U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-28-2015, 08:48 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 20 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,006 posts, read 102,606,536 times
Reputation: 33064

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
The situation varied by area but there were cases where the neighborhood flipped dramatically, 90% to 10% is an extreme case, but a neighborhood like Brownsville, Brooklyn flipped very quickly in 20 years. Others did not. If what you were saying is true "race had little effect on population change in cities, it was mainly whites gradually leaving the cities as they had children" then you'd see a gradual decrease in white population throughout much of the city with minorities moving to replace them [though not to the same population as before]. That's not what occurred. Instead, some neighborhood transitioned from mostly white to mostly black while others had a much smaller change. An alternate explanation would be the white population declined in neighborhoods of worse housing quality. But if you look at a map of of black population in say, 1960, the best predictor of the neighborhoods that would have a large % decline in white population are the ones adjacent to existing mostly black neighborhoods. The simplest way to explain that pattern is "white flight". Ditto with the unusual pattern in Southeast Queens and Nassau of middle-class mostly black neighborhoods.

White Flight in Brooklyn During The Mid Part of The 20th Century
It may be the simplest, but it might not be right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-28-2015, 08:57 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,989 posts, read 41,979,923 times
Reputation: 14805
Quote:
Originally Posted by FallsAngel View Post
It may be the simplest, but it might not be right.
Perhaps, but a more convoluted explanation deserves more skeptism. Perhaps there's a good alternate explanation, I can't think of one though.

I suppose you could argue blacks were choosing to move near other black neighborhoods. But it would also require that whites also avoid that neighborhood at some point in order to get such nearly no white people.

Last edited by nei; 01-28-2015 at 09:09 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2015, 09:37 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,989 posts, read 41,979,923 times
Reputation: 14805
Quote:
Originally Posted by memph View Post
I made a couple maps of Detroit and Houston showing census tracts where the share of visible minorities increased by 20 percentage points or more, ex from 40% VM to 60%+ VM.
SW Ontario Urbanist: Rapid changes in racial/ethnic composition in Houston and Detroit
I found a bunch in New York City, mainly in the outer parts or just past the border. Many more that an increased in minority % by 15% percentage points. A large section of both southern Brooklyn and northeastern Queens saw over a 20%+ decrease in white non-hispanic population. Note that that's not the same as the percentage share decreasing by 20%, though most of these census tracts didn't have large total % population changes. In both regions, there was high Asian population growth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2015, 01:38 PM
 
2,388 posts, read 2,955,715 times
Reputation: 1953
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I found a bunch in New York City, mainly in the outer parts or just past the border. Many more that an increased in minority % by 15% percentage points. A large section of both southern Brooklyn and northeastern Queens saw over a 20%+ decrease in white non-hispanic population. Note that that's not the same as the percentage share decreasing by 20%, though most of these census tracts didn't have large total % population changes. In both regions, there was high Asian population growth.
I think I've pointed this out before but % change isn't evidence of white flight. All it shows you is that other groups are either growing faster or in the case of places like Detroit shrinking less fast.

I get that if you use % it's easier to make the case you're trying to make but that doesn't make it accurate. Use numbers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2015, 02:02 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,989 posts, read 41,979,923 times
Reputation: 14805
Quote:
Originally Posted by drive carephilly View Post
I think I've pointed this out before but % change isn't evidence of white flight. All it shows you is that other groups are either growing faster or in the case of places like Detroit shrinking less fast.

