Buy Houses in Detroit for $1500, Monthly Pmt. = $7
You can go to Realtor.com and search for homes for sale in any city in the U.S., and you can specify a certain price range. If you search for homes for sale in Detroit, Michigan, you'll find that there are 22,387 homes for sale right now, and if you search for Detroit homes for sales between $0 and $20,000, you'll find that there are 3,431 homes for sale in that price range!
That is, more than 15% of the homes for sale in Detroit, or almost 1 out every 7 homes for sale, is priced at $20,000 or less, including the "Great Investment Property" pictured above, which is listed at a $1,500 sales price (negotiable?) with estimated monthly payments of only "$7 per month."
"$7 for a monthly house payment," isn't that about what a single pack of cigarettes cost now?
55 Comments:
At prices like that, it would be feasible to buy not houses but contiguous areas.
Zoning considerations aside, if prices are that low it probably was't meant to be residential anyhow.
And I'm not necessarily talking factory. Could be public parks, etc.
--
The Banjo Players Must Die
A pack of cigs will usually run you around 3.25-4.00$, depending on the area.
The problem is that it would cost you maybe [this is just a SWAG] $5k to demolish the house - if there was no asbestos or lead paint in the house.
Then you would have paid $6,500 for a city lot - maybe 1/4 acre? - or around $26,000/acre.
What do you get for $1,500.00 though? These homes are in war zones. Places you wouldn't feel safe going to without an armored car--even in the daytime.
If these homes were in livable areas they would be snapped up by investors a long time ago. The problem is that any income generated by these houses is offset by losses due to maintenance, repair and theft of such things as doors, windows, wiring, plumbing and etc.
Those cheap Detroit houses have gone up in value though...I remember back in 1992 you could buy them for $250.
cigarettes can run even higher than that. aren't they close to $9 a pack in some places?
I need to move out of the Bay Area...
I live in detroit so I may be able to shed a bit of light on this. A large number of these sub-20k houses are burnout remnants of devils nights past.
However there are a number of perfectly good houses in this range as well. Unfortunately this is not at all a worthwhile investment in most cases....simply because the economy here lacks much to be desired. 1/3 of the metro lives below poverty line, Crime rates are very high, abandoned and burnt houses litter the city in frightening numbers. The population of detroit has cut itself in half since over the past 50 years.
Finally, there is another snag...it is not uncommon to find what looks like a beautiful home, windows long boarded by the bank to protect its value from vandalism, contact the bank and hear a beautifully low price....then discover that the yearly taxes are in the order of renting from the city....I recently viewed a $30k house with a $12k yearly tax bill.....
My final wrapup....if nothing I have said bothers you. If you are willing to hunt for a good deal.... If you have an income you can bring with you...ie your own business... then come to detroit.
Ironically, a similar search of MLS.ca in Windsor, a stones throw away, yields only 3 houses under 25,000 CDN$...and all three are "as-is" mobile homes. I have no doubt that the sub-prime problem will affect both countries, but why the great divide?
the house pictured comes with seven acres of land. It actually costs around $7000 to demolish a house, but even then, your total investment would be $8500, which is just a bit over $1000 per acre. Plus, the house still looks fixable. Why tear down what can be used as-is? It's not like there's a high demand for rebuilding McMansions there.
one option would be for an oppressed or displaced social group to go in together and purchase an entire neighborhood of these homes, and rebuild them as a "city-within-a-city."
Habitat for Humanity's first-ever whole-community project? New Orleans refugees move north? A way for FEMA to save money and build community at the same time? Of course, such logic is rarely applied by government decision-makers....
& pics of a few certainly in that range...
http://www.23hq.com/insky/album/2181473
relocating people to detroit is not an answer to anyones problem. as I pointed out before....Detroits Population has DROPPED by 50% since the late 50s. 26.1% of the existing population lives below poverty levels. There are simply not enough jobs here for the people that live here already. In the first 6 months I lived in detroit every interviewer I spoke with said the same thing when I told them I had just moved here "Why would you do that? You should go back to phoenix"
I purchase similar houses in the Pittsburgh area, and it all started as an experiment in adding breadth to my investment portfolio.
I purchased a 4,200 square foot brick multi-unit on a corner lot for $18,500 and a 4,000 square foot brick multi-unit across the street, also a corner lot, for $7,500 last year. One required $21,000 in repairs and maintenance, most of which I performed myself. I am now renting out three of the four units at a range of $475 - $635 each. Annual property taxes run around $2,000. On the more expensive property, my annual return on investment (estimated at $12K) is close to 30%. The lesser expensive property will require more repairs and I expect will not be rented out until 2009. In the interim, I am using it as studio space for artists and earning enough to cover fixed costs (insurance, taxes, utilities, some repairs).
Tenants are incented to pay their rent on time by offering them one month off for all other months paid timely. All rentals include free internet service.
The recent increase in foreclosures and abandoned properties have been a dream come true for me! I am now up to my 5th property - all paid for in cash.
Municipalities are thrilled that people like me are buying the properties and go out of their way to help. Police make regular patrols and neighbors keep an eye on them - happy that the improvement next door serves to improve and enhance their quality of life (and property values).
as for the 7 acres...that is a listing typo. its .7 acres the property shown is located at 6185 Huber St. I drove past it last week.
Just to comment on the anonymous post of "...New Orleans refugees move north? A way for FEMA to save money and build community at the same time? Of course, such logic is rarely applied by government decision-makers"...Are you insane? Has you your islamo-fascist fanatical outrage and let's just build a big wall immigration fear together with a why don't the poor just get jobs mentality ever thought about simply rebuilding New Orleans correctly instead of displacing families even further and continuing to default on our country's moral responsibility to its citizenry in times of disaster?
Do you think that MAYBE the citizens of New Orleans might wake up and realize that they are living in a flood plain, and maybe they shouldn't be living there at all? Why whould we continue to pay for this ignorance?
You don't buy house, you buy a neighborhood.
The cigarettes will kill you slower than Detroit will.
Given that it's at the mouth of the Mississippi, New Orleans happens to be a major U.S. port. No more N.O., no more flotilla of cargo ships floating up the river with cheap bananas for your supermarket.
You can not purchase a "sub prime" mortgage in Canada, also any mortgage in Canada has to be insured by the government run CMHC or the private GE.
However, you are right the Sub Prime problem in the United States will affect us in Canada, but only in as much as our economies are very much tied together anyway.
You put docks at the mouth of a river. Not homes.
New Orleans was a great place for a city in the 1700's when direct access to the mouth of the Mississippi was important both economically and for strategic defense.
Now that we have roads, airplanes and no longer need to worry about a surprise attack from a European armada that sails unseen up the Mississippi it might be time to admit that below sea level in a hurricane zone isn't really the best place for a major city.
How can you not be concerned about a surprise attack from a European armada? Americans are concerned about shoe bombers, people mixing liquids on planes, 5 year-olds being terrorists because their name resembles someone else's, and non-white people in general. None of those are any more dangerous than a potential European armada.
