be some racism at play, and even doing that well is hard because there's loads of factors to control for. If he had done ten of these appraisals and the "black family" ones consistently came out lower than the "white family" ones then yeah, that's pretty clear-cut. But two? It doesn't prove anything.

rayiner 4y ago

You’re going to run around talking about whether racism exists or not based on an article that’s literally “anecdata?” This will persuade nobody who doesn’t already agree with you, and will make legitimate efforts to reduce discrimination look bad.