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.
I am not sure about the discrepancy between wikipedia and citydata on the household income for Itasca. When I bought in 2003, I looked up the 2000 household income, which was 83k. I will doublecheck this.
We should definitely look at 2010 census numbers when they come out.
I will look at census numbers to see which numbers are accurate. Whether or not Itasca has 102k or 79k household income, the fate of Itasca may have also been influenced by relatively stable school and decent appreciation on housing prices.
I consider Itasca middle class. I would consider Glen Ellyn for instance upper middle class. Hinsdale and Burr Ridge might be considered upper class, certainly in parts.
I am not sure about the discrepancy between wikipedia and citydata on the household income for Itasca. When I bought in 2003, I looked up the 2000 household income, which was 83k. I will doublecheck this.
We should definitely look at 2010 census numbers when they come out.
I will look at census numbers to see which numbers are accurate. Whether or not Itasca has 102k or 79k household income, the fate of Itasca may have also been influenced by relatively stable school and decent appreciation on housing prices.
I consider Itasca middle class. I would consider Glen Ellyn for instance upper middle class. Hinsdale and Burr Ridge might be considered upper class, certainly in parts.
All the suburbs that you mentioned are nice middle class and affluent suburbs. But again, the mistake you and many others make about middle class and even affluent neighborhoods with high populations of african americans is that they are in some kind of slow decline and eventually they will become low income, high crime areas, with property values completely in the tank. Even though these areas are highly desirable communities with very middle class and upscale homes, attract middle class and affluent african american residents, and have high property tax bases, that somehow these areas are flawed and will eventually just become ghettos with stately homes. Recent history tends to show this not to be the case. That view is very near sided and doesn't reflect the long term facts that seem to show otherwise. This debate has already been had decades ago. If you have ever been to the east and west coast to metropolitan areas of cities like new york, los angeles, washington DC you will find mature middle class, upper middle class, and affluent neighborhoods with large percentages of african americans that experienced the same kind of white flight issues decades before in the 1970's and 1980's. Long term home price appreciation was not affected in these neighborhoods after white flight subsided. Just a decade or so after white flight had subsided many of these neighborhoods now have home prices comparable to some of the most expensive neighborhoods that we have in chicagoland like hinsdale, oak brook, the north shore or what ever. For example the median home price in ladera heights, california is $1,119,553 according to city data. //www.city-data.com/city/Ladera...alifornia.html . Ladera height is over 70 percent african american and experienced major white flight in the 70's and 80's. In comparison according to city data the median home price in hinsdale in $872,993 . //www.city-data.com/city/Hinsdale-Illinois.html .
Last edited by allen2323; 09-11-2010 at 11:33 AM..
All the suburbs that you mentioned are nice middle class and affluent suburbs. But again, the mistake you and many others make about middle class and even affluent neighborhoods with high populations of african americans is that they are in some kind of slow decline and eventually they will become low income, high crime areas, with property values completely in the tank. Even though these areas are highly desirable communities with very middle class and upscale homes, attract middle class and affluent african american residents, and have high property tax bases, that somehow these areas are flawed and will eventually just become ghettos with stately homes. Recent history tends to show this not to be the case. That view is very near sided and doesn't reflect the long term facts that seem to show otherwise. This debate has already been had decades ago. If you have ever been to the east and west coast to metropolitan areas of cities like new york, los angeles, washington DC you will find mature middle class, upper middle class, and affluent neighborhoods with large percentages of african americans that experienced the same kind of white flight issues decades before in the 1970's and 1980's. Long term home price appreciation was not affected in these neighborhoods after white flight subsided. Just a decade or so after white flight had subsided many of these neighborhoods now have home prices comparable to some of the most expensive neighborhoods that we have in chicagoland like hinsdale, oak brook, the north shore or what ever. For example the median home price in ladera heights, california is $1,119,553 according to city data. //www.city-data.com/city/Ladera...alifornia.html . Ladera height is over 70 percent african american and experienced major white flight in the 70's and 80's. In comparison according to city data the median home price in hinsdale in $872,993 . //www.city-data.com/city/Hinsdale-Illinois.html .
Which Chicagoland suburb has gone from having a white majority population to a black population and not had crime increase and the quality of schools decline?
Also, values in California are always higher than midwest due to climate.
Chuckcity poses a valid question.
Look what has happened in other midwest cities of St Louis, Cleveland, Detroit.
I know Indianapolis well and the nicest parts are mostly on the north side (carmel, fishers, zionsville, noblesville) or along meridian and park tudor area are very nice but not the most diverse.
Also, values in California are always higher than midwest due to climate.
Chuckcity poses a valid question.
Look what has happened in other midwest cities of St Louis, Cleveland, Detroit.
I know Indianapolis well and the nicest parts are mostly on the north side (carmel, fishers, zionsville, noblesville) or along meridian and park tudor area are very nice but not the most diverse.