I live in western Canada and cannot come close to understanding what has gone on in Detroit. It seems to me the USA needs more people like iamnorth@gmail.com to really make things happen not only for him/herself but also to help the less fortunate. With work a little money and immagination it can be done.
top 5 tiny house you may afford (pictures)
http://www.rankthehot.com/_Top_5_Tiniest_Tiny_Houses-fabric
At some point, people need to look at the areas of Detroit that are in trouble and work together to fix the problem. In Grand Rapids, some of the areas that were dangerous and run down several years ago are now really nice to live in. It happened because people saw a bargain, and took a chance on humanity.
Someone will make money on this and Detroit will turn around.
Detroit offers little incentive to draw businesses to locate here. In many ways it drives businesses away.
http://www.somacon.com/p469.php
detroits population is dropping. If a population is cut over 60 years from 1,849,568 to 871,121, then half the housing in existence 60 years ago is either available, decaying, or destroyed.
Imagine taking your neighborhood and emptying every even numbered address of occupants. That is what has happened here.
26%+ live below poverty level.
In June the city of Detroit reported a 14.9% unemployment rate, the metro as a whole was 7.9%. And remember that Detroit loses an average of 200 people a day....look at the census and do the math....This means that employment is still shrinking faster then people can get out.
Want to get rich off detroit....
step1: relocate a profitable company here.
Step2: Hire a crapload of detroit citizens at minimum wage.
Step3: Form a real estate holding corp and buy property
Step4: Rent the properties to your employees at inflated rates.
Step5: pay your original company dividends from your real estate holdings.
Step6 : Fire anyone who complains
Step7 : Pay lots of bribes to city officials
step8: Shift your money offshore and declare bankruptcy
Step9: Leave detroit
There are many groups advocating urban farms on a grand scale in Detroit. This article is kind of old http://www.metrotimes.com/editorial/story.asp?id=2625. It sort of reminds me of "The World Without Us".
Hmmm, $1500 for hovel in a war zone run by libtard socialist?!?!
That's $250,000 to much...
CARPE DIEM
Always a laugh watching a bunch of White people ignore RACE while trying to talk about the destruction of every major city in America (and most of the western world) over the last 60 years.
The reason Homes are so cheap in Detroit is because Detroit is a 3rd world city within a first world nation.
What makes an area a "bad part of town" kids?
.....THE PEOPLE.
I know you NEVER get to hear the honest truth on your T.V. or from that globalist Big Media you trust so much....but the simple fact is that EVERY PLACE Blacks (and Browns) have moved into over the last 50 years has been destroyed and turned into a 3rd nation (just like the nations where they came from.)
Just one more reason why IMHO the US real estate market has a LONG WAY TO FALL.
The truth is that this nations insane Mass. 3rd world immigration program is flooding this nation with millions of 3rd worlders every year.
Over time more and more of America is going to be turned into Detroit, Dayton, L.A., N.O., Cincinnati, Gary IN., New York, S.L.....on and on.
As long as this nation keeps flooding this country with people from Horrific 3rd world nation I see no LOGICAL reason not to expect American to keep being pulled down into a 3rd world nation her self.
Im sure the real estate in Ethiopia, Rwanada and Mexico are MUCH CHEAPER THAN EVEN DETROIT.
....and im also sure that IMPORTING Ethiopia, Rwanada and Mexico into YOUR CITY WILL DO WONDERS FOR YOUR ECONOMY, YOUR CRIME RATE, YOUR SCHOOL TEST SCORES....AND YOUR REAL ESTATE VALUES.
Enjoy the neo-Dark ages is going to be a blast for everyone.
Wow this is ridiculous... its so cheap... why isnt everyone buying the houses already?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/31/nbrum131.xml&CMP=ILC-mostviewedbox
Think US is bad have a look at Europe....
There is something wrong with the Realtor.com listing. I notice that the same houses are listed more than once, sometimes three or four times. I don't doubt there are many substandard homes in Detroit under $20K, but the 3,457 number is overstated because of the duplicate entries.
Generally I've found that city economies collapse not because of the influx of migrants (from any country - be it Ireland and Scotland or Asia or Africa or South America) but because of a lack of jobs and education.
Before blaming the decay of Detroit on its population, annonymous, you should probably check out other cities around the world that have had an influx of so called third world migrants and have thrived.
The difference between those cities that have thrived with migrants and those that haven't isn't to do with race - it's to do with opportunity. Check your history. Detroit was flourishing until the big car manufacturers moved away - which in turn meant other service industries (i.e. food, clothes, entertainment) shut down too. Massive unemployment has a way of depressing people and the economy.
Idiot.
You wrote,
"Before blaming the decay of Detroit on its population, annonymous, you should probably check out other cities around the world that have had an influx of so called third world migrants and have thrived."
Would you be so kind as to list a few of these cities?
Thanks.
Mark
If we can be adults here and speak the TRUTH??
The FACT is that the REAL REASON Black/Brown...areas, towns and nations are economic basket cases, with massive crime rates and social decay...HAS VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH "racsim"....AND EVERYTHING TO DO WITH...(hold the childrens ears!).....GENETICS!!!
Recent Scientific Research (you BIG MEDIA wont dare mention) has found that Black and brown populations have SMALLER BRAINS...and thus much LOWER IQs (ON AVERAGE)...than populations whos ancestors evolved in Cold regions of the world.
In short the "free press' you trust so much has been telling all of you the BIGGEST LIE IN HISTORY over the last 50 years or so.
In fact a host the world top scientists from ALL OVER THE WORLD have written several books of late on this very subject.
No better than the worlds top expert in the field Doctor R. Lynn (Harvard/Berkley) who research has shown the SINGLE LARGEST FACTOR IN ANY POPULATIONS ECONOMIC LEVEL (as well as levels of Technology and wealth)....IS THE IQ OF ITS POPULATIONS.
Im sure most of you have never heard of this international best seller because the "free press' have Blacklisted this book (and Doctor Lynns latest book "Racial differences in IQ" as well!)
Here are a few world from Doctor J.P. Rushton talking about Doctor R. Lynns important book:
{"Winters Are Good For Your Genes: Lynn Book Finds World Average IQ 90, Declining From North To South
By Professor J. Philippe Rushton
Four years ago, via VDARE.com, I was able to give the first significant publicity to IQ and the Wealth of Nations, the luminous book on IQ and the diverging economic performance of different countries co-authored by Richard Lynn with Tatu Vanhanen. Now Professor Lynn has followed up with another important book, Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis.
Its central finding: the world average IQ is no more than 90, equivalent to the mental age of a white 14-year-old. (Standardized IQ tests are normed to 100, the mental age of the average white 16-year-old.) Lynn also draws attention to the fact that a north-south IQ continuum has evolved, apparently through selection for survival in cold winters. (See the New IQ Map of the World.)
These findings in Lynn’s latest book have profound geopolitical significance. They imply it may simply not be possible to transmit Western-style democratic and economic systems to the populations of Latin America and Moslem North Africa and the Middle East, let alone sub-Saharan Africa. They mean that the world’s long-term problems will stem from its populations' capabilities—much deeper and more intractable than any "Clash of Civilizations"-style competition between different political concepts.
