Distribution of racial and ethnic groups (Valley Stream: live, restaurants, dangerous)

[PortRichmonder]

Originally Posted by jordandubreil

no when i ask that question i was referring to central/southern staten. i always knew northern Staten was black and Latino i use to always be out in mariners harbor. But on the map it shows brown coloring(decreasing) on pretty much the majority of central/southern Staten.

Are blacks , Latinos, and Asians starting to move down their?

You know, I don't venture too far South on Staten Island often but I don't see how the minority population can't be increasing down there. I know there's Asians situated in a few areas near the middle of the island and I've heard that Mexicans are moving into such Mid-Island neighborhoods as New Dorp and South Shore neighborhoods like Tottenville. I've also always been surprised at how many Puerto Ricans that I meet that don't live on the North side. I remember reading about a year ago that roughly 50% of poor minorities that get priced out of Brooklyn move to Staten Island. I guess they can't ALL live on the North Shore.

This map is crazy though. I'm especially surprised at how high some of the Hispanic and Asian populations are. They break my neighborhood up into about 4 different tracts and while the one I live in is only 1% Asian, the other three are 5%, 8% and 10%, respectively. I can't tell you how few Asians I see on a daily basis, lol. That's sorta cool. And it also shows that a lot of areas on the island that people consider "black areas" are closer to being 45% black-35% Hispanic-20% other areas. Also kinda cool.

[SobroGuy]

1 nevets it may not make sense to you because you don't like the story it tells. I am not claiming anything other than the fact that these stats are INTERESTING and that the white percentage at 24% is highest of anywhere south of the Cross Bronx, which is true. Whether it is sparsely populated is interesting also...does this mean when they build all new housing that whites will continue to make up 24% or more of the population? Nobody knows.

And since you mentioned it, the 2nd highest percentage of whites south of the Cross Bronx is by the 2/5 Simpson ave station at 10% (tract 12701), which is much more densely populated and well within the heart of the community. The 3rd highest is 6% by the 2/5 Jackson Ave station (tract 73) which is even more densely populated than tract 12701, and in the heart of the community as well. What makes this more significant is that these populations were likely 0 before, so why such an increase? This is interesting and something worth noting as it was unheard of even 10 years ago.

IMO and based on this data, the borough overall is becoming more Hispanic, less Black, and less white, while some parts of the Southern Bronx are showing more whites moving in. The old school irish/italians ("whites") of the north and east Bronx are leaving, while some newbies are moving into the Southern Portion.

[1nevets]

Originally Posted by brooklynborndad

Way back around 1980 or so, my dad, may he rest in peace, said there was no future in Brooklyn for aging white ethnics like him - for irish, italians, non-orthodox jews, etc. He said it would all be "minorities" IE blacks and hispanics, or Orthodox jews. Except perhaps for the affluent brownstoners in Brooklyn heights and Park Slope.

He was right, and wrong. The maps show the dramatic expansion of the minority population into new areas as he expected - that virtually the entire area east of Flatbush avenue, including Canarsie and Starett City are mainly black, is dramatic, if you remember those days. And the expansion of the orthodox population displacing "old ethnic brooklyn" down the ocean parkway corridor from church avenue to Ave U, though it doesnt show up clearly in those maps, is another fulfillment. Note, he did not predict this to despair at it, but only to note the flux of the city.

But he was wrong, also. He didnt expect there to be major areas where 'minorities' declined - he did not expect the 'brownstoner' population to expand so dramatically . Nor did he expect that the orthodox jews would not only expand in southern brooklyn, but would enlarge their old areas in williamsburg and crown heights. And he did not foresee the dramatic upsurge in new immigrants, which is quite visible, as well.

True, perfect examples are Clinton Hill and Fort Greene. Those places were H*ll Holes when I was a kid. My area of Carroll Gardens and Boerum Hill were losing the old Italians and Irish families and saw an increase of Latinos when my family moved out in the late 70's. Today that area is still losing the old Italian guard but it is being nominated by white transplants rather than Hispanics. The only ethnics today are found on an "island" in the center of all this gentrification called Gowanus Housing. Which strangely enough is starting to look gentrified. I walked into a bodega on Bond st. that serves the projects and it was like walking into a deli in midtown. Marble entranceway, granite counters, very bright and clean and no blaring salsa or Arabic music.

[1nevets]

Originally Posted by SobroGuy

1 nevets it may not make sense to you because you don't like the story it tells. I am not claiming anything other than the fact that these stats are INTERESTING and that the white percentage at 24% is highest of anywhere south of the Cross Bronx, which is true. Whether it is sparsely populated is interesting also...does this mean when they build all new housing that whites will continue to make up 24% or more of the population? Nobody knows.

And since you mentioned it, the 2nd highest percentage of whites south of the Cross Bronx is by the 2/5 Simpson ave station at 10% (tract 12701), which is much more densely populated and well within the heart of the community. The 3rd highest is 6% by the 2/5 Jackson Ave station (tract 73) which is even more densely populated than tract 12701, and in the heart of the community as well. What makes this more significant is that these populations were likely 0 before, so why such an increase? This is interesting and something worth noting as it was unheard of even 10 years ago.

I see nothing wrong with the story it tells. When I was helping my gf find a new place in the Bronx one of my intentions was to find an area that was well integrated. Thanks to Bluedog I found those actual areas. I prefer integrated communities. What you are pointing out is a very small and not realistic view of any change to the South Bronx as a whole. What you're stating only tell a sentence to a whole book.

