If you had dark colored skin you couldn't live there. That's as starkly about race as it can possibly get.
For the honor of living in an average small house in this economically depressed area you can look forward to shelling out ~$500,000 and paying $8,000+ a year in property taxes. That's the real obstacle for working people to come move to places like Levittown. A few decades ago young, working people looking to start a family could buy a house in a place like Levittown for 2-3x their annual income. Now its more like 8-10x of their annual income. It isn't economically sustainable, like much of the rest of our economic system, and it has absolutely nothing to do with racism.
This amounted to a big transfer of wealth to white Americans, that black Americans couldn't participate in. They were stuck paying rent for 67 years while their white "peers" were able to build equity, as they had access to cheap credit.
https://www.npr.org/2017/05/03/526655831/a-forgotten-history...
The median white family is worth $100k (almost entirely home equity). The average black family is worth $7,000. You don't think massive subsidies for white home ownership during the first half of the 20th century might have something.to do with it? Black people couldn't get mortgages. White people had theirs guaranteed by the Feds. It was a sweet deal. That equity didn't just evaporate.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurashin/2015/03/26/the-racial...
"the environment for individuals to achieve their dreams of an independent and secure home life"
"Levittown served two or three generations very well"
Each of these statements are simply not true. The benefit, the individuals, the generations- they were all white, by law (whites-only requirements were written into the covenants.you had to sign to buy a place). Sure, not everyone could take advantage, but everyone who could was white. This article is misrepresenting the history: this was for white benefit, white individuals, and white generations.
Did you intend to jump between median and mean here? I'd guess that using median for both would make your case even stronger.
> the Federal Housing Administration, which was established in 1934, furthered the segregation efforts by refusing to insure mortgages in and near African-American neighborhoods — a policy known as "redlining." At the same time, the FHA was subsidizing builders who were mass-producing entire subdivisions for whites — with the requirement that none of the homes be sold to African-Americans.
https://www.npr.org/2017/05/03/526655831/a-forgotten-history...
Here's an entire book dedicated to discussing the government policies that drove separation: https://amzn.to/2Zz4Zeh (or get it from your local library!)
It's tough reading because a lot of things that happened were pretty ugly.