Discussion: Systemically Racist Appraisals

I asked my liberal debating friend about this Rasmussen poll question: “Is it okay to be white?”

I hope we all believe it is acceptable to be white, black, or to possess any other immutable trait. Yet, this disappointing result says I am viewed as problematic by a large percentage of people who don’t even know me. I can imagine a similar response a century ago regarding the question “is it okay to be black?” We fought and won that battle against government imposed systemic racism. We are supposed to have progressed beyond such narrow-minded biases of such racism, right? Well, apparently we are not so different than the prior generations the one channel media and cultural iconoclasts blame for everything wrong today. The ugly specter of racism still exists, but in a different form.

This disturbing trend is even more pronounced among younger age groups. They don’t remember the battles fought or the progress made. Separate but equal does not need to be revived, yet we are on that path yet again.

My liberal friend, however, is not so alarmed:

“What do you consider problematic about the poll other than its obvious intention to be inflammatory.  It provides absolutely no context or counter questions to provide any value. ”

On one hand, I also wonder why would these questions even need to be asked. We wouldn’t ask is it okay to be a wife-beater or is it okay to be an ax-murderer because we already know the answers to these questions. On the other hand, my friend ignores the result, implying this is a trick by the conservatives to make their political opponents look bad.

I think the question was asked to measure our progress on the front of racism. It shows we have declined once again.

My friend says the question needs context. Why? Almost 30% of the population cannot reflexively agree it is okay to have been born white. This should be a concern, a wake-up call. Just like in the 1940s and 1950s, people tell us there is no problem.

Poll results were also broken down responses by race as well:

Rasmussen, citing respondents reached through automated landline calls and a panel of volunteer participants, reported that 53 percent of the 117 Black participants agreed with the statement but 26 percent of Black participants disagreed and 21 percent said they weren’t sure.

Scott Adams, Dilbert cartoonist, suggested white people should separate themselves from the newly forming black ‘hate group.’


“I would say, based on the current way things are going, the best advice I would give to white people is to get the hell away from Black people,” the cartoonist joked.

No. We must focus on reversing trends, not simply by washing our hands and separating into groups yet again.

Both Adams and my liberal friend have no viable solutions. My friend doesn’t even recognize a problem. Still, I have a few slivers of hope. First, the sample size is relatively small, so maybe the results are not actually this bad. Second, America fixed systemic racism against blacks sixty years ago, so we perhaps can fix different systemic biases again today. However, we must acknowledge the the sentiment that it is not okay to be white is as racist as Adams statement to “get away from Black people”.

Many scholars believe racism is a bias deliberately instilled in others, often from an early age. Parents or racist cultures are often blamed for instilling these values, but today the problem begins with the one-channel media. Media influence today is enormous. Consequences, which media often dictate, are based more on “who you are” rather than “what you say or do”. Whoopi Goldberg said the Nazis were not racist, but because she is black, she still has her day job on The View.


Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt railed against Goldberg for her latest comments, writing on Twitter, “Whoopi Goldberg’s comments about the Holocaust and race are deeply offensive and incredibly ignorant. When she made similar comments earlier this year, we explained how the Nazi regime was inherently racist.”

Whoopi Goldberg makes this extremely bizarre and odd sounding defense of Nazis, a culture which should not be excused, and is lightly admonished. Scott Adams makes an inappropriate comment regarding a problematic poll result and his syndicated cartoon strip is immediately canceled by papers all across the country.

The Washington PostThe Los Angeles Times and other newspapers across the country had already announced they would no longer carry the syndicated comic strip.

I won’t defend either Adams’ or Goldberg’s actions, but why the disparate consequences? The smart woke answer is: Adams is white, part of the more powerful class; he must be stopped so whites don’t continue to abuse their power and privilege, whereas Goldberg is black and despite her fame, wealth, and popularity, she is still a victim and cannot possibly be viewed in the same fashion as the white Adams. Nonsense.

The Rasmussen poll shows 79% of Americans agree that blacks, like Goldberg, can be racist too–a slightly better result than the first question. Racism of any sort, no matter the perpetrator, is a problem. Excusing racism from certain individuals is an even bigger problem. Goldberg received a pro-forma light suspension for her holocaust comments. Adams, on the other hand, has been canceled permanently.

U.S. Representative Cori Bush:

And let’s be clear: merely diversifying police forces will never address the violent, racist architecture that underpins our entire criminal legal system. The mere presence of Black officers does not stop policing from being a tool of white supremacy.

