Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Baltimore is actually very segregated - probably even more than Chicago, at least for Blacks.
A few other cities have it too outside of the Midwest. Though parts of NYC are very integrated, there are also huge swaths of population which are very segregated as well. The following represent the populations in NYC for the number of people living in census block groups of 75% or more of just one race:
* Black: 979,697 people
* Hispanic: 504,762 people
That's a pretty large population for those two groups about the size of Philadelphia.
Here are Chicago's numbers (which are of course worse by percentage):
* Black: 707,303
* Hispanic: 401,785
Large population for that as we know and higher than NYC obviously percentage wise, but NYC is still another city not in the midwest still with large scale segregation going on too.
Historically, Chicago held the title. Not saying rates may not be worse in other places now but Chicago has lost 1,000,000 residents, many white and now the black rates (educated and poor) have been leaving these industrial cities.
Btw, I love how Asians are never included in any of this stuff.
First off, may the poster could provide his meaning but, at one time, all of the industrial cities listed, esp on the Great Lakes, had huge foreign population rates, including Chicago. Were these cities then, including Chicago considered to be ''eastern or east-coast''? Answer: nope; same then as it is now, Midwest. Since when did foreign populations in Midwest cities elevate them to be quasi-east coast. I forgot, the thread is about Chicago trying be eastern again and pointing to its foreign born population.
Most cities in the US, especially from what's the midwest and to the east (also San Francisco to an extent) at one time used to be heavily foreign born in the US. What's your point? We're a country of immigrants. Probably 85-90% of this country's ancestors weren't even here 150 years ago. That obviously faded greatly over the years as immigration slowed down a ton while people actually stayed in the country and had families.
Also, I don't think most people are calling Chicago east-coast. Some are, though I'd say more people in here don't agree with that fully. I think most people are trying to say and I 100% agree with, that there are large parts of Chicago that do not feel like anywhere else in the midwest. There are some parts, on the other hand, that do. Last night I was in Lakeview for a little bit for example - definitely felt midwestern. Then I returned downtown - didn't feel midwestern anymore and that, is actually a pretty good thing IMO. Chicago though is a lot different than most of the midwest where you have entire cities that you could go to one area and feel like you're in the midwest and another you could say "hmm, not necessarily..." Please educate me on all the areas in the Midwest right now that are like Little Village, Pilsen, Chinatown, etc. The only large scale area I can think of really, is in Dearborn, MI and a few suburbs around there. I remember being in Pilsen in April, going to a bakery on 18th street when a huge group of high school kids entered in. I'm talking like 100 students inside and outside of this place. I asked one of the adults what it was for and she told me they were from Michigan (she was the HS teacher) and their Spanish spring break trip was to come to Chicago and partake in culture in Pilsen and Little Village. They had to come to Chicago because no place in Michigan, Ohio, or Indiana, or even Pennsylvania could offer them the same thing.
Historically, Chicago held the title. Not saying rates may not be worse in other places now but Chicago has lost 1,000,000 residents, many white and now the black rates (educated and poor) have been leaving these industrial cities.
The MSA has never lost population. The peak of the city's population was 1950. The MSA population then was 5,495,364. As of the 2010 census, it is 9,461,105. The population is almost 4 million greater today in the area than 1950 - or an increase of 72.2%
The following cities have a lower population as of the 2010 Census than their peaks in either 1950 or 1960. Accompanying that are the percent decrease from that time:
* St. Louis | -62.7%
* Detroit | -61.4%
* Cleveland | -56.6%
* Buffalo | -55%
* Pittsburgh | -54.8%
* New Orleans | -38.8%
* Birmingham, AL | -37.7%
* Newark, NJ | -37.3%
* Baltimore | -34.6%
* Providence, RI | -29.6%
* Minneapolis | -26.7%
* Philadelphia | -26.3%
* Chicago | -25.5%
* Washington DC | -25%
* Boston | -22.9%
* Milwaukee | -19.8%
* Atlanta | -15.2%
And while NYC has gained population, it's still not a ton since its peak of 1960. It's gained 3.6% population since then, which amounts to a gain of 283,176 people since 1950. They unfortunately lost over 800,000 people between 1970 and 1980.
