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.
Well I am sure in some instances you're right but you can also bet your bottom dollar that the vast majority of third- and fourth-generation Jews who grew up in Southfield in the '50s and '60s would have no use for those old homes now regardless of who else was living there.
A LOT of those suburbs were all the rage when they were built and have been subsequently abandoned by the original inhabitants because they're old, ugly and offer nothing in terms of a downtown or anything else of interest except small 50-year-old house after small 50-year-old house.
Hey....you know there ARE poor white folks don't you? Southfield would be a "step up" for many whites, thank you very much, just as it has been for blacks. Thus, why don't such whites move there? Certainly Metro Detroit demographics includes more than simply wealthy Jews....right? Besides, again, all the whites have not vacated Southfield. ITs still about 35% white.......but the schools are not. Again, this pattern of white flight when the black student body breaks the 20% threshold is repeated ALL OVER THIS NATION. Of course there are others reasons why this happens, but its mostly racial.
That's right, and it's not a problem exclusive to Southfield. Who wants to raise six children in a 1100 square foot ranch house anymore? That sort of thing was common when those houses were new...I don't know if Southfield had thaaat many children, but where my parents came from (north Warren and Sterling Township) that was pretty common.
LOL......I am sorry but the degree of cognitive dissonance and denial here is laughable. I bet you guy would rewrite history if you could......arguing that in the 50's, 60's and 70's this pattern was motivated by something other than race as well. Same behavior.....different generational rationalizations. You all are NOT as different from the past as you like to believe. Those people in the 60's would have made the same arguments you are making today......if they feared being labeled a racist like people today do.
Color has nothing to do with it. People don't want to live in small houses anymore. I do, but that's because I bought at the top of the market. I may live deep in suburbia, but race had nothing to do with it; it was more to do with low taxes and a reasonable proximity to my place of employment, two things of which Southfield has neither, from what I've heard. I checked out a couple of houses in Detroit, as the 'burbs were overpriced and I like being closer in, but I would have been taxed right out of the middle class.
My comment regarding raising six children in a ranch house was simply a matter-of-fact comment. People routinely did that back then, but having eight people in a house that size will get child protective services called on you in some neighborhoods.
BTW, please don't blame me for the people of forty years ago leaving Southfield and Detroit for greener pastures and bigger houses. I wasn't born yet; it wasn't my fault.
"Southfield would be a "step up" for many whites, thank you very much, just as it has been for blacks. Thus, why don't such whites move there?"
Market forces. They traditionally move up from places like the rathole Hamtramck/Detroit border up to south Warren/Roseville/Eastpointe/dumpy Clinton Township, then north Warren/Fraser, then Sterling Heights/good Clinton Township/Macomb Township. Their parents did it, they are doing it, now the immigrants are starting to do it as well. Southfield simply has not been "the step-up for many whites" in 40-50 years. Perhaps race has a lot to do with it, but that's not my fault and not the fault of our fellow posters on here. I'm not trying to rewrite history. In fact, the 20 per cent minority white flight rate you mentioned may be on its way out for a variety of reasons:
-Greater residential upward mobility within the black working and middle classes. They're moving into better areas and areas that have had in the past minimal minority populations. Racist whites have a much tougher time running away from integration nowadays.
-Less residential upward mobility for many whites in this housing market. They can't simply run anymore. Many owe on their mortgage twice what their houses are actually worth.
-Schools of choice...A school district like Clawson, whose resident population is almost entirely white, gets an influx of students from districts like Oak Park and Pontiac.
-Today's white population is less racist than past populations. Many are more accepting of neighborhood integration.
[quote=us66;17444146]Color has nothing to do with it. People don't want to live in small houses anymore. Here you say PEOPLE do not want to live in small houses anymore. I do, (well.....you are not a person based upon your previous premis) but that's because I bought at the top of the market (and of course no one else could have such a motivation but you). I may live deep in suburbia, but race had nothing to do with it; (I don't think the debate was even about YOUR personal motivation.) it was more to do with low taxes and a reasonable proximity to my place of employment, two things of which Southfield has neither, from what I've heard. I checked out a couple of houses in Detroit, as the 'burbs were overpriced and I like being closer in, but I would have been taxed right out of the middle class. Again, no one has argued that people with different motivations did not exist. The truth is that the pool of potential home buyers in SE Michigan is about 80% (white) of the market even though they are only 70% of the population, because of income qualification and credit. Hence, whites moving out should be replaced by some whites moving in. Again, whatever you say about the small homes in Southfield, there are whites in the area who are moving into those types of homes in different suburbs all the time....they just don't appear interested in Southfield.
My comment regarding raising six children in a ranch house was simply a matter-of-fact comment. People routinely did that back then, but having eight people in a house that size will get child protective services called on you in some neighborhoods.
Why are you taking this PERSONAL? What we are talking about is the big picture here and you are talking about your individual situation. Unless you can demonstrate that everyone who moved from Southfield had the SAME motivation as you.....your personal story does not shed any light.
BTW, please don't blame me for the people of forty years ago leaving Southfield and Detroit for greener pastures and bigger houses. I wasn't born yet; it wasn't my fault.