Media allows folks like Goldberg and others to make racist statements without serious consequences; therefore, the public ignores many racist actions, focusing only on the problems media emphasizes. If we held all people equally accountable, we wouldn’t get so many problematic statements and our culture would not have such a distorted view of race.

The following video is a little more than a minute long and enlightens us to facts about white people, who apparently are better at things like: “insecurity”, “ignorance”, “being fearful of nothing”, “playing the victim”, “oppression”, “lack of empathy”, “gaslighting”, “violence”, “stealing people’s ideas”, “lying”, etc. It takes almost no time to condemn more than half of the U.S. population (59% to be exact). Congratulations on efficiency.


I don’t know the point of this video. My friend never commented on it; he never said its intent was inflammatory. I hope these folks are not at all representative of most Americans. Indeed, wonder how many people they had to ask to distill the video down to these few ignorant people. I am encouraged by the fact that far more people disliked the video than liked it (15 times more). Most Americans can still recognize racism in its many forms; media has the biggest blind spot. Of course, this video received little media criticism. If we want to curtail racism then we should not tolerate such hateful rhetoric.

Atlantic magazine journalist Jamele Hill:

“I need so many people to understand this regarding Tyre Nichols. Several of the police officers who murdered Freddie Gray were Black. The entire system of policing is based on white supremacist violence. We see people under the boot of oppression carry its water all the time.”

No ma’am. Comments like yours and Rep. Bush’s are the problem.

What does my Friend Think?

Somehow, the discussion with my liberal friends was re-directed to the Civil War, reparations, and then to home appraisals, a sign of continued systemic racism, per my friend. Ok. Let’s discuss appraisals then.

With appraisals, if you are caught misappraising a house you will likely lose your job. It is not science and there are a lot of factors that go into an appraisal, and as you say the skin color of the current owner shouldn’t be one of them.  There have been studies that show appraisal bias – Study: How Houston’s Appraisal Industry Reinforces Racial Inequality | Kinder Institute for Urban Research | Rice University.  The study is from Rice University.  Take it as you may.  There are many others showing similar results.

I must ask: is this study cherry-picked? Many distributions of data, such as home prices, follow a normal curve (the famous bell curve). That means on average 5% of the data are outliers, more than two standard deviations from the mean (or 1% of the data are more than three standard deviations from the mean).

There are many doing these studies and if they do not find the expected result of racism, they will not receive funding for future studies. So, if one study does not achieve the desired result, it may be better not to publish and find a better study group. In other words, keep looking until you find the outlier and claim it is representative.

The mathematics relies on selecting a study group at random (and reporting no matter the result). The randomly selected group will fall outside the expected range (the large portion of the distribution around the middle) only 5% of time (1% if using the stricter, three standard deviation, criteria). Most results we expect to fall in the large middle area (around the mean or 0 in the graph above). However, if you design studies to fulfill expected results and do not randomly select, the mathematical theory no longer applies. Any conclusion from such a study is invalid.

Next, how was the study conducted? What assumptions were made?

Before controlling for a long list of factors that might also determine a home’s value, the researchers found that “the average tax appraisal of homes in White neighborhoods is more than eight times greater than the average tax appraisal of homes in Black communities and more than seven times greater than the average tax appraisal of homes in Hispanic communities.”

A home’s tax value is not a good measure of the home’s actual value.


While assessed value and market value may seem similar, these numbers can be different—typically, the value as assessed is lower—and they’re used in different ways. So let’s clear up any confusion, so you can use these terms to your advantage.


“The assessed value will be defined by the legal framework of that jurisdiction,” she says. “A lot of states have value limitations in law, so they might have a market value for the property. But then they have a per law allowable assessed value that they work off of, so it becomes very localized.

The study also said the “white” neighborhoods had home values more than eight times those in “black” neighborhoods. I have never lived in a neighborhood exclusively of one race or another. To find strictly black neighborhoods or strictly white neighborhoods, you have to exclude most neighborhoods. We don’t believe in segregating neighborhoods any more, right? So, why does the study attempt to segregate neighborhoods? They must find that ripe cherry.

