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.
"Millennial" may be vague, but so are maps if we get too worried about precision; there's always room from disagreement when we try to nail down a definition.
I agree there's always a problem with defining areas and groups for comparison, but since the article is focused on the desirability of dense, walkable areas it should try to limit itself to people who actually have a choice in where they live. Not a group that has over 1/3rd still living at home. In terms of geographical boundaries they should define the boundaries by density, walkability, and public transit. They made absolutely no attempt to do this, and went with a completely random choice for geographical boundaries:
Quote:
Overall, from 2010 to 2013, the population of 20- to 29-year-olds in core counties (which in most cases are identical to the core city of the metropolitan area)
Counties are far from standard across the country, and the second statement in bold is a flat out lie. There are large sprawling counties (like Cook IL, King WA, Wayne MI) that include loads of suburbs. There are small counties that don't even cover the full urbanized area - Cambridge would be left out for Boston and NYC would leave out Queens and the Bronx. San Antonio is actually in 3 counties, and completely surrounds some unincorporated areas. You cannot use county boundaries to make the comparisons they're trying to make.
By using counties as geographical boundaries they've produced nothing more than a random grab bag of statistics.
I can't imagine too many of them can afford to live in SF, Chicago, NYC, etc. At least not the type of neighborhoods that privileged white kids (which is really who we're talking about) would want to live in. I mean, technically I'm still in that bracket (barely, 29). San Francisco would be a stretch on my income. To live in a popular neighborhood would certainly require roommates.
No such thing as White Privilege unless legislated or actively enforced by the community. While White Privilege existed during Jim Crow, What we have mostly is Majority privilege. Those that are the biggest population get the most recognition. This contrasts with White Privilege in Latin America where the White minority is overrepresented in the media. In the US, while White is seen more, minorities are actualy overrepresented in the media.
Too many people confuse burdens with privileges. A privilege is an advantage given, that is beyond what one would have if segregationary tactics weren't involved. A burden is the opposite. If a White person would get a bank loan at 10% in an all White neighborhood, and then some Blacks and Asians moved in and the Asian gets it at 10% as well, while the Black person gets it at 12%, that is a Black Burden, not a White privilege.
I constantly hear how Whites have a privilege because they can go into a store and not be followed by suspicious sales reps, or because they can hail down taxis. That is not a privilege. That is a standard. If there were twenty people out there of non Black and Non-White ancestry, and all were being ignored by Cabbies, and then one White person hailed a cab and all Cabbies stopped for him, then it would be White privilege.
The vast majority of White Americans do not have privileges. In fact, the stigma created because they supposedly have all these privileges has been exploited by the elite for centuries. First with petty privileges, during slavery, reconstruction and Jim Crow, that led to a huge divide and conquer success, and now by both race card mongers and White liberal apologist mongers alike. Race card mongers use petty perceptions of superiority to foment separatism to a disenfranchised population, and White apologists, seek to bolster their standing among Non-Whites by pointing the finger and claiming all types of supposed privileges for even the poorest Whites.
It has created a vicious circle. Who wants to grow up being vilified by the media as innately privileged, and evil, through no wrongdoing of their own? Especially when they are poor and struggling with their own burdens? White Nationalism, at its heart, is a group of people who has lost a lot of its ethnic heritage through massive multigenerational inter and intra-national migration.
Most have no idea of their roots, except for a vague European. And to celebrate that identity: Whiteness/Europeanism, is immediately branded as racism. Yet every other group is allowed to celebrate some sort of ethnic pride. Ethnic pride is not something evil if it isn't compounded with ethnocentrism, xenophobia, prejudices and scapegoatism.
But if it is not allowed to exist in a healthy state, it will exist in an unhealthy one.
You can't dam a river without an outlet.
Every White kid who is vilified growing up is a potential racist. And it has nothing to do with what his parents taught him and everything to do with a self defense mechanism from being accused every day of doing the evils that people who just happened to look like them perpetrated over a half century ago.