Again....you are taking this personal. No one is blaming you for anything. No one is going to come looking for you asking for reparations....lol.
"Southfield would be a "step up" for many whites, thank you very much, just as it has been for blacks. Thus, why don't such whites move there?"
Market forces. They traditionally move up from places like the rathole Hamtramck/Detroit border up to south Warren/Roseville/Eastpointe/dumpy Clinton Township, then north Warren/Fraser, then Sterling Heights/good Clinton Township/Macomb Township. Their parents did it, they are doing it, now the immigrants are starting to do it as well. Southfield simply has not been "the step-up for many whites" in 40-50 years. Perhaps race has a lot to do with it, but that's not my fault and not the fault of our fellow posters on here. I'm not trying to rewrite history. In fact, the 20 per cent minority white flight rate you mentioned may be on its way out for a variety of reasons:
You keep taking this personal talking about what is and what is not your fault. Look....this pattern of white flight has existed a long time all over this nation. There is nothing unique about this to Michigan or Southfield. I live in Minnesota and I see white flight more reflected in the schools than in communities. With open enrollment kids can go across districts to the school of their choice. Certain suburban schools attracted a lot of black kids from Minneapolis and in a short period of time the white population halfed and is steadily decreasing. That has nothing to do with home sales, size of houses or anything that you explained. Its simply that the white parents pulled their kids out of these schools...but of course....it has nothing to do with race.
-Greater residential upward mobility within the black working and middle classes. They're moving into better areas and areas that have had in the past minimal minority populations. Racist whites have a much tougher time running away from integration nowadays.
45% of the children 5 and under in America are minorities. Soon America will be a majority minority country and yes it will be extremly hard for racist to run and hide...so I agree.
-Less residential upward mobility for many whites in this housing market. They can't simply run anymore. Many owe on their mortgage twice what their houses are actually worth.
I agree with this as well.
-Schools of choice...A school district like Clawson, whose resident population is almost entirely white, gets an influx of students from districts like Oak Park and Pontiac.
I don't agree with that because that happens here in Minnesota and white parents just enroll their kids in further out schools. As long as the schools to break the 20% threshold of blacks, there will not be a mass departure of white students.
-Today's white population is less racist than past populations. Many are more accepting of neighborhood integration.
Yes....I agree with this especially when it comes to those under 30. I think a lot of people 30 and over are simply holding their noses and tolerating things, but young people are mixing and enjoying each other regardless of race.....which is good.
I am certainly not trying to say what whites should or should not do or to imply that black people in general, or I in particular, should care. I am simply trying to undress the “code words” used by whites to expose what t hey really mean in the real world. When you undress the layers, what it exposes is simply that whites are averse to sending their kids to school with blacks.
Look, to throw water on your theory is simple. Most schools started out as predominantly white. Take the Southfield schools for example. Likely in the 60’s and 70’s those schools were nearly all white and probably were considered “good schools”. You say that if black schools were good with High Test scores that white parents would likely send their kids to school there. Yet, the schools were indeed “good schools” (meaning mostly whites) to begin with. Then blacks started to attend the schools in greater number which in turn triggered a mass enrollment decline of white students. These white students did not suddenly start scoring less on their ACT and SAT or started to get poor grades because the school became 15% black. In other words, there has been no demonstrated correlation of blacks causing whites to do less well in school or to score less on ACT and SAT.
I don't think my theory is that people moved (at least not exclusively) for the purposes of better schooling. I was just saying that black areas would become more desirable for whites if the educational performance stats were better.
Also, I think that Blacks would be better served by focusing on what they can do to improve their own communities and schools independently of white people than they would be about worrying about white people. To hear some commentators tell it, you would think that white people were a magical commodity that are necessary for economic prosperity and good schools. Almost every time some commentator complains about white people moving away the underlying message seems to be, "We need white people."
My guess as to what drove whites out of Southfield is that it was a combination of many factors such as a desire for newer, more modern homes and larger plots of land in swankier towns as well as concerns (founded or unfounded) about educational quality, concerns (founded or unfounded) about crime, and outright racism. For some Jewish people part of the issue might have been a desire to live near other Jews and to be closer to Jewish community centers.
[quote=Bhaalspawn;17452373]I don't think my theory is that people moved (at least not exclusively) for the purposes of better schooling. I was just saying that black areas would become more desirable for whites if the educational performance stats were better.
....and I can accept that but just because it becomes "more desirable" does not mean that it becomes "desierable". One could say that it becomes "Less undesirable" which is essentially the same as more desirable. Again, take Renaissance High in Detroit. It was ranked 20th out of over 800 public high schools in the state.....and I don't see much demonstrated interest from whites in sending their kids to school there. In all honesty, I think that the performance of the schools offers a smoke screen.
90% of the time when I hear whites talk about poor performing schools and students.....they blame it on the parents. That's what makes no sense to me. If what it takes to do well in school is good parents and many whites think they are good parents, then whats the problem? Then why all the fuss about finding just the right public school? The truth is that it is way more than that.....but to mention the "way more" would expose some racial stereotypes, if not racism.