The study would be more conclusive if it compared neighborhoods with roughly equal home values. Home values are not shown, but we could say they are comparing homes of values say around $600,000 with homes of values around $75,000. The market for these two types of homes are vastly different. Why make such a comparison and call it representative of America? They found neighborhoods with rich white folks, probably living on large lots and compared them with poorer, more tightly packed black neighborhoods. They could have compared Detroit (80% black) neighborhoods with West Virginia (96.5% white) neighborhoods and claimed just about anything. The mantra for real estate has always been: location, location, location. Isn’t the difference here one of location and not necessarily race?

The study accounted for factors other than race and said this eliminated much of the eight times difference. Still, it seems to me they may not have accounted for all the necessary factors. Maybe Houston has naturally segregated and neighborhoods which are poorer and crowded and primarily of one race, might not appeal to many people. People living there may want out and people looking for homes don’t want in. It seems a natural conclusion, but not a racist one. Rich white neighborhoods with high dollar values, means lots of land and privacy; many people prefer these kinds of neighborhoods (again not because of race), albeit one most of us cannot afford.

I looked for a second article and found this one at random:


When Paul Austin and Tenisha Tate-Austin sued their real estate appraiser, her company, and the company that hired her for allegedly under-valuing their home based on their race, they were after more than just financial restitution.

Again, we cannot discount human nature. Were the Austins after financial restitution, so it is in their interest to blame the appraiser? Sigmund Freud called this natural human tendency: transference. The article says the Austins were also featured in a documentary on racist appraisal tactics. How nicely this turned out for them, with some new measure of fame and money.

The problem recounted stemmed from a tale of two appraisals: one for $995,000 vs one for $1,450,000. A third appraiser was summoned and came in with a more acceptable figure. The conclusion was that the one appraiser who low-balled the Austins must be racist. However, it is possible the low-ball figure was correct and the other two appraisers were wrong. I need more evidence before jumping to this racist conclusion, but the article provided no other evidence against the appraiser.

Amazingly, the article even provided a potential reason why the first appraiser, the supposedly racist one, came in under:

Since there’s such little turnover in Marin City, Howard-Gibbon argues that Miller should have expanded her survey to neighboring Sausalito and Mill Valley — communities that have homes that are more similar to the Austins’ newly remodeled property, are predominantly white and have much higher home values.

Instead, court documents state that of the six properties Miller used, “three properties were not comparable … in any way except for their location in Marin city.” One was a bank-owned property that had sold in foreclosure two years earlier. Another was an attached dwelling.

According to realtor.com, the number of homes for sale in a market is a relevant factor in determining appraisal value. The appraiser is directed to look at comparable homes in this this market, not some other market.

Real estate agents are trained to pinpoint a home’s value in the real estate market, which is done by looking at a variety of characteristics, including the following:

Comps, or comparablesWhat similar homes in the same area have sold for recently.

Supply and demand: The number of buyers and the number of sellers in your area.

This is a neutral standard, nothing to do with race. The couple re-financing their home wants to maximize their profit, but the appraiser needs to be unbiased towards all in the market, not just those of a certain race.

Nonetheless, the appraiser was eventually “re-educated”. If a pound of flesh is not extracted, the whole system is deemed racist, so it is better to punish this one peon than cast doubt on the entire system. These types of punishments are disturbing. The message becomes: you are better off safe than sorry. In the future you favor black clients, even if not justified because nobody cares if a white client claims racism.

She has agreed to watch a 76-minute documentary called Our America: Lowballed, about discriminatory practices in the appraisals industry, which recent studies have shown is widespread and result in higher values for homes when occupants are white, and can plummet if they are people of color. The Austins are heavily featured in the film, produced by ABC Owned Television Stations.

The article provides one more fact that “proves” the racism case:

As of the end of 2018, 85% of appraisers nationwide were white, while less than 2% identified as black, according to a report from the Appraisal Institute.

Is this the standard to determine racism now: equality vs. equity? If we do not have equal outcomes in all instances, racism becomes the deciding factor. It is the reflexive conclusion. Still, does anyone believe if magically 15% of all appraisers were now black, this would have changed the situation for the Austins? This is such a facile explanation, yet one rarely questioned. 90% of the NBA players are black. Does that mean white players do not get a fair shake in the NBA? I’m not advocating that point, but that would be the conclusion we must come to in order to affirm equity in all things.

Even Senator Bernie Sanders in an interview with Bill Maher backed off defense of equity in favor of equality. This simple question from a friendly seemed to overwhelm Senator Sanders who has often touted equity.