The implications for immigration are obvious: it can have fundamental, and permanent, consequences.
For Lynn, Race Differences In Intelligence represents the culmination of more than a quarter of a century’s work on intelligence. It was in 1977 that he first ventured into this field—some would say minefield—with the publication of two papers on IQ in Japan and Singapore. Both showed that the East Asians obtained higher averages than White Europeans in the United States and Britain. These initial studies were disputed, but the present book lists 60 studies of the IQs of indigenous East Asians, all of which confirm the original contention. IQ and the Wealth of Nations showed that variation in IQ largely explains the problem of why some countries are rich and others poor. More recently, Lynn has helped overturn the century-long consensus that there is no average sex difference in intelligence by showing that men average 4 to 5 IQ points higher than women. (E.g. Lynn & Irwing, 2004, "Sex Differences on the Progressive Matrices: a meta-analysis," Intelligence, 32, 481-498. [pay archive] This finding is controversial even by the standards of the IQ debate—I hope to write about it soon in VDARE.COM.)
Most studies of race differences in intelligence have been local in focus. In the United States they have been largely concerned with the IQs of Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, East Asians and Native American Indians. In Australia they have been concerned with the low IQ of the Aborigines, and in New Zealand with the low IQ of the Maoris. Although a few theorists have taken a global perspective and posited genetic and evolutionary explanations for the three macro-races of East Asians, Europeans and Africans, most have typically explained the local differences by environmental and cultural factors such as poverty and racism.
Lynn’s book extends the global perspective well beyond the three-macro races. He reviews more than 500 published IQ studies worldwide from the beginning of the twentieth century up to the present, devoting a chapter to each of the ten "genetic clusters," or population groups, as identified by Luigi Cavalli-Sforza and his colleagues in their mammoth 1994 book, The History and Geography of Human Genes.
Lynn regards these genetic clusters as "races." He concludes that the East Asians—Chinese, Japanese and Koreans—have the highest mean IQ at 105. Europeans follow with an IQ of 100. Some ways below these are the Inuit or Eskimos (IQ 91), South East Asians (IQ 87), Native American Indians (IQ 87), Pacific Islanders (IQ 85), South Asians and North Africans (IQ 84). Well below these come the sub-Saharan Africans (IQ 67) followed by the Australian Aborigines (IQ 62).
The lowest scoring are the Bushmen of the Kalahari Desert together with the Pygmies of the Congo rain forests (IQ 54).
After the ten chapters setting out the evidence for the average IQ of each of these ten races, there follows a chapter on the reliability and validity of the measures. These show that, although additional evidence may be required to confirm some of the racial IQ estimates, many have very high reliability in the sense that different studies give closely similar results. For instance, East Asians invariably obtain high IQs, not only in their own native homelands but also in Singapore, Malaysia, Hawaii, and North America.
To establish the validity of the racial IQs, Lynn shows that they correlate highly with performance in international studies of achievement in mathematics and science. And racial IQs also correlate with national economic development. This means they can help to explain why some countries are rich and others poor.
Lynn suggests further that IQ differences explain how quickly populations made the Neolithic transition from hunter-gatherer to settled agriculture, to building early city states, and later the development of mature civilizations.
Lynn concludes that the causes of race differences in intelligence are 50 percent genetic and 50 percent environmental. This estimate is in line with those of other recent reviews. (Arthur Jensen and I also took it as our starting point in our 2005 survey [pdf] of IQ and race difference literature published in Psychology, Public Policy, and Law.) Lynn argues that the consistency of the racial IQs in so many different places differing widely in circumstance can only be explained by powerful genetic factors.
Lynn also applies a general principle from evolutionary biology to previous analyses that found a substantial genetic contribution to the differences in intelligence between East Asians, Whites, and Blacks. He argues that wherever subspecies adapt to novel environments, they invariably develop differences in all characteristics for which there is genetic variation—such as skin colour, hair texture, musculo-skeletal traits and susceptibility and resistance to various diseases. Lynn asserts that intelligence cannot be an exception.
Lynn works out the genetic contribution in most detail for people of African descent. He argues that Blacks in the United States appear to have experienced broadly the same environment as Whites in regard to the environmental determinants of intelligence, such as nutrition, because Blacks and Whites have had the same average height since World War I. He presents evidence that Blacks in the southern states have very little White ancestry and have an average IQ of about 80, and he proposes this be adopted as the genotypic IQ of Africans. Consequently, because the average IQ for Blacks in sub-Saharan Africa is about 67, he takes this 13-point difference as the amount due to the adverse environmental conditions, principally poor nutrition, and health, found on that continent.
Lynn's last three chapters are concerned with the book’s subtitle—An Evolutionary Analysis. They discuss how race differences in intelligence have evolved.
Lynn begins by putting the problem in context by summarizing Harry Jerison’s (1973) classic study, The Evolution of the Brain and Intelligence. This showed that during the course of evolution, species have evolved greater intelligence in order to survive in more cognitively demanding environments. The same principle, Lynn argues, explains the evolution of race differences in human intelligence.
As early humans migrated out of Africa they encountered the cognitively demanding problem of having to survive cold winters where there were no plant foods and they had to hunt, sometimes big game. They also had to solve the problem of keeping warm. This required greater intelligence than was needed in tropical and semi-tropical equatorial Africa where plant foods are plentiful throughout the year. Lynn shows that race differences in brain size and intelligence are both closely associated with low winter temperatures in the regions they inhabit. He gives a figure of 1,282 cc for the average brain size of sub-Saharan Africans, as compared with 1,367 cc for Europeans and 1,416 cc for East Asians.
Since I have argued many of the same positions as Lynn in my book Race, Evolution, and Behavior, I will add that Lynn’s brain size data are backed by a great deal of independent, converging evidence, including that from brain weights at autopsy, endocranial volume, and external head size measures. (My book provides many details of individual studies.) Moreover, magnetic resonance imaging studies make clear that the relation between brain size and intelligence is highly reliable. Lynn is on very safe ground in his statements here.
From time to time Lynn notes anomalies in his theory that require explanations. One of these is that Europeans made most of the great intellectual discoveries, while the East Asians, despite having a higher IQ, made relatively few—a paradox extensively documented by Charles Murray in his 2003 book, Human Accomplishment. Lynn proposes an explanation for this: it may be that East Asians are more conformist than Europeans and this inhibits creative achievement. (In Race, Evolution, and Behavior, I presented evidence that this personality trait has genetic roots.)
Another anomaly: the average IQ of Israel is only about 95—substantially higher than the median IQ of 85 found elsewhere in the region, but much lower than the average IQ of Jews outside of Israel, estimated at between 108 and 115.
Lynn breaks the Israeli IQ into three components: 40 percent Ashkenazim (European Jewish) with a mean IQ of 103; 40 percent Sephardim (Oriental Jewish) with a mean IQ of 91; and 20 percent Arab with a mean IQ of 86, which is virtually the same as that of Arabs elsewhere. Lynn suggests these differences could have arisen from selective migration (more intelligent Jews emigrated to Britain and the USA), intermarriage with different IQ populations (those in Europe versus those in North Africa), selective survival through persecution (European Jews were the most persecuted), and the inclusion of ethnic non-Jews among the Ashkenazim in Israel as a result of the immigration of people from the former Soviet Bloc countries who posed as Jews.
