U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-12-2013, 07:55 PM
 
Location: roaming gnome
12,391 posts, read 23,804,307 times
Reputation: 5617

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanologist View Post
I use to live in Japan those places are a dime a dozen. Expensive food and cities doesn't always equate being better. There is no price on happiness. I lived in a rich life style money and material stuff means nothing to me. I could take a sledge hammer to a BMW and not feel guilty about it. I've been to some expensive restaurants. Some (didn't say all) of the kid's size serving of little decorative food on an expensive plate I tried actually tasted like crap. Yeah, I can be picky but I decided not to become a snob in real life. I would be just as happy eating something cheap rather if it's NYC or Chicago. Expensive or cheap makes no difference as long as the food is decent regardless of city.
Who said it was better. As I said, I walked out. I was saying nyc has more extremes on the high and low end that change the "average" grocery and eating out cost. And speaking of dime a dozen, that is how cheap ethnic food is in NYC. While Chicago has this too for sure, NYC goes deeper and broader. You can eat out in NYC on a shoe string budget or drop 3000 a month eating out like the people in the link I posted. I don't see how some of those people make money selling dollar pizzas and 2 dollar falafels, has to be just high volume and getting by.

 
Old 08-12-2013, 08:17 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
45,754 posts, read 39,728,377 times
Reputation: 14675
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakal View Post
Brooklyn's black population declined by 4% and declined in Clinton Hill and Fort Green by over 1/3...even as the white population in those areas dramatically increased.

It's part of a larger demographic change...the number of African Americans in NYC declined for the first time ever since the Civil War, according to the 2010 census.

Why is this happening when every other group's population is increasing?
If you mean African-Americans as blacks whose families who've been in the country for over a century or rather "native" to the US, their population has been decreasing for decades. Their loss has been offset by black immigrants, mostly from the Caribbean. The main cause is a slowdown in immigration from the Carribean. I suspect non-immigrant blacks are more likely to leave, and are more interested in moving to the South, unsure though.

New Immigrants to New York

From the link, roughly equal % of NYC blacks claim southern US ancestry as Caribbean ancestry.


The director of the Center for Urban Research at the CUNY Graduate Center, John Mollenkopf, said the number of American-born blacks has been falling in the city for decades, but in the past foreign immigration had led to a net increase. "It's my sense that Afro-Caribbean migration to he city has slackened off to a degree in recent years," Mr. Mollenkopf said. "It was really the growth of the Afro-Caribbean population that did mask the slow decline of the African-American population."


Quote:
Originally Posted by PCH_CDM View Post
Why not ask why the sky is blue? Blacks in NYC aren't some alien species separate from everyone else. If they're moving to the suburbs and Down South in Philly, DC, Boston, Chicago, Detroit, LA, SF. etc., then why would NYC be different?
NYC's trend may be unique.

"What struck me is that the blacks who left New York City weren't going to suburban New Jersey, they were going to Washington, D.C., or Virginia, or some place like that," Mr. Frey said. "For blacks, a lot of it is not just the unaffordability of the city itself, but of the metropolitan area."

both quotes from

Census Finds Black Exodus From City - The New York Sun
 
Old 08-12-2013, 08:29 PM
 
787 posts, read 1,425,065 times
Reputation: 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
If you mean African-Americans as blacks whose families who've been in the country for over a century or rather "native" to the US, their population has been decreasing for decades. Their loss has been offset by black immigrants, mostly from the Caribbean. The main cause is a slowdown in immigration from the Carribean. I suspect non-immigrant blacks are more likely to leave, and are more interested in moving to the South, unsure though.

New Immigrants to New York

From the link, roughly equal % of NYC blacks claim southern US ancestry as Caribbean ancestry.


The director of the Center for Urban Research at the CUNY Graduate Center, John Mollenkopf, said the number of American-born blacks has been falling in the city for decades, but in the past foreign immigration had led to a net increase. "It's my sense that Afro-Caribbean migration to he city has slackened off to a degree in recent years," Mr. Mollenkopf said. "It was really the growth of the Afro-Caribbean population that did mask the slow decline of the African-American population."




