Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I guess it never occurred to you that blacks don't want to live there? (self seggregate)
Most groups self segregate. Most of the threads on this forum about moving are pretty much I am (insert group) I am looking for a neighborhood with a high concentration of (same group).
The median home sold price in Winnetka is $1.1 million. That's what excludes black and brown people, who tend to make a lot less. I bet you a significant number of liberal Winnetka residents decry "systemic racism" and "white privilege," of which this disparity would be one result. So if they believe that, then they should take affirmative steps to cure it, such as a large affordable housing development or two in their downtown!
Of course that will never happen. Instead, they'll continue to virtue signal, supported by citing to a small handful of minorities who may live in their town. Maybe they'll even protest when the median price of a house in a minority majority city neighbourhood goes fron 210k to 220k due to gentrification. But in the end, they'll still live in an isolated bubble, safely protected by high housing costs and property taxes.
You post kind of implies black and brown people cannot afford property in Winnetka because thir their color that is probably an overstatement. I am a new resident of Winnetka/Kenilworth, well, a renter now with a view to buy in Kenilworth, within the Joseph Sears Boundary. I am an international transferee and my whole process, from Australia to the USA has not ever concerned my skin color. Which for me personally varies a lot -- being an ethnic Ukrainian I tan very well achieving South Indian/Shiralnkan Brown Shade in probably 5 days of lounging on a beach (if making an effort). If I don't -- I'm your average white guy, albeit lacking the blue eyes and fairness of a proper Aryan.
As someone who came from Europe's poorest country, being a non-native English speaker I struggle to understand the money argument -- 18 years ago on my arrival in Sydney I had noone there, $5K cash and 23 kgs of luggage, everything went up from there. It is not your color but the effort you put in. I know plenty of people of color who are doing it very well and none of me colleagues have ever complained about color being an issue. I dare to say it is not what is on the outside, but the inside that matters.
Lack of desire/drive/effort -- we can talk, but stating Winnetka is unaffordable for people because of their of color is (sorry) BS.
I sound like a Ukrainian who spent 18 years in Aus -- a mixture of two terrible accents. This didn't cause any drama in renting out a townhouse remotely, from Australia, for a heavily accented guy who just wanted to bring his family to the bestest suburb of America. Color?? Has never been an issue. I did everything remotely, phone and email. People could hear my accent -- no one had any idea about my skin color -- I could have been a rainbow unicorn for the f sake.
If I can get a nice Georgian or Tudor for 1.1 (well, realistically that will be 1.5+), East of the Green Bray Dr -- I'd be all over it provided I get the "mates rates" mortgage wise.
But yeah, I did my research, as much as I felt necessary. I didn't go to Pullman or Riverdale despite their super cheap property prices. I could probably buy a whole block in there but well, I'm not sure how welcoming the neighbors or kids at the school would be considering we will be a minority there. regardless of my days on a beach.
I agree we may be talking past each other. I do not disagree that there are wealthy African-Americans who can afford to but choose not to live on the North Shore. I'm not sure how many given the statistics stated in the links I posted but certainly there are most certainly some, though this number may be shrinking as our black population continues to shrink.
But really, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about providing fair housing to millionaires. I'm talking about fair participation in the stated goal of the vast majority of affordable housing programs, which is to provide opportunity for low income families to live in high opportunity areas.
Now, I also agree with you in that these programs are questionable at best. Governmental attempts to meddle in the housing market, such as through rent control or by forcing developers to designate X% to low income end up having too many unintended consequences. Incentives are a better way. However, if we are going to have these programs and are going to keep throwing money and mandates at them, then there should be fair participation across all income levels. Restrictive zoning and high housing costs exempt certain areas from participation, and that is not fair.
If by "high opportunity" you mean a place close to jobs, then you need to be looking for housing that is closer to Chicago. There are plenty of other affordable suburbs that you can move to that are closer such as Skokie, Niles, Des Plains, etc. A low income family does not need to live in an area like Glencoe, Winnetka, or whatever to have an opportunity.
I think a better solution would be fixing the neighborhoods where these low income families live.
If by "high opportunity" you mean a place close to jobs, then you need to be looking for housing that is closer to Chicago. There are plenty of other affordable suburbs that you can move to that are closer such as Skokie, Niles, Des Plains, etc. A low income family does not need to live in an area like Glencoe, Winnetka, or whatever to have an opportunity.