Lynn also notes some anomalies in the cold winter theory of intelligence. The most striking: the Inuit, exposed to the coldest winter temperatures, have a brain size equal to East Asians, and yet have an average IQ of only 91. To explain this anomaly, Lynn proposes that additional genetic processes are important—such as population size. The larger the network of co-operating and competing population groups ("demes"), the faster any mutations for advantageous alleles can spread. So large landmass groups like East Asians and Europeans average higher IQs than isolated hunter-gatherer groups like the Inuit.
The discussion of race and intelligence is being actively repressed on campuses as I write these words. But intellectually, the battle is over: Race realism has won. Race Differences in Intelligence is a symbol and a symptom of that victory. It may be Richard Lynn’s crowning achievement.
J. Philippe Rushton [email him] is a professor of psychology at the University of Western Ontario, the author of Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective."}
http://www.vdare.com/rushton/060322_iq.htm
Here is another article by Doctor J.P. Rushton talking about his PERSONAL WORK WITH AFRICAN SCHOOL STUDENTS IN SOUTH AFRICA.
...At some point we ALL going to have to just STOP PRETEDING.
Or were ALL DOOMED.
{"I.Q.: Why Africa is Africa – and Haiti Haiti
By J. Philippe Rushton
Early in 2002 I published a VDARE.COM review on Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen’s book IQ and the Wealth of Nations. It was powerfully seconded a few weeks later by Steve Sailer.
The book’s thesis—that a country’s prosperity is closely related to the average IQ of its population—should have made the cover of The Economist because of its devastatingly important implications. But, although some academics took notice, it was ignored by the mainstream media.
Finally, a year and a half later after I introduced the subject to VDARE.COM readers, the essential argument appeared in the London Times, along with a beautiful IQ Map of the World. [The wealth of nations is mapped by their IQ, By Glen Owen, November 10, 2003.]
Why the sudden interest? Could it be because Matti Vanhanen, the son of co-author Tatu Vanhanen, Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Tampere in Finland, was recently elected Prime Minister of Finland? (Richard Lynn is Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Ulster.)
No, no. that’s too cynical. More likely; because Lynn and Vanhanen had reported some new analyses of their data which caught the attention of a journalist willing to listen. (This happens sometimes.)
This is what they reported: For sixty countries with clearly identified IQ scores, the correlation with real gross domestic product, or GDP, was significant (about r = 0.60). The countries of the Pacific Rim (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, China, Hong Kong and Singapore) had the highest average IQs, of about 105. Then next come Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, averaging 100. In South Asia, North Africa and most Latin American countries, the average IQ score was about 85, and in sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean around 70.
The bottom line: well over half (about 58 per cent) of the differences in national wealth can be explained in terms of national differences in average intelligence. Each IQ point above 70 in the national average was worth about $850 in per capita GDP.
The new Lynn-Vanhanen report concluded that people with high IQs were better able to master the complex skills needed to produce goods and services for which there is international demand. They were more likely to develop efficient public services such as transport and telecommunications, which provide an efficient infrastructure. They are more likely to have intelligent political leaders who manage their economies effectively.
As Richard Lynn explained to The Times:
“Our critics would suggest that we are confusing cause and effect, and that IQs are higher in rich countries because of better health, education and so on. But we don't think that is likely: intelligence is the largest single factor behind national wealth. It then becomes a virtuous circle, with the benefits of the resulting affluence adding extra IQ points.”
The authors are not denounced as “racist” for showing that East Asians have higher IQs than Whites.
Nor is umbrage taken at what Professor Lynn told The Times about China’s IQ potential for becoming a superpower:
“The per capita income in China is low…because of the inefficiency of the communist system. Now the Chinese have introduced a market economy the growth rate is rapid…China can be predicted to reach parity with Europe and the U.S…and become the new economic and military superpower.”
What critics have objected to—very strongly—is the statement that sub-Saharan Africans have an average IQ of 70.
This is, indeed, extremely low. In North America, an IQ of 70 suggests borderline mental retardation.
Critics of the finding that the average African IQ is 70 say that it simply must be wrong. They insist that biased testing procedures must have been used, even though dozens of separate studies have corroborated the results from East, West, Central, and Southern Africa. For Example, one 1992 study carried out for the World Bank reported that a random sample of 1,639 adolescents in the West African country of Ghana had an average IQ of 60.
In 1998, I went to Johannesburg, South Africa, to initiate a 5-year series of IQ studies in the university system to determine whether such a low IQ was accurate. I, too, wondered how well all the previous data had been collected, if sufficient care were taken in giving instructions, ensuring motivation, having a quiet room for testing, or giving enough time to complete the tests.
First, I contacted psychologists in the Faculty of Education at the University of the Witwatersrand (all anti-apartheid liberals) and together we tested hundreds of students of African, East Indian, White, and East Asian backgrounds, along with those of mixed ancestry, under optimal testing procedures, using culture reduced tests. We used a large, quiet, well-lit, well-ventilated examination room with desks spaced far enough apart to prevent copying or feeling crowded. As I walked up and down the aisles watching the students diligently at work, it was plain to see they were well-motivated.
We used the Raven’s Matrices, one of the best known, well researched, and most widely used of all the culture-reduced tests. Consisting of 60 diagrammatic puzzles, each with a missing part that the test taker attempts to identify from several choices, it is an excellent measure of the non-verbal component of general intelligence. Typically, the test is so easy for university students that they do it in less than 20 minutes. We set no time limit for the test. All those being tested were allowed to complete it.
We found African university students averaged an IQ of 84. In some studies, by other researchers, they have scored lower (IQ = 77). In still others of our studies, highly-selected engineering students who took math and science courses in high school scored higher (IQ = 103).
Assuming that, like university students elsewhere, the African university students on average score 15 points above the general population, the African general population average of about 70 would appear to be corroborated.
One way to comprehend an IQ of 70 is to think in terms of mental age. For example, for adults an IQ of 70 is equivalent to a mental age of 11 years. So the normal range of mental ages in Africa is from 7 to 16 years, with an average at 11 years.
Eleven-year-olds, of course, are not retarded. They can drive cars, build houses, and work in factories—if supervised properly. They can also make war.
In terms of mental age then, the Africans who drop out of primary school correspond to 7-year-olds. Those who get to high school correspond to 11-year-olds. The top university students we tested correspond to 16- and 17-year-olds.
Adult Whites, by contrast, have mental ages ranging from 11- to 24-years, with an average mental age of 16- to 18-years.
This is an astonishing fact, with sweeping implications for both domestic and foreign policy.
But it seems to be very difficult for people to grasp. One reason put forward by Arthur Jensen in The G Factor (P 367-9): many sub-70 IQ whites are retarded as a result of in utero misfortunes, with visible deficiencies in motor skills and speech. The majority of sub-70 IQ blacks, in contrast, are technically normal. They appear fully functional.