Quote:
Btw, I love how Asians are never included in any of this stuff.
Because Asians are by far the best integrated racial group in the US. If you must know, the population is around 80,000 for this in NYC. My girlfriend is from China, and while she was looking for places to live in Brooklyn and Queens, the race of whomever lived around her was of zero concern. I looked at places with her in Brooklyn that were 90% afro-caribbean and mainly foreign born, and she cared 0%. The area she lives in now is heavily Middle Eastern and European - she could really care less. If you do analysis for Chicago for example, they are the most integrated racial group.
Last edited by marothisu; 10-24-2015 at 03:52 PM..
The MSA has never lost population. The peak of the city's population was 1950. The MSA population then was 5,495,364. As of the 2010 census, it is 9,461,105. The population is almost 4 million greater today in the area than 1950 - or an increase of 72.2%
The following cities have a lower population as of the 2010 Census than their peaks in either 1950 or 1960. Accompanying that are the percent decrease from that time:
* St. Louis | -62.7%
* Detroit | -61.4%
* Cleveland | -56.6%
* Buffalo | -55%
* Pittsburgh | -54.8%
* New Orleans | -38.8%
* Birmingham, AL | -37.7%
* Newark, NJ | -37.3%
* Baltimore | -34.6%
* Providence, RI | -29.6%
* Minneapolis | -26.7%
* Philadelphia | -26.3%
* Chicago | -25.5%
* Washington DC | -25%
* Boston | -22.9%
* Milwaukee | -19.8%
* Atlanta | -15.2%
And while NYC has gained population, it's still not a ton since its peak of 1960. It's gained 3.6% population since then, which amounts to a gain of 283,176 people since 1950. They unfortunately lost over 800,000 people between 1970 and 1980.
Because Asians are by far the best integrated racial group in the US. If you must know, the population is around 80,000 for this in NYC. My girlfriend is from China, and while she was looking for places to live in Brooklyn and Queens, the race of whomever lived around her was of zero concern. I looked at places with her in Brooklyn that were 90% afro-caribbean and mainly foreign born, and she cared 0%. The area she lives in now is heavily Middle Eastern and European - she could really care less. If you do analysis for Chicago for example, they are the most integrated racial group.
Why Asians, many of them foreigners, able to integrate so easily? Not only does your friend not care about what her neighbors are but her neighbors don't care what she is.
Contrary to popular belief, most normal people do. Not to mention that if you're familiar with any of these areas, especially Minneapolis, you'd know that the suburbs there are pretty different than an area like Uptown in Minneapolis Comparing Eagan to Uptown in Minneapolis? LOL! Sorry, but in reality most people when saying "Indianapolis" are talking about the city, not Carmel.
Right, I know most people are oblivious to the serious difference between city population and metro population, but most people on city data know better, I was curious why you decided to compare city populations, that's all.
Indianapolis is a unique case, just because it consolidated with the governments of the other cities in Marion county in 1970 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unigov). I wouldn't regard this step for the sake of government efficiency as making Indianapolis a "bigger city." The majority of the "city" is very very suburban, as opposed to Minneapolis.
Why Asians, many of them foreigners, able to integrate so easily? Not only does your friend not care about what her neighbors are but her neighbors don't care what she is.
Oh I don't know. I'm just talking about my own experiences. An ex gf of mine was also from Malaysia and between all of them (current one and previous), if the area was relatively safe and had what they wanted, they'd be there regardless of who was there. The one from Malaysia lived in Lincoln Square first and then moved to Lakeview East. Especially LVE, the area is pretty damn white and though there's a lot of different cuisines there, it still has a kind of midwest-lite feeling for a lot of it. Never once did I hear her talk about who lived there like "Oh there's too many white people" - she was just happy with the fact it was so close to good public transit, the lake, and a ton of restaurants and shops. That's all she cared about. A lot of her friends, also from Asia, lived in areas like Lakeview, Lincoln Park, and a few lived in Uptown. They never complained - the only one who did was a girl moving to London 2 weeks later who lived near Clark/Fullerton once ask me if I'd ever noticed how white her area was. LOL. She didn't say it as if it was a terrible thing - she still loved Lincoln Park for its options and having what she wanted out of a neighborhood.
