House ownership has reduced more for some races and ethnicities compared to others in the cities of California cities and New York cities. Currently, Hispanic and Black residents are still far less likely than white residents to own their houses, 41.3 percent, and 47 percent, respectively, compared to 71.9 percent for whites. As a result, the ownership disparity for blacks and whites notably worsened after 2004. A study of mortgage-market statistics reveals some of the obstacles that black and Hispanic homeowners and would-be purchasers continue to encounter.
According to a study of data obtained from the federal Home Mortgage Accountability Act, 27.4 percent of black participants and 19.2 percent of Hispanic participants were rejected mortgages in 2015, in comparison to roughly 11 percent of white participants. In reality, blacks have been turned down for mortgage loans at greater rates compared to other races, during the housing upsurge, and restoration stages and Hispanics are turned down at increased rates than non-Hispanics.
The explanation outlined by lenders for rejecting some mortgage applicants displays a certain variation based on ethnic background. The commonly reported explanation for the rejection of conventional house loans amongst whites and Hispanics, for example, is that their debt to income ratios are too high (25 percent and 26 percent, accordingly). For the blacks, a low credit record of 31% is the most commonly stated cause. Even if rejection rates were the same, fewer blacks and Hispanics would be obtaining house loans since mortgage requests from these communities have dropped substantially. Considerably, just 132,000 black people sought conventional loans in 2015, compared to 1.1 million in 2005, despite the demand for mortgage among Hispania’s and blacks as shown.
The graph below outlines the rejection rates as of 2015 to show how hard it becomes for blacks and Hispania to get mortgages.
Not only is today’s candidate application less than in the past, but it also has a distinct racial and cultural make-up. In 2005, over 10% of conventional mortgage requests emerged from black residents; by 2015, that number had dropped to lower than 4%. Hispanics made around 14 percent of all applications in 2005, but just about 7% in 2015. From 2005 to 2015, the number of applications for conventional mortgages decreased by 69 percent altogether, but it fell 88 percent amongst blacks and 85 percent amongst Hispanics, compared to 66 percent for whites. On average, Blacks and Hispanics put down lesser payments on houses in relation to the total amount than other ethnicities.
According to a second study in 2015 data from the American Household Surveys on mortgage-holding residents, more than half of Hispanic and Black homeowners announced making deposits of less than 10% of the household’s worth, compared to 37% of whites. Around a quarter of white residents, on the other hand, indicated deposits of 21% or more, compared to only 17% of Hispanics and 12% of blacks. The table below shows how Hispanics and blacks are more likely to pay higher mortgage rates in California and New York cities.
In contrary to 73 percent of white households, less than two-thirds of Hispanic and Black residents are still having mortgage rates under 5%. In comparison to 13 percent of white households, 23 percent of black owners, and 18 percent of Hispanic residents with mortgages are still spending more than 6 percent on their loans.
To be more specific, in 2019, Mortgage loans held by Black and Hispanic householders were around 60% of what would be predicted based on their demographic share in California. This disparity was observed for both high- and low-income neighborhoods. Black women make up 30% of the inhabitants in California, yet just 8% of house loans are given to them. In regional analyses, the trend continues. Although black people make up 7.8% of all inhabitants in the Los Angeles/Glendale metropolitan area, only 4% of house purchase loans were obtained in 2019. Black people make up 3.6% of people in the San Francisco/Redwood city, but only get 0.7% of mortgages. Comparatively, between 2002 and 2008, the population of Black householders in the city fell by 10%, from 210,000 to 189,000 due to discrimination. Approximately 60% of Black mortgage loans were from only three locations in 2019: portions of the northern Bronx, Central Brooklyn, and Southeastern Queens.
The bank as a solution to intervene for the black and Hispania households can at first, expand the availability of down payment help. Secondly, it can improve the availability of credit at a reasonable cost. It must therefore provide business credit and mortgage to disadvantaged, low-income, and minority homeowners and regions, considering the history of housing discrimination. Additionally, reinvesting and providing tax incentives aimed at these localities would aid in the rehabilitation and development of these areas. However, these expenditures must be thoughtfully planned to avoid displacing existing inhabitants and companies. Banks should also invest in affordable rental property. This is because capital investment in housing equality is important to addressing black households’ comparatively large financial constraints and housing insecurity. Above all, banks must follow and execute anti-discrimination regulations in mortgage lending, such as those found in the ‘Fair Housing Act and the ‘Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA)’, both of which were enacted in 1974.
