[ericdykstra]

If foreigners are perceived as being higher risk, and they probably are, then I don't see any problem with landlords discriminating against them in general. It just means that the standard will be higher to offset whatever the risk is. There are some landlords who probably won't rent to foreigners at all, and that's fine, too. There are plenty of places available.

If this kind of thing would bother you, I would strongly recommend not considering moving to Japan.

[kazagistar]

> perceived as being higher risk

Yep. That's what racism is.

[ericdykstra]

If they are a higher risk, it's just risk mitigation. If English teacher foreigners are 25x more likely to break their lease than a Japanese person making the same salary, then it's not worth renting to them for the same price.

You can call it whatever you want, but it's part of being a foreigner. If you don't like it, then stay in the country of your citizenship/heritage.

[yathern]

If in the US, a black man is 2X more likely to have committed a murder than a white man, is it not worth associating with them?

This is absolutely the root of racism. Acting out of fear and self-preservation in a self-sustaining loop.

The most insidious kind of racism to me isn't the mindless hatred that you sometimes see. It's the thoughtful, logical-sounding explanations that justify the behavior.

[ericdykstra]

I don’t really care who you choose to associate or not associate with regardless of the reason.

If a landlord doesn’t want me because I’m a foreigner, that’s fine with me. If I ask why and he explains the risk profile, I can offer to pay for my 2-year lease up front to mitigate the risk.

[ericdykstra]

If the landlord won’t take 2 years payment up front, that’s her prerogative and I’ll find a different place.

I don’t understand the obsession with wanting to force people into economic transactions they don’t want to participate in.

Fortunately for me, I’ve literally never been denied an apartment or a service or anything at all due to my race in Japan. But hypothetically, I wouldn’t have a problem with it. Discrimination laws are a violation of freedom of association and they increase the cost of transactions because people can’t state their prejudices publicly.

[zhengyi13]

Yes, but you won't even get that opportunity. It's flat out not an option.

[toomuchtodo]

Insurance companies charge men more than women for car insurance because the data shows they're more risky. Is that gender discrimination? There's a line somewhere between -isms and data driven decisions.

[moate]

Is it gender discrimination: Yes. Is it legally protected gender discrimination: Also yes!

Welcome to systemic problems!

"Data Driven Decisions" are almost always about "this consumer/user group will probably do X". This is discriminatory against people in the group who don't/won't do X. Insurance companies (and college admissions boards, and police deciding where to send officers) do their best to try and remove broad categories (race, sex, etc) and tailor their data to a specific outcome, but that doesn't mean data can't be used to discriminate. "Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics" after all.

There is a line, but it moves, and it's blurry, and sometimes it's not really a line but more of a circle. The point is, sometimes these things are bad/discriminatory but they're allowed to keep happening because that's how we've always done things or something to that effect.

Dealing with people as groups is at the heart of -isms and stereotyping/discrimination. It's also how data/statistics tend to treat people.

[oh_sigh]

Replace foreigners with "black people"

[oh_sigh]

I'll just note for posterity that I was arguing that these stereotypes about 'foreign people' are just as toxic as stereotypes about 'black people', not that I believe in these stereotypes about black people or foreigners.