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.
Interesting thing about the Chicago map is that the greatest exodus came from Chicago's south and west sides, mainly from African-Americans fleeing the worst neighborhoods in the city to more stable suburban enclaves. Chicago's north side--where the majority of its denser neighborhoods are located--is mostly gray (no change) mixed in with pockets of blue (net influx).
i'd be curious to see some similar historical maps from the 60s, 70s and 80s. My guess is that the color red would be much more pervasive across many of these cities.
So, assuming that was the case, it's probably a fair inference that the urban neighborhoods in these cities that lost population turned out to be something less than the "American Dream" for their residents. Perhaps they didn't get the memo informing them that there had been a sea change in values and that they should stay put and take advantage of their comparatively picket fence-free neighborhoods.
In any event, is the sub-text of your pointing this out to suggest that, once these poorer neighborhoods empty out, life for the yuppies who move in will be even more fabulous? In general, that's what I've taken to be the preferred vision for several of the posters on this thread - that eventually DC and other American cities would come to resemble European cities, where the elites live in the central city and the poor are relegated to the "banlieues" on the periphery. I think there are sufficient differences between how Europeans and Americans live that it will take quite a while to see if that ever happens.
i'd be curious to see some similar historical maps from the 60s, 70s and 80s. My guess is that the color red would be much more pervasive across many of these cities.
But the map is tracking population movement between 2000 and 2010. If the theory is that we are moving away from suburbanization towards urbanization, then this evidence disproves it.
^ I was expecting so much more from someone with that user name.
Okay, so I grow tired of your persistence... Here. Evidence of a shift in values:
Quote:
"Preference for urban living among young adults — especially the well-educated — has increased sharply, data show:
•In 2000, young adults with a four-year degree were about 61% more likely to live in close-in urban neighborhoods than their less-educated counterparts. Now, they are about 94% more likely.
•In five metropolitan areas — Boston, Chicago, New York, San Francisco, Washington — about two-thirds of young adults who live in the city center have at least a four-year college degree. Less than a third of the nation's 25- to 34-year-olds do.
"This is no longer anecdotal," Coletta says. "Every metro area has good suburbs, but if you don't have a strong downtown and close-in neighborhoods, then you're not offering a choice that many of them are seeking. Offering that choice is a real competitive advantage for cities."
Just in today's USA Today, the front page says that 89% of the 200,418 population loss in Chicago's population is from African Americans. 89%! So, it's not fair to continue to debate overall demographics that include subsets with significant outmigration trends when we're talking about a different subset of the population.
You ask for "data" on the Ballston corridor, ignoring the fact that the very existence of the Ballston corridor reflects a massive shift in values from 30 years ago. If you truly think people have always wanted to live near transit and sidewalks, then you've never lived in suburbia. Mass transit, in a vast majority of the country, has long been seen as the repository of the poor. Walking instead of driving has been seen as even worse. The Northeast, obviously, bucks this trend to some degree due to its age and density.
The New Republic takes a look at Chicago as a case study for the influx of the middle-class back into downtown areas. “To describe what has happened virtually overnight in Logan Square [a neighborhood north of the Loop] as gentrification is to miss the point. Chicago, like much of America, is rearranging itself, and the result is an entire metropolitan area that looks considerably different from what it looked like when this decade started.”
“A new image of urban America is in the making,” said William H. Frey, a demographer at Brookings who co-wrote the report. “What used to be white flight to the suburbs is turning into ‘bright flight’ to cities that have become magnets for aspiring young adults who see access to knowledge-based jobs, public transportation and a new city ambiance as an attraction.”
“This will not be the future for all cities, but this pattern in front runners like Atlanta, Portland, Ore., Raleigh, N.C., and Austin, Texas, shows that the old urban stereotypes no longer apply,” he said.
In more than two-thirds of the nation's 51 largest cities, the young, college-educated population in the past decade grew twice as fast within 3 miles of the urban center as in the rest of the metropolitan area — up an average 26% compared with 13% in other parts.
