blue hills (Kansas City, Overland: real estate, mortgage, house)

[aragx6]

Originally Posted by MOKAN

You think so? Doesn't the census distinguish between Hispanic (of any race) and what we more typically think of as white? I'm not sure Hispanics have any reason for marking "white - non-hispanic". Am I missing something?

Hispanics are certainly breaking up areas of extreme black segregation though all over the city. I can clearly see this in KCK, where I'm from (in person, but also reflected in the stats). They're moving north at full speed into once strictly black territory. It won't be long and they'll have opened storefronts along Quindaro, if they haven't already. They chose old working-class white areas first, and sort of gentrified them driving up prices because of demand, and now are going into black neighborhoods for steals on houses. From experience on the ground, I know that it's common for a group of Hispanics to pool resources and buy cheap houses with cash.

Hmm, I thought it was two separate questions: Choose a race and then note if you are Hispanic of any race -- because one is an ethnicity and the other a race.

So they would choose white (and be counted as such) and then state that they are Hispanic.

Wikipedia agrees with me, but of course they could be wrong too: White Hispanic and Latino Americans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[MOKAN]

Originally Posted by aragx6

Hmm, I thought it was two separate questions: Choose a race and then note if you are Hispanic of any race -- because one is an ethnicity and the other a race.

So they would choose white (and be counted as such) and then state that they are Hispanic.

Wikipedia agrees with me, but of course they could be wrong too: White Hispanic and Latino Americans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm not sure I was ever saying anything you're saying is wrong. I know "Hispanic" is not a race, but an ethnicity. I also know that even within the Hispanic community there's a lot of confusion about this. It seems that more claim 'white' than anything else, even if 'American Indian' would be more accurate. And that is partly because of the confusion and when asked to choose a "race", they're at a loss. It's also partly that in many Latin American countries 'white' is seen as superior because the whites (Spanish) are generally the wealthier and ruling class. When you have your feet on the ground in Mexico, the contrast between whites and natives can be stark.

But as for the original topic, whether Blue Hills and other neighborhoods east of Troost are seeing an influx of white non-Hispanics, I think I see what your point is - the increase in whites are not necessarily non-Hispanic whites. That kind of sucks, but like I said at least Hispanics are breaking up the segregation of longtime solidly black areas.

[TabulaRasa]

Why would anyone describe a neighborhood as "gaining in one race and hemorrhaging another," and call that "gaining in diversity?"

[MOKAN]

Originally Posted by TabulaRasa

Why would anyone describe a neighborhood as "gaining in one race and hemorrhaging another," and call that "gaining in diversity?"

If you were familiar with these neighborhoods east of Troost, you would know they are roughly 90% black. So anybody else moving in to break up that sort of segregation is a good thing. Hispanics tend to fix up houses and enliven neighborhoods. Whites could end up sort of expanding Brookside eastward if they were to take advantage of the cheap housing en masse. At any rate, I see breaking of the Troost divide as a great thing because as it is now one side is 90% white with $158K houses while a block away on the other side of Troost is 90% black with $58K houses. That's just an example. It's a stark divide.

[aragx6]

Originally Posted by MOKAN

I'm not sure I was ever saying anything you're saying is wrong. I know "Hispanic" is not a race, but an ethnicity. I also know that even within the Hispanic community there's a lot of confusion about this. It seems that more claim 'white' than anything else, even if 'American Indian' would be more accurate. And that is partly because of the confusion and when asked to choose a "race", they're at a loss. It's also partly that in many Latin American countries 'white' is seen as superior because the whites (Spanish) are generally the wealthier and ruling class. When you have your feet on the ground in Mexico, the contrast between whites and natives can be stark.

But as for the original topic, whether Blue Hills and other neighborhoods east of Troost are seeing an influx of white non-Hispanics, I think I see what your point is - the increase in whites are not necessarily non-Hispanic whites. That kind of sucks, but like I said at least Hispanics are breaking up the segregation of longtime solidly black areas.

That's exactly my point. You found it odd to see so many whites moving into those census tracts and based on what I know about the census as well as what I've seen in those areas, I think it's mostly Hispanics who are moving in, which didn't seem to be exactly what you'd imagine when you hear whites are moving in en masse.

