Why is Boston so famous for its racism?! (Lowell, Cambridge: private school tuition, DMV)

[redplum33]

Originally Posted by timberline742

Not sure about portrayals of racism, but a couple of shows that didn't do any favors were Cheers, where not only is it white as white, but then you add the Frasier factor, that is, stuck up academic pompousness.

Diane also.

But I don't know why you'd expect anything to be different at a higher end Back Bay sports bar in the 1980s.

[Bridge781]

Has nothing to do with Boston but I’ve always loved the golden girls. I’d watch it with my grandmother on Saturday nights. She would sometimes turn it off if something rude was said and i often had no idea what. Lots of sex talk but lots of making fun of other races/ethnicities:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffp...b24bf31617/amp

They often called Blanche a S l u t as well. I rarely hear that word used anymore. I remember people said it all the time when I was in high school and college in the 90s.

[John Rose]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

Mission Hill, I would credit that to the silver line as well as general increased minority populations. To a lesser extent I would say there is an increase in young black professional nationwide and that includes Boston. These are the type of people who frequent downtowns and enjoy the urban experience.


Despite all the gentrification Boston's minority population continues to grow slowly, the opposite of Seattle and D.C. But similar to NYC.Large parts of that is that most black/Hispanic neighborhood a in Boston aren't very T accessible except from Ruggles to Green street. So I think the so laces away from the T were heavily minority and have only gotten more so in the past 15 years. With gentrification happening in nearly every major city it's making white people who may have no social ties to the area second guess if Bostons worth the price tag.

Blacks and latinos generally have fewer job options so if they get offered in a Boston-it's likely they HAVE to come. And speaking for Bostons current black pppulation, the economic opportununity here is still attracting people from the DR and Cape Verde RAPIDLY. They, as well as Nigerians, Haitians, Ethiopians, Vietnamese, usually already have family in the area.

"Despite all the gentrification Boston's minority population continues to grow slowly"

Gentrification typically increases minority populations? Really?

"The opposite of Seattle and D.C."

The black population of Seattle has actually gone down since 1990, while the Asian and Hispanic populations have only grown marginally and Seattle is still 2/3 white non-Hispanic, which isn't all that smaller than what it was in 1990, when it was 73%.

The non-Hispanic white population of Washington, D.C. has gone up since 1990. The minority population is smaller, but somewhat more diverse, with less blacks and marginally more Latinos and Asians.

Boston has actually seen the minority population grow and the white population shrink MORE than D.C. (where the white population actually GREW) and Seattle since 1990.

[Boston Shudra]

Originally Posted by John Rose

Boston has actually seen the minority population grow and the white population shrink MORE than D.C. (where the white population actually GREW) and Seattle since 1990.

DC’s suburbs have diversified rapidly, while Boston’s generally haven’t.

[Bridge781]

Originally Posted by Boston Shudra

DC’s suburbs have diversified rapidly, while Boston’s generally haven’t.

Why do you Think that is ?

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by Bridge781

Why do you Think that is ?

Zoning differences due to government structure and the resulting less NIMBYism. It's been discussed here a lot.

[id77]

Originally Posted by John Rose

"Despite all the gentrification Boston's minority population continues to grow slowly"

Gentrification typically increases minority populations? Really?

Around here, I'd believe that yes. The thing is in inner Boston, there are only scraps and shreds of the middle class left as residents due to gentrification. All that's left is luxury condos and rowhomes that cost $1,000+ per square foot and subsidized/low-income apartment complexes packed with the poor, who often also tend to be minorities.

Therefore, you have two populations available to produce children: low income, who are likely to be both minority and producing children, and upper-middle and upper class couples and families who are only occasionally popping out a child between career and travel.

It would be no surprise to me that the low income are out-producing the wealthy. That's already a well established fact in most of the world, so it makes sense it would apply here too.

[JacksonPanther]

Originally Posted by id77

Around here, I'd believe that yes. The thing is in inner Boston, there are only scraps and shreds of the middle class left as residents due to gentrification. All that's left is luxury condos and rowhomes that cost $1,000+ per square foot and subsidized/low-income apartment complexes packed with the poor, who often also tend to be minorities.

Therefore, you have two populations available to produce children: low income, who are likely to be both minority and producing children, and upper-middle and upper class couples and families who are only occasionally popping out a child between career and travel.

It would be no surprise to me that the low income are out-producing the wealthy. That's already a well established fact in most of the world, so it makes sense it would apply here too.

I'm not sure that the low income folks out-reproduce the high earners. But what is true is that high earners leave Boston once they reproduce. They either don't want to send their kids to public schools, don't want to pay private school tuition, or just want to fulfill their fantasy of a white picket fence lifestyle in the suburbs.

What maybe happening is that for the high earning class, Boston becomes a haven for young singles and newlyweds, and empty nesters. Earners with kids leave the city.

The poor may be having the same number of kids, but they don't leave Boston. There's no calling for a poor family to have kids and then up and move to suburb.

What's interesting is that the poor absolutely should leave, to get access to the better schools and try to break the cycle. But good luck finding anyone to accept their housing voucher...

[id77]

Originally Posted by JacksonPanther

I'm not sure that the low income folks out-reproduce the high earners. But what is true is that high earners leave Boston once they reproduce. They either don't want to send their kids to public schools, don't want to pay private school tuition, or just want to fulfill their fantasy of a white picket fence lifestyle in the suburbs.

What maybe happening is that for the high earning class, Boston becomes a haven for young singles and newlyweds, and empty nesters. Earners with kids leave the city.

The poor may be having the same number of kids, but they don't leave Boston. There's no calling for a poor family to have kids and then up and move to suburb.

What's interesting is that the poor absolutely should leave, to get access to the better schools and try to break the cycle. But good luck finding anyone to accept their housing voucher...

One quick sample on income vs. birth rate:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ome-in-the-us/

It's been studied around the world since rate of replacement is becoming a concern. The only areas where rate of replacement is a net gain is in the impoverished parts of the globe. Most first world nations are are going to shrink in the coming generations without an influx of immigrants.

EDIT: Last I saw there was also quite the line for getting vouchers. People most definitely want to live in Boston; it's just unaffordable for most.

[timberline742]

Long thread, I haven't read even a bit of it...


but I wonder if that famous (I believe it won a major award) of the white dude about to spear a black kid with an American flag/flagpoll from the busing crisis era was an impactful one... I'm guessing it got run in media across the country in time.