So, we can conclude:

  1. Courts should not tell appraisers how to do their jobs, especially when there is an anomaly that might explain different results.
  2. The Austins victim status proved profitable, a disincentive from being objective.
  3. There is not enough information to conclude the appraiser was actually racist. Benefit of doubt should go to the accused.
  4. A sample size of three appraisers is not sufficient to determine a pattern, especially since Marin county is an anomaly of sorts with very few recent home sales.


If we still have systemic racism which mistreats blacks and favors whites, Scott Adams would not have been treated as he was.  Not much of a reason would be needed to have canceled Whoopi Goldberg and many others long ago. Disparate consequences for these two are prima facie evidence our system has changed dramatically.

My friend says: “Nothing about systemic racism would protect an individual, let alone Scott Adams.” The systemically racist America of the 1950s would have sided with Adams or at best ignored his comments; it would not have canceled him as they did.  Furthermore, in 2023, Whoopi Goldberg, not Scott Adams, was protected. This should tell my friend something.

Nobody is denying America has a racist and sometimes shameful past or that racism still exists today. Our goal should be first to eliminate systemic racism, racism that does not give people a fair opportunity. Secondly, we should discourage individual racism from all, not just the racism of whites, but we should also accept that not even progressive liberalism can eliminate any one sin from human nature.

My friend tends to conflate individual racist acts with systemic racism, so an individual appraiser, who may or may not have even been racist, is just another cog in a never-ending systemically racist system. We have become so extreme in attempting to root out white racism that we cannot recognize other forms of racism and often punish the innocent. Let’s all accept that racism is bad, but let’s treat all forms of it in similar fashion.

The recent comments issued by Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot to explain her decision to only do one-on-one interviews with Black and Brown reporters on the two-year anniversary of her inauguration is a bold move.  National Association of Black Journalists

No. It is not a bold move. Call it what it truly is: racism. Maybe such actions are why Lightfoot lost the last election.

Dave https://seek-the-truth.com/about/

For more on systemic racism, including more discussions with liberals: https://seek-the-truth.com/category/systemic/

5 thoughts on “Discussion: Systemically Racist Appraisals

  1. Comment from my liberal friend:

    Your blog misses my entire point of the Rasmussen poll. I’ll start with racism is problematic no matter who is doing it, but the poll you identified doesn’t show racism, it only shows that a higher percentage of Black respondents did not agree with the statement “it is OK to be White”. In the world of logic, the negative, maybe inverse, not sure which, of the polls results cannot be implied so it doesn’t mean the respondents think it isn’t OK to be White, and even if that were valid, it is a very long stretch that means they are racist. In the end they don’t agree with the question “is OK to be White”, and it isn’t clear what that means. Just to be clear, I am not saying Black people aren’t racist or prejudiced, however, this poll is not a good source to show it.

    Several problems I see is it isn’t a complete poll, which would include addition questions in the form of “is it OK to be _____”, where the _____ is Black, White, Hispanic/Latino (to be controversial use Latinx), Japanese, Chinese, Jewish, Catholic, man woman, trans person, etc. Not all have to be used, but certainly Black and White for purposes of our discussion. The original Rasmussen poll may have included those questions and then cherry picked the one item that would get a rise out of people. Also, the poll is extremely ambiguous, what does OK mean in the context, “is it OK to be White?”. The setup is a bunch of Black people answered the question and a high percent of the respondents answered they did not agree with the statement that you take it as an indicator of racism, but you don’t know how the respondents understood the question. I’m sure you are aware the way polls are written can influence the results, but I’ll remind you of poll wording bias. For example, polls on Obamacare versus the Affordable Care Act “Obamacare” vs. “Affordable Care Act” – Harvard Political Review (harvardpolitics.com). This is a fun one and not necessarily what you expect.

    I haven’t watched the video titled “what are white people better at” and can only comment on the title. Titles are picked to attract attention, but without content I don’t know. In today’s social media world, the more clicks is the name of the game, people like drama, controversy = drama. Controversy means clicks. Any blanks to fill in?

    Home appraisals, you certainly get into the math of statistics. The term Black, or White neighborhood should typically have the word “predominantly” in front of it. The problem that valid studies show aren’t houses in different neighborhoods, but ones in the same neighborhood. While there is variation in prices, even for houses next to each other, the studies show house values that should be similar in value are statistically not, and the commonality is based on the skin color of the occupant. As you mentioned, this is not legal, but studies show it happens and is statistically significant. Happening once or twice shows individual bias and are rogues. Statistically significant findings show a systemic problem. In this situation, since it is based on skin color it is called racism. Put it together and you have systemic racism. Let me write this one more time for those who missed it before, systemic racism does not equal government sponsored racism.