I hope to return to discussing this phenomenon more fully in a future VDARE.COM article.
J. Philippe Rushton [email him] is a professor of psychology at the University of Western Ontario, the author of Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History
Perspective."}
http://www.vdare.com/misc/rushton_african_iq.htm
{"December 07, 2006
IQ And Global Inequality: “The Most Important Contribution To Economic Understanding Since Adam Smith.”
By Professor J. Philippe Rushton
[Earlier by J. Philippe Rushton: Winters Are Good For Your Genes…]
IQ and Global Inequality, the new book by Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen, is an elaboration and extension of their IQ and the Wealth of Nations, which was reviewed on VDARE.COM by myself and by Steve Sailer. In that book the authors presented measured IQs for 81 countries and estimated IQs for the remaining countries in the world—a total of 185. They showed that these IQs correlated around 0.70 with per capita income and rates of economic development. This was predictable, they argued, because intelligence is correlated with earnings among individuals. Nations are aggregates of individuals, so the same correlation could plausibly be expected across nations.
This was a very bold claim. The cause of national differences in wealth is one of the major problems in economics. Hundreds of books have been written on the subject and several journals are devoted to it. The problem has also been addressed by sociologists, historians, psychologists and most recently by an evolutionary biologist, Jared Diamond. None of these have suggested that national differences in intelligence might be a major factor determining why some nations are so rich while others are so poor.
Perhaps they lacked the courage.
In my view, Lynn and Vanhanen have made what is arguably the most important contribution to economic understanding since Adam Smith showed that free markets promote economic development. They have shown also that national IQs explain much of the variation between nations in a wide range of economic and social phenomena—not just income levels. Their book extends the explanatory power of the concept of intelligence in a way that makes a major contribution to the integration of psychology with the other social sciences.
In advancing their intelligence theory, Lynn and Vanhanen begin by noting that economists usually regard it as axiomatic that all peoples of the world have the same intelligence. For instance, Richard Easterlin, then Kenan Professor of Economics at the University of Pennsylvania, wrote in 1981:
"I think we can safely dismiss the view that the failure of modern technological knowledge to spread rapidly was due to significant differences among nations in the native intelligence of their populations." [Why Isn't the Whole World Developed? Journal of Economic History, Vol. 41, No. 1]
As another, more recent example, we meet the same claim in December 2000 by Eric Hanushek and Dennis Kimko in The American Economic Review:
"We assume that the international level of average ability of students does not vary across countries" [Schooling, Labor-Force Quality, and the Growth of Nations (PDF)]
This assumption that the average level of intelligence is the same in all nations is seriously wrong. Lynn and Vanhanen have found huge national differences in average intelligence. Some countries in sub-Saharan Africa appear to have average IQs of 67. Some of the "Asian Tiger" nations of the Pacific Rim average out at 105. This is very significant.
For perspective, the reader might note that an IQ of 70 is the lower limit for primary school educability, and an IQ of 105 the lower limit for College-level (although of course these can always be "dumbed down").
Lynn and Vanhanen’s work got a mixed reception. Some were convinced; others were vehemently hostile. Many preferred to ignore the idea.
In IQ and Global Inequality, Lynn and Vanhanen build on their previous work and extend it in six directions.
First, they have increased the number of countries for which they have calculated measured IQs from 81 to 113. They show that, in the new larger sample of 113 countries, the correlation between IQ and per capita income for 2002 is 0.68—virtually identical to the correlation reported in their earlier book.
Second, they use the same method for estimating the IQs of countries for which they were unable to provide measured IQs, i.e. from neighbouring countries with culturally and racially similar populations (e.g., the IQ of Latvia is estimated at 98 from the measured IQs of 99 in Estonia and 97 in Russia). By the use of this method, they provide IQs for all 192 countries in the world. For these the correlation between IQ and per capita income for 2002 is 0.60.
Third, they address the argument made by several critics of the invalidity of the estimates of national IQs from the measured IQs of neighbouring countries. They show that there is a correlation of 0.91 between the estimated IQs for 32 countries given in their first book and the measured IQs for the same countries given in their new book. This establishes their case that the estimated IQs were remarkably accurate.
Fourth, a number of critics attacked the reliability and validity of the national IQs. To address this question the new book presents results of 71 countries for which two independent measures of IQ have been obtained and show that the correlation between these is 0.95, which is a very high reliability. To establish the validity of national IQs they present the results of national scores from tests of mathematics and science. These correlate with national IQs from 0.79 to 0.89, which is a very high validity.
Fifth, IQ and Global Inequality examines the relation between national IQs and a variety of social phenomena. A path model in which genes and environment both contribute equally (0.50) to national IQs allows a determination of economic growth (0.71) from 1500 to 2000. These national differences in the rate of economic growth are almost entirely responsible for the contemporary differences in per capita income (0.98). The model also posits that national IQs are determinants of a number of social phenomena such as adult literacy (0.64), enrolment in tertiary education (0.75), life expectancy (0.77), and democratization (0.57).
Of course, some of these phenomena have positive feedback relationships. For instance, countries whose populations have high IQs have high per capita incomes, which enable them to provide high quality nutrition, education, and health care for their children, and these enhance their children’s intelligence. This is the principle of genotype-environment correlation applied to national populations.
Sixth, IQ & Global Inequality addresses more fundamentally the question of the causes of national differences in intelligence. It concludes that these depend on the racial composition of the populations. Thus, the 6 East Asian countries (China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore) all have IQs in the range of 105 to 108. The 29 European countries all have IQs in the range of 92 to 102. The 19 countries of sub-Saharan Africa all have IQs in the range of 59 to 73. Thus there is remarkable consistency in the IQs of countries when these are classified into racial clusters.
As often happens with important discoveries in science, the fact that these national differences in intelligence must inevitably determine differences in economic development seems obvious in retrospect.
Indeed, it seems astonishing that no-one had hitherto advanced this simple thesis—even before the recent Dark Age of Political Correctness closed in. "}
J. Philippe Rushton [email him] is a professor of psychology at the University of Western Ontario, the author of Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective.
http://www.vdare.com/rushton/061207_iq.htm
....SURE DONT SEE THIS ON T.V. or in USATODAY NOW DO YA.
heres a somewhat less racially motivated analysis.
As employment in an area starts to decline home values drop. This allows people who previously couldnt afford a home in that area to move in.
The influx of poorer people, OF ANY RACE, will motivate a number of the more affluent to leave.
This will create a vacuum in the housing market that further lowers the home values opening the door to even more lower income families.
These lower income households are less financially prepared for the upkeep and maintenance costs of their homes further reducing their values over time.
Additionally, less affluent areas are often deprioritized by city services further attributing to the overall decline of an area.
You throw in the ever escalating unemployment in a manufacturing based economy such as detroit and you are left with a formula perfect for sustainable long term urban decay.
Off the top of my head - cities that have thrived with migrant populations: London, New York, Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane.