Quote:
Even in Detroit, where the population shrank by 25% since 2000, downtown added 2,000 young and educated residents during that time, up 59% , according to analysis of Census data by Impresa Inc., an economic consulting firm.
"This is a real glimmer of hope," says Carol Coletta, head of CEOs for Cities, a non-profit consortium of city leaders that commissioned the research. "Clearly, the next generation of Americans is looking for different kinds of lifestyles — walkable, art, culture, entertainment."
In Cleveland, which lost 17% of its population, downtown added 1,300 college-educated people ages 25 to 34, up 49%.
Ah, the classic flight to the suburbs, but with a twist! Click through and look closely, and at the very center of the biggest cities – within a stone’s throw of downtown – you’ll see a tiny, resurgent dot of blue.
^ I was expecting so much more from someone with that user name.
Okay, so I grow tired of your persistence... Here. Evidence of a shift in values:
Just in today's USA Today, the front page says that 89% of the 200,418 population loss in Chicago's population is from African Americans. 89%! So, it's not fair to continue to debate overall demographics that include subsets with significant outmigration trends when we're talking about a different subset of the population.
You ask for "data" on the Ballston corridor, ignoring the fact that the very existence of the Ballston corridor reflects a massive shift in values from 30 years ago. If you truly think people have always wanted to live near transit and sidewalks, then you've never lived in suburbia. Mass transit, in a vast majority of the country, has long been seen as the repository of the poor. Walking instead of driving has been seen as even worse. The Northeast, obviously, bucks this trend to some degree due to its age and density.
Good to see that we can continue to talk past each other so effectively. You say there's a shift in values because the young adults living in central cities today are increasingly well-educated, and others point out that, overall, the downtown populations of most urban areas have declined and that DC, in particular, has yet to become the jurisdiction of choice for families with school-age children.
It all falls into the "you don't have to be wrong for me to be right" category, as far as I can tell.
To me, the most telling quote from the latest materials you cited was the following:
“The crucial issue is not the number of people living downtown, although that matters. The crucial issue is who they are, and the ways in which urban life is changing as a result.”
This ultimately ties back to the original post in this thread. The newcomers to DC tend to have a very high opinion of themselves and their significance to the city ("the crucial issue is who they are"), and others are poking holes at the idea that a large influx of lawyers, lobbyists and Government workers in their 20s into DC (or its next-door neighbors like Arlington) is either a cause for unmitigated celebration or evidence of a major shift in American cultural norms. Young people like to live in urban areas, and it's become more convenient, and a lower-risk proposition, for many of them to do so. It's not exactly edge-of-your-seat type stuff, but I'm as happy as the next guy that there's a new Frozen-Yo next door, not to mention Shake Shack in town, too.
Good to see that we can continue to talk past each other so effectively. You say there's a shift in values because the young adults living in central cities today are increasingly well-educated, and others point out that, overall, the downtown populations of most urban areas have declined and that DC, in particular, has yet to become the jurisdiction of choice for families with school-age children.
It all falls into the "you don't have to be wrong for me to be right" category, as far as I can tell.
To me, the most telling quote from the latest materials you cited was the following:
“The crucial issue is not the number of people living downtown, although that matters. The crucial issue is who they are, and the ways in which urban life is changing as a result.â€
This ultimately ties back to the original post in this thread. The newcomers to DC tend to have a very high opinion of themselves and their significance to the city ("the crucial issue is who they are"), and others are poking holes at the idea that a large influx of lawyers, lobbyists and Government workers in their 20s into DC (or its next-door neighbors like Arlington) is either a cause for unmitigated celebration or evidence of a major shift in American cultural norms. Young people like to live in urban areas, and it's become more convenient, and a lower-risk proposition, for many of them to do so. It's not exactly edge-of-your-seat type stuff, but I'm as happy as the next guy that there's a new Frozen-Yo next door, not to mention Shake Shack in town, too.
You asked for evidence that there has been a shift in values and not just the same old routine. I proved that.
You are holding it against me that I don't have a crystal ball to determine future behavior.
