 If we compare Figures 15a and 15b we see that when agents have a preference to have at least 1 out of every 5 of their neighbors be like them, the distribution isn’t substantially impacted. However, if we compare Figures 15a and 15b to Figure 15c we see that when that threshold is increased from 20% to 30% the agents become significantly segregated. And by the time the threshold reaches 50% agents have been sorted into almost completely homogeneous neighborhoods. In other words, even when agents have no objection to the vast majority of their neighbors being different from them (in the case of Figure 15c, as many as 70%), a preference to have just some neighbors like oneself can have massive distributional consequences, and in addition to being unintended these may be undesirable. However, while we might criticize the underlying preferences in light of these consequences, and there may be thresholds for neighborhood composition that seem obviously discriminatory, when the preference in question is to have just 30% of one’s neighbors be like oneself (in a world with only two groups) it’s far from obvious that this preference is objectionable.