People in this nation have been seen blacks as gnetically, culturally and ethnically undesirable for centuries. We have been seen as a degrading influence on white culture and purity. I am not making this stuff up. The history is LONG and STRONG with these beliefs and attitudes. People want to believe that America is now free of those types of beliefs but with a 300 year head of steam built up.....its just hard to believe that those attitudes have come to a complete halt or slowed significantly enough as to not be a major factor in American life, especially when people are still moving away from blacks residentially and at schools. Same historical behavior with only a different rationalization.
Also, I think that Blacks would be better served by focusing on what they can do to improve their own communities and schools independently of white people than they would be about worrying about white people. To hear some commentators tell it, you would think that white people were a magical commodity that are necessary for economic prosperity and good schools. Almost every time some commentator complains about white people moving away the underlying message seems to be, "We need white people."
I think that black people are conditioned to worry about white people....given history, just like America is conditioned to worry about threats to it around the globe, which is why we have a military, CIA, NSA and other agencies. However, that does not mean that we cannot walk and chew gum at the same time. Its just that black people CANNOT explain how we arrived at our station without talking about the impact of whites on that situation, which has been profound.
Detroit once had about 1.7 million whites living in the city. Today there is about .1 million. The decline and decay of Detroit has most profoundly been the product of white flight. .7 million blacks cannot maintain structures and infrastructure built for 2 million people, especially when nationally blacks rate of poverty and unemployment is signficantly greater than whties. Thus, one has to manage expectations. Blacks are indeed focusing on what they can do independent of whites, yet, the problem gets defined based upon "white standards". What I mean by that is that the City of Detroit and its statistics are usually juxtaposed against cities that have a much larger percentage white population. There is not that much difference from Detroit and say....Gary, Indiana or any other principle cities that are about 85% black. Detroit is simply a microcosm of Black America and black America lives a lot worse off than white America, as the legacy of years of racism.
My guess as to what drove whites out of Southfield is that it was a combination of many factors such as a desire for newer, more modern homes and larger plots of land in swankier towns as well as concerns (founded or unfounded) about educational quality, concerns (founded or unfounded) about crime, and outright racism. For some Jewish people part of the issue might have been a desire to live near other Jews and to be closer to Jewish community centers.
Yes.....and that was the case 10, 30, 50 and 100 years ago. Even during the height of racism in America, there were always "other" factors influencing behavior. Its just that then, unlike today, it was socially accepable to denigrate and look down upon black people and to give that as the reason for certain actions and behaviors. Today its not socially acceptable to have such beleifs and thus people repress them as explanation for things and bring other factors to the forefront as the reason. Its just like homosexuality. 50 years ago gays hide in the closet, married and tried to present themselves as "strait" to avoid social negative social stigma. 50 years ago whites freely called blacks the "N" word and talked of black inferiority and how they did not want to integrate and immerse with an inferior people, among other thing. Today, gays are out the closet giving the impression that a much larger percentage of the population is gay than in the past. Today, racist are in the closet due to avoiding the negative social stigma and feelings associated with being racist, giving the impression that there is a much smaller percentage of racist than there really is. One cannot simply go by what people "say" or how they try to appear to others. Humans are more complex than that because only humans consciously practice deception.
I doubt white folks left Southfield because the houses were too small.
I mean, Royal Oak generally has smaller homes than Southfield, yet the whites stayed. Berkley has tiny houses right next to Southfield, yet the whites stayed.
Southfield, generally speaking, has decent-sized houses. Maybe not huge, but not small either. Definitely bigger-than-average for Metro Detroit.
IMO, the racial changes in the community were a major influence on whites leaving Southfield. That doesn't mean that folks were necessarily racist, however. It just meant that the Jewish community wanted its own enclave, and now has it again in West Bloomfield.
Schools were also a factor. The Jewish community, in particular, is known for attention to schooling, and Southfield schools were traditionally top-notch. Once they became average (at best) there was no reason to stay.
I doubt white folks left Southfield because the houses were too small.
I mean, Royal Oak generally has smaller homes than Southfield, yet the whites stayed. Berkley has tiny houses right next to Southfield, yet the whites stayed.
Southfield, generally speaking, has decent-sized houses. Maybe not huge, but not small either. Definitely bigger-than-average for Metro Detroit.
IMO, the racial changes in the community were a major influence on whites leaving Southfield. That doesn't mean that folks were necessarily racist, however. It just meant that the Jewish community wanted its own enclave, and now has it again in West Bloomfield.
Schools were also a factor. The Jewish community, in particular, is known for attention to schooling, and Southfield schools were traditionally top-notch. Once they became average (at best) there was no reason to stay.
Agreed....but Southfield was not an all Jewish community before blacks arrived. Also, the issue of what color moved out should not be the only focus. One should also look at what color is NOT moving in. Yes, whites and Jews moved out of Southfield.....but whites and Jews did not move in to replace those that left. As telling as the question of who moved out and why is the question of who is not moving into Southfield and why? Over 70% of the metro area is white and hence 70% of the people who replace those who move out of Southfield should be white also, but its not.....why....when 70% of the metro area is white?
Race still matters.
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.