NYC's trend may be unique.

"What struck me is that the blacks who left New York City weren't going to suburban New Jersey, they were going to Washington, D.C., or Virginia, or some place like that," Mr. Frey said. "For blacks, a lot of it is not just the unaffordability of the city itself, but of the metropolitan area."

both quotes from

Census Finds Black Exodus From City - The New York Sun


+1.

There has been an uptick in immigration from Africa, especially from the francophone West African nations. That's one of the only things that has kept Harlem majority black. You can tell West Africans are making inroads in upper Manhattan and the Bronx.

The overall black population is decreasing, as you noted. It will be interesting to see what the 2020 census says.
 
Old 08-12-2013, 08:52 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
45,754 posts, read 39,728,377 times
Reputation: 14675
Interesting comparison of postwar population changes. For NYC, 1940 to 2010 with a nice map as a well as a link to the numbers breakdown:

Center for Urban Research - New York from the 1940s to now

While the city has 10% more people, the population distribution is drastically different. The oldest, core neighborhoods lost population, with the exception of a few Manhattan neighborhoods with heavy high-rise construction. The outer neighborhoods all posted heavy gains. Most the declines are from decreasing household size, but the heaviest losses involved destruction of existing housing.

and here's Chicago:

Chicago community area populations 1950 vs. 2010 - SkyscraperPage Forum

Losses in most districts, though without a map and more knowledge of the neighborhoods it's hard to tell a pattern. Gains look like they're in outer areas as well.
 
Old 08-12-2013, 09:40 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland - Southeast
314 posts, read 333,695 times
Reputation: 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by flotard View Post
I am pretty sure I'd hear it from every fan that simply envies the performance of the Yankees.
Everybody has an excuse for losing lol
Is THAT it? The Red Sox, Giants, and Cardinals fans would care to differ as all of these teams have won the series twice in the last decade, Yankees once.. the Giants twice in the last 3 years alone. Not much to envy about the Yankees organization at this point unless you include the fans that pay for A-Rods ridiculous, undeserved salary which they "boo" him everytime he goes to bat. You are w/o a doubt the WORST NYC booster I've EVER seen on here.. the irony of it is you're not even from there, it's truly embarrassing.
 
Old 08-12-2013, 10:37 PM
 
Location: Broward County Florida
555 posts, read 468,725 times
Reputation: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by HC1980 View Post
Is THAT it? The Red Sox, Giants, and Cardinals fans would care to differ as all of these teams have won the series twice in the last decade, Yankees once.. the Giants twice in the last 3 years alone. Not much to envy about the Yankees organization at this point unless you include the fans that pay for A-Rods ridiculous, undeserved salary which they "boo" him everytime he goes to bat. You are w/o a doubt the WORST NYC booster I've EVER seen on here.. the irony of it is you're not even from there, it's truly embarrassing.
NYC booster? Simply because I pointed out that the Yankees historically outperform every other team in the league?
Is that consider boosterism? Lol
Again. Sour grapes. Each and every Yankee hater simply envies the team that has been able to deliver this kind of performance decade after decade.
The Cubs on the hand: the lastWS title over 100 years ago. How can you be so pathetic and still survive? Only in Chicago, only in Chicago. Lol
 
Old 08-12-2013, 11:19 PM
 
2,601 posts, read 3,906,846 times
Reputation: 2275
Quote:
Originally Posted by flotard View Post
NYC booster? Simply because I pointed out that the Yankees historically outperform every other team in the league?
Is that consider boosterism? Lol
Again. Sour grapes. Each and every Yankee hater simply envies the team that has been able to deliver this kind of performance decade after decade.
The Cubs on the hand: the lastWS title over 100 years ago. How can you be so pathetic and still survive? Only in Chicago, only in Chicago. Lol
See Above
 
Old 08-12-2013, 11:23 PM
 
Location: A box below 59th
655 posts, read 522,890 times
Reputation: 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by flotard View Post
There is no better or worse, it's all subjective, but when you make claims that don't make any sense don't be surprised people will try to correct you. And of course this is an Internet board because in real life Chicago cant be competition for New York City
Goodness me. You really don't like Chicago.

