May 17, 2009

NYC graph of foreclosure rates v. minority share of census tract

The New York Times offers a cool interactive map showing that foreclosure rates at level of census tract for New York City. And, whattaya know? The high foreclosure rate neighborhoods aren't the ones where New York Times economics reporters tend to live. The common denominator in the heavily defaulting neighborhoods is a high percentage of minority residents.

It must be the fault of that "reverse redlining" that the NAACP is suing about.

I've got some new data nobody has seen yet on California, the epicenter of the crash, which I'll display in graphs in VDARE.com tonight.

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

20 comments:

clem said...

But the creatures of [race-realist] evil
Have captured [Steve's] heart
And that same old obsessionStill keeps us [i.e., whites, NAMs, and feminists] apart

--Gordon Lightfoot, "That Same Old Obsession"

:)

silly girl said...

It's like some social engineer thought you could dress up anyone like they are responsible and productive people and voila, they would behave like those who actually are.

I remember reading a sociology essay that discussed how so many envy Japan's productivity, work ethic, low crime etc. The author felt that in order to duplicate that sort of society in an area like California would require 25 million Japanese.

It is the human capital that makes a society. We never had locomotives, or lending libraries or great universities until people invented them. It is a natural law. You can't break it. You can only prop people up for so long. If they can't stand, well it's like the humorist, Dave Barry says,

Gravity Strictly Enforced

Anonymous said...

Hovering over the map, I saw a few census tracks where the non-white population is 100%, but the number of foreclosures is 0. New Yorkers will recognize these as public housing projects.

Pissed Off Chinaman said...

Despite these foreclosures, housing prices in the MY metro area are still too damn high. I'm talking buying and rentals.

John Seiler said...

This Bush Depression is just starting. How many SBA loans went to shaky minority businesses, which now will fail, also making the ongoing commercial real estate crash even worse?

For decades, our elites, and the voters who elect them, have been fools. Any country that imposes on itself 3 Bush presidencies is going to get smacked down good and hard.

agnostic said...

This is why I don't care about hard-copy newspapers vanishing and existing mostly online.

The text is still there, but these great interactive graphs that the NYT routinely churns out online could never be in print.

Anonymous said...

Hategraph!

tanabear said...

It seems that the areas with the highest foreclosure rates(10% or more) are at least 70% non-white.

Richard Posner has a new book out on the current economic crisis, "A Failure of Capitalism: The Crisis of '08 and the Descent into Depression". I wonder if he mentions any of the issues that Steve discusses.

I'm guessing it doesn't.

jack strocchi said...

Okay steve, you have proved that minorities are over-represented in both sub-prime loan approvals and subsequent foreclosure. But that could just be because minorities are over-represented in the ranks of the low SES. Or, to put it another way, poor people, whether black, brown or white, could all be subject to foreclosure at extra-ordinary rates independent of their race.

You need to control for income/wealth to prove the "diversity recession" thesis - that irresponsible and politically motivated credit allocations to minorities triggered the bank collapse. To do that you need to show that minorities are liable to foreclosure at rates far in excess of those suffered by the majority race who occupy the same rungs in the SES.

It may be that poorer members of the community from both majority and minority races were all drawn into the housing market at the same time. And that both suffered comparable rates of foreclosure.

This would prove that there was no disparate racial effect in Bush's "ownership society" play. But it would also suggest that debauching credit standards to allow more poorer people of all races
into the property market was imprudent so far minimizing the overall risk to the financial system.

It just so happens that minorities are relatively over-represented amongst the ranks of the poor. And since the overall number of poor minorities is large in an absolute sense it follows that allowing them access to credit during a period of debased financial standards was likely to lead to a financial catastrophe.

Which basically means that poorer people - whether black, brown or white -should not be given unlimited access to credit. Something we knew all along anyway.

Anonymous said...

But that could just be because minorities are over-represented in the ranks of the low SES. The infinite regress continues!

You need to control for income/wealth Dance to the leftist's tune! Dance! Dance! Because the leftist himself will never actually soil himself by actually dealing with the facts. Instead it is incumbent on *Steve* to disprove jack strocchi's 15th hypothesis -- something, anything that doesn't take the fact that the upstream variable is IQ into account.

poorer people - whether black, brown or white -should not be given unlimited access to credit. Something we knew all along anyway. Try stating that poor people are high credit risks and should not be offered loans on national TV. Then try stating that blacks should be disproportionately denied loans because they are poor.

See if you live to tell the tale.

Anonymous said...

There's something odd on this interactive map: high foreclosure rates in Leonia and Fort Lee. These two Northern NJ towns have high non-white populations, but those non-whites are mostly Northeast Asians, not blacks or Latinos.

Dave

Ronduck said...

There are two tiny census tracts in northern Staten Island that have a 14.2% and 18% foreclosure rate, although the number of houses foreclosed is small in each tract.