This is no different than White Supremacists here who blame all Blacks or all Hispanics for the misdeeds of miscreants within their group.
White Apologists are as much to blame for this vicious circle of hate, as are White Supremacists, Black Supremacists, Nation of Aztlan, etc.
Gentrification is a growing issue and classism is a big issue in our society as well and these are issues that are often avoided that have to and must be addressed! That is a big focal point and crux of the issue, and present and future generations need to be aware of this or else they and the world and we are all doomed or will be doomed.
No such thing as White Privilege unless legislated or actively enforced by the community. While White Privilege existed during Jim Crow, What we have mostly is Majority privilege. Those that are the biggest population get the most recognition. This contrasts with White Privilege in Latin America where the White minority is overrepresented in the media. In the US, while White is seen more, minorities are actualy overrepresented in the media.
Okay.
But that has nothing to do with privileged white kids. It's a complete tangent that had nothing to do with my post. Thanks for the rant though, I guess.
No such thing as White Privilege unless legislated or actively enforced by the community. While White Privilege existed during Jim Crow, What we have mostly is Majority privilege. Those that are the biggest population get the most recognition. This contrasts with White Privilege in Latin America where the White minority is overrepresented in the media. In the US, while White is seen more, minorities are actualy overrepresented in the media.
Too many people confuse burdens with privileges. A privilege is an advantage given, that is beyond what one would have if segregationary tactics weren't involved. A burden is the opposite. If a White person would get a bank loan at 10% in an all White neighborhood, and then some Blacks and Asians moved in and the Asian gets it at 10% as well, while the Black person gets it at 12%, that is a Black Burden, not a White privilege.
I constantly hear how Whites have a privilege because they can go into a store and not be followed by suspicious sales reps, or because they can hail down taxis. That is not a privilege. That is a standard. If there were twenty people out there of non Black and Non-White ancestry, and all were being ignored by Cabbies, and then one White person hailed a cab and all Cabbies stopped for him, then it would be White privilege.
The vast majority of White Americans do not have privileges. In fact, the stigma created because they supposedly have all these privileges has been exploited by the elite for centuries. First with petty privileges, during slavery, reconstruction and Jim Crow, that led to a huge divide and conquer success, and now by both race card mongers and White liberal apologist mongers alike. Race card mongers use petty perceptions of superiority to foment separatism to a disenfranchised population, and White apologists, seek to bolster their standing among Non-Whites by pointing the finger and claiming all types of supposed privileges for even the poorest Whites.
It has created a vicious circle. Who wants to grow up being vilified by the media as innately privileged, and evil, through no wrongdoing of their own? Especially when they are poor and struggling with their own burdens? White Nationalism, at its heart, is a group of people who has lost a lot of its ethnic heritage through massive multigenerational inter and intra-national migration.
Most have no idea of their roots, except for a vague European. And to celebrate that identity: Whiteness/Europeanism, is immediately branded as racism. Yet every other group is allowed to celebrate some sort of ethnic pride. Ethnic pride is not something evil if it isn't compounded with ethnocentrism, xenophobia, prejudices and scapegoatism.
But if it is not allowed to exist in a healthy state, it will exist in an unhealthy one.
You can't dam a river without an outlet.
Every White kid who is vilified growing up is a potential racist. And it has nothing to do with what his parents taught him and everything to do with a self defense mechanism from being accused every day of doing the evils that people who just happened to look like them perpetrated over a half century ago.
This is no different than White Supremacists here who blame all Blacks or all Hispanics for the misdeeds of miscreants within their group.
White Apologists are as much to blame for this vicious circle of hate, as are White Supremacists, Black Supremacists, Nation of Aztlan, etc.
This thread is about where millennials are living--moving to and from--and why and if what people like Joel Kotkin are saying about that generation is true.
I was born in 1986. I'm about to turn 28 in a couple of days. Therefore, I'm smack dab in the middle of the "Millennial" category.
