White flight from SW side (Chicago, Oak Park: for sale, home equity, buying a)

[At1WithNature]

sorry about that...LOL. it's been about 6 months since I have had any discussions on race. I'm a little out of tune. I've been avoiding them for so long because it is the smart thing to do.

[aragx6]

Originally Posted by At1WithNature

sorry about that...LOL. it's been about 6 months since I have had any discussions on race. I'm a little out of tune. I've been avoiding them for so long because it is the smart thing to do.

And I'll tell you right now: We all like you better for it.

[Humboldt1]

Actually, by 2015, Hispanics will outnumber whites in this country. I don't know where the 2050 number is coming from.

Clearly, both latin america and africa are screwed up with major third world type of problems (corruption, starvation, genocide, etc.).

I don't know if blacks will outnumber whites in this country anytime soon, but with their much higher birth rates I am sure this is possible.

I don't know where 2.6 came from (the numbers I have seen are closer to 2.2 to 2.4 for white birth rates).

Either way, with the high rate of blacks incarcerated and those with felonies on their records, their high birth rates may not affect public policy via voting for quite some time.

When many of the illegal hispanics (mostly Mexican) are given citizenship in the next few years, this will have a much more profound effect on changing how public policy goes. This is a big part of why we are so lax on enforcing immigration law because we don't want to tick off all these potential future voters or their american-born kids.

I very much doubt there will be another Barack Obama anytime soon after he serves his 8 years (I am guessing he gets re-elected because he is so popular). It is more likely we will have a hispanic president before we have another black president. With blacks only accounting for 9-10 percent of the population (much less percentage of the electorate due to felonies) I don't see blacks constituting a significant voting force going forward. Barack only won because he was able to reach out to non-blacks. Depending on solely black support to get elected would have made him just another Jesse Jackson Sr.

[oakparkdude]

Humboldt1,

Do you have a reference for your claim that hispanics will be the plurality by 2015, because I seriously doubt its validity. That's only 6 years away. Census estimates for the white, non-hispanic population is 66% as of 2006.

[aragx6]

Actually the numbers I produced are from the Heritage Foundation -- used them specifically because I didn't want anyone to come back and say "Oh the New York Times, what a liberal organization making up lies..."

Also ... blacks, according to 2006 census bureau estimates, account for 12.8%.

And, actually only 12 states permanently bar felons from voting. (Why Can't Felons Vote? - TIME)

[oakparkdude]

These are the projections from the US Census. Note that almost all the change can be accounted for by the increased hispanic population. Also, considering that hispanic can include people like Bill Richardson and Cameron Diaz, I question whether by 2050 Hispanics will be considered significantly differently than Italians or Greeks.

____________________2008__2050
Non-Hispanic whites____68%___46%
Hispanic______________15%___30%
African Americans______12%___15%
Asian American _________5%____9%

[icebergsyndrome]

USA Population: 1790 to 2000 and beyond

Nifty little website that goes by census estimates.

[Humboldt1]

I was mistaken. I probably got 2050 and 2015 mixed up.

In what year will whites account for less than 50% of the population? I think the government underestimates the hispanic population due to illegal immigration. Does this number include both white and non-white hispanics? There are 12-14 million illegals in this country alone out of 300MM people (mostly hispanic). So, 4-5 percent of US population is illegal. I am thinking there are more than 45MM hispanics in the country legally if we count hispanic (including Argentinians with German names) whites. I am still not sure if the census numbers account for Carmen Diaz (she is basically white) but do account for Bill Richardson (he is not white, with distinctive indian features).

I agree that Hispanics are becoming considered the same as Italians or Greeks.

We should also note that when a white person has a child with a black or hispanic, their children are considered hispanic or black, not white.

Sukwoo, would a child by an asian man and white woman be considered white or Asian? I suspect even though they are half-white, they would be considered Asian. Perhaps this is part of what is fueling the decline in the white population in this country. Your thoughts?

[oakparkdude]

According US Census definitions, a hispanic is anyone who self-identifies as hispanic. Therefore, if Cameron Diaz considers herself hispanic, she can check the box on the census form. That's why I think those numbers are suspect. Over time, (and especially in 40 years), the percentage of ethnic/genetic hispanics who self-identify as hispanics will decrease just as ethnic white Europeans, over time, lose their distinctiveness and become generic white Americans. Sure, they'll eat traditional foods occasionally and celebrate Cinco de Mayo, but it'll be no different than Italians celebrating Columbus Day or Greeks going to a Greek restaurant on special occasions.

