The best
Housing & Urban Development Law books:
Reddit reviews
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
The best of Housing & Urban Development Law books by number of unique Reddit comments:
Top Reddit reviews mentioning Housing & Urban Development Law books:
Those are striking visualizations and help understand the cities in which we live.
This segregation didn't happen by accident by the way. Richard Rothstein published 'The Color of Law' and it describes how local, state, and federal housing policy is responsible for most of the segregation we see today.
These segregationist zoning laws are still in force today and we are becoming even more segregated, although nowadays it is increasing more by class than race.
The Color of Law is a great book that covers all the strategies used to keep neighborhoods segregated after discriminating based on race was no longer legal, including how HOAs were used.
i didn't know this until i read The Color of Law, but back in the early 20th century the popularity of personal automobiles skyrocketed to such a size that cities simply weren't able to keep up with the congestion they caused. the number of people who owned cars essentially doubled every year for a while and traffic was a plague. it's one of the reasons why cities embraced the idea of widening roads and eventually building highways so much in the first place, even back then they thought doing so would solve congestion
> Still wondering why anyone really cares where people choose to live.
Actually, where people live is one of the biggest drivers of life outcomes. If you're born in KCK instead of Leawood - your probable life outcomes is much worse.
At one time, segregation was official city/state/fed policy, which subsidized the development of all-white suburbs (like Prairie Village was one of the first) and movement of people from urban areas to the suburbs - aka 'white flight'. Today, we're still living with white flight. If there were a middle to upper income suburb of Kansas City that were 88% black, do you think many white people would choose to move there? Me neither.
Check out Richard Rothstein's book "The Color of Law", or his lectures on YouTube. Great history and info about the relationship between housing segregation and life outcomes in the US.
As the Vox illustrates, segregation is still going on today (it's actually getting worse) due to policies like zoning laws and drive to prevent low-income housing and apartment complexes from being improved in middle-upper income cities, resulting in low income minorities living in a small number of areas in the metro (as illustrated by the original Vox piece map).
sometimes I wonder, its literally physically embedded in our society. if you have heard of "red lining", basically on the basis of discriminatory law and practice, colored folks sequestered into poor housing. There is a book about it apparently too, the Law of Color:
https://www.amazon.com/Color-Law-Forgotten-Government-Segregated/dp/1631492853
(read the first review there, its just nuts how jacked up an affect it all has)
on top of this, struggling to even go to a college because of one's skin color, and all the other historical challenges. How will we change embedded physical geographical areas built upon oppression and prejudice? I have no idea.
There is a short clip on youtube about it basically:
'Only' is a bit strong, but there were numerous programs which encouraged the development of suburban, single family homes - specifically for whites. The Color of Law offers a thorough, policy based exploration of the racialization and segregation of housing in the US, and also deals with those policies which tended to encourage home ownership and low density zoning.
https://www.amazon.com/Color-Law-Forgotten-Government-Segregated/dp/1631492853
This is an excellent summary. White Americans got success by making sure the lowest rungs of the economic ladder were full of black people. It was done intentionally with laws and descrimination at all levels of society, city, state and federal.
Here's a book by an actual expert on the topic--
https://www.amazon.com/Color-Law-Forgotten-Government-Segregated/dp/1631492853
It has all the things your token black conservatives won't mention.
I don't believe in busing. Instead we must address the lack of diversity inherent in these neighborhoods.
The lack of diversity is by design and is encoded in municipal zoning codes that are set up in such a way to exclude poorer people from certain areas.
Take West Cambridge or Belmont for instance. In these areas it's almost all expensive single family home; plus one needs a car to get around. Cheaper type of homes like apartments are illegal and buses don't run often or at all. This keeps out poorer people and increases segregation.
This was done on purpose. Richard Rothstein wrote a whole book about the topic called The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America
To address segregation, we must reform zoning, allow plentiful housing, and build neighborhoods where people of different backgrounds can live together.