I was trying to anser this quote of yours:

You think so? Doesn't the census distinguish between Hispanic (of any race) and what we more typically think of as white? I'm not sure Hispanics have any reason for marking "white - non-hispanic". Am I missing something?

What you were missing is that they're two separate questions on the census -- race and ethnicity, except that they only ask about ethnicity as it relates to Hispanics, no other -- and that's because of this exact confusion point. So they don't mark "white non-hispanic" because that's not a choice.

Really, the only Hispanics who aren't checking white are those who are black, like folks from the Dominican (as well as some from Puerto Rico, Colombia, the Bahamas and Cuba).

And it's definitely true that there is a distinction in places like Mexico based on how much Spanish you have in you -- the Telemundo stars are significantly lighter in complexion than most of the lower classes. It's the same in many Spanish-influenced countries. My future mother in law says she can tell what kind of family someone came from in the Phillipines just by looking at them -- and it's why she doesn't like it when the SO gets super tan and dark in the summer. To her, dark means poor.

But most Hispanics, for census-counting purposes, fit better into the white category than any other and that's what most choose.

[MOKAN]

So your future mother in law is racist in her own way?

[aragx6]

Originally Posted by MOKAN

So your future mother in law is racist in her own way?

Very much so. And not just about low-class Filipinos -- blacks, whites, Chinese. She's not a big fan of anyone who's not like her. It's mostly about ignorance coupled with some really bad experiences.

[TabulaRasa]

Originally Posted by MOKAN

If you were familiar with these neighborhoods east of Troost, you would know they are roughly 90% black.

I am more than familiar. My first job when I moved to Kansas City was at Swope Health Services Central, at Blue Parkway and Cleveland. Most of the families I served were East KC familiies.

Having lived in the southern half of Waldo, equidistant between Leawood and KC's Marlborough Heights neighborhood, I'm also aware of the stark divide between high and low income, geographically speaking.

My comment still stands, though, that when you note that all the black people are leaving and their spots are being taken by Hispanic families, you're still not necessarily talking about diversity.

[MOKAN]

Originally Posted by TabulaRasa

I am more than familiar. My first job when I moved to Kansas City was at Swope Health Services Central, at Blue Parkway and Cleveland. Most of the families I served were East KC familiies.

Having lived in the southern half of Waldo, equidistant between Leawood and KC's Marlborough Heights neighborhood, I'm also aware of the stark divide between high and low income, geographically speaking.

My comment still stands, though, that when you note that all the black people are leaving and their spots are being taken by Hispanic families, you're still not necessarily talking about diversity.

I don't think all black people are leaving, but many are escaping (perhaps to Raytown and other more suburban areas). I don't see how the area becoming more of a mix of Hispanics from vast majority black isn't diversifying of the neighborhoods affected, which is what I meant. I don't think non-Hispanic white people are as afraid of Hispanics as they are of black people, so the trend of increasing Hispanics may lead to an increase in non-Hispanic whites as well, if that isn't happening already, being that the location is pretty good. I personally know 6 white people who have houses and live east of Troost east of Brookside/Waldo. One just recently moved there.

[westender]

Originally Posted by GraniteStater

That isn't the case. Some of the neighborhoods south of 103 and Antioch were built in the 1960s. The real JOCO sprawl took off by the late 1980s south of College Blvd so I do generally agree with that.

Perhaps I shouldn't have spoken so categorically. Of course there were settlements south of 103d and west of Antioch, but I do remember that intersection as the 'outer limits' of what was commonly considered the metro area in 1980. I would even argue that 95th and Metcalf was the outer limits in 1970. The Dickinson cinema and Metcalf South were "out there." Olathe, Lenexa, and a smattering of southern Overland Park were of course already there by 1980, and I-35 drove a lot of that growth. 119th Street was in parts a dirt road as recently as 1985.

The significant in-fill happened later, starting in the 1980s. Johnson County was strictly a bedroom community when I grew up near the Plaza in the 1970s. Now, it's a wholly functioning polity of its own -- its own jobs, its own economy, its own society.