4 ms·

https://www.google.com/search?q=USA+public+housing&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjTxuecref9AhU71jgGHT6VAAAQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=USA+public+housing&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzIFCAAQgAQyC

https://www.google.com/search?q=USA+public+housing&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjTxuecref9AhU71jgGHT6VAAAQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=USA+public+housing&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzIFCAAQgAQyCQgAEIAEEAoQGDoGCAAQCBAeOgYIABAHEB46CAgAEAgQBxAeUJUPWNITYPEUaABwAHgAgAGTAYgByAWSAQM1LjKYAQCgAQGqAQtnd3Mtd2l6LWltZ8ABAQ&sclient=img&ei=AaoWZJPCMLus4-EPvqoC&bih=883&biw=1680&rlz=1C5CHFA_enVN933VN933 https://www.google.com/search?q=USA+public+housing&tbm=isch&... What do you see?

eesmith 4y ago
I see someone who needs a refresher on Bayesian logic. Apartments are associated with many things, only one of which is public housing. An image search of public housing, which brings up many apartment buildings, doesn't mean that apartment buildings are only associated with public housing. Or, to structure it as you did. https://www.google.com/search?q=apartment+house https://www.google.com/search?q=apartment+house What do you see?
- senttoschool 4y ago
  But using TV shows as evidence is better?
  - eesmith 4y ago
    What evidence do you have to support your comment? If "Apartments are associated with low-income ghettos" is meaningful, then how come there are many more TV shows taking place in middle- and high-income apartments than in "low-income ghettos"? If we do a GIS search for "apartment building", why are so few of them "low-income ghettos"? If we look at the population of people living in apartments, why are relatively few of them actually living in "low-income ghettos"? (Or does the US really have that many low-income regions?) If we strip away the term "ghetto", with its racist and pejorative history, and its built-in bias for urban living, and instead look at "low-income households", we can easily see there are many poor people who live in houses, including houses with a lawn and back yard. Rural poverty is a serious issue - rural poverty rates in the US are higher and more persistent than in urban areas - and those people are not living in apartments. https://www.nmhc.org/research-insight/quick-facts-figures/quick-facts-resident-demographics/household-incomes/ https://www.nmhc.org/research-insight/quick-facts-figures/qu... shows that households who rent a house (or building with 4 or fewer units) and households in apartments have almost the same income; only slightly less for households in apartments. While those who own a house are significantly richer. Which means there are more likely to be able to buy a house. This would seem to reduce your original comment to saying there's a strong association of having a large house with middle to high income families, and of low-income people living in smaller residences. Which I have no serious disagreement with.

eesmith 4y ago

I see someone who needs a refresher on Bayesian logic. Apartments are associated with many things, only one of which is public housing. An image search of public housing, which brings up many apartment buildings, doesn't mean that apartment buildings are only associated with public housing. Or, to structure it as you did. https://www.google.com/search?q=apartment+house https://www.google.com/search?q=apartment+house What do you see?

senttoschool 4y ago
But using TV shows as evidence is better?
- eesmith 4y ago
  What evidence do you have to support your comment? If "Apartments are associated with low-income ghettos" is meaningful, then how come there are many more TV shows taking place in middle- and high-income apartments than in "low-income ghettos"? If we do a GIS search for "apartment building", why are so few of them "low-income ghettos"? If we look at the population of people living in apartments, why are relatively few of them actually living in "low-income ghettos"? (Or does the US really have that many low-income regions?) If we strip away the term "ghetto", with its racist and pejorative history, and its built-in bias for urban living, and instead look at "low-income households", we can easily see there are many poor people who live in houses, including houses with a lawn and back yard. Rural poverty is a serious issue - rural poverty rates in the US are higher and more persistent than in urban areas - and those people are not living in apartments. https://www.nmhc.org/research-insight/quick-facts-figures/quick-facts-resident-demographics/household-incomes/ https://www.nmhc.org/research-insight/quick-facts-figures/qu... shows that households who rent a house (or building with 4 or fewer units) and households in apartments have almost the same income; only slightly less for households in apartments. While those who own a house are significantly richer. Which means there are more likely to be able to buy a house. This would seem to reduce your original comment to saying there's a strong association of having a large house with middle to high income families, and of low-income people living in smaller residences. Which I have no serious disagreement with.