The frustration of trying to invest in my hometown
This could be a chicken and egg problem, too.<p>Banks lend on statistics, just as insurance companies have rates based upon the same.  And insurance companies, for the most part, can assign rates based upon <i>average</i> accident rates, for identifiable traits.<p>Like one&#x27;s sex.  Or where they live (a common way to get statistics without &#x27;race&#x2F;colour&#x27;).<p>So what do I mean by the chicken and the egg, here?<p>Well, imagine that black landowners go bankrupt more often.  And sadly, this could be because black landowners go bankrupt more often!<p>If a specific statistical classification indicates more bankruptcy, then it becomes true.  For example, bank $a is bold enough to lend to someone whom they view as, statistically, more likely to fail.  Then.. a few years later?<p>That person needs a fiscal injection.  Were that person not black, it would be <i>easier</i> to get funding at a time of need.  However, since that person is?<p>Well, then they get more denials, go bankrupt, and add to the proof that &quot;statistically, more black people go bankrupt&quot;.  Or as the banks are likely doing it, &quot;the area where people live in&quot;.<p>In other words, unless you can make EVERYONE, 100% not deny based upon an statistical models?  Race&#x2F;gender&#x2F;sexual orientation&#x2F;sex&#x2F;where they live, etc, etc?  Anyone, like bank $a lending outside of those models, will be lending to people less able to find additional assistance when&#x2F;if the time comes.<p>Chicken and egg.  It&#x27;s not right, but I view this a little bit like certain regulations, where corporations can&#x27;t compete against other corporations which &#x27;cut corners&#x27;, so we have to mandate all corps behave in a certain manner to level the playing field.