If it is indeed the neighborhood itself that affects the opportunity, and not the people living there, then white flight shouldn't be a problem.

I.e. even after the white people get replaced, it would still be a good neighborhood.

There's a term used by "race realists" to describe the liberal consensus towards integration: "magic dirt". It's a mocking way of phrasing the belief that an immigrant who moves from a dysfunctional to a successful society will likely become successful, or that the same is true for a child from a dysfunctional neighborhood going to a good quality school.

Naturally, I don't agree with the "race realist" view on this, and think the term is a bit of a strawman. Humans are intensely social, people's actions are deeply shaped by their social environments, and the liberal view being mocked isn't that your location transforms you but that your social milieu does.

But your comment seems to actually be this strawman come to life, which I find fascinating. To be clear, do you really think it's likely that good neighborhoods are shaped _primarily_ by factors independent of who lives in them? I know this is possible in the abstract, eg a downtown neighborhood is closer to jobs, a neighborhood with a freeway running through it is rarely cohesive, etc. But this seems dwarfed by the mountains and mountains of data points of neighborhoods transforming dramatically due to shifts in resident demographics, and pretty much every housing-related phenomenon is in line with this: white flight, gentrification, the recent impoverishing of the suburbs etc.

> To be clear, do you really think it's likely that good neighborhoods are shaped _primarily_ by factors independent of who lives in them?

I do not - I was pointing out the contradiction. Although to be fair, the way schools are funded in the US complicates this. If a neighborhood becomes low-income, then the schools will get less funding as well, as I understand it, because schools are funded from neighborhood-level property taxes.

My mistake, I misinterpreted your comment. Sorry about that.

No need to apologize, my comment wasn't unambiguous. But that's because it doesn't matter how my sentiment is interpreted - it gets people thinking either way.