1. One of the reasons that i love talking about planning and infrastructure so much is because a lot of folks don't realize how certain municipalities are planned out and zoned to intentionally heighten segregation and disparities. When suburbs were originally formed, they were

2. Planned around the automobile, because that made it easier to keep certain demographics (i.e. Black, Brown and Native) from moving there. There were and still are zoning laws that would only allow only one house per developer lot to be built, which means a limited stock of
3. Housing, which makes affordable housing hard to find. Additionally, things like height requirements (not being allowed to build above a certain number of feet) was another method of limiting housing. These were some of the reasons that a lot of suburbs remained very white up
4. Until the 1980's/1990's. Once homes in suburbs became accessible due to policies becoming lax in regards to affordable housing, one would think that the problem of exclusion via planning has been solved, but you start to run up against a whole slate of new problems. As Black
5. And brown folks moved into innner-ring suburbs, white folks would tend to move even FARTHER out into the exurbs, which meant the tax base which supported these first ring suburbs would close to. This meant that businesses would leave too because of course they're going to
6. Follow the money, which means less jobs, which also leads to more social issues ie petty crimes, more predatory housing situations like shady apartment complexes springing up, more predatory businesses like pawn shops, check cashing places, etc. And also, going back to how
7. Suburbs were initially planned around the automobile, this means a good bit of people end up being literally trapped in the suburbs with no way to get around due to how poor public transit often is. So while they may have moved there and got a job at the local restraunt, that
8. Restraunt may have packed up and moved 30 minutes away to follow the folks who fled from the inner-ring suburb, but you can't get there, because you don't have a car. If we are going to a effectively address institutional racism, it has to start on the local level, as opposed
9. To the federal. This start by making many of these cities which were planned to exclude, find a way to be inclusive for folks of all economic backgrounds and demographics. This means we need to not only promote things like expanding public transportation, but we also have to
10. Promote concepts such as multimodal transportation. This means more sidewalks, bike lanes, trails, and finding ways to connect subdivisions so that people can move from place to place easily. This also means getting rid of single lot zoning so that developers aren't
11. Prohibited from building multihousing units. It's going to take a long time to get things right to address these issues, But we have to start soon.

More from Economy

You May Also Like

Trading view scanner process -

1 - open trading view in your browser and select stock scanner in left corner down side .

2 - touch the percentage% gain change ( and u can see higest gainer of today)


3. Then, start with 6% gainer to 20% gainer and look charts of everyone in daily Timeframe . (For fno selection u can choose 1% to 4% )

4. Then manually select the stocks which are going to give all time high BO or 52 high BO or already given.

5. U can also select those stocks which are going to give range breakout or already given range BO

6 . If in 15 min chart📊 any stock sustaing near BO zone or after BO then select it on your watchlist

7 . Now next day if any stock show momentum u can take trade in it with RM

This looks very easy & simple but,

U will amazed to see it's result if you follow proper risk management.

I did 4x my capital by trading in only momentum stocks.

I will keep sharing such learning thread 🧵 for you 🙏💞🙏

Keep learning / keep sharing 🙏
@AdityaTodmal
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."


We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.

Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)

It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.

Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".