It has a great many problems, not least of which are financial, and the wages on offer there are alarmingly low, but it sounds like you want it to sink into the prairie.

It has the Art Institute, the CSO, UofC, varied, affordable neighbourhoods, lovingly tended public spaces, 24-hour transit, beautiful architecture and housing stock that actually meets demand. (Shock, but it's possible to remove those artificial limitations.) It has a grand history of scientific, industrial and artistic achievement. Its street-life, cafe culture and late-night commerce are connected and top-notch. The low-rent galleries and craft stores in its neighbourhoods are generally interesting. You can live there without a car. These things make it competitive with NYC, and frankly elevate it above all other American cities except, objectively, NYC and LA.

It also has stretches of unfortunately located big-box stores, lower overall density, surface parking lots in its core, lower wages, patchily concentrated nightlife and urban amenities, and more than a few 'towers-in-the-park' in lieu of uniformly dense, mixed-use streetscape. It has too many sports bars with TVs in them. It's having severe financial trouble, its government smells of corruption and its school system is suffering.

So, in competition, it loses. But it's damned well competitive. I much prefer NYC, but so many people on this site dogpile on Chicago, I feel we need a little perspective.
 
Old 08-13-2013, 01:32 AM
 
Location: Broward County Florida
555 posts, read 468,725 times
Reputation: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by compactspace View Post
Goodness me. You really don't like Chicago.

It has a great many problems, not least of which are financial, and the wages on offer there are alarmingly low, but it sounds like you want it to sink into the prairie.

It has the Art Institute, the CSO, UofC, varied, affordable neighbourhoods, lovingly tended public spaces, 24-hour transit, beautiful architecture and housing stock that actually meets demand. (Shock, but it's possible to remove those artificial limitations.) It has a grand history of scientific, industrial and artistic achievement. Its street-life, cafe culture and late-night commerce are connected and top-notch. The low-rent galleries and craft stores in its neighbourhoods are generally interesting. You can live there without a car. These things make it competitive with NYC, and frankly elevate it above all other American cities except, objectively, NYC and LA.

It also has stretches of unfortunately located big-box stores, lower overall density, surface parking lots in its core, lower wages, patchily concentrated nightlife and urban amenities, and more than a few 'towers-in-the-park' in lieu of uniformly dense, mixed-use streetscape. It has too many sports bars with TVs in them. It's having severe financial trouble, its government smells of corruption and its school system is suffering.

So, in competition, it loses. But it's damned well competitive. I much prefer NYC, but so many people on this site dogpile on Chicago, I feel we need a little perspective.
Take a breath. All I said is that Chicago is no competition for New York. Isn't that a common knowledge?
Is that a bad thing to point that out or maybe it's some kind of taboo and we are not supposed to mentione this here? Does mentioning that fact equals dog piling on Chicago ? How would you feel if someone from Milwaukee would starts saying that its pretty much a cheaper, cleaner version of Chicago?

Take a breath
 
Old 08-13-2013, 07:28 AM
 
517 posts, read 538,272 times
Reputation: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by compactspace View Post
These things make it competitive with NYC, and frankly elevate it above all other American cities except, objectively, NYC and LA.
This is completely wrong, and the general delusional theme of this thread, and the 1000 other delusional threads started by Chicagoans.

Chicago isn't competitive with NYC, or LA. This can easily be seen in the Census-based population stats, in the immigration stats, and in the housing cost stats. It just isn't that similar with these cities. Stop it already.

And objectively, one could very easily argue that SF, Boston, DC are more desirable than Chicago, since they're far more expensive and growing, and have more of an international feel. Miami, Seattle, Philly and a few others would also be considered equally desirable or more desirable than Chicago, depending on who you're asking.

You may personally think Chicago is the greatest place anywhere, which is totally fine. I think Chicago is a great town too, and it's certainly in my Top 5 of American cities. But don't be surprised when many Americans think Chicago is more like Dallas or Detroit than like NYC or LA. Objectively, those comparing it to Dallas are much closer to the mark on 90% of metrics than if they compared it to NYC.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top