Turner M.A., and Skidmore F. (N.A). Mortgage Lending Discrimination: A Review of Existing Evidence. Available online: https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/66151/309090-Mortgage-Lending-Discrimination.PDF
How Do The Realist And Instrumentalist Interpretations Of Science Differ? Sample Essay
Scientific interpretation is an important aspect that has helped explain many phenomena that occurs in the world in a significant manner. It is vital for the essay to explore various approaches towards the interpretation of theories, processes and various concepts as they relate to the natural world (Furedy, 1991). Two of the most prominent approaches utilized towards the interpretation of science include the realist and instrumentalist strategies that have proved to be differing in one way or the other. The primary aim of the essay is to explore arguments related to the two approaches with a view of establishing distinct differences (Fine, 1986). For instance, realist approach refers to the belief that explanations, theories and other aspects in science are a reflection of the true or approximately true descriptions of the natural physical world. Equally, instrumentalists believe that the theories and concepts existing in science are utilized as tools that can help people achieve their goals (Lawson, 2001). In essence, the essay aims to explore the two approaches to interpretation of science, with a view of establishing which among them is more plausible. Examining existing literature on approaches towards interpreting science can help gain a deeper insight on the most plausible method that can be applied.
The Realist Approach towards Science Interpretation
The realist approach assumes that concepts,, theories and other aspects in science are a true or approximately a true reflection of the natural physical world (Hesse, 2020). It is important for the essay to explore basic concepts that underlie the scope of the realist approach in a bid to gain a deeper insight towards differences with the instrumentalist approach. Science aims to provide an explanation about the natural world and existence of various laws. The realist approach provides a strategic option that helps explain theories, models and other concepts as they relate to the natural world (Furedy, 1991). The approach is a positive epistemic attitude towards various theories and models, recommending that individuals should believe in both observable and unobservable aspects of the world as described by science. The realist approach assumes that scientific research is a strategy to gain a deeper understanding towards various phenomena in the natural world.
Another important aspect about scientific realism is that it interprets science in a manner that allows one to believe or not believe the actual findings of a study. It is important to note that anti-realists believe that only observable features about the world should count while realists believe that both observable and unobservable aspects of the world matter (Rowbottom, 2019). Realism rejects imaginative idealization in a manner that favors close observation of outward appearances. Many realists across the world put emphasis on what is real and true, which makes the approach to interpretation of science more reliable (Bhakthavatsalam and Kidd, 2019). Failure to make a clear distinction between the instrumentalist and realist approach to interpretation of science would be detrimental towards filling the gap of information on the two concepts that are crucial towards understanding scientific aspects. The realist approach is elaborate on the inclusion of unobservable and observables when making conclusions about the natural world.
It is important to provide an example that can help illustrate the existence of realist approach in gaining an understanding to various phenomena in science. For instance, existence of electrons in an atom is a confirmation that there are aspects in the natural world that are unobservable but existent (Fine, 1986). Realists take a position to defend the existence of such aspects in the natural world as a way of interpreting various aspects in the physical world. The best current scientific theories, models, and other ideas in the natural world are at least true according to the realist approach towards interpreting science (Hesse, 2020). This is unlike the instrumentalist approach where the theories and models are tools that help understand and explain the natural world in a significant manner. Realists believe that the approximate truth of a scientific theory is the only possible explanation of its forecasted success (Lawson, 2001). Equally, the theory assumes that scientific theories make genuine and existential claims that can be accounted for through other methods. In essence, the theory can be used to increase understanding on various phenomena and other theoretical concepts in the natural physical world.
Instrumentalist Approach to Interpretation of Science
Another important approach used to explain phenomena in the scientific world is the instrumentalist approach that assumes that theories, models and concepts are avenues utilized to make predictions about phenomena (Cacioppo, Semin and Berntson, 2004). According to instrumentalists, scientific theories are used to predict various issues instead of providing the true or approximately true descriptions of the physical world. Instrumentalism is the opposite of scientific realism where people tend to believe in observable and unobservable aspects as an explanation to the physical world. It is vital to understand the difference between the two as a way of gaining a deeper understanding on the discussion topic. A physical theory is not an explanation about the natural world and instead, it is a system of propositions whose aim is to represent as possible the whole group of experimental laws (Bhakthavatsalam and Kidd, 2019). Most people ignore some characteristics that should be important when making an explanation about the physical world. Instrumentalists do not deny that some theories and aspects in science are not true but rather view them as avenues that can be improved through other processes such as research (Rowbottom, 2019). Cognitive activities of humans work in a manner that aims to satisfy needs and find out true facts about the physical world. The instrumentalist approach should be utilized to make explanations where necessary regarding the physical world.
