The eighteenth discussion debates the extent to which segregation exacerbated the unequal effects of the mortgage-driven financial collapse of 2007 and ways to address racial disparities in mortgage lending.
Although the impact of America’s Great Recession was widespread, the collapse of the housing market and the subsequent rise in unemployment were highly structured by race. Foreclosures and job loss landed disproportionately on blacks and Latinos—even five years into the recovery, the black unemployment rate was more than twice the white rate and higher than the national rate at the peak of the recession. The distressingly large racial wealth gap also widened during this time, as did disparities in homeownership.
In his essay, Jacob Faber argues that racial segregation exacerbated the great recession. He bases this view on two major premises: 1. That residential segregation is a long standing feature of U.S. cities that has had significant negative effects on African-Americans, and 2. That poor African-American neighborhoods were disproportionately affected by the subprime lending boom and the foreclosure crisis that followed. Both of Faber’s premises are correct, but his conclusion does not follow inevitably, and the evidence indicates that it is overstated.
In the recent financial crisis, millions lost their jobs; millions lost their homes; and many lost a considerable portion of their household wealth. As so often seems to be the case, communities of color were hit the hardest, with their net worth being approximately cut in half.
The effects of segregation are more ubiquitous than we realize, reaching into a number of different domains. Researchers have long known that it affects schooling opportunities, access to neighborhood amenities, and even access to jobs in some cases. Professor Faber's article reminds us that it also has important implications for wealth accumulation.
The seventeenth discussion debates the extent to which preferences in neighborhood residents in accessing new affordable housing promote or betray the goal of truly inclusionary communities.
The sixteenth discussion reacts to HUD’s renewed commitment to the new requirement of the Fair Housing Act to “affirmatively further fair housing.”
The fifteenth discussion explores the most effective ways to address concentrated poverty, focusing on policies that target both people and place.
The fourteenth discussion examines the policy issues underlying Texas vs. The Inclusive Communities Project: how government officials should balance the use of Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) allocations to create affordable homes in low-poverty neighborhoods with the use of LIHTC allocations to catalyze economic development in high-poverty neighborhoods.
The thirteenth discussion debates the significant of disparate impact liability under the Fair Housing Act, in light of the Supreme Court's deliberation in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project.
The twelfth discussion weighs the controversy about "poor doors" in the context of a debate over the costs and benefits of mixed-income housing in high-cost markets.
The eleventh discussion in The Dream Revisited explores how metropolitan development patterns shaped by race and class set the stage for the events in Ferguson, MO.
The tenth discussion in the Dream Revisited debates the appropriate balance between investments to help low-income households move to neighborhoods that offer greater access to opportunity and investments to improve the quality of life in low-income neighborhoods.
The ninth discussion in The Dream Revisited analyzes segregation by income and debates the significance of the increasing isolation of the affluent.
The eighth discussion in The Dream Revisited explores how the federal Housing Choice Voucher program can most effectively improve social, educational, and economic opportunities for voucher recipients.
The seventh discussion in The Dream Revisited explores what can be learned by looking at racial and economic segregation through a comparative lens.
The sixth discussion explores how implicit bias contributes to residential segregation and whether or not awareness of implicit biases can heighten a sense of moral urgency.
The fifth discussion explores proposals to re-imagine affirmative action by focusing on neighborhood disadvantage instead of race.
The fourth discussion explores the relationship between gentrification, neighborhood integration, and public participation.
The third discussion in The Dream Revisited asks why we haven't made more progress in reducing segregation.
The second discussion on The Dream Revisited explores economic segregation in our schools and argues for its continued relevance today.
The frst discussion in The Dream Revisited asks what we mean by "integration" and why it may be a necessary strategy to acheive racial and economic equality.