    I don’t have time to respond to anything else right now.


  2. My response to my liberal friend:

    Change the question to: “is it okay to be black” and have 30% of the population disagree. Many more today would acknowledge the problem if the question was changed. The question doesn’t need context in my opinion. My thoughts from the post are summarized below:
    I think the question was asked to measure our progress on the front of racism. It shows we have declined once again.
    My friend says the question needs context. Why? Almost 30% of the population cannot reflexively agree it is okay to have been born white. This should be a concern, a wake-up call. Just like in the 1940s and 1950s, people tell us there is no problem.
    There is a problem. The question is relevant. Until more folks like you recognize a problem, we cannot deal with it.

    I analyzed the Rice study you gave me and found one other at random. I did not find conclusive evidence in either and found serious logic flaws in both.

    I go into the math because people accept the conclusions of these statistical theories without meeting the hypotheses. Any college math major can tell you this is not valid. 99% of the population does not understand because they don’t know the math theory behind statistics (which is why I did a brief primer on stats). So, the studies may be “statistically significant” but the result is meaningless if the hypothesis is not met. For instance, the Pythagorean theory can be applied only if you have a right triangle. You can find an infinite number of non-right triangles where X^2 + Y^2 does not equal Z^2, but that proves nothing because you did not start with a right triangle. You must meet the necessary conditions laid out in the hypothesis or your cannot apply the theory, and if you insist on applying the theory, results are meaningless. This is a massive problem in all areas of study today. Every discipline uses stats today, but few understand the theory. I saw it repeatedly when I was a graduate study 25 years ago.

    Give me another study to analyze. I worked with what I had. You said this one would be solid evidence. I think I showed it is not.

    Part of the problem I didn’t get into in the post is that we are dealing with subjective data. In the past we talked about unemployment rates, murder rates, prison rates, graduation rates, etc. These are all objective measures that nobody can dispute. Appraisals are not completely objective; they are a bit of science and art; therefore, concluding racism from them can be sketchy.

    I figured you would agree with the 79% of Americans who acknowledge black Americans can be racist too. You are a fair-minded individual, but just wrong about stuff.


  3. Email Comment from Walter:

    Trigger warning…

    There is certainly a problem amongst the black race but their problem isn’t white people. There is a God, marriage, family and culture problem and till they search upwards and inwards their culture will continue to implode. It is a Biblical condition of the heart. The statements above could apply to any race but seem to be disproportionately affecting the black society.

    “the highest rates of church closures per general population were in the areas with the highest percentage of Black people”

    Only 12.1% percent of the population in the US are black. However over 43% of all murders were by a black person.

    In 2021, 54% of the White population was married compared to 31.2% of the Black population.

    In 2020, 39% of all women who had abortions in 2020 were Black. Yet there’s only 12.1 percent black population.

    By percentage of population a black person is almost 4 times more likely to murder, 1/2 as likely to marry, and 3 times more abortions.

    I attended a historical black university (HBCU) and had some black elementary school teachers in the deep south who were sticklers on using proper English grammar. They would not tolerate ebonics. One said she viewed it as a language of thugs. They did not tolerate black people calling each other the N word masked in the guise of ebonics. There should be no tolerance of the N word by any race including black people (even if they change up a few letters and call it part of ebonics).

    The degradation of the quality of music by the mainstreaming of gangster rap has changed innercity culture and shaped how young black men treat each other, women, and authority by glorifying murder, rape, drugs, degradation of women etc.

    There is extreme peer pressure against young black children to succeed in school. 4.18% of high school dropouts are black whereas 4.77% were white. These percentages should not be almost equal when there’s only a 12.1% black population.

    Till a greater percentage of Black men and women stand up and decide to have one partner, get married and stay married their children will be more likely to drop out of school, abort babies and commit violent crime. Till they stop accepting gangster rap as music appropriate to listen to and embrace proper grammar by refusing to accept ebonics their culture will not get better.

    Till more parents get involved in their children’s schooling vote in the school board elections, overhaul the education system and allow the teachers to discipline then the culture will not change, children will not value education and they’ll drop out of school.

    Till society as a whole stops attacking the messengers of bad news by calling them racist… Till we stop blaming everyone else for the individuals lack of taking responsibility for their own actions then we will still get stuck in the traps of institutional racism, reparations, and more programs. No government program will fix the problems of black society just as no government program ever fixed the homelessness crisis.