There are more - however these five are the ones that I have had personal experience with or the opportunity to study.
In the five listed there, we have the two financial power-houses of the world (London and New York - as of last year, London has overtaken New York as the financial powerhouse of the world).
In Australia you see three cities with the largest influx of migrants in the country having not just strong economies but bustling growth.
As for the so-called conspiracy regarding Doctor J. Phillippe Rushton, race linked with IQ and the media not talking about his work: hardly. Rushton's work is and has been dissected by the scientific community. The reason his work isn't largely spoken about in newspapers and on the mass media might simply be because his research methodology is questioned by his scientific peers. Examples of these questions:
Lisa Suzuki and Joshua Aronson of New York University in 2005 because he ignored evidence that contradicted his theories.
Steven Cronshaw and colleagues in 2006 in a paper in the "International Journal of Selection and Assessment" for bias in his tests against black Africans causing their test scores to drop,
Zack Cernovsky, in the "Journal of Black Studies" because Rushton used letters to Penthouse Forum and a pornography book as scientific references for sexual characteristics differing between races.
In case you need me to point this out, those three examples above pokes holes in Rushton's research method, the tests on which his theory is based upon and the scientific references he used as part of his research.
I would also point out two facts:
1) It is recognised that IQ tests are known to be very biased towards those brought up in a western society, with western educations and with the ability to speak English.
2) Rushton is a psychologist - not a geneticist, biologist or even doctor. To truly prove anything regarding IQ and race, you'll need supporting, conclusive and provable research from the medical and biological fields. Till you have that (and no, size and weight of brain does not count because THAT was proven to be inconclusive in terms of IQ back in the mid 90s) your argument is fallacious.
And as for Doctor R. Lynn - never heard of him, found references to his work anywhere in academic texts, Wikipedia or through general searching on the internet. For the sake of your conspiracy theory I hope that his theory has been peer reviewed and found to be valid and well founded at the very least. After all scientists that can't get peer reviewed are those that can't prove their theories.
First of all...although its very common for people to attack IQ test as being "unfair" and "developed for the Western world" with lots of "bias".
...The TRUTH is that tests like the Ravens IQ test are made up of patterns of COLORS, SHAPES AND SIZES to judge brain power!
THERE IS...NOTHING..."Cultural"...ABOUT COLORS, SHAPES AND SIZES.
THERE IS...NOTHING.."Racist"...ABOUT COLORS, SHAPES AND SIZES.
....Thats why this test is used by the NBA, NFL, AL, NL, ARMY, AIR-FORCE and the US Government to test basic brain power.
Doctor R. Lynn is probably the World TOP EXPERT in the field. From his early work at Harvard in the 1960s to his latest at his office at Berkley he know by international scientists as a giant in the scientific world.
In fact Doctor Lynn is known as the very FOUNDING FATHER of his field and is known as "Doctor Ice Water" for his near total lack of person bias...hes does research and records the data as he finds it.
You should get a copy of his latest books "IQ and wealth of Nations" and "Racial differences in IQ".
{{{"To truly prove anything regarding IQ and race, you'll need supporting, conclusive and provable research from the medical and biological fields."}}}
....Yea, but the problem is that EVERYTIME a Scientists produces such research the RACE POLICE come rushing in to SHUT IT DOWN AND COVER IT UP!!
...FOR EXAMPLE...SCIENCE HAS NOW FOUND...SOME..OF THE..SPECIFIC...GENES...THAT PRODUCES RACIAL DIFFERENCES IN BRAIN SIZE AND IQ.
And yet somehow this the most important story in Homospapien Biology was not only IGNORED BY THE BIG MEDIA...IT IS NOW BEING FORCED TO SHUT DOWN.
{"Scientist's Study
Of Brain Genes
Sparks a Backlash
Dr. Lahn Connects Evolution
In Some Groups to IQ;
The Wall Street Journal
By ANTONIO REGALADO
June 16, 2006
CHICAGO -- Last September, Bruce Lahn, a professor of human genetics at the University of Chicago, stood before a packed lecture hall and reported the results of a new DNA analysis: He had found signs of recent evolution in the brains of some people, but not of others.
It was a triumphant moment for the young scientist. He was up for tenure and his research was being featured in back-to-back articles in the country's most prestigious science journal. Yet today, Dr. Lahn says he is moving away from the research. "It's getting too controversial," he says.
Dr. Lahn had touched a raw nerve in science: race and intelligence.
What Dr. Lahn told his audience was that genetic changes over the past several thousand years might be linked to brain size and intelligence. He flashed maps that showed the changes had taken hold and spread widely in Europe, Asia but weren't common in sub-Saharan Africa.
Web sites and magazines promoting white "racialism" quickly seized on Dr. Lahn's suggestive scientific snapshot. One magazine that blames black and Hispanic people for social ills hailed his discovery as "the moment the antiracists and egalitarians have dreaded."
Dr. Lahn has drawn sharp fire from other leading genetics researchers. They say the genetic differences he found may not signify any recent evolution -- and even if they do, it is too big a leap to suggest any link to intelligence. "This is not the place you want to report a weak association that might or might not stand up," says Francis Collins, director of the genome program at the National Institutes of Health.
Several scientific groups have set out to disprove or challenge Dr. Lahn's discoveries. His own university now says it is abandoning a patent application it filed to cover a DNA-based intelligence test that drew on his work.
As scientific tools for probing genes become increasingly powerful, research into human differences has exploded... some research is raising tensions as scientists such as Dr. Lahn venture into studies of genetic differences in behavior or intelligence.
Pilar Ossorio, a professor of law and medical ethics at the University of Wisconsin, criticizes Dr. Lahn for implying a conclusion similar to "The Bell Curve," a controversial 1994 bestseller by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray. The book argued that the lower average performance by African-Americans on IQ tests had a genetic component and wasn't solely the result of social factors. Referring to Dr. Lahn and his co-authors, Prof. Ossorio says: "It's exactly what they were getting at. There was a lot of hallway talk. People said he's doing damage to the whole field of genetics."
The 37-year-old Dr. Lahn says his research papers, published in Science last September, offered no view on race and intelligence. He personally believes it is possible that some populations will have more advantageous intelligence genes than others. And he thinks that "society will have to grapple with some very difficult facts" as scientific data accumulate. Yet Dr. Lahn, who left China after participating in prodemocracy protests, says intellectual "police" in the U.S. make such questions difficult to pursue.
Scientists believe that a small group of anatomically modern humans struck out from Africa probably less than 100,000 years ago. After arriving on the Eurasian land mass, they continued to split up and eventually humans populated nearly every corner of the globe. One use of genetic research is to probe how each group evolved differently after becoming isolated from the others. Recently created genetic maps of people of African, Asian and European ancestry make that research easier.
For instance, researchers have found that most Europeans have a genetic variant that lets them fully digest milk as adults. The variant is much less common in Africa and Asia, where lactose intolerance is widespread. Scientists theorize that it spread quickly among Europeans because drinking milk from domesticated dairy animals conferred a nutritional advantage. Similar evolutionary reasoning may explain why many people in malaria-prone parts of Africa carry gene variants linked to malaria resistance.