Regarding mixed-race kids, its becoming more and more common, and in the 2000 Census for the first time, mixed-race was one of the boxes you could check. In 50 years, I think our country will have a fundamentally different view on race due to the increasing mixture of white, black, asian, and hispanic. My sisters have several half Asian/half-white kids who are essentially 100% integrated into the dominant American culture, with marginal to minimal residues of their original Asian heritage. I assume my daughter (and any other kids we may have) will be the same, although I'll work hard to maintain the proud Asian tradition of math nerd and science geek.

[jpramire]

Hi all,

Long time reader - first time poster. I have never posted; but, this time I just could not resist. I want to focus back on the topic of this thread. I was born and raised in Ashburn, and I attended St. Denis grammar school. Fr. Larry, the pastor mentioned in the story, joined the St. Denis parish when I was in about 6th grade. I have a hispanic last name; but I almost completely identify as caucasian. My mom is South Side Irish - last name Sullivan. My parents were city workers; hence we are very much part of the "white flight" of city workers in the SW side. My ashburn home was one of those built in the 1950's. It was were my Mom grew up, and her and my father eventually bought the home from my Grandpa. This home was where I was born and raised. I'm now in my 20's and as a young working professional (yuppie) - a topic I'd like to discuss further at some point. I have recently bought a condo in Bridgeport.

This board has some very strong opinions, and I thought it'd be nice to share a more intimate story of how this white flight affected me and my family. I cannot tell you how distressing and sad it was to watch your neigborhood become more and more decimated over time. My poor mother, who was born and raised there, lived there her entire life, raised her child there, and had to watch nearly every local family move out, and be replaced by, almost exclusively in the neighborhood's later stages, a lower income family with many inherent problems.

As an aside, I agree with the posts that white flight seems to be most talked about; but I think it is more of an issue of higher class flight as a lower class of people move in. In Chicago, this is typically a black and white issue. But elsewhere, it could very well be black people fleeing, etc.

I'd just like to pose a question, if you lived in this area and you were raising children, how in your right mind could you decide to stay there when you could clearly see a spike in crime, and a decline in the schools? Its just not fair to have any animosity to the majority of the white people who moved. I will say, I do hold some anger to the families that were first to go; because I truly believe these people moved because one or two black families moved into an area; not because crime went up. How could crime increase with only one or two homes changing hands? It didn't. In my opinion the white people who were the first to go were driven to make their move by underlying racism. They simply could not stand the thought of living next to a black family. I think these are the people are at the root of this whole problem.

Being from the SW side, I can, with some confidence, say the vast majority of people are racist. However, I cannot fully blame them. I know my parents would live next to black family; and they did so for years - until the neighborhood declined to the point where safety was an issue. Nearby Drugs/Gang Activity/Domestic Abuse/Animal Abuse all played a role in my parents ultimate decision to flee Ashburn - for Mt. Greenwood of course. I'd like to expand on my comment that most of the people on the SW side are racist. Places like Mt. Greenwood are built on the foundation of people who were forced to flee from their homes. How can these people not hold some resentment to the people they see as the cause of their displacement? I know I do - I just think I am a little more open-minded and can place the majority of blame on the white people who couldn't live next to an equivalent class black family, not the black family looking for a better place to raise their children.

It is so sad to drive through my old Parish. To remember all my friends and family; and my school - which has closed and now is part of CPS. But it is even sadder to think that these transitions appear to be never ending. Stabilizing is possible; and I think Beverly is a good indicator of this (to some degree). It just seems silly that these waves will start and end every few decades. Every single person I associated with on the southside seemed to be part of this white flight. It is incredible the amount of people affected. And, it is completely generational and never-ending.

I guess, in conclusion, I'd attribute the blame to racism. But, not to the vast majority of the white people but to the few who first decided to move when a black family moved into an area. I will say - where does the line get drawn? Is it between the families who move in a year and those who stayed past a year, or past 2 years, or 3 years? Who knows? I guess that is where the complications arise. My thoughts are that the line should be drawn at the point when parents of children can honestly say their children cannot be raised in an area and have an as fulfilling childhood as possible elsewhere. For St. Denis/Ashburn this threshold was crossed a long time ago.

I agree with the posts that in Evergreen Park/Oak Lawn/Hometown - this threshold is fast approaching.

Thanks for reading!
JR

I'm not writing to change anything; and I suppose I do not add anything to help solve the problem. I just want people (black/white/hispanic) to think about things a little differently. It is very obvious that generalizing is prolific on this board. By posting, I hope both sides can think about "white flight" a little differently.