Continually impressed at the brain rot among so-called Planning intelligentsia.
Imagine writing a book about the damage done by government preferences regarding neighborhood racial composition and going "they were just the WRONG preferences!!!"
The long history of intentional racial discrimination in housing. mean that it is both a race issue and a class issue.
The Color of Law, by Richard Rothstein
Fantastic read if you're interested in all the racist shitty things the government has done to black people regarding housing. It is amazing how intentional racist our government was, and either allowed or forced others to be.
>I recommend listening to Uncle Sam God Damn by Brother Ali. Sums up what I think about the US pretty well.
Thanks for the recommendation. I'll have to check it out. I'm no stranger to reading about our shitty side.
Got into a debate with my neighbor the other day because he thought, "the people protesting just want things to change so fast! It's not that bad!" So I bought him a copy of The Color of Law. So many people have no clue about this country and it's past. it's pathetic.
>If anyone is Gonna safe us, it's gonna be the US by making us an interplanetary species.
Let's hope we can keep it together to make it that far.
White's only deeds used to be common. The effects are still in force in Philadelphia, even if the deeds are not.
The Color of Law by Richard Rothstein is an excellent intro to the topic. It is a very engaging book, meaty not dry, utterly fascinating and depressing.
You're coming from a good place, but everyone who is advising you to take a deeper look at the ENTIRE situation is right. Just because YOUR family did it, does not imply it is possible for ALL in a similar situation. Please take a look at this book, if you have any intention of trying to understand it from a educational point of view - https://www.amazon.com/Color-Law-Forgotten-Government-Segregated/dp/1631492853
>I said nothing about race. Your comment is nothing but racial. There are industrious individuals that are black, white, and brown profiting from revitalizing neglected areas. I love it. Success knows no color, but green.
There are certainly people of all backgrounds doing their best to make it in this world.
At least in an American context, it ABSOLUTELY makes sense to bring up race, as the tools that made the Black Community overwhelming poor and overwhelmingly shut-out of home ownership were based on racial public and private policy.
If you're up for a read or list, The Color of Law goes into great detail as to how this came to be the case.
The Color of Law by Richard Rothstein was assigned as part of a class in college, as someone born and raised in the US it was frankly embarrassing how ignorant I was on the topic of systemic racism. I highly encourage anyone who wants to learn more on the blatant segregation of the 20th century and its effects in the contemporary to read this book. It's even on sale on Amazon right now.
People would never admit it, but you're right. People need to educate themselves why minority communities in this country are too often left disenfranchised and poor- its from systemic racism.
Here is a good starting read if anyone wants to check it out.
Title: "Home Appraised With a Black Owner: $472,000. With a White Owner: $750,000."
"Last summer, Nathan Connolly and his wife, Shani Mott, welcomed an appraiser into their house in Baltimore, hoping to take advantage of historically low interest rates and refinance their mortgage.
They believed that their house — improved with a new $5,000 tankless water heater and $35,000 in other renovations — was worth much more than the $450,000 that they paid for it in 2017. Home prices have been on the rise nationwide since the pandemic; in Baltimore, they have gone up 42 percent in the past five years, according to Zillow.com.
But 20/20 Valuations, a Maryland appraisal company, put the home’s value at $472,000, and in turn, loanDepot, a mortgage lender, denied the couple a refinance loan."
literally got denied a refinance because of it
"Months after that first appraisal, the couple applied for another refinance loan, removed family photos and had a white male colleague — another Johns Hopkins professor — stand in for them. The second appraiser valued the house at $750,000."
Again though, this isn't "new" and has been reported on and studied quite a lot, especially in the past years.
Just within this very narrow direction this book goes into some good detail on how the government has been screwing over black communities even long after the Jim Crow era https://www.amazon.com/Color-Law-Forgotten-Government-Segregated/dp/1631492853
Maybe not the type of Progressives that San Francisco has: Book: San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities. Much exaggerated as a generalization, but applies well to S.F.