Other research is starting to explain variations in human skin color and hair texture. But scientists tense up when it comes to doing the same sort of research on the brain...
Dr. Lahn traces his interest in human differences back to his youth in China...
By the time violence struck Tiananmen Square in 1989, Dr. Lahn, the son of two physicists, was an undergraduate at Harvard University. He channeled his curiosity into genetics and built his reputation with a groundbreaking study of the Y chromosome. After taking a post at the University of Chicago in 2000, Dr. Lahn won a prestigious fellowship from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
The fellowship pays most of his research bills and has allowed him to pursue creative projects, often on attention-grabbing subjects. One study looked at how promiscuity among female chimpanzees, gorillas and humans affected the evolution of a gene that makes sperm sticky. "Bruce is in a hurry to be famous," says Martin Kreitman, a Chicago colleague who is friendly with him.
Henry Harpending, a University of Utah anthropology professor who recently published a theory for why Ashkenazi Jews tend to have high IQ's, says Dr. Lahn once suggested they co-author an article for Scientific American about the genetics of behavior, in which they could explain why "Chinese are boring."
"I think that Bruce doesn't understand political correctness," Dr. Harpending says. Dr. Lahn says he only vaguely recalls the conversation but confirms that he wonders whether during China's imperial times there was "some selection" against rebellious individuals.
In recent years, Dr. Lahn has become interested in why the human brain is so large and complex. Although humans and chimpanzees share about 96% of their DNA, human brains are about four times larger. Even today, researchers can find a correlation, on average, between people's brain size and their IQ.
Dr. Lahn's group zeroed in on the role of two genes, called ASPM and microcephalin, that are known to have a role in brain size. Humans with defective copies of either gene are born with brains only about one-third the normal size.
Studying DNA from several species, the Chicago team found that, over millions of years, the genes had undergone more rapid change in monkeys, apes and humans than in other animals. Their next step was to determine if evolution had continued in modern humans. Dr. Lahn's graduate students began decoding DNA from 1,184 people belonging to 59 groups from around the world, including Bedouins, Pima Indians and French-speaking Basques.
The data showed that evolution had continued in recent millennia. A statistical analysis of DNA patterns suggested that new mutations in each of the two brain-related genes had spread quickly through some human populations. Evidently, these mutations were advantageous among those populations -- just as the genetic variant promoting milk digestion was advantageous to early Europeans. Dr. Lahn and his team further observed that the new mutations are found most frequently outside of Africa.
While acknowledging that the evidence doesn't permit a firm conclusion, Dr. Lahn favors the idea that the advantage conferred by the mutations was a bigger and smarter brain. He found ways to suggest that in his papers. One mutation, which according to his estimates arose some 40,000 years ago, coincided with the first art found in caves, the paper observed. The other mutation, present mostly in people from the Middle East and Europe, and estimated to be 5,800 years old, coincided with the "development of cities and written language."
That suggested brain evolution might have occurred in tandem with important cultural changes. Yet because neither variant is common in sub-Saharan Africa, there was another potential implication: Some groups had been left out.
The dean of the University of Chicago's medical school, James L. Madara, says he approached Dr. Lahn before the papers were published. They discussed whether the report could be taken out of context. "Let the chips lie where they may," Dr. Madara says he told Dr. Lahn. As long as the ideas and data are clear, "don't worry about the implications," the dean said.
John Easton, head of media relations at the medical school, says his office was worried the work could be misinterpreted and abused by racist groups. Mr. Easton borrowed a copy of "The Mismeasure of Man," the famous attack on IQ tests and brain-volume measurements by the late paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. Mr. Easton helped Dr. Lahn with talking points about his research. "We said, 'Don't be shy about telling people what it doesn't mean,' " Mr. Easton recalls.
Mr. Easton says Dr. Lahn "makes us nervous" but "with Bruce we know it's not driven by personal bias." That is because Asians "don't score at the top" in the frequency of the brain-gene mutations, Mr. Easton says.
P. Thomas Schoenemann, a professor of anthropology at the University of Michigan-Dearborn, says that at Dr. Lahn's request he collected DNA from 25 people whose brain sizes he had studied previously. But the two scientists haven't been in touch recently.
The university's patent office is having second thoughts. Its director, Alan Thomas, says his office is dropping a patent application filed last year that would cover using Dr. Lahn's work as a DNA-based intelligence test. "We really don't want to end up on the front page...for doing eugenics," Mr. Thomas says.
More recently, Dr. Lahn says he was moved when a student asked him whether some knowledge might not be worth having. It is a notion to which he has been warming. "}
Write to Antonio Regalado at antonio.regalado@wsj.com
....WONDER WHEN IM GOING TO SEE THIS MAJOR STORY IN USATODAY, FOXNEWS, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS...or ANY "newspapers"???? (LOL!)
Umm, the $1500 is a MONTHLY PAYMENT.
often MLS listings are mis-used for "lease options" aka rentals.
From a purely financial standpoint, buying a home in Detroit is a no-brainer: Don't do it.
That's what Barry Burton discovered last year after he found what he thought was his dream house for sale on Lodge Drive, a few doors away from the Manoogian Mansion.
There was a view of the Detroit River, an updated furnace and the property was immaculately kept, all for $289,000. But then Burton, who returned to the city in the fall after working for the Chicago mayor's office, discovered his annual tax bill would be about $9,700.
"There was no way I could afford that," said Burton, who instead bought a two-flat home in Grosse Pointe with his sister for $500,000.
"With the property taxes, income taxes, higher insurance rates ... it didn't make sense."
Along with crime, blight and underperforming schools, high property taxes are one of the main problems standing in the way of a Detroit renaissance. While city officials actively tout the need to get people like Burton back as city residents, the odds are stacked against them
I didn't want to get drawn into the race analysis, but I'll wade in.
The FACTS are that East Indians and Chinese ( well, all Asians acutually ) ARE FAR...FAR...FAR...SUPERIOR in intellectual performance than any other race.
The above is proven by the FACT that asian immigrants have the HIGHEST per capita income of all groups.
Heck, even colleges have now began to discriminate against Asians during the admissions process. Asians score the highest in all standardized tests.
Almost 90% of science classes in colleges are populated by Asians.
Silicon valley, has more asians as a % representation of the entire population than any other group.
So I fail to understand the "brown" comment.
As for the Blacks, well they have a legacy of dysfunctional heritage. The same goes for native americans. Sodomized and abused children usually end up being dysfunctional adults who then pass on a viscious generational cycle of abuse and low achievement to their next few generations.
The problem with moving into any socialist paradise, either for residence or to build a business, is that you will not be seen as a member of the community -- you will be seen as a source of revenue.
No thanks.
By the way, bananas don't come to the US on boats. 99.5% of imported fruit is flown here.
The reason that there are so many duplicate and/or triplicate listings for homes in Detroit is because there are 2-3 MLS databases which different agents subscribe to....notice the different MLS #s.
find an online payday
It's amazing listening to these racial superiority/inferiority arguments from 200 years ago.
