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.
Why are white people required for an area to be non segregated? And even then you're wrong, there are many parts of the city with both nonwhites and whites.
Aside from that, he's talking about a section of the city that's 14% white.....in a city that's around 33% white. Even if you oversimplify it by saying that The Bronx is homogeneous (which it clearly isn't), 14% vs. 33% isn't that large of a difference. And 14% white.....that's roughly 1 out of 7 people, not exactly negligible.
Now if he had mentioned that there are neighborhoods in the South Bronx that are like 1-2% white, he might have a point, because that does indicate segregation to a degree.
Aside from that, he's talking about a section of the city that's 14% white.....in a city that's around 33% white. Even if you oversimplify it by saying that The Bronx is homogeneous (which it clearly isn't), 14% vs. 33% isn't that large of a difference. And 14% white.....that's roughly 1 out of 7 people, not exactly negligible.
Now if he had mentioned that there are neighborhoods in the South Bronx that are like 1-2% white, he might have a point, because that does indicate segregation to a degree.
14 v 33% is a large difference. It's what we would call statistically significant.
Furthermore, we don't know exactly how much of that 14% is Hispanic who identify as non-Hispanic white.
I lived in Bedford Park for a year and while the census indicated it was around 13% white, there is no way in hell it was really 13% white European. I'm not saying this was a bad thing just that IMO, it was more like 5% white European at best.
True. A lot of poor people have been displaced to bad parts of Westchester, NJ, or in extreme cases Western Pennsylvania. A 15 minute commute is if you're rich or if you live in a Manhattan or Wester Brooklyn/Western Queens NYCHA or Mitchell Lama.
Western PA? That would be quite a commute back into the tri-state area!
Look at all of the development going on in Northern Manhattan. It's not for the working class/poor.
If by "Northern Manhattan" you're talking about Washington Heights, Inwood or Morningside Heights...yeah no duh. Spanish Harlem? Still mostly poor/working class and mostly Spanish. Not that many hipster or other white transplants compared to say, Bushwick.
If by "Northern Manhattan" you're talking about Washington Heights, Inwood or Morningside Heights...yeah no duh. Spanish Harlem? Still mostly poor/working class and mostly Spanish. Not that many hipster or other white transplants compared to say, Bushwick.
There are many more than you'd imagine. Not Hipsters (do those even exist anymore in NYC?) but yuppies.
Anecdote and take it for what it's worth, but a few of my brothers colleagues (whoa are in their mid to late 20's and make around 80K) who work for a very large chemical company based in Westchester just moved to Spanish Harlem.
You haven't been north of 96th Street on the UES/Spanish Harlem recently have you?
While not yet "over run" there are plenty of hipsters/transplants straight and gay up there. Stand on the corner of East 96th and Second Avenue and watch the foot traffic going north.
Given the number of housing projects/NYC subsidized housing up there, no the area will never totally gentrify, but things are changing.
You can thank the SAS in part for much of this as property values along Second Avenue up to 125th Street are going up. From 96th to 125th there is plenty of good older housing stock, new buildings and more being planned.
*Letting out a huge sigh* Yes I have been, recently. Yes, I already acknowledged there are some that live up there (between E. 97th and 100 usually, haha). Not as many as I'd have thought by now though.
2nd Ave subway might change things a little bit, but it's not like there isn't already a train line that goes above E 96th St into Spanish Harlem so IDK how difference another one is going to make. UES between York and 2nd Ave will certainly become less affordable because of it if I had to wager.
14 v 33% is a large difference. It's what we would call statistically significant.
Furthermore, we don't know exactly how much of that 14% is Hispanic who identify as non-Hispanic white.
I lived in Bedford Park for a year and while the census indicated it was around 13% white, there is no way in hell it was really 13% white European. I'm not saying this was a bad thing just that IMO, it was more like 5% white European at best.
You can easily find out what percentage non-Hispanic white it is.
Aside from that, he's talking about a section of the city that's 14% white.....in a city that's around 33% white. Even if you oversimplify it by saying that The Bronx is homogeneous (which it clearly isn't), 14% vs. 33% isn't that large of a difference. And 14% white.....that's roughly 1 out of 7 people, not exactly negligible.
Now if he had mentioned that there are neighborhoods in the South Bronx that are like 1-2% white, he might have a point, because that does indicate segregation to a degree.
As prices have risen? A huge chunk of them live in NYCHA to begin with in Williamsburg. Price makes no difference when it comes to them. When you see them buying brownstones in Bed-Stuy and living in them, let me know.
You don't know do you?
As we have been discussing in other threads, not all Orthodox Jews are dirt poor. Who do think is funding land purchases (ok, grabs) in Orange County? That so called village of Kiryas Joel is rapidly becoming a small city. Someone has to pay for all that land acquisition, water rights, taxes, etc... And no, it isn't all from government funded housing.
Just as with the Amish many Orthodox Jews can and where possible purchase land to ensure housing and other purposes. Did you know the Talmud actually "demands" Jews to own real estate? Not in exact words but it is there; and it explains why so many of them are involved in real estate.
*Letting out a huge sigh* Yes I have been, recently. Yes, I already acknowledged there are some that live up there (between E. 97th and 100 usually, haha). Not as many as I'd have thought by now though.
2nd Ave subway might change things a little bit, but it's not like there isn't already a train line that goes above E 96th St into Spanish Harlem so IDK how difference another one is going to make. UES between York and 2nd Ave will certainly become less affordable because of it if I had to wager.
Walking from Lexington to Third and further east above 96th once was (and can still be) rather dicey. You also didn't have the housing pressures being seen now that have rendered that area desirable. Can recall late as the 1980's or even much of the 1990's you really didn't want to go far above 86th Street and certainly not 96th Street. From Lexington going west was "ok" but there still was crime (Carnegie Hill had and still has paid private security force), so you had to watch yourself.
Just as with below 96th Second Avenue above that street is and will change. Part of the problem is yes, certain elements are in place and cannot be gotten rid of easily or at all. You also have a good number of RS tenants and others in various subsidized housing schemes living in apartments that cannot be moved.
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.
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.