I think a better solution would be fixing the neighborhoods where these low income families live.
Welcome to the U.S.! I can definitely understand your confusion. Many of the disadvantaged low income individuals that housing programs seek to move into "high opportunity areas" already live in the City and very close to the City center at that. Areas such as Garfield Park and North Lawndale, for example, are extremely troubled in terms of violence and unemployment. There should be nothing preventing access to our largest job center. There are other social factors at play there.
I strongly agree that a better solution would be fixing the neighborhoods where these low income families live. But that's a separate discussion, and one which the affordable housing discussion often ignores anyway, so you'd kind of be talking to yourself. What I was pointing out is that the definition of "high opportunity area" does not include our most wealthy areas, and certainly by design. Subsidized housing and low income housing set asides have tended to remain concentrated in areas considerably far down the income ladder.
You see, there are political undertones to all of this, and those may not make sense to you yet if you just moved here. As to your earlier point, statistically, African-Americans in Chicagoland have considerably less wealth and income than other demographic groups. This isn't a slam on anyone or meant to disparage, it's a statistical fact, and I posted links in support of that if you want to take a look at them. But regardless, my point wasn't that but, rather, that if we are going to do "fair housing," then everyone should participate, not just certain areas. Then maybe there'd be more enlightenment about the actual problem!
A title like that makes one think that this is a troll/bait post looking to cause trouble, however I'm genuinely curious as to why North suburbs in Chicago like Winnetka, Glencoe, Highland Park etc. are so white. I'm an Accountant living in the Skokie area, and on the weekends (when it's not tax season) I drive for Doordash and sometimes the destination is in North suburbs. It can be very uncomfortable for a person of color , like the other day I picked up an order from a restaurant in Winnetka , there was an outdoor dining area and i kid you not it was 100% white (As i walked past them I felt like I did not belong there)
Bro, if you feel uncomfortable around "whites" that's solely your mental issue, you need to work on your racist problem.
There are good white people, and there are bad black people, vice versa is true as well - just put it into your head.
Welcome to the U.S.! I can definitely understand your confusion. Many of the disadvantaged low income individuals that housing programs seek to move into "high opportunity areas" already live in the City and very close to the City center at that. Areas such as Garfield Park and North Lawndale, for example, are extremely troubled in terms of violence and unemployment. There should be nothing preventing access to our largest job center. There are other social factors at play there.
I strongly agree that a better solution would be fixing the neighborhoods where these low income families live. But that's a separate discussion, and one which the affordable housing discussion often ignores anyway, so you'd kind of be talking to yourself. What I was pointing out is that the definition of "high opportunity area" does not include our most wealthy areas, and certainly by design. Subsidized housing and low income housing set asides have tended to remain concentrated in areas considerably far down the income ladder.
You see, there are political undertones to all of this, and those may not make sense to you yet if you just moved here. As to your earlier point, statistically, African-Americans in Chicagoland have considerably less wealth and income than other demographic groups. This isn't a slam on anyone or meant to disparage, it's a statistical fact, and I posted links in support of that if you want to take a look at them. But regardless, my point wasn't that but, rather, that if we are going to do "fair housing," then everyone should participate, not just certain areas. Then maybe there'd be more enlightenment about the actual problem!
Addressing those social factors and cleaning those neighborhoods should be a higher priority, you're not really solving any problems if you just transfer the population to a different area. It's gonna be the same crap all over again, just a different neighborhood. So I disagree, that's not really a separate discussion because it's all tied together. Also it's not realistic to transfer everyone from those areas to other areas, so what's your criteria exactly? Take some of the families and leave the other behind? Well that wouldn't be fair would it? Also I'm assuming when you're talking about low income families, we're talking low income families in general right? Not just African-American? There are plenty of non-African-American low income families that could use help too.
Anyways you're correct, I have only lived in the US for 5 years, but I know enough BS when I see it. This whole racism discussion sometimes gets taken too far, not saying it doesn't exist, but the more you generalize it and fuel it, the worse it gets.