The value of scientific concepts and theories is not based on whether the facts held are true or untrue but rather the extent that they help make accurate empirical predictions or solve conceptual problems (Cacioppo, Semin and Berntson, 2004). The basic difference is that realism believes that the theories are true or at least true while instrumentalists do not take that into account but rather how helpful the ideas can be towards solving conceptual issues. According to John Dewey, instrumentalism is the view that knowledge results from the discernment or correlations between events or processes of change. In essence, the main argument presented by instrumentalists is that the theories and concepts in science are used as predictive tools that can change the society for the better (Bhakthavatsalam and Kidd, 2019). Most realists reject instrumentalist approaches to explanation of scientific phenomenon as the two are based on different principles. For instance, an experiment may seek to discern how students can become better learners when exposed to particular strategies or instructions.
Ideas are instruments or tools that human beings utilize to make greater sense of the world in a significant manner. Equally, ideas refer to plans of actions and predictors of future events (Psillos, 2017). For instance, one can have the idea of a hammer when they need to use it to perform a particular function. An idea in the science of medicine can imply a vaccine that is used to control and treat a certain disease (Rowbottom, 2019). The facts in science can be true or false according to instrumentalists even though the ideas can be utilized to make the world a better place for all humans. In essence, instrumentalists believe that the best way to evaluate a theory is how efficient it is in explaining phenomenon and changing the world to a better place (Cacioppo, Semin and Berntson, 2004). It is vital to highlight that there is no amount of evidence that can be used to ascertain that a certain theory of science is indeed true hence the need to adopt an instrumentalist approach towards the same.
It is important to analyze the two approaches towards the interpretation of science and ascertain which of the two approaches is plausible. A close examination of the two indicates that realists take a different approach towards gaining an understanding of the natural world (Psillos, 2017). For instance, instrumentalists believe that the best approach towards evaluating a theory is through its effectiveness in explaining situations or making the world better. It is important to note that there is no amount of evidence that can make a theory or concept true and there is a need to assess effectiveness and efficiency of a theory in changing the world (Fine, 1986). Much needs to be done in relation to the same and ascertain the best possible approach towards understanding the physical world. In essence, the instrumentalist approach proves to be the most plausible explanation or interpretation towards science and other aspects.
To sum it up, there is a clear distinction between the realist and instrumentalist approaches towards the interpretation of science. Realists believe that theories, tools and ideas in science are true or approximately true of the existing physical world. on the other hand, instrumentalists believe that every concept in science is a tool utilized by human beings to make the world a better place. Equally, there is no specific amount of evidence that should validate a specific theory. Instead, evaluation should be done based on useful the concepts are in improving the lives of people. In essence, scientific explanations are made based on gathered facts about the natural world. Both realists and instrumentalists should come up with research that improves understanding on the same. However, the instrumentalist approach seems more plausible as compared to the realist strategy towards interpretation of science.
Bhakthavatsalam, S. and Kidd, I.J., 2019. Science, realism, and unconceived alternatives: introduction to the special issue on unconceived alternatives. Synthese, 196(10), pp.3911-3913.
Cacioppo, J.T., Semin, G.R. and Berntson, G.G., 2004. Realism, instrumentalism, and scientific symbiosis: psychological theory as a search for truth and the discovery of solutions. American psychologist, 59(4), p.214.
Fine, A., 1986. Unnatural attitudes: Realist and instrumentalist attachments to science. Mind, 95(378), pp.149-179.
Furedy, J.J., 1991. Cognitivism and the conflict between realist and instrumentalist approaches to scientific theorising. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 32(3), p.461.
Hesse, M., 2020. CHAPTER TWELVE. A Realist Interpretation of Science. In The Structure of Scientific Inference (pp. 283-302). University of California Press.
Lawson, T., 2001. Two responses to the failings of modern economics: the instrumentalist and the realist. Review of Population and Social Policy, 10(1), pp.155-181.
Psillos, S., 2017. The realist turn in the philosophy of science. In The Routledge handbook of scientific realism (pp. 20-34). Routledge.
Rowbottom, D.P., 2019. The instrument of science: Scientific anti-realism revitalised. Routledge.