I can't speak for others - that's just how it is with the ones I knew. My current girlfriend is kind of the same way. As long as it's decently safe, she could care less what area it is and who her neighbors are. When we looked at some places in Brooklyn, all she wanted to know was "is it safe?" When we'd walk through the neighborhoods, she just didn't care who was there, even if we were about the only non-whatever on the street at the time. Those sorts of things don't bother either one of us. People are defined by a hell of a lot more than just what race they are - it's really stupid to think you can't relate to someone in some way just because you are one race and they are another. This kind of mentality of just wanting to be safe and being around amenities I think you'll find a lot of - at least in my experiences. I think if Bronzeville for example was deemed to be pretty safe (I mean it's so so safe, but a lot of people don't think so still) and you had a fair number of drinking establishments there and more restaurants, I think you'd see it more on the radar and more people moving there. No, not everyone would move there as I think there are people who would really care about who their neighbors are still and hold stupid prejudices, but I think you don't need everybody going there to get it on the radar or anything. I have a lot of friends from all sorts of backgrounds here who pretty much only care about being (a) safe and (b) within walking distance to a nice array of restaurants and sometimes bars.
Last edited by marothisu; 10-24-2015 at 07:05 PM..
Indianapolis is a unique case, just because it consolidated with the governments of the other cities in Marion county in 1970 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unigov). I wouldn't regard this step for the sake of government efficiency as making Indianapolis a "bigger city." The majority of the "city" is very very suburban, as opposed to Minneapolis.
The MSA has never lost population. The peak of the city's population was 1950. The MSA population then was 5,495,364. As of the 2010 census, it is 9,461,105. The population is almost 4 million greater today in the area than 1950 - or an increase of 72.2%
The following cities have a lower population as of the 2010 Census than their peaks in either 1950 or 1960. Accompanying that are the percent decrease from that time:
* St. Louis | -62.7%
* Detroit | -61.4%
* Cleveland | -56.6%
* Buffalo | -55%
* Pittsburgh | -54.8%
* New Orleans | -38.8%
* Birmingham, AL | -37.7%
* Newark, NJ | -37.3%
* Baltimore | -34.6%
* Providence, RI | -29.6%
* Minneapolis | -26.7%
* Philadelphia | -26.3%
* Chicago | -25.5%
* Washington DC | -25%
* Boston | -22.9%
* Milwaukee | -19.8%
* Atlanta | -15.2%
And while NYC has gained population, it's still not a ton since its peak of 1960. It's gained 3.6% population since then, which amounts to a gain of 283,176 people since 1950. They unfortunately lost over 800,000 people between 1970 and 1980.
Because Asians are by far the best integrated racial group in the US. If you must know, the population is around 80,000 for this in NYC. My girlfriend is from China, and while she was looking for places to live in Brooklyn and Queens, the race of whomever lived around her was of zero concern. I looked at places with her in Brooklyn that were 90% afro-caribbean and mainly foreign born, and she cared 0%. The area she lives in now is heavily Middle Eastern and European - she could really care less. If you do analysis for Chicago for example, they are the most integrated racial group.
But what a comeback NYC has seen in population, gained the lost 800,000 and now a nice surplus, and still growing. Quite impressive that the 800,000 loss has all been wiped out; a total of 1,200,000 or so new residents. Still hard to grasp that just Brooklyn's population is comparable to the city of Chicago's total.
So Chicago would have to gain about 1,000,000 -1,200,000 people to match NYC's growth. Wow. Chicago's estimated growth is about 25,000 since 2010 so there's a way to go, but you have to start somewhere. All the population gain of the 1990s gone and then some, down to 2,695,000. This was another reason I never saw the Chicago vs. NYC competition; NYC is not only three times + the population of Chicago, it's blowing it away in current growth as well.
The numbers and the state of Chicago's and the Illinois debt burdens do not bode well. Houston is coming for the 3rd city rank.
Last edited by Kamms; 10-24-2015 at 11:17 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