You are accusing me of celebrating a phenomenon that I'm simply conveying to you. Many black people are rising into the middle class and voluntarily moving out, so it's not all good versus evil.
I don't have anything more I can add. Either you get it or you don't at this point.
You asked for evidence that there has been a shift in values and not just the same old routine. I proved that.
No you didn't. You just posted links that say that city dwellers tend to be better educated and more affluent than non-city dwellers.
"Let's move to the city so we smoke can hookah right after work at Chi Cha Lounge with other recent law school grads" is not indicative of a change in values.
"Honey, let's sell the 3,500 sq house in Fairfax, give up the SUV and the yard, and move our 3 kids into a 1,600 sq foot townhouse in a walkable, urban setting" would be indicative of a shift in values.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly
Many black people are rising into the middle class and voluntarily moving out, so it's not all good versus evil.
There you go again making these statements with no factual basis. How do you know that the blacks leaving the District aren't just poorer blacks moving into communities in Suitland, Capitol Heights, Oxon Hill, Temple Hills, Landover, Hyattsville, Sligo, Lanham, Forestville, Clinton, District Heights and Forest Heights? What evidence do you have that they're "rising into the middle class" as opposed to making a parallel move from Southeast to Suitland?
You asked for evidence that there has been a shift in values and not just the same old routine. I proved that.
You are holding it against me that I don't have a crystal ball to determine future behavior.
You are accusing me of celebrating a phenomenon that I'm simply conveying to you. Many black people are rising into the middle class and voluntarily moving out, so it's not all good versus evil.
I don't have anything more I can add. Either you get it or you don't at this point.
You didn't prove there was a "shift in values," but it's obviously very important to you to believe that you're in the vanguard - of something.
So, yes, we do "get it," but simply think it's pretty thin beer for you to characterize in such lofty terms. Nothing more, nothing less.
You didn't prove there was a "shift in values," but it's obviously very important to you to believe that you're in the vanguard - of something.
So, yes, we do "get it," but simply think it's pretty thin beer for you to characterize in such lofty terms. Nothing more, nothing less.
Have a good weekend.
The data of shifted values speaks for itself, increasing from a 61% desire to a 94% desire in a mere 10 years..
The blue in-migration points on the map amid a sea of red out-migration speak for themselves. If it were only external factors forcing people into city centers, then there wouldn't be such an outflow in other demographics.
Perhaps your personal disdain for this particular subset is clouding your ability to see the data that clearly shows a shift in lifestyle preference, even with negative impact on others. That's fine. We're here for you.. Have a nice weekend as well.
The data of shifted values speaks for itself, increasing from a 61% desire to a 94% desire in a mere 10 years..
The blue in-migration points on the map amid a sea of red out-migration speak for themselves. If it were only external factors forcing people into city centers, then there wouldn't be such an outflow in other demographics.
Perhaps your personal disdain for this particular subset is clouding your ability to see the data that clearly shows a shift in lifestyle preference, even with negative impact on others. That's fine. We're here for you.. Have a nice weekend as well.
Hey, you're the one begging everyone to focus on the "tiny, resurgent dot of blue" (migration to downtown areas) and to overlook the sea of red (population loss to the suburbs) over the past decade.
Whatever else DC lacks in terms of urban panache, I'm sure there are some good eyedoctors there to help with the case of myopia.
I will. Hopefully, not only the uber-hip neighborhoods in DC will get some sunshine.
Hey, you're the one begging everyone to focus on the "tiny, resurgent dot of blue" (migration to downtown areas) and to overlook the sea of red (population loss to the suburbs) over the past decade.
Whatever else DC lacks in terms of urban panache, I'm sure there are some good eyedoctors there to help with the case of myopia.
I will. Hopefully, not only the uber-hip neighborhoods in DC will get some sunshine.
FINALLY you agree with me and the facts about this part of the population! Thank you. Whatever personal issues you have beyond that about whether it's good or bad or neither is for you to work out with yourself.
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.
. Have a nice weekend as well.