Culture and education follow racial lines and affect affluence so so much more the DNA. To claim that you can delineate between nature and nurture so readily is downright laughable.
The entire human race has less genetic variation then your average flock of sheep and Nelson Mandela shares more genetic material with some swedes then with some nigerians.
Not to mention the definition of a "latin" race.... which would have an enormous amount of european DNA. Nevermind the black population in the united states is about as european as it is african (40% european DNA in your average american black). Less we all forget you did what you wanted with your slave girls....
"Race" is,at best an anthropological term It certainly isn't a biological one.
---
You wrote,
"Before blaming the decay of Detroit on its population, annonymous, you should probably check out other cities around the world that have had an influx of so called third world migrants and have thrived."
Would you be so kind as to list a few of these cities?
Thanks.
Mark
---
*Snore* I'll do it for him. Sydney. Melbourne. Actually I'll name an entire country: Australia.
Hi i'd just like to write that even when people are ''really intelligent'' on paper,they aren't really functionnal nor intelligent in the moment,i've seen,lived,been raised by a very intelligent dad,very very..and yet i see a thousand more functionnal people than him.
So that black and small brain thing..please shut up about it cause it makes you sound biaised and dumb,a bit like a sheep,regardless of the color of course cause in the end,it's like a car..no matter what the color in may run or break.Black do cimes..right,yet you didn't say that almost ALL serial killers were whites.You're biaised man!
These homes that are beautiful, still standing and in a terrible area of town should be examined....
First, they are outstanding housing stock if they've withstood decades of owner-occupied living (say from the 20's to the 50s), a decade of defaults and owner turnover (see the Detroit News' exam of rapid turnover in neighborhoods at the hands of unscrupulous real estate agents and their land contracts in the wake of 1950s white flight) and then 40 years of post-riot neglect. In some cases (especially following the mortgage boom/bust where homebuyers added crummy or low-quality additions and remodels) you are left with homes on Boston Blvd and throughout zip code 48206 that are $35k today and sold for $291k four years ago.... They were never worth $291k, and are worth far more than the price at which they are selling today. Undo the cheap "Flip This House" renovations and you've got an unbelievably high-quality home to live in.
The tragedy, at least to this white man, is that perception is reality. If folks believe they SHOULD be scared, then they WILL be scared of a neighborhood. What I mean is this... If owners of their homes flip their collective middle finger at crime and criminals, ineffective law enforcement that is meted out from the driver's seat of a squad car instead of on a walking beat, corrupt and incompetent politicians (Mayor Kilpatrick's right where he belongs), and don't depend on anyone but themselves to improve their communities something strange will happen - your neighborhood will become yours again.
Don't trust your alderman, don't trust the mayor, don't depend on the police, don't blame the white man, Republicans or the construction of interstate highways for the decline of your neighborhood. Don't blame GM or the unions to which it has acted as a lapdog and gravy train for 70 years.
Take back the city, starting in your kitchen, then move to your yard and then enlist your neighbor to do the same. Don't trust anyone who says they're gonna fix your problems. They're either lying or just plain fooling themselves. If you buy a home to rent to others in the city, you are killing the city. Without an ownership stake, what's the incentive to take care of the home in which I live? Think about it this way.... have you ever taken care of, I mean really taken care of, a rental car? No. You paid your rental fee and the vehicle be damned. It's the same deal in countless neighborhoods across the city.
I believe in Detroit, and I have sought out and secured a job that will permit me to move to a 7 bedroom home that I plan to live in (until I retire not until I trade up to a McMansion in suburbia), purchase a gorgeous mid-century modern warehouse and office building on Grand River, and be a part of a proud city that I've admired all of my life.
All for less than $125,000.00. You can't lament the city unless you live there. You can't change the city unless you live there. You can't fix your neighborhood unless you own a home there. If that offends renters - tough. If you want to change your station, become a stakeholder, now would be the time to do so when homes - liveable homes with plumbing, garages, etc. - are $12,000.00. Otherwise, shut your mouths because you don't pay property taxes and you just use services vs. actually paying for them.
I grew up in a city that has been strangled by renters who use the water, overcrowd the schools, tax fire and police services by virtue of unnecessarily high population density, and all the while blamed their warehouse-like existence on everyone else. To be fair, not all renters really realize that they are dead weight in a housing community. Sure, their landlord may pay property taxes, but is that home treated like an owner-occupied home? I submit that those rental homes that are treated well are the exception and not the rule..... With that in mind, renters who whine and do nothing to change their status and those who purchase properties to "get rich" as landlords are not what's needed to save Detroit's neighborhoods.
Here's something interesting to consider. When you see a home on realtor.com or elsewhere, look at the home's location on the aerial map provided at the bottom of the listing. Select the "bird's eye" view of the home and this will give you an impression of the neighborhood in which this home is located. Look at the number of vacant lots, vacant blocks, etc. Go to Google maps and type in an address and look for the "Street View." Much of the city is viewable this way. This will give you an idea of the street-level view of many neighborhoods in Detroit. Yes, many homes have been demolished over the past 30 years. So many vacant lots exist that wildlife has cropped in former residential areas. It's called an urban prairie, and it's not cool - it's the saddest thing I've ever seen. It means that block has died.
So, if Detroit is to repair itself, stakeholders must move back and live there, and the countless thousands who have lived there and have felt powerless must start in their kitchen, move to their yard, then enlist their neighbors, and take back their blocks - one at a time. This city's worth it, and the people who live there are proud, industrious, intelligent and discouraged. Once the discouragement changes, then real changes happen in the city. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't be moving from South Dakota back to Michigan to be part of the solution.
i just stumbled on this webpage and i'm stunned by the stupidity of the racial arguments. I'm an african immigrant, highly educated as are most of my fellow african immigrants with a household income of over 200k in different highly skilled professions just like Asian immigrants. Since when did race and immigration become a blight?...i think the race issue has become a ridiculous topic. There are high IQ people and low IQ people in all races and nations.
I believe your genetics do determine your IQ.Its true so I dont take any offense to it.I am black and native american.I have all of the physical features of a japanese person.Im always asked am I half japanese.I know that I am racially connected to them.Alot of asians treated me as an asian.I can understand them completely.My friends who I grew up with are are blacks,hispanics and american indians.
When I was in sixth grade I got an IQ test.They told my mother I have the IQ of a college professor.I didnt really pay it any mind until I got older.I realize that Im so much smarter than everyone that I feel like im surround by infants.I havent met an equal yet.Its like im alone.I dont like to make people feel bad so I never bring it up.When I do I make enemies too.So I use my smarts for me and the people I like.
Let me say that Im not racist.
Its true that some non-whites destroy communities.
Its true Europeans are the reason for the bad economy.If you cant figure out why than thats why enough.
The reason Detroit is what it is today is because it is a shining example of what happens to a society when it is completely controlled by liberalism and unions. New Orleans is another example of the result of decades of liberalism. Chicago, another prime example. Take ANY city that has become a cesspool of sub-human waste, and you'll find liberals in control.
Post a Comment
<< Home