For me personally as an individual who grew up in sidewalkless, car-dependent suburbia I'm overwhelmingly stoked to now be living in the heart of a thriving major U.S. city. I still drive because my job as a delivery courier manager requires me to have access to a personal vehicle for if and when I have to take delivery runs myself. With that being said I rarely use a vehicle in my downtime. I don't go into work today until 5 PM, for example, so I'm about to hop into the shower and then walk down to a museum to spend a few hours perusing some new exhibits. I never could have done this in suburbia. My partner just turned 28 and grew up in a rural area. He also prefers city life. His 12-year-old Suzuki literally just bit the dust this week, and instead of springing for a new car he's walking back-and-forth about 40 minutes each way to work. Otherwise I'll drive us to the laundromat and grocery store together once each week, and that's about all he had used his car for anyways, as he drove it under 5,000 miles per year.
I'm hoping to open my own business at some point over the next year. If and when that comes to fruition I'm selling my car, which eats up nearly $1,000/month of my income (car payment, gasoline, depreciation, maintenance, insurance, etc.) and renting us a cheap apartment in a neighborhood where I'd be able to walk to my office, and where my partner could walk to a light rail station that would drop him off two blocks from his office. Then we could both truly enjoy a sans car existence, which I personally feel is much more liberating than battling the increasing gridlock here.
We are that typical media darling "Millennial" couple, I suppose. Late-20s, educated, white, gay, and possessing a love of all things walkable and urbane. For us Pittsburgh has been amazing because we only pay $700/month ($350/month each) to live in the heart of all the action in a safe area. If and when we're financially settled in our mid-to-late-30s I'd love to adopt at least one child and bring them into a home of love and warmth. When that time comes I envision us going the city public school route (perhaps via magnet/charter schools) to help reinforce this city's core and make it more attractive for other middle-class parents to STAY here once their children reach school age.
I think in MOST major U.S. cities the public school systems are viewed as being inferior to suburban school districts because the former educate a lot of socioeconomically disadvantaged black children from broken homes while the latter educate mostly the privileged white children of educated people. Cities need to evolve as being welcoming and attractive to ALL demographics---not just poor blacks, the gays, white DINKs, empty-nesters, Hispanic entrepreneurs, Asian students, etc. Middle-class and upper-middle-class PARENTS of all races/ages still seem to avoid Pittsburgh (and I'm sure MOST other major U.S. cities) like the plague due to the perceived notion that the public schools are abysmal when, in fact, a child with a strong parental support system is just as likely to thrive in most city schools as most suburban schools.
The current strong momentum cities like Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, and, yes, even Pittsburgh have these days in terms of economic growth and population growth is going to wane if they don't convince these Millennials to stay and plant down ROOTS once they mate, have children, and have those children reach school-age (or at least middle school age, maybe, as most elementary schools in cities are viewed as being acceptable/tolerable). Instead of exclusively focusing on protected bike lanes, food trucks, BRT, etc. the way Pittsburgh has been doing, this city in particular ALSO needs to develop a strategy to rebrand its public school system. It's much easier to retain existing residents through all life stages than to CONSTANTLY be trying to woo new young people to replace the 30-somethings as they age and want to hoof it to the 'burbs to better their child(ren)'s perceived educational opportunities.
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,282,012 times
Reputation: 1483
I think the reason some Millennial's may not show as much a influx remaining in Big Cities and the Millennial growth showing a lower increase or decline is? .....Once they start families and children get past pre-school age? Because MOST BIG CITY schools have low grades, and not seen as good as suburban and smaller cities public schools? The Millennial's begin to leave for the suburbs. If in a smaller city like some on Forbes list with better public schools? The Millennial's will be more likely to remain when their children reach elementary school age. So these cities are then keeping more older Millennial's Big cities lose. While still getting the newer ones?
That may be the case for a Big city like Chicago? Lots of gentrification and Millennial's but seen as poor public schools. So it's losing its older Millennial's to the suburbs seeking better schools when the time comes.
I was born in 1986. I'm about to turn 28 in a couple of days. Therefore, I'm smack dab in the middle of the "Millennial" category.
