In an article by Thomas Sowell
http://www.lewrockwell.com/sowell/sowell79.1.html
he claims that

Is this true? Why has this happened?

IMO yes

less ignorance and idiocy

It never gets old for me that Sowell's real first name is Thomas.

Yeah, I'm sure he hasn't heard that one before. Bitch.

you think he has brothers and sisters then? and perhaps some of them have children?

Well, I guess when you cannot possibly refute a man's arguments calling him names is your best approach.

Can you walk me through where you were going with this thread? Like what point you(and the Esteemed Dr. Tom) were getting at?

I don't even know what argument Tom is making there, so for now I'm just going to call him, names. It's something about how liberals ruin everything? There are very few cites and even if what he claims is true it doesn't build to a solid thesis at the end, he just kinda stops listing facts and leaves it to the reader to draw their own conclusions.

I was surprised to learn that racial segregation was increasing and curious as to alternate explanations aside from Sowells. I was shocked, absolutely shocked, to discover pointless name calling instead of actual value oriented discussion. I'm not sure what that ****** hating apologist for the white man was trying to say. Something about keeping darkie down, I'm sure.

Partly that, plus a crackdown on ultra-destructive policies like redlining.

useful intelligent posting IMO

I'll give you a hint: it starts with "War" and ends with "on Drugs".

fwiw I live exactly where that that wiki article is citing and its FOS in my experience

Full of **** about what, exactly? I know redlining sounds a lot like some liberal plot to blame everything on racist white people(gosh it's so tiring how often we return to that well, amirite?), but there's a ****ing map on that Wikipedia page that contains actual red lines.

Do you mean that the page is like, referencing forgeries?

Wtf is this article? I don't see what his reasoning is for discrediting government from taking credit for residential desegregation progress.

I can think of two mid-20th century happenings off the top of my head that could definitely help explain the turnaround, both of which Sowell would probably be against. Obv the civil rights act increased options for minorities, and in 1948, the government stopped enforcing property covenants that restricted based on race.

You would think if anything redlining would promote integration, as blacks fled these areas which banks won't invest in, no? I think if a bank finds it imprudent to invest in a given geographical area that is okay. Isn't the government forcing banks to make loans to people who cannot pay them one of the reasons for the mortgage melt down?

what are those pesky blacks doing with their vast supply of resources anyways?

Warthog on drugs?

Because people like to live around their own socioeconomic and racial similarities. Whether it is entire cities, or individual neighborhoods within cities, census data clearly shows whites congregrate around whites and blacks around blacks.

http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010/map

Vid. Crossing a St Louis street that divides communities

"The city of St Louis, Missouri, remains one of the most segregated cities in the US, according to a study by the Manhattan Institute. But one street in particular has been known to residents as the "dividing line".

Delmar Boulevard, which spans the city from east to west, features million-dollar mansions directly to the south, and poverty-stricken areas to its north. What separates rich and poor is sometimes just one street block."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17361995

Good chance someone who posts here lives around that area. Not that bad? Worse?

We have this in Cleveland. Rough inner-city neighborhoods border Shaker Heights and Cleveland Heights; with literally million-dollar homes on Fairmount Blvd and Shaker Blvd and within a mile of ghetto.

I didnt know of the second but the civil rights movement and associated laws was the obvious go to on why this was happening since the mid 20th century. The better question is why segregation was increasing in the first half of it.

The OP article is extremely incoherent on the subject. If anyone is interested in what the study really says, check the actual study:

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cr_66.htm

As for boundary streets between white and black neighborhoods, none in the country is more stark or famous than 8 Mile Road in Detroit. There you've got a road that runs for about ten miles, 90%+ black on one side and majority white on the other. The black population is more recently moving north of 8 Mile, but historically it has been the ironclad dividing line.

There are actually a number of different measures of segregation. A great resource for reviewing the change of different metrics over time by city is here:

http://www.s4.brown.edu/us2010/segre...aspx?msa=19820

I don't have anything to back this up wrt the study in question, but when the sample size is small (ie a very small concentration of given ethnic group in the area) it tends to distort some of these statistics wildly. For instance, if one black person moves to a city that is 100% white otherwise, some statistics will indicate that the city is as residentially integrated as possible. Which is true, but trivial. The relative lack of black folks in many cities circa 1900 (the Great Migration started circa 1910) might be the cause of some serious data distortion that makes the numbers hardly apples-to-apples.

For a modern example, Miami stands out as having a more integrated Asian population than Seattle in some of the metrics. Which is probably meaningless: Miami's Asian population is so tiny that it would be basically impossible for it be meaningfully segregated from other populations.

I don't get it

Uncle Tom

hurr hurr Fly made a funny

I think Fly was instead going for what it sounds like when you elide "Thomas" into "Sowell."