Talk:Residential segregation in the United States/Archive 1

why did the article only mention a single type/reason of/for residential segregation?
It seems to me that any kind of residential sorting based on some criteria or other should be described. As I already tried to add to the main article, residential sorting based on political affiliation is already de rigoeur since the '70s or so. Uslaner traces it back to the rise of Evangelicalism/fundamentalism in the US, points out it happens more often in countries with a high gini coefficient (although I don't remember the connection he draws between the two, as fundies are generally not particularly rich), and suggests that the sorting leads to decreased exposure to members of different social groups, and thus a decrease in trust between subcultural/SES groups. Evangelicals were among those most likely to live together, but the phenomena is of course much broader than that. In any case, it hardly seems as though black/non-black sorting is the most important kind of sorting, even if the blacks are a very large subset of the bottom 2 SES quintiles. As such, shouldn't the article make more mention of these effects/reasons for sorting? boombaard (talk) 16:10, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Biased?
The article makes it sound like there are no mixed areas at all, which is wrong. There are many mixed areas, with people of different backgrounds living next door to each other. The article also sounds slightly biased, and with not enough information. 4.168.0.145 (talk) 00:09, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

edits
I believe that the section of this article titled “White Flight and Its Consequences” should be deleted. The article in no other place talks about white flight, and though an argument can in fact be made that a link exists between white flight and residential segregation, it is not here made. For this reason it makes no sense to have a section talking about consequences have not been clearly defined, shown to exist, or shown to have relevance. There is a page here on Wikipedia about white flight and I think that this article would better serve its purposes if it gave a brief description of white flight, such as: white flight occurs in middle class and usually suburban neighborhoods which have been traditionally white when a few black families move in and many white families decided to move out. This definition should link to the white flight page that already exists. A brief paragraph could then follow explaining specifically how white flight can lead to or exacerbate residential segregation. This section could perhaps include the following points: that residential discrimination is most vividly seen in urban cities where minorities live in disproportionally large concentration in poor neighborhoods, but it also exists in middle class areas and in suburban regions. This middle class segregation may have been worsened by white flight.

In stead of a section about the consequences of white flight, I would rather see a section about the consequences of residential segregation. Some such consequences that the article should detail are: 1.	higher dropout rate 2.	higher rates of teen pregnancy 3.	lower college attendance rates 4.	higher unemployment 5.	lower earnings All of these effects have actually been measured, and all these effects all serve to perpetuate the cycle of poverty within the United States, making it harder for some people to simply fix their neighborhoods and situations (as the first commenter of this section proposed people do). There are other things holding such neighborhoods from helping themselves such as the stigmatization of the whole neighborhood due to high criminal incarceration rates. Bruce Western and Becky Pettit talk about this in their article Beyond Crime and Punishment: Prisons and Inequality where they argue that when incarceration rates increase many businesses move out of the area which further hinders employment opportunities and perpetuates the cycle of unemployment. However, parts of this person’s arguments are valid, not for the complete deletion of this page, but for the need for added sections. This person talked about ways in which they believed housing situations could be improved, and though their solutions were based on opinion, they did point out a gap in the article in the proposed responses to residential segregation, which is why I added this section. One change that someone should consider doing is adding into this article more about residential segregation as it appears in other countries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tnfranklin (talk • contribs) 17:40, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

The article does not adequately describe the class dimension of residential segregation, and could include additional information about the relationship between poverty and residential segregation. The "Gentrification" section incorrectly defines gentrification and urban renewal (as a form of residential segregation) and needs to be clarified and expanded. The "Consequences of Residential Segregation" could be expanded to include more explanation as to how residential segregation results in that list of consequences (using the literature on "neighborhood effects"). Also, the connection between residential and school segregation could be included. Ahb492 (talk) 02:52, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the article could be bolstered by connecting residential segregation to education and its consequences on economies. For instance, little is mentioned about busing, a brief discussion of which could be combined with the "Consequences..." and "Reducing..." sections to create a more coherent "Consequences and Reactions" section. The "Preferences..." section might benefit from a historical look at examples like the 1917 Supreme Court case Buchanan v. Warley or Restriction of deeds. And studies can be referenced to discuss the lost potential income due to segregated communities. Jeffree lee (talk) 06:57, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree with TnFranklin about expanding the consequences section of the article, though I think the numbered suggestions of subheadings he gave are too specific. Residential Discrimination has links on a broader level to health, education, and employment, which I suggest as subheadings under the "Consequences" section. Within these subheadings can exist the main points Tnfranklin suggested, as well as other specific issues. It would also be interesting to see a section on international residential segregation (i.e. examples of residential segregation other than in the United States). Similar situations exist in various populations of countries such as Denmark and South Africa. Mschweickart (talk) 16:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Untitled
A classmate and I will begin editing and updating this page in the next two or three weeks as part of a class assignment. Kgf3585 (talk) 18:33, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Why do black people always blame their white counterparts for their poor living conditions. Just start to work together and clean up your neighborhoods. Do not litter. Maintenance of buildings are important. White neigboorhoods look good because a lot of work goes into them. Wake up.

