For first time, Detroit's black population falls

[RustTown]

If you'd like, I'll continue this through private messages, but I'm not going to continue it, here. I have an argument that I've been saving if you'd like to hear it. I've danced around it thus far, but if you'd like to hear it, just hit me up. I'm not going to indulge this any further.

[Ark]

That's fine. There's been too many posts already.

[Jin Kim]

Are we really debating which race is less racists than others? I don't think within that frame, there's any progress to be made.

For the original topic and to Lmichigan's point, I think it'd be beneficial to frame the debate differently.

Consider suburbs of Atlanta. Many of them are populated by affluent African Americans. Crime is low and city services, etc. are comparable to any other affluent suburbs. Though I don't have particular statistics to reference, from my observations, it's unusual to see white families or other races moving into these well established black neighborhoods. There was a PBS series by William Gates a couple of years back, one episode exploring the migration of affluent African American back to south and particularly from cities like Detroit to Atlanta. He laid out some statistics there, but I've fogotten. In those cases, I think Lmichigan's points are valid that racism is perhaps the main driver. Granted, this is in the south and also I got the sense from those interviewed for the show that they really preferred that their neighborhoods remain black.

However, that's not the case everywhere. In some cities, you may observe exact opposit trend. Some of the urban centers which were mostly populated by minorities have recently been revived and have attracted many white residents - pushing out the minorities. In those cases, it was perhaps the economic factors that made a strongest impact on population movement. Some may even have moved back inspite of the fact that they would not have considered moving into mixed neighborhoods if it weren't for the economic factors.

There are different forces that work to push a population from one area to another.

In Detroit, the city is suffering and it seem to be generally getting worse (with a very few bright spots). So it makes sense that there's a continued exidus from Detroit to the surrounding suburbs and elsewhere where things are/seem better. It also makes sense that there would be no counter movement into the city in general. Though, racism surely plays a part (there are some people who would never move into Detroit no matter how prosporus the city becomes) my sense is that Metro-Detroiters are just searching out better lives and opportunities as anyone would do. Detroiters being mostly African Americans, it makes sense that their population drop would be pronouced.

[RustTown]

I'm sorry that I framed the argument the way I did, but it was only in response back on page two not even halfway down the page, that whites had more to fear moving into Detroit, than blacks moving into suburbs, which was implied because of their race. I was simply making the argument, that got out of hand, that if we're talking ethnic intimidation or crimes we have no doubt are based on race, that that assessment is more than ridiculous because the evidence actually supports the direct opposite of that. I'll say it again, anyone, in general, has more to fear moving into Detroit than into the suburbs, but it has little to do with race. The idea that whites living in Detroit (or even visiting the city) are more often targets of violent crime in the city just doesn't seem to be the case, and I'd never have said anything if someone hadn't implied that.

[MetropolitanSA]

That said, it means nothing to show crossover crime statistics showing whites more likely to be victimized by blacks than blacks victimized by whites. That does not mean that blacks are singling out whites more than whites are singling out blacks. Most crimes are crimes of opportunity and the opportunity to victimize a white person in America given that it is far more whites in America than blacks, nearly a 6 to 1 ratio. There are far more potential victims who are white than black so it makes mathematical sense that more whites would be victimized by blacks, in percentages, than blacks victimized by whites, when the percentage of blacks committing violence is much higher than whites.

Yes, there are far more potential victims who are white. However, there are also far more potential criminals who are white. It works both ways, so wouldn't you expect the percentages to be fairly even?

[HolidayInnExpress]

Yes, there are far more potential victims who are white. However, there are also far more potential criminals who are white. It works both ways, so wouldn't you expect the percentages to be fairly even?

That

[MetropolitanSA]

That

[HolidayInnExpress]

What contributing factors would lead to blacks to kill whites at rates much higher than whites killing blacks? Poverty? What do poor blacks have to gain from killing whites?

I think that LMich has accurately explained this. The typical white person across this nation comes in far less contact with black persons than the typical black person comes into contact with whites. You cannot commit violent crime against someone without coming into contact with them, in regards to street crimes. Blacks have a much higher probability of coming into contact with whites than whites have with coming into contact with blacks. Keep in the ratio of blacks to whites in this nation. That really explains It all, as well as the segregation and isolation patterns of the two groups.

[hudkina]

HolidayInnExpress, you act like white people have never seen a black person before... Just because most suburbs have a high percentage of white residents doesn't mean that those residents don't work, shop, go to school, or *gasp* associate with people outside their race.

Also, how the hell could one race have a higher probabilty of coming into contact with the other when each contact would count the same for either race? If a black person comes into contact with a white person, that means a white person comes into contact with a black person.

[HolidayInnExpress]

HolidayInnExpress, you act like white people have never seen a black person before... Just because most suburbs have a high percentage of white residents doesn't mean that those residents don't work, shop, go to school, or *gasp* associate with people outside their race.

Also, how the hell could one race have a higher probabilty of coming into contact with the other when each contact would count the same for either race? If a black person comes into contact with a white person, that means a white person comes into contact with a black person.

Simple example: Given 100 people, 13 of which are black and 87 of which are white, each black person can theoretical come into contact with 87 white persons, but each white person can at most come into contact with only 13 black people. For the sake of example, if a black person wanted to commit a crime, they have greater pool of whites to choose from than black, and if any of the 87 whites wanted to commit a violent crime, they also have a greater pool of whites than blacks to choose from.

In Idaho, I can guarantee you that the average black person living there comes into contact with far more whites than whites come into contact with blacks. That