BTW, the "growing" white population on Simpson st. is not from young whites or families but from some other element of white people. From what I could see from using that station during the summer months, they were mostly former homeless and drug addicts. They probably live in the rehab NYCHA. Several times walking to the station I'd notice them hanging in the park or panhandling on Westchester ave. Also I belive Arabs are registered as white and there is an Arab population mixed in all along Westchester ave all the way to Parkchester. If there are traditional white families living in that area they are doing a great job of hiding themselves.

[SobroGuy]

I have not indicated that these are integrated communities, and had we been discussing that, I would have said that. And if you recall, I recommended integrated communities along with Bluedog in other threads.

I was merely pointing out the stats and interesting percentages, which these no doubt are. It is entirely possible that all the whites south of the Cross Bronx are drug addicts and panhandlers, however I am happy to say this is a pretty sad statement and untrue. 1nevets, if you like I can introduce you to lots of "traditional" white families (what does that even mean and since when did that standard ever apply to NYC?) who live very actively in the community, and who are not drug addicts living in homeless shelters.

If you would like to discuss integrated communities, we can do that. However, these stats still stand, despite your best efforts to put them in as bad a light as possible. One has to wonder why you would do that in the first place though. All drug addicts? Arabs? Really? Lol. I would be happy to show you what you are missing, but I suspect you would not believe anything anyway. PM me.

[1nevets]

Originally Posted by 2 Tha Five

My neighborhood in SE Queens is 99% black. I knew we were the vast majority but that's crazy to me.

What is the highest income, all black area? I would imagine it to be somehere in SE Queens.

It's strange people's POV. I think many parts of SE Queens are stable middle class neighborhoods but on the LI boards those area are seen as crime ridden slums that are too dangerous to even ride your car around. One poster even accused that area for being the reason for the decline of Valley Stream and the Green Acres Mall.

[bluedog2]

I think we have to take some of the details of each census tract with a little degree of skepticism.My census tract says there are no same sex couples out of the 3,000 plus households but there are at least 3 that I know of in my building alone and definitely more in the neighborhood.
Also,all of the info that went into these maps was done by a sampling survey before the 2010 census so the actual census figures may be different when they come out.Maybe more accurate,maybe not.

It's fun to see the broad picture of neighborhood trends but there is danger in accepting the minute details of each little area as fact.

[SobroGuy]

To be fair alot of same sex couples don't identify themselves as such, so that statistic can be greatly misleading. But using the same logic, those areas that have a high percentage of same sex couples probably have much higher also, for the reasons I just stated. Also, it is true that this is a sampling and the actual census data release in January will give a better / more accurate snapshot (in theory).

[1nevets]

Originally Posted by SobroGuy

I have not indicated that these are integrated communities, and had we been discussing that, I would have said that. And if you recall, I recommended integrated communities along with Bluedog in other threads.

I was merely pointing out the stats and interesting percentages, which these no doubt are. It is entirely possible that all the whites south of the Cross Bronx are drug addicts and panhandlers, however I am happy to say this is a pretty sad statement and untrue. 1nevets, if you like I can introduce you to lots of "traditional" white families (what does that even mean and since when did that standard ever apply to NYC?) who live very actively in the community, and who are not drug addicts living in homeless shelters.

If you would like to discuss integrated communities, we can do that. However, these stats still stand, despite your best efforts to put them in as bad a light as possible. One has to wonder why you would do that in the first place though. All drug addicts? Arabs? Really? Lol. I would be happy to show you what you are missing, but I suspect you would not believe anything anyway. PM me.

Why are making this personal? I'm merely debating your argument. There really is no need to interject what you think I'm feeling. That's not fair and against the rules of this board so please stop it! My comments were merely from observances of walking in the area during the day.

Traditional whites are those of European, non-Hispanic background.

Today the term whites include a much larger group than that. Even some Indian groups consider themselves as whites as well as many Latinos. This reminds me of your argument that Dominicans are mixed race. Well if that is true so are African Americans. Most AA have some European ancestry. Every famous black person from Rashida Jones to Wesley Snipes has mentioned some white ancestry. Remember these are debates and shouldn't be an opportunity to assume the poster personal feelings.

I'm not putting a bad light on the subject. I'm displaying the whole picture. 230 residents are not significant in a surrounding area of over 20,000 people. That's the real picture.

[1nevets]

Originally Posted by bluedog2

I think we have to take some of the details of each census tract with a little degree of skepticism.My census tract says there are no same sex couples out of the 3,000 plus households but there are at least 3 that I know of in my building alone and definitely more in the neighborhood.
Also,all of the info that went into these maps was done by a sampling survey before the 2010 census so the actual census figures may be different when they come out.Maybe more accurate,maybe not.

It's fun to see the broad picture of neighborhood trends but there is danger in accepting the minute details of each little area as fact.

Thank you! When reading these numbers look at the larger picture not some minor fact that clearly is an anomaly to the broad area.

I think there are way more same sex couples than the government is aware of because many probably do not want it to be public knowledge. In my younger years I lived the Down Low lifestyle but if someone accused me of being gay I would have denied it to my deathbed. This was during the 3 years I was living with my former bf. Thankfully, I don't have those hangups today but I'm sure the DL lifestyle is still alive and well.