    The issue is a condition of the heart and personal responsibility. Till people realize that, then they’ll continue to blame others and never improve and then leave another generation doing the same.

    Successful black professionals who voiced these issues publicly were harshly ridiculed and some derogatorily were accused of working as slaves in the white man’s kitchen to become successful.


    1. Email comment from Adanna:

      Thank you David and Walter for the great discussion. I am a black American but I was not born here; I am the child of (legal) immigrants. I also attended an HBCU for graduate school. I am not triggered! Walter, we need to clarify that there is a problem with the culture of the black “American” race, not the black race worldwide. The destruction of the family is not happening to black West African communities which remain patriarchal and take marriage and family very seriously.

      The dysfunction of the black American culture cannot be separated from the history of slavery. The enslaved were forced to abandon their more traditional cultures and take on a dysfunctional, irresponsible, and promiscuous culture, which is actually white red neck culture according to some scholars. However, I agree that each person has personal responsibility for their lifestyle no matter their background or history of adversity. I am not saying that West African culture is perfect; there are problematic aspects that have been addressed in the past few centuries.

      Racism still exists against black Americans but it is not a stumbling block to achievement. It is more like a speed bump.

      Otherwise your points are valid. It is very sad to see intellectually gifted children such as my son
      bullied by other black male students. Only the kids of West African immigrant descent and South Asian descent respect his
      academic achievements and befriend him.

      The only solution for black America’s problems is to repent and submit to God and His Word. Unfortunately hip hop culture, LBJ’s anti-family welfare policies, and other leftist policies are against that.

      Thanks for all the great discussions on various topics.


      1. Dave’s response to Walter and Adanna:

        The problems you point out are becoming worse for all Americans. They are more acutely seen for black Americans today, but when the rest of the society catches up, we are in ever bigger trouble than the big trouble this is already causing us. I believe broken families are the biggest contributor to the problem. White illegitimacy is growing along with black illegitimacy. The trends are the same for both groups but separated by 50 years. If the trend continues, all American demographics will be in the same awful place. This is not strictly a black problem by any means.

        With regards to black illegitimacy, we have seen many public figures raise the issue. Senator Moynihan raised the issue in 1965. Bill Cosby and President Obama among many other black public figures have raised the issue as well. It needs to be raised more frequently and with regard to all Americans as well. Racism is still a problem, but it is a problem we will never be shed of and like you say is not the problem it was in the past, and is not the most pressing of problems today.

        By the way, I believe government welfare checks, designed to help poorer individuals are a big source of the problem. The government replaces the father’s vital role of providing support for young children. The problem is that the government (partially) fulfills only this one role and cannot fulfill all the other necessary roles of a father. Since the mid-60s with the advent of the “Great Society” we have seen a significant increase in illegitimacy, especially among whites (3% in 1965 to 28% in 2018).

        Your points are very relevant. These trends must be reversed, but they can only be reversed if the problem is acknowledged. Today’s media and political leaders are hesitant to do that to avoid any controversy or be labeled racist.

        Here are a few stats I found in a quick internet search:

        • In 1940, black illegitimacy stood at 14 percent. It had risen to 25 percent by 1965, when Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action” and was widely condemned as a racist. By 1980, the black illegitimacy rate had more than doubled, to 56 percent, and it has been growing since. Both during slavery and as late as 1920, a teenage girl raising a child without a man present was rare among blacks.

        • In 1965, 24 percent of black infants and 3.1 percent of white infants were born to single mothers. By 1990 the rates had risen to 64 percent for black infants, 18 percent for whites

        • Late last year, the final data for 2018 were published here (the key is Table 9 on page 25), and here’s what we learn: For all racial and ethnic groups combined, 39.6 percent of births in the United States were out-of-wedlock (incidentally, isn’t that appalling?). And there was as always a tremendous range among groups. For blacks, the number is 69.4 percent; for American Indians/Alaska Natives, 68.2 percent (Native Hawaiians/Other Pacific Islanders were at 50.4 percent); for Hispanics, 51.8 percent; for whites, 28.2 percent; and for Asian Americans, a paltry 11.7 percent.

        Black Illegitimacy
        1940: 14%
        1965: 25%
        1980: 56%
        1990: 65%
        2018: 69%

        White Illegitimacy:
        1965: 3%
        1990: 14%
        2018: 28%


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: