Posted on 05/22/2016 3:38:49 PM PDT by EveningStar
What percentage of the blacks that left were homeowners as opposed to renters?
Somehow I think they got priced out of the market, not that they sold out at high prices.
Not saying this is a bad thing, it is pure economics at work, but I don't think many non-homeowners benefitted from the housing cost increase.
That's the million-dollar question. Do you know? Neither do I. But I've known a lot of blacks as neighbors in SF. I grew up in the Mission District, and a fourth of my neighbors on the block were black. And homeowners, long gone. I attended Balboa High in the outer Mission, and it seemed that about a third of the students were black. Most of their parents were homeowners, the surrounding area being middle class. Some of these black kids were better off than me. That area has changed to house a lot of latinos and asians. There are still some holdouts. In SF, my mother-in-law's next-door neighbor is black, inheriting her home from her recently passed mother. The other siblings moved to the suburbs (all have good jobs). Interesting that some of the newer owners (white yuppies) in the neighborhood look down their nose at the black and asian families hoping they move, even though the non-whites have been there for 60 years or more. These homes on the block are currently going for about $1.3 million, so there is a lot of incentive to cash out.
Spend a little time in the upper "courtyard" by the main BART terminal and your premise will be proven....
LOL!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.