THE ISSUE:

Census data reveals disturbing levels of inequality in the Capital Region.

THE STAKES:

Inequality of outcome is often determined by inequality of opportunity

The Capital Region is rife with inequality, as anyone who lives here is aware.

There are poor and rich neighborhoods, often in proximity. There are school districts in which nearly every student goes to college and others where many don't graduate from high school. There are blocks where crime is rare and others where it is common.

We know all this. In this country, such disparities are commonly understood and accepted facts of life. With time, we become blind to them.

But data can force us to take another look at things we would rather not see, including the ugly reality of our inequality.

This is ugly: Residents of Hamilton Hill in Schenectady have an average lifespan of just 66.2 years, the shortest of any census tract in the region and far below the statewide expectancy of 81 years. Just two miles north, in a city census tract near Niskayuna, the life span is more than two decades longer, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.

As Bethany Bump reported in Sunday's Times Union, a glaring difference between the neighborhoods is wealth. Hamilton Hill is among the region's poorest places; the neighborhood to the north is wealthier. Poverty and its stresses are inextricably linked to diminished health and the "deaths of despair" — suicides and overdoses.

Differences in life expectancy aren't solely tied to race — residents of some white rural areas also have lower-than-average life spans — but race is an important factor. Capital Region neighborhoods with the lowest life expectancies are largely inhabited by people of color; areas with the most longevity are overwhelmingly white.

Racial disparities were also evident, to put it mildly, in census estimates in a recent Times Union story by Diego Mendoza-Myers. They showed that 27 percent of black households in the region owned their own homes, compared to 69 percent of white households. Meanwhile, 46 percent of white households had yearly incomes above $75,000, compared to just 19 percent of black households.

Of course, in a free society with free choice, there will be inequality of outcomes. A sedentary person who lives on junk food will tend to die younger than someone who exercises regularly and eats fresh food. A person who graduates from high school and waits until marriage to have kids is more likely to avoid poverty.

But we're fooling ourselves if we believe choices alone are the determining factor for the inequality detailed in the statistics. It often results from systemic racism and policies, both historic and modern, that reinforce it. It's about inequality of opportunity.

There is no silver bullet for fixing this, but as a new legislative session begins, ensuring that education aid goes to where it is needed most, and that it's wisely spent in ways that help address the added challenges low-income students of color face, is certainly a good place to start.

We like to think our society offers an equal chance to succeed in life's proverbial race. But by no choice of their own, the poor get stuck at the starting line when others are already off and running. That's the reality, and it's up to us to address it, or not.