Where does Hispanic culture have a bigger impact: Bay Area vs. Chicagoland? (living, largest)

[Lifeshadower]

This seems like a weird question at first, but it makes more sense when you read it more closely.

Both of these areas are typically left out of the discourse concerning movements of Latinos in America. Most of the time, the study of Hispanics in the US are limited to areas near the Mexican border (meaning the zone from Southern California all the way to Texas), Southern Florida (especially around Miami), and New York (especially as a zone of Carribean populations).

The Bay Area (despite having large cities named San Francisco and San Jose) and Chicagoland have typically been left in the dust when it comes to discussions about areas with large Latino populations. However, both areas have large Latino populations with nearly the same amount of Latinos living in both (around ~20% of the population, or between 1.6-1.8 million people).

Chicago has the 2nd largest Mexican population (after LA) and 2nd largest Puerto Rican population (after NYC) within its city limits, while San Francisco itself has an increasing Central American population with Mexicans increasingly looking elsewhere in the Bay Area to live. However, once you leave the city limits, the rest of the Bay Area actually has more Latinos OUTSIDE of SF than within it (and the rest of California has way more Hispanics in terms of % of the population than the Bay Area) while the presence in the rest of Chicagoland is a bit more limited to the areas closest to the city (but places like Aurora and Waukegan still have a lot of Hispanics within them, despite being a bit distant from Chicago).

The question I pose is "which area does the Hispanic presence/culture make more of an impact?"

Here are the numbers to make this question pertinent:

Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI CSA - ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates: 2006-2008
Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI
19.2% Hispanic or Latino of which (or a population of 1,862,141);
15.1% are Mexican (or 77.8% of the Latino population)
1.8% are Puerto Rican (or 9.3% of the Latino population)
0.2% are Cuban (or 1.0% of the Latino population)
2.1% are Other Latinos (or 10.9% of the Latino population)

San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA - ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates: 2006-2008
San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA
22.4% are Hispanic or Latino of which (or a population of 1,626,935)
17.1% are Mexican (or 76.3% of the Latino population)
0.5% are Puerto Rican (or 2.2% of the Latino population)
0.1% are Cuban ( <1% of the Latino population)
4.6% are Other Latinos (20.5% of the Latino population)

[grapico]

chicago in the city, bay area in the area... (its california and the mexican/hispanic population is widely part of the culture)

[hsw]

Economic role is an important element of any cultural impact

Ethnic distribution of region's top 1% of earners or per capita taxes paid is often asymmetric vs population mass of any large group

[ckhthankgod]

Originally Posted by grapico

chicago in the city, bay area in the area... (its california and the mexican/hispanic population is widely part of the culture)

I agree with this......

I will say there are other areas that get left out in the Hispanic conversation. For instance, there are cities in Eastern PA with high Hispanic populations like Allentown, Reading, Lancaster and Bethlehem, among some others. Most are mainly Puerto Rican with some Dominicans in those cities too. Just looking at those 4 cities, the 2008 estimates for each of in terms of percentage of Hispanics in order are: 36.2%, 52.1%, 33.2% and 22.9%.

Some cities in the Eastern part of Massachusetts and in Rhode Island are known for having high percentages of Dominicans and Puerto Ricans too. Lawrence MA, a city known for having a huge Dominican community is estimated in 2008 at 70.8% Hispanic. Nearby Lowell is about 16% Hispanic. Chelsea, just outside of Boston is at 56.1%. Lynn, another blue collar Boston suburb is at 25.6%. In Rhode Island, you have Central Falls, which according to the 2000 census is 47.8% Hispanic. Nearby Pawtucket is 16.7%. There are other areas with high Hispanic populations that people forget about or overlook. So, there two areas are not alone in that regard.