I get that if you use % it's easier to make the case you're trying to make but that doesn't make it accurate. Use numbers.
I know what the difference btetween the two are. But in the part of the post you're quoted after southern Brooklyn or northeastern Queens, the % numbers show a decline in the non-hispanic white population, it was 20% or more less than in 2000. As for whether it's evindence of white flight, I did not say it was (or wasn't).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2015, 02:18 PM
 
2,388 posts, read 2,955,715 times
Reputation: 1953
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
The situation varied by area but there were cases where the neighborhood flipped dramatically, 90% to 10% is an extreme case, but a neighborhood like Brownsville, Brooklyn flipped very quickly in 20 years. Others did not. If what you were saying is true "race had little effect on population change in cities, it was mainly whites gradually leaving the cities as they had children" then you'd see a gradual decrease in white population throughout much of the city with minorities moving to replace them [though not to the same population as before]. That's not what occurred. Instead, some neighborhood transitioned from mostly white to mostly black while others had a much smaller change. An alternate explanation would be the white population declined in neighborhoods of worse housing quality. But if you look at a map of of black population in say, 1960, the best predictor of the neighborhoods that would have a large % decline in white population are the ones adjacent to existing mostly black neighborhoods. The simplest way to explain that pattern is "white flight". Ditto with the unusual pattern in Southeast Queens and Nassau of middle-class mostly black neighborhoods.

White Flight in Brooklyn During The Mid Part of The 20th Century
I think what you guys are doing is basically combing every census tract looking for the exceptions that prove the rule.

But I never said there weren't exceptions, what I've said repeatedly is that it's way more hype than reality and that white people were leaving those places anyway and if they hadn't been then it wouldn't have been possible for black people to start moving in in the first place . . . and for neighborhoods that white people were truly fleeing then yes that at a certain point in population loss there's going to be a tipping point, and that half of the numerical decline in the first place is from the simple shrinking of household size.

There's also the real issue of crime that middle class (and at the time working class) families can and will move to avoid. Homicides in Detroit went from 172 in 1960 to 495 in 1970. Show me that these neighborhoods that were flipping in a decade weren't also showing triple digit increases in crime and then I'd be happy to say "yup, those were some racist white people."

But again, this kind of action that puts the "fleeing" in white flight is the exception that proves the rule.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2015, 02:23 PM
 
2,388 posts, read 2,955,715 times
Reputation: 1953
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I know what the difference btetween the two are. But in the part of the post you're quoted after southern Brooklyn or northeastern Queens, the % numbers show a decline in the non-hispanic white population, it was 20% or more less than in 2000. As for whether it's evindence of white flight, I did not say it was (or wasn't).
20% of what?

20% of 100? 20% of 10,000?

That's why I'm suggesting that's important to use numbers. It's like using weasel words - it makes it look like you're trying to hide something.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2015, 02:28 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,989 posts, read 41,979,923 times
Reputation: 14805
Quote:
Originally Posted by drive carephilly View Post
I think what you guys are doing is basically combing every census tract looking for the exceptions that prove the rule.

But I never said there weren't exceptions, what I've said repeatedly is that it's way more hype than reality and that white people were leaving those places anyway and if they hadn't been then it wouldn't have been possible for black people to start moving in in the first place . . . and for neighborhoods that white people were truly fleeing then yes that at a certain point in population loss there's going to be a tipping point, and that half of the numerical decline in the first place is from the simple shrinking of household size.
And I never said that shrinking household sizes wasn't a big factor nor that many whites weren't leaving on their own. I didn't think that was being argued. But the fact is, in most northern cities there are large rather segregated mostly black sections and I said, the white population leaving wasn't uniform: it was heaviest and steepest in areas next to existing black neighborhoods. The tipping was a reality, not the only or biggest factor but an important.

Quote:
There's also the real issue of crime that middle class (and at the time working class) families can and will move to avoid. Homicides in Detroit went from 172 in 1960 to 495 in 1970. Show me that these neighborhoods that were flipping in a decade weren't also showing triple digit increases in crime and then I'd be happy to say "yup, those were some racist white people."
I'm sure crime was a large factor involved, the same Brooklyn examples I described had severly worsening crime issues. But it's still "white flight" either way, whatever the reason for leaving is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2015, 03:37 PM
 
2,388 posts, read 2,955,715 times
Reputation: 1953
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
And I never said that shrinking household sizes wasn't a big factor nor that many whites weren't leaving on their own. I didn't think that was being argued. But the fact is, in most northern cities there are large rather segregated mostly black sections and I said, the white population leaving wasn't uniform: it was heaviest and steepest in areas next to existing black neighborhoods. The tipping was a reality, not the only or biggest factor but an important.