For me personally as an individual who grew up in sidewalkless, car-dependent suburbia I'm overwhelmingly stoked to now be living in the heart of a thriving major U.S. city. I still drive because my job as a delivery courier manager requires me to have access to a personal vehicle for if and when I have to take delivery runs myself. With that being said I rarely use a vehicle in my downtime. I don't go into work today until 5 PM, for example, so I'm about to hop into the shower and then walk down to a museum to spend a few hours perusing some new exhibits. I never could have done this in suburbia. My partner just turned 28 and grew up in a rural area. He also prefers city life. His 12-year-old Suzuki literally just bit the dust this week, and instead of springing for a new car he's walking back-and-forth about 40 minutes each way to work. Otherwise I'll drive us to the laundromat and grocery store together once each week, and that's about all he had used his car for anyways, as he drove it under 5,000 miles per year.
I'm hoping to open my own business at some point over the next year. If and when that comes to fruition I'm selling my car, which eats up nearly $1,000/month of my income (car payment, gasoline, depreciation, maintenance, insurance, etc.) and renting us a cheap apartment in a neighborhood where I'd be able to walk to my office, and where my partner could walk to a light rail station that would drop him off two blocks from his office. Then we could both truly enjoy a sans car existence, which I personally feel is much more liberating than battling the increasing gridlock here.
We are that typical media darling "Millennial" couple, I suppose. Late-20s, educated, white, gay, and possessing a love of all things walkable and urbane. For us Pittsburgh has been amazing because we only pay $700/month ($350/month each) to live in the heart of all the action in a safe area. If and when we're financially settled in our mid-to-late-30s I'd love to adopt at least one child and bring them into a home of love and warmth. When that time comes I envision us going the city public school route (perhaps via magnet/charter schools) to help reinforce this city's core and make it more attractive for other middle-class parents to STAY here once their children reach school age.
I think in MOST major U.S. cities the public school systems are viewed as being inferior to suburban school districts because the former educate a lot of socioeconomically disadvantaged black children from broken homes while the latter educate mostly the privileged white children of educated people. Cities need to evolve as being welcoming and attractive to ALL demographics---not just poor blacks, the gays, white DINKs, empty-nesters, Hispanic entrepreneurs, Asian students, etc. Middle-class and upper-middle-class PARENTS of all races/ages still seem to avoid Pittsburgh (and I'm sure MOST other major U.S. cities) like the plague due to the perceived notion that the public schools are abysmal when, in fact, a child with a strong parental support system is just as likely to thrive in most city schools as most suburban schools.
The current strong momentum cities like Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, and, yes, even Pittsburgh have these days in terms of economic growth and population growth is going to wane if they don't convince these Millennials to stay and plant down ROOTS once they mate, have children, and have those children reach school-age (or at least middle school age, maybe, as most elementary schools in cities are viewed as being acceptable/tolerable). Instead of exclusively focusing on protected bike lanes, food trucks, BRT, etc. the way Pittsburgh has been doing, this city in particular ALSO needs to develop a strategy to rebrand its public school system. It's much easier to retain existing residents through all life stages than to CONSTANTLY be trying to woo new young people to replace the 30-somethings as they age and want to hoof it to the 'burbs to better their child(ren)'s perceived educational opportunities.
You haven't been involved in some of our school discussions. Most people on this board will tell you straight up they have no interest in schools. They'll argue tooth and nail that schools have nothing to do with urban planning. Until urban planners think that schools are as important a part of the "urban fabric" as museums, bike paths, chi-chi coffee shops and the like, most parents will eschew the urban public schools.
As far as the second bold, yes, parental involvement is key, but few want their kids, especially high schoolers, going to schools where there are major discipline problems such that the teachers are doing as much if not more disciplining than teaching; where there are so few kids interested in taking college preparatory classes (note I did NOT say AP courses) that the courses can't be offered, etc. So I think the underlined part of your post is incorrect.
Also, suburban schools have single parent families, families with problems and in some suburbs, low-income students as well.
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.