Isn't the subtitle of this graph politically inappropriate?

A New York Times analysis found that foreclosure rates in the region were highest in areas
with high minority populations
.

Dave Lincoln said...

I luv your color scheme, Steve! Your political incorrectness kicks a$$ ! This is so much easier to read than one you wouldn't see in a newspaper, since the newspaper wouldn't have the guts to print it to begin with.

Plus, the Asian sector is making me salivate for a slice of some banana creme pie (served by a Korean hottie in a tight skirt).

Dave Lincoln said...

oops, my comment was meant to respond to the post above, with the pie (mmmmmhh) chart.

Svigor said...

Which basically means that poorer people - whether black, brown or white -should not be given unlimited access to credit. Something we knew all along anyway.

Which basically means a disparate impact litigation hurricane. Which means that we need some whiteout for portions of our so-called "anti-discrimination law," just to make the trains run on time.

(To make our system worthy of our trust (in a narrow context), we obviously need to repeal every part of them)

Something we knew all along anyway.

We never forgot loaning to poor people isn't a good idea; we just haven't learned that the Diversity People are the enemy.

Pissed Off Chinaman said...

Dave I think Leonia and Fort Lee have high foreclosure rates due to the high housing prices in those areas. Layoffs in many of the high paying professional fields have had a negative effect on first time homebuyers in wealthier areas.

Anonymous said...

As an immigrant black new yorker here is what I see as happened:

If you are a typical lower middle class family with kids, it is very difficult, to find affordable rental units in NY metropolitan area. The rent is outrageous. One bedroom in the bronx goes for at least $900.00. Imagine if you have a family! At the same time, you do not qualify for subsidized housing or section 8 because your income is too high.

Landlords do not like to rent to families with kids if they can avoid it, and if one finds one willing to rent you an apt,you have to deal with complaints from your downstairs neighbors every time the kids ran around or even walk.

So people were therefore desperate to buy a house for their family. This they did in with good intentions for their kids and in good faith to pay the mortgage and taxes. To those of you who do not live in NY, the houses I am talking about in queens for example are not like the ones in the rest of the country. They are old, narrow cramped houses with small room, but never the less they will do for most new yorkers.

Those who bought their houses in the 90's are still doing okay even with the economic downturn because they bought their houses before the height of the housing bubble. Even buyers who bought with subprime loans are still okay today if they bought in the late 90's early 2000's.

However as interest rates kept going down, the homes became more and more expensive leading to grossly overpriced houses.

Still people with families needed housing desperately, and they see how the people who bought in the 90's are doing well for themselves, and how the earlier buyers have built equity.

So they take decide to buy a home, and since their income is low compared the cost of the overpriced house they want to buy, they obtained horrible subprime loans. The real estate agents and mortgage brokers did their share to push them for these loans since they will be paid a commission if the sale goes through. Also, please note that those who had bought earlier with subprime had not done too badly for themselves, so many people figured they would refinance later once they built equity. Also many thought that they can cover the mortgage by renting a room in the house, or taking two jobs, so on and so forth.

Everybody assumed they will continue to have a job, and the price of houses will continue to go up-bad mistake!

Than trouble begins-some people get divorced-so where there was two income, now there is less income for the house even with alimony.

Some get sick and loose their jobs.

Some loose their jobs for other reasons.

All the above problems are nothing special and are part of life HOWEVER-now those in trouble can not sell their homes because the houses are OVERPRICED!!!

(Remember, those who bought earlier are mostly okay because their mortgage payments are reasonable. It is the ones who bought in the height of the bubble that are in trouble).

More trouble-the subprime loans start readjusting to very high monthly payments, but the borrowers cannot sell their homes to get out because again-the houses are overpriced.

So the whole scheme starts to collapse"

house prices too high-distressed homeowners can't sell their homes- foreclosure-recession, homeowners loose their job, subprime payments go up- foreclosure, , etc etc.

Don't forget that that the fancy numbers and graphs you are all getting about excited do not tell the whole story. This is a human story people trying their best to "make it" and live dignified lives despite everything....

Anonymous said...

Don't forget that that the fancy numbers and graphs you are all getting about excited do not tell the whole story. This is a human story people trying their best to "make it" and live dignified lives despite everything....


Thanks for the sob story. And I wish that all those people didn't do it on my dime.

Anonymous said...

Yeah? people like you like to blame minorities, while it is your own in wall street that robbed you blind- LOL Oh, and whatever is left of your dime WILL be taxed to pay for wall street's mistakes-so keep whining as much as you want.

Anonymous said...

Yeah? people like you like to blame minorities, while it is your own in wall street that robbed you blind- LOL Oh, and whatever is left of your dime WILL be taxed to pay for wall street's mistakes-so keep whining as much as you want."

Your own?

What are you, some kind of antisemite???