[Lifeshadower]

Originally Posted by grapico

chicago in the city, bay area in the area... (its california and the mexican/hispanic population is widely part of the culture)

It's pretty interesting to note that out of all the regions in California, the Bay Area actually has the less amount of Hispanics by percentage (but is offset by the extremely LARGE Asian population) than most of populated California.

http://ccsre.stanford.edu/reports/report_9.pdf
(Page 9, using Census 2000 numbers)

Los Angeles County- 44.6% Latino
Central Valley (Kern to San Joaquin)- 39.8% Latino
Coastal Counties (Central Coast from Ventura to Santa Cruz)- 33.7% Latino
Southern Counties (OC, SBD, Riverside, SD, and Imperial)- 32.7% Latino
San Francisco Bay Area- 19.4% Latino
Sacramento Metro- 15.5% Latino
Northern Counties- 11.8% Latino
Eastern Mountain Counties- 9.1% Latino

Originally Posted by hsw

Economic role is an important element of any cultural impact

Ethnic distribution of region's top 1% of earners or per capita taxes paid is often asymmetric vs population mass of any large group

I agree that the composition of the high earners can also determine the type of cultural impact they have on a region. However, I wouldn't exactly weigh economic weight as the sole determinant of cultural impact, but its important.

Here are some income numbers (but not exactly top 1%) of Hispanics in each region because it shows the degree to which a certain community is amongst the elite of a certain region.

Affluent hispanic Communities
http://www.city-data.com/forum/11407968-post8.html

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Hispanic Households Earning $100,000+, 2007

Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City
Hispanic Households 57,475

San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland
Hispanic Households 85,448

Affluent hispanic Communities

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

More immigrant-related stats of the largest CSAs and MSAs

Hispanic Households Earning $200,000+ Annually, 2008
San Francisco 15,625
Chicago 7,186

[MIATL]

I think the reason why these cities are often "left out" is because of the larger minority in the city i.e Blacks in Chicago and Asians in the Bay Area. Though i think the Hispanics in Bay Area have a bigger impact than Chicago

[Alacran]

Chicago

[Lifeshadower]

Originally Posted by MIATL

I think the reason why these cities are often "left out" is because of the larger minority in the city i.e Blacks in Chicago and Asians in the Bay Area. Though i think the Hispanics in Bay Area have a bigger impact than Chicago

Historically, Hispanics have always been a larger "minority' group in the Bay Area than Asian Americans. Nowadays, they are more or less at parity.

Bay Area Census -- Bay Area -- 1860-1960 Census data
1950
5.0% White Persons of Spanish Surname
2.8% Other Races (2.7% Asian)

1970
8.2% Persons of Spanish Origin or Descent
4.4% Asian

1980
12.2% Spanish Origin
8.9% Asian and Pacific Islander

1990
14.9% Hispanic
15.3% Asian and Pacific Islander

2000
19.4% Hispanic
19.3% Asian and Pacific Islander

2008
22.4% Hispanic
21.6% Asian and Pacific Islander

In Chicagoland, Hispanics outnumbered Blacks at this last community survey (19.2% Hispanic, 17.4% Black), but Blacks have historically outnumbered Hispanics as the largest minority in the area. However, the same could be said about the NYC area (20.1% Hispanic, 15.7% Black), but they're typically included in both discourses about each group.

When it comes to the Bay Area, most people recognize the large Asian population but not the Hispanic one. It's just interesting to see.

[DANNYY]

I voted for San Francisco and this is why;

I come from Chicago and what I've seen there, there are a lot of people of Hispanic origin, but all of Chicago seems to be a smaller NYC to me, in terms that it's s melting pot. It's hard to tell which minority group holds the stronger influence in the city, because they all have sectors in the city with their own culture representing Chicago. Devon street would be an example of South Asian area in Chicago.

I picked Bay Area because;
1. It's proximity to larger Hispanic centered places, which means I feel that even if it's Hispanic influence is smaller than Chicago's that it still has a lot of key factors from nearby areas to influence a growth.
2. San Francisco's population is still on the rise, a lot faster than Chicago's, and that could mean an influx of new Hispanic residents calling the Bay Area home, as California's population growth continues, there are a lot of new Hispanic residents as well.
3. Since the 1950's, Mexican culture has started growing at a faster rate in San Francisco.

[mas23]

san francisco/bay area. Compared to califorina latinos are relatively new to chicago.