I'm sure crime was a large factor involved, the same Brooklyn examples I described had severly worsening crime issues. But it's still "white flight" either way, whatever the reason for leaving is.
I think the white flight narrative of the last 30+ years leans very heavily on the idea that white people didn't want to live next to black people . . . because they were black. That might be the case in some instances but from my research and observations it wasn't widespread.

I'm going to call out this bolded part. I don't think this happened consistently enough to mean very much. A high percentage of renters is a much better predictor of how far and fast the white population of a neighborhood would fall. But then you can say much the same about the black population in neighborhoods with a lot of renters - indeed a lot of those black renters, even starting in the 60s started to leave those neighborhoods and started buying houses in nearby neighborhoods. Off the top of my head this was dramatic in the Graduate Hospital neighborhood in Philly where a lot of people were buying houses in Point Breeze (which already had a high number of black families) but then 10 years later a lot of those people were leaving Point Breeze to buy newer, larger houses in West Philly.

Anyway, in 1970 the poverty rate for white families in Philadelphia was 6.6% and for black families it was 21.4%. In Brooklyn and Queens it was 8.1% vs. 19.8%. The two cities have a much different relationship when it comes to housing tenure but I think it's reasonable to say that B'klyn and especially Queens are more like Philadelphia than Manhattan or the Bronx. Suffice to say that the white population was in a much better position to be buying a house in the suburbs when compared to the black population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2015, 09:29 PM
 
Location: Thunder Bay, ON
2,610 posts, read 3,762,451 times
Reputation: 1616
Quote:
Originally Posted by drive carephilly View Post
I think I've pointed this out before but % change isn't evidence of white flight. All it shows you is that other groups are either growing faster or in the case of places like Detroit shrinking less fast.

I get that if you use % it's easier to make the case you're trying to make but that doesn't make it accurate. Use numbers.
It the areas I showed on the maps the overall population wasn't really shrinking. It was basically just a case of the black population was exploding as the white population was collapsing.

Here's the areas I showed as experiencing intense white flight in the 60s in NW Detroit.

1960 Population
White: 87,976 (97.6%)
Black: 1,978 (2.2%)
Other: 181 (0.2%)
Total: 90,135

1970 Population
White: 18,453 (19.5%)
Black: 75,523 (80.0%)
Other: 481 (0.5%)
Total: 94,457
Avg Family Income: $75,326
Avg Income of 14+ Population: $29,267

So even the overall population grew a little.

1970 incomes are adjusted to 2013 for inflation. So the 1970 residents weren't exactly the "hood crowd", in fact they might have even been a bit wealthier than the 1960 white residents. $8000 in 1960 was worth about the same as $10000 in 1970. In 1960, 43% of families had incomes above $8000, compared to 60% of families with incomes over $10000 in 1970.

Additional stats

1960
Over 25 with 4 years of high school education: 47.1%
Over 25 with some college education: 20.3%
Over 25 with 4+ years of college education: 9.7%
Unemployment Rate: 4.9%
Home owners: 73.5%
Vacant housing: 3.1%


1970
Over 25 with 4 years of high school education: 51.7%
Over 25 with some college education: 19.0%
Over 25 with 4+ years of college education: 9.1%
Unemployment rate: 6.3%
Families below poverty level: 7.7%
Home owners: 74.2%
Vacant housing: 4.0%

The 1970 stats are about the same as the averages for the Tri-County area. To me, it seems like a case of middle class whites fleeing middle class blacks...

There may have been cases of middle class whites fleeing lower class blacks, but it seems like in Detroit they were fleeing middle class blacks too, and very rapidly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top