This was a really interesting book and had a lot of good information! I didn't realize when I requested it that it was a university press book, which totally makes sense because it did feel a bit dry, but overall it was really readable and I think if I was a city planning student it would be extremely valuable!

The writing felt very impersonal and I found myself skimming alot. This droned on worse than a college textbook and had no pictures, graphs or anything engaging other than words. I do not feel this text is accessible in understanding, for those seeking casual reading. I appreciated how it was divided, but also found that the case studies chosen (LA, Detroit...) were stereotypical and offered nothing new. Detroit especially, used as an example, though it may fit well, is SO overly examined in the field that it felt like a cop-out by the writer. There was also alot of focus on politics, instead of city planning, which I would have preferred. Can I recommend this? Maybe as a textbook for an entry level college student in urban studies, but for a casual reader, no.

This book is more academic and reads like a thesis/dissertation paper more than a book. The author was thorough in his research and made some excellent points but it was difficult for me to focus due to the dry, academic writing. It could be a great book for those more knowledgeable in economics and urban planning! However for me, I prefer to read these types of non fiction books as a casual interest so it simply wasn’t the book for me.

While this book tended a bit more towards the academic than my normal readings, I found the subject fascinating. As our country has evolved, populations have shifted and the current result in an inequality in representation between urban and rural areas. It was easy to recognize issues related to the presented information within my own community. And the points presented were very clear and understandable to someone who barely survived Econ 100. I was a tad disappointed that some avenues of discussion, specifically related to the continued impact of systemic racism on our communities, were not further investigated. That being said, I can understand if it was felt those were outside the narrow discussion put forth or that it was felt those points were better suited to other presentations. Mr. McGahey's proposed solution will never ever happen for a variety of reasons; however, that does not negate the common sense it makes. Until Americans begin to look at a more regional and nationwide approach, these issues will continue to hinder our progress.

This book misses the mark completely because inequality has been falling in the US for at least the last 100 years. Mr. McGahey's major error was not fully understanding the work of Piketty, Saez, and others on the question of rising income and wealth inequality which they insist have been rising since the 1970s. But their work utilized "tax unit" data that consists mainly of households or families and this skews the results mostly because of the sharp increase in unwed mothers over the past 50 years. Also, the 1986 tax act caused most wealthy people to alter their tax status from C corporations to sub-S corporations and this switch fully explains most of the increase in the divergence in the wealth statistics. Given this major flaw at the very outset, I must severely downgrade "Unequal Cities".