Stock Market Fluctuations Amid Pandemic Shocks University Essay Example
In the New York Times article, “The Stock Market’s Covid Pattern: Faster Recovery from Each Panic,” Russel and Hadi (2021) address the devastating effects of the pandemic on the global economy. Since the outbreak Omicron variant of the coronavirus, concerns have been raised about the possibility of another global economic recession. The emergence of the Omicron variant is the latest cause of the stock market upheaval after the Delta variant. Since the pandemic outbreak, various news outlets have been shifting their assumptions about whether employees should show up for work, whether product demand will increase or whether people should travel abroad. With each phase of the pandemic, new requirements have been introduced for border closings, testing, vaccine administration, and warnings regarding physical distancing. Much, however, remains widely unknown about the new Omicron variant, including; the rate of spread of the virus and if existing vaccines provide sufficient protection. Due to the effects on the economy, the stock market has taken a hit, becoming highly volatile and unstable.
Due to its high sensitivity to economic changes, the stock market is considered a barometer for the pandemic’s path, plummeting after announcements and skyrocketing on introducing vaccines and other treatments. Each phase of the pandemic has brought its unique volatility in the stock market, with the trend being; a shorter low, followed by a higher recovery. The S&P Index indicates that since the beginning of December, the stock market has recovered approximately all financial losses that occurred after the announcement of the Omicron variant on 26th November (Russel & Hadi, 2021). Nevertheless, the stock market and the pandemic have not always moved together since other factors such as government spending and low-interest rates can drive corporate profits. This means that despite the pandemic shocks followed by increased reported cases, the stock market does not necessarily plummet with a significant increase in the spread of the virus. The figure below illustrates the pandemic-induced fluctuations of the stock market for the past six months.
Source: (The New York Times, 2021)
Russel and Hadi’s (2021) comparison between the stock market decline and the Covid-19 daily reported cases shows that the stock market and the pandemic do not necessarily move in a locked step. For instance, in February 2020, the pandemic reached a global scale, the global economy entered into a recession, and millions of people lost their jobs. The S&P lost more than 33.9% of its value from its peak. In September and October, the exponential increase in case counts and global death tolls fueled concerns about new and more stringent restrictions that would bring the economy into a new historical low. Along with the political uncertainty surrounding the United States presidential elections, the stock market speculations seemed bleak.
Nevertheless, the S&P neared a correction to the peak experienced in February and after that declined by 9% (Russel & Hadi, 2021). This was a worrisome yet symbolic improvement in the stock market. Other factors thought to have contributed to the slight improvement in the stock market performance are government spending (stimulus checks) and lowered interest rates.
In the period between March and April 2021, although case counts reached an all-time high, the stock market steadily climbed due to market optimism surrounding the vaccination rollouts. The emergence of the Delta variant between September and October threatened the stock market recovery (Russel & Hadi, 2021). Meanwhile, high inflation rates raised concerns about whether the Federal Reserve would cut back on stimulus injections into the economy. Between November and December, the coronavirus’s Omicron variant has again caused declines in the stock market, but the signs of recovery remain strong. The stock market’s recovery after economic dips caused by pandemic shocks is underpinned by the Federal Reserve’s efforts to cut interest rates (reducing borrowing costs), thus keeping capital in circulation throughout the financial system. Therefore, the Federal Reserve has played a significant role in sustaining the stock market ever since the outbreak of the pandemic.
In the past few weeks, economists have downsized their economic growth forecasts, citing the potential impacts of the Omicron variant on the rate of economic recovery. The main concern is that the variant will shutter global supply chains, reducing corporate activity and profit earning capacity, ultimately sending the stock market tumbling into a new low. The issue here is uncertainty; a lot is yet to be uncovered about the novel Omicron variant. Projections are, if the variant results in tighter restrictions and lockdowns, it could force companies to reduce productivity and factories to shutter (Russel & Hadi, 2021). This will increase the shortage of goods from building materials to cars. Previously, with each phase of the pandemic, reduced economic activity and the consequent product shortages have been the key reason behind inflation (the rise of commodity prices). Therefore, there is a possibility that the Federal Reserve will have to increase the interest rate (which will increase borrowing costs) to pump down inflation (reduce commodity prices). This scenario is likely to cause more turbulence in the stock market.
Russel, K., & Hadi, M. (2021, December 8). The stock market’s Covid pattern: Faster recovery from each panic. The New York Times – Breaking News, US News, World News, and Videos. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/12/07/business/omicron-stock-market-covid.html