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.
All I have to say is that, while the Northeast constantly points its finger at the South as being racist, look how many of these CT, NY and NJ burbs are almost completely white.
The north has always been segregated. Up there, they like to tell you that they are open minded and accepting of all people, but that just isn't the case.
I used to live around Chicago in it's suburbs. No color in Naperville or on the North Shore.
The south is much more integrated than the north. You can clearly see that in the demographics of suburbs down here.
Point of this thread is that the OP is suggesting that suburbs will be going down as white population declines...
This is the type of extrapolation I was trying to achieve with these threads.
I made multiple threads because you can only put so many characters in a thread.
I never realized the New York City metro area was so racially segregated. There are so many suburbs that have > 95% or < 1%. Cities like Atlanta and Dallas don't look like that.
Ditto Denver (doesn't look like that in the burbs).
Don't be fooled by New York's burbs. If you notice, there's alot of them. That's because many of them are pretty small towns. Alot of those diverse suburbs in New York are the largest in population as well. Most of the suburbs in California and the South I noticed where pretty large. That's why I put the white demographic for the entire metro's as well. The asterisk means that town has a per capita income of more than $30,000. This is the line that would put them in the category of upper middle class and up.
To actually add something of value to this thread, I see no future for far out suburbs, or exurbs, especially around sun belt cities. The homes in exurbs are poorly built production homes, all of which are practically falling down 5 years after they are built. .
I'd never live in a city or any town with a population over 35,000 and now that I'm retired and commuting isn't a factor, I don't even have to consider it. I rent an apartment. I like sprawl and open spaces. I like to drive long distances. And the best thing about my state, in my opinion, is the state parks and outdoor opportunities. Why do city people think cities are for everyone? All I see are too many people in too little space, too much noise, too much traffic, too many big ugly buildings, a patch of green space you call a park, a lot of garbage and smells, a city tax on top of your state and federal tax and you usually pay for the privilege of entering and leaving it.
I live in the burbs a GHETTOburb in Southern California called Alberhill Ranch in Lake Elsinore. We are diverse on the weekends we have Marriachi music blaring from many of the houses and fruit trucks on the streets in this ghetto development. I call it a ghetto because we seem to be deprived of fresh clean air......
All I have to say is that, while the Northeast constantly points its finger at the South as being racist, look how many of these CT, NY and NJ burbs are almost completely white.
Well, it's complicated, as many of these suburbs are probably ethnically segregated due to people in the region having more of a connection to their ancestry of origin too.
Also, you see a wide range too. So, you'll have some that are very diverse and some that a overwhelmingly majority White or Black, with maybe a couple being majority Hispanic/Latino.
Then, you have to think about the ethnic/racial history in terms of demographics too. Of course the South will look to be more integrated due to Blacks having a longer history with a higher volume in comparison to other regions in the US.
Lastly, segregation doesn't necessarily mean racist. I think people have to differentiate between the two, because things like economics, history and industry, among other things come into play. For example, in my area, there is a blue collar suburb by the name of Solvay, which was named after Belgian chemist that came up with a process for soda ash. So, this community was built around this industry and used a lot of Italian immigrants, among others, to do the work for the Solvay Process Company. To this day, that community has a reputation for being a highly Italian community and you can tell by the surnames of many of the people there. So, in the NE, you have other thngs to consider, unlike other regions in the US except for maybe the Midwest.
Don't be fooled by New York's burbs. If you notice, there's alot of them. That's because many of them are pretty small towns. Alot of those diverse suburbs in New York are the largest in population as well. Most of the suburbs in California and the South I noticed where pretty large. That's why I put the white demographic for the entire metro's as well. The asterisk means that town has a per capita income of more than $30,000. This is the line that would put them in the category of upper middle class and up.
Cheers..
True, a lot of them I've never heard of an are most likely small.
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.