Quote. According to Conley, “black housing may be worth less because the majority group (whites) controls the market” and inherently “segregation is in this group’s interest” to preserve this control

Shame don't the black people have control over their own neighborhoods.

Please African Americans are always playing the victims while the jail population show statistical irregularities regarding the amount of African Americans present.(Too many).

Redlining and steering are driven by white households' preferences to live in predominantly white neighborhoods. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Professorpat47 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Why are whites assuming that the article is created by blacks?
the reason for the disputes is not logical. it seems that the comments are all based on some notion that white people should not be questioned for actions that are obviously happening. I am talking about things that we have as a society, documented with test studies and legal cases. Steering, the reasons for white flight, etc. are not "blacks blaming whitey" as many whites like to say in any racial issue that shows the treatment of blacks at the hands of whites in the USA.In fact, the very notion that Blacks seem to be unable to state their case regardless of hark and obvious evidence without being called a "whiner" by the oppressor, is oppressive in itself. tell me something, to the men opposing the fairness of this article, exactly what would you have it state regarding the reasons for white people moving from blacks? it happened to my own family. we were the third black family in our area. Fore sale signs were popping up everywhere, and every single white that moved out had their home purchased by a black family. the people who i knew, moved to areas in further western suburbs of Chicago. Those areas were totally white. there are far too many things that have to be ignored and far too many experiences that we as a people are having, to be thwarted by whites that are simply able to say to us "stop whining" and in turn, shut us up by getting such obvious realities taken down off Wikipedia. your people white wash the news from truths of your own behaviors, and now you want to white wash the internet as well? it would seem you don't want an even playing field of open conversation anywhere. It seems you would rather live your lives and not worry about what that life or view does to others. but unfortunate for you, this is not Iraq, and you are not the US military. you cannot simply do whatever you feel to us and have no rebuttal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Themtb2007 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I completely agree with Themtb2007. I would also like to add that the information about the research, measurement, and impact of residential segregation is fairly well established. I do not see research that says blacks are blaming whites for their trouble.Rachel Garshick Kleit (talk) 18:21, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

U.S.-centric point of view
I added a tag to the article because presumably residential segregation exists in places other than the United States. Mlm42 (talk) 21:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Residential segregation definitely exists in other countries, particularly Latin American countries. i am potentially going to edit this page as part of a class at Rice University. If so, I will focus on the non-US aspects. K_Gagalis (talk) 24 Feb 2012 —Preceding undated comment added 07:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC).

Residential segregation is a topic that I am very interested in and I am studying as a part of my university sociology course. The existence of residential segregation is very clear in certain areas, more prominent in areas of urban towns with rural villages surrounding it. The government have started to address this issue with new social housing policies. The problem with residential segregation is that it so often leads to a circle of poverty, with people in underprivileged areas attending poorer quality schools, therefore not getting such good exam results so not getting the best employment opportunities and so on. Even if people do break the cycle and get a better education and create more opportunities for themselves, they often then leave the area, reinforcing the inequalities. The problem is clear, but the solutions are a lot more difficult. Just providing social housing in more affluent areas isn't the answers, as those upper classes will then move out, and the area that the poorer people move from will risk degeneration. In response to this article, I feel that it misses some key issues, and should explain the faults with current government solutions. Beckie2707 (talk) 17:22, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

My take on Residential Segregation
Residential segregation is a topic that I am very interested in and I am studying as a part of my university sociology course. The existence of residential segregation is very clear in certain area's, more prominent in areas of urban towns with rural villages surrounding it. The government have started to address this issue with new social housing policies. The problem with residential segregation is that it so often leads to a circle of poverty, with people in underprivileged areas attending poorer quality schools, therefore not getting such good exam results so not getting the best employment opportunities and so on. Even if people do break the cycle and get a better education and create more opportunities for themselves, they often then leave the area, reinforcing the inequalities. The problem is clear, but the solutions are a lot more difficult. Just providing social housing in more affluent areas isn't the answers, as those upper classes will then move out, and the area that the poorer people move from will risk degeneration. In response to this article, I feel that it misses some key issues, and should explain the faults with current government solutions. Beckie2707 (talk) 17:23, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Rename proposal
This article has been tagged for globalisation since December 2011. It still appears to deal primarily and almost exclusively with the United States of America, and barely touches on the subject in the rest of the world. At times, it is not even clear which particular region or country the article is referring to - instead leaving it to inference or guesswork.

As the article concerns itself mostly with the USA, and has not been change significantly since being tagged, I think it should be renamed as per the proposal. --98.122.20.56 (talk) 23:29, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Causes expansion I think it might be worth exploring a bit more into the roots of residential segregation in terms of the institutional racism, and finding links within to explain how and why residential segregation occurs. Hannansylla (talk) 20:11, 14 April 2018 (UTC)