Addressing those social factors and cleaning those neighborhoods should be a higher priority, you're not really solving any problems if you just transfer the population to a different area. It's gonna be the same crap all over again, just a different neighborhood. So I disagree, that's not really a separate discussion because it's all tied together. Also it's not realistic to transfer everyone from those areas to other areas, so what's your criteria exactly? Take some of the families and leave the other behind? Well that wouldn't be fair would it? Also I'm assuming when you're talking about low income families, we're talking low income families in general right? Not just African-American? There are plenty of non-African-American low income families that could use help too.
Anyways you're correct, I have only lived in the US for 5 years, but I know enough BS when I see it. This whole racism discussion sometimes gets taken too far, not saying it doesn't exist, but the more you generalize it and fuel it, the worse it gets.
You must have read my mind. I just posted about that here...
Maybe you've picked up on this, or maybe you haven't, but our society, or at least in our current political culture, is not ready to really address those social factors and clean up the neighborhoods. That's unfortunate but maybe providing an even distribution of the lowest income people, versus continuing to concentrate them while hypocritically providing lip service to the concept of giving them access to "higher opportunity", will provide the necessary insight. When you allow people to isolate themselves from problems, you prevent real solutions.
Obviously, you do not force this. But we build new developments with 20-30% required low income set asides all the time in Chicago. And often those displaced by a new development in a gentrifying neighborhood end up in different (usually low income) neighborhoods where the developer has built its required affordable housing allotment. So not sure what you're getting at in terms of taking families and leaving others behind? People move all the time.
Maybe you've picked up on this, or maybe you haven't, but our society, or at least in our current political culture, is not ready to really address those social factors and clean up the neighborhoods.
That's unfortunate but maybe providing an even distribution of the lowest income people, versus continuing to concentrate them while hypocritically providing lip service to the concept of giving them access to "higher opportunity", will provide the necessary insight. When you allow people to isolate themselves from problems, you prevent real solutions.
Obviously, you do not force this. But we build new developments with 20-30% required low income set asides all the time in Chicago. And often those displaced by a new development in a gentrifying neighborhood end up in different (usually low income) neighborhoods where the developer has built its required affordable housing allotment. So not sure what you're getting at in terms of taking families and leaving others behind? People move all the time.
That's the main problem right there, if you're not ready to address these issues then there's no solution. Also if you want affordable housing, I mentioned that this could be achieved without having to go live in Winnetka or Glencoe, why are we insisting on putting low income families in the middle of the super rich? I don't even live in a rich neighborhood and find it weird. Granted I could also complain, why should a low income person get a free ride to be in a New Trier district while I bust my butt off and not get that same chance? See what I mean? Your solution creates more division and bitterness. If you really care to solve the problem, you make those neighborhoods where these families live safe so they can enjoy their privilege of being so close to the job-hub in the city to take advantage of all those opportunities.
That's the main problem right there, if you're not ready to address these issues then there's no solution. Also if you want affordable housing, I mentioned that this could be achieved without having to go live in Winnetka or Glencoe, why are we insisting on putting low income families in the middle of the super rich? I don't even live in a rich neighborhood and find it weird. Granted I could also complain, why should a low income person get a free ride to be in a New Trier district while I bust my butt off and not get that same chance? See what I mean? Your solution creates more division and bitterness. If you really care to solve the problem, you make those neighborhoods where these families live safe so they can enjoy their privilege of being so close to the job-hub in the city to take advantage of all those opportunities.
So are you for no affordable housing at all? Do you not care that it might create "division and bitterness" in the city neighborhoods that have to have it by mandate? What specifically about these individuals would cause division and bitterness in a rich neighborhood but not in a less affluent one? I pointed out earlier that any new developments in Pilsen and Little Village must have 30% of the units set aside as affordable. In the rest of the city it is 20%, though that can be diverted. So why limit this just to certain parts of the city?
And how do you propose to make those areas where they live safe? Despite millions upon millions of dollars spent on social programs, these neighborhoods have not gotten any safer. The solution for some on the left - of which the North Shore is home to many - is to take some or all of the police budget and spend even more on these programs, which I virtually guarantee won't work. And signs of gentrification in depopulating East Garfield Park are already being met with protest. So what would you do to fix it?
Last edited by BRU67; 10-04-2021 at 05:57 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
