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.
So what's DCs excuse? They moved to suburbia? Well voila, that's what happened here too. Except our Blacks moved to places like Bakersfield, Victorville, Stockton and Sacramento.
Singling out the Bay Area or Los Angeles implies that Blacks everywhere else are doing far better, and we know that's not true, in fact the opposite is true when it comes to income and educational attainment of Blacks.
Quote:
so folks are looking else where.
This is a national trend that mirrors the White Flight to suburbia which began about 50 years ago.
SF & LA aren't the best places for Black folks to live. Collectively, Blacks are peripheral minorities almost completely invisible outside of the ghetto areas in SF & LA. Because of this, Blacks have been leaving LA and SF by the thousands over the past 20 or so years.
So what's DCs excuse? They moved to suburbia? Well voila, that's what happened here too. Except our Blacks moved to places like Bakersfield, Victorville, Stockton and Sacramento.
Singling out the Bay Area or Los Angeles implies that Blacks everywhere else are doing far better, and we know that's not true, in fact the opposite is true when it comes to income and educational attainment of Blacks.
This is a national trend that mirrors the White Flight to suburbia which began about 50 years ago.
Yes in other cities blacks leave to the suburbs. In the bay and la how ever blacks are fleeing the metro all together, beyond the suburbs. Bakersfield, stockton, victorville, and Sacramento are not suburbs of the Bay or LA.
What is happening in the bay is not similar to white flight of the 1950's, rather it is more comparable to the biblical exodus.
The bay are did not have a significant black population before 1940 and it likely wont by 2040, where as cities like Chicago, Atlanta, and DC have had large black populations for quite some time, and will continue to do so.
Well the data in this thread clearly shows that Blacks are having a hard time all over the country, even in Washington DC.
In D.C., blacks are no longer the majority - USATODAY.com
So what's DCs excuse? They moved to suburbia? Well voila, that's what happened here too. Except our Blacks moved to places like Bakersfield, Victorville, Stockton and Sacramento.
Singling out the Bay Area or Los Angeles implies that Blacks everywhere else are doing far better, and we know that's not true, in fact the opposite is true when it comes to income and educational attainment of Blacks.
The entire Bay Area wasn't on the rising Black unemployment list, it was just San Francisco. In San Francisco, it is no stretch to say the majority of Blacks living there are poor. DC is not like this. Black yuppies are some of the people gentrifying Southeast DC!
Ultimately, DC is a top ten city for Black people to live because of the great economy for educated people and because of the federal government which is one of the biggest employers for Black America. DC consistently ranks as the number one best city for Blacks to live every year:
I couldn't imagine SF being on any of these lists. SF is one of the worst places for Black people to live. Although Blacks are almost statistically insignificant in SF, Blacks are disproportionately represented as the face of the impoverished, victimized and downtrodden in SF. SF only boasts one of the highest per capita murder rates (if not the highest) for Blacks in the country (even higher than Oakland, Baltimore and New Orleans in many years), the only places with high concentrations of Blacks in SF also happen to be some of the most run-down unlivable public housing complexes in America and the only Black majority neighborhood left in SF in Hunter's Point is sitting on the most toxic waste dump on the West Coast. Historically, Black San Francisco, as a whole, has been so impoverished, unlivable and crime ridden that it has been completely swept under the rug by the national media to save the much Whiter and wealthier northern San Francisco's face as a shiny pretty tourist attraction.
DC is still 50% Black. But that 50% is definitely not all poor people. SF is barely 5% Black and you bet most of that is poor people who live in and around the projects. DC has a much greater of a balance between rich, upper middle class and poor Blacks. SF does not. Most of the few upper middle class Black San Franciscans are not natives of The City, let alone the Bay Area. In DC, there are countless bars, restaurants and establishments that cater almost exclusively to highly educated, working upper middle class Black folks. SF does not have this in 2011. Maybe the Fillmore and Hunter's Point had this once upon a time, but not today.
Last edited by goldenchild08; 10-12-2011 at 09:56 PM..
SF & LA aren't the best places for Black folks to live. Collectively, Blacks are peripheral minorities almost completely invisible outside of the ghetto areas in SF & LA.
This might be true in SF (you backed it up pretty well in a later post) but there are more areas in Los Angeles that are middle class and even upper middle class and are majority black, such as Ladera Heights, View Park and Leimert Park. Most of the really bad ghettos in Los Angeles these days are mostly Central American and/or Mexican...
It would be interesting to see if this study is for metro areas or just the individual cities. A lot of blacks have moved to San Bernardino, Riverside and the rest of the Inland Empire, areas which were devastated by the housing bubble burst, and really bring down the areas rating in all things economic no matter the race.
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.