Do you not believe that people locked up in mental wards are force fed drugs?
The solution isn't a harder government hand, its a smart approach. Look I agree with your desire for a safer streets, id just rather achieve it though other methods. first lets try better solutions like the ones proposed in San Fransicko, then lets maybe actually allow people to protect themselves....
I agree things will get worse if nothing is done. I just think its hilarious that people think "This time the government will get taking away people rights and locking them up the RIGHT way".
There are so many other good solutions, you should give San Fransicko a read, lots of other good solutions proposed other than giving the government wild approval to force feed drugs to people.
>You know what does cause homelessness? Cutting welfare programs, making homelessness illegal so that they can't even have the chance of getting on their feet, preventing shelters from being built because of NIMBYism, etc. In short, not actually addressing the causes of homelessness, which is blatant in your post.
Incorrect. homelessness is caused by enabling open air drug markets. go read https://www.amazon.co.uk/San-Fransicko-Progressives-Ruin-Cities/dp/0063093626 that's my source. I can't read it for you.
Just a point of curiosity: Levitt and Sons intentionally didn't allow blacks to live in their neighborhoods and developments. This is one reason for the vast discrepancy between white wealth and black wealth. Black people were not allowed in on homeownership.
You can read all about it in The Color of Law.
It's weird no one has mentioned this book yet.
A great (but depressing) read, it goes into the "soft touch no accountability" policies and traces a lot of fund that go into "caring" for the homeless-- it's become an industry in itself.
This is also why the "Why don't we just give homeless people apartments" argument is stupid. You want a drug addict to die, give them a quiet secluded place to do drugs all day. This is a good read if you want to learn about what strategies really work for the homeless.
https://www.amazon.com/San-Fransicko-Progressives-Ruin-Cities/dp/0063093626
What a crock of bullshit that is. Other nations don't have homeless problems like America because officials direct homeless, whether they like it or not, to set up camp in certain places on the outskirts of cities. Homeless typically build shanty towns, which are better than nothing. A roof over your head.
And if homeless try to go to central parts of cities and set up camp, and refuse orders to move, they get a big boot or go to jail. Even 5 European cities forcibly relocated homeless and drug addicts trying to commandeer public spaces. Officials there typically refer to homeless encampments as "open drug scenes." 2014: Open drug scenes: responses of five European cities.
> "All of the cities had initially a period with conflict between liberal and restrictive policies...Homelessness is often prevalent...Today all these cities have zero tolerance for public nuisance..."
To clear public drug scenes, the cities used "compulsory interventions...expulsion from city...relocation centres...sanctions imposed...antisocial behaviour orders"-- all methods that left-leaning activists in the U.S. oppose.
America is arguably the most liberal country in the world in giving carte blanche to hardcore drug addicts, mentally ill and an assortment of other behaviorally challenged people occupy public spaces and act as they please. Three words summarize American policy on problem: No Mandatory Interventions.
If anyone is confused, this is brought to us by left-leaning activists. Further explanation in this book: San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities
> Cause your making up arguments.
Nonsense. We hear the narratives every day from soft-on-crime people.
>Free homes has nothing to do with CC theives
There's a lot of evidence that a hard core of the homeless (20% - 25%) are involved in a lot of theft, especially breaking into cars. (link on S.F above). Big constituency both in SF and LA for giving all homeless free housing. Michael Shellenburger, author of "San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities, discusses this.
Big overlap between homeless advocates and criminal justice performers who DON'T want sanctions on most property crime offenders. The two groups lobby together all the time.
It's more like the legitimate problem of a lack of affordable housing and the search for solutions being harmed by progressive policies. Author Michael Shellenberger's discussion of what happened in San Francisco is useful: San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities.
It is true that most places, especially Connecticut, don't have the homeless problems that S.F. does, but the book discusses the excess of criminal justice reform. That is affecting more and more parts of America. Big Sacred Cow there -- criminal justice reform.