Gee whiz, let's be honest here there are many mostly white poor communities and they are also very undesirable places to live. High crime, drugs, ghetto houses, gangs, high unemployment, you name it. I think for whatever reason people on this board tend to only see the harvey's and the englewood's. Most middle class african americans would not want to live in these places either. What about rockford? Lots of lower class whites in rockford. Kankakee looks pretty run down these days. Lots of poor whites in Hammond, indiana also. The poverty rate in the hoosier state has almost doubled in recent years to 13.1 percent of the entire state from like 7 percent just 8 years ago. Poverty is equal opportunity my friend. And all middle class and affluent african americans do not live in the southern suburbs. In glencoe which is like the most affluent suburb in chicago there are like close to 200 african americans living there, and another north shore afluent suburb lake forest has over 250 african americans living there. Higland park has about 175 african american residents. About 5,500 african americans live in naperville which is double the number of african americans living in affluent south suburban olympia fields which has about 2400 african americans. You will find african americans living in every affluent and also every middle class neighborhood in the chicagoland area including the ones that are largely white. And you will find poor whites living in almost every poor community in the chicagoland area including the majority african american ones. Harvey has close to 2000 whites living there, and Maywood has about 1500 whites living there.
Last edited by allen2323; 09-11-2010 at 07:28 PM..
Gee whiz, let's be honest here there are many mostly white poor communities and they are also very undesirable places to live. High crime, drugs, ghetto houses, gangs, high unemployment, you name it. I think for whatever reason people on this board tend to only see the harvey's and the englewood's. Most middle class african americans would not want to live in these places either. What about rockford? Lots of lower class whites in rockford. Kankakee looks pretty run down these days. Lots of poor whites in Hammond, indiana also. The poverty rate in the hoosier state has almost doubled in recent years to 13.1 percent of the entire state from like 7 percent just 8 years ago. Poverty is equal opportunity my friend. And all middle class and affluent african americans do not live in the southern suburbs. In glencoe which is like the most affluent suburb in chicago there are like close to 200 african americans living there, and another north shore afluent suburb lake forest has over 250 african americans living there. Higland park has about 175 african american residents. About 5,500 african americans live in naperville which is double the number of african americans living in affluent south suburban olympia fields which has about 2400 african americans. You will find african americans living in every affluent and also every middle class neighborhood in the chicagoland area including the ones that are largely white. And you will find poor whites living in almost every poor community in the chicagoland area including the majority african american ones. Harvey has close to 2000 whites living there, and Maywood has about 1500 whites living there.
Your argument has so many statistical comparison inconsistencies in it that's it's not worth pointing them out. However, we're still waiting for you to answer Chuckity's question before anyone gives you and your opinion any credibility. What town has gone from predominently white to predominently black and showed an improvement in crime and quality of schools, and I'll add my own- an increase in property values?
We also have to take account for inflation. Values in South Holland are probably slightly up from 2000 to now but this does not take into account inflation. I agree with you on property values in areas such as South Holland not going up as ethnographics shift (not demographics).
Allen,
Naperville is not the best argument or the North Shore. Naperville has over 140000 people. 5500 people is statistically insignificant. Same for 175 people in Highland Park.
I don't pretend to know the exact ethnographic tipping point (probably varies based upon demographics for area) but unless a group represents much more than 10 percent you will not see much change in an area.
Also, when white flight happens the first arrivals are generally middle class, not welfare class. Conversely, when an area gentrifies you usually start with artists, not yuppies. Yuppies come later. The first wave of new residents more closely mirror those they are replacing (regardless of color of skin). It is the later arrivals that really bring the area up or down.
No, there are no such examples (this "challenge" has been issued a dozen times on this site, several times by humboldt himself).
Probably a fairer question is what neighborhood or suburb has gone from all white to more racially balanced and not deteriorated in these ways. Otherwise, the answer is sort of implied in the question -- if all the whites fled, there was probably a good reason (I don't believe that most whites are racist in that sense).
Perhaps in Chicago the answer is still "none" (it is debatable). I think this is likely to start to change in the next generation though (based on strong anecdotal evidence over the years -- nothing I can prove). To me the key question is whether one even aspires to this or whether they think such black/white segregation is natural and will always be an inevitable consequence of white people practicality and common sense mixed with black intrinsic suckiness. I sense a lot of the latter attitude on this forum, so I very much appreciate Allen's contributions, even though he/she didn't directly address the question posed in this case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckity
Which Chicagoland suburb has gone from having a white majority population to a black population and not had crime increase and the quality of schools decline?
To answer my own question, I would site Oak Park as an obvious example of a place whose desirability has increased even as its population has become more integrated (going back to the 70s). I'm sure this is born out in several metrics (property values for example and the obvious commercial vibrancy and health of the town) but I can't be sure that crime stats or test scores have gotten better since then. Still, I think it's clear that they were ahead of the curve in how they retooled themselves as the integrated suburban urban option, rather than fail sticking to an outdated model. To say "Oak Park isn't majority black" doesn't really seem like the key issue to me, since if it were that would be precisely because it wasn't succeeding.
We also have to take account for inflation. Values in South Holland are probably slightly up from 2000 to now but this does not take into account inflation. I agree with you on property values in areas such as South Holland not going up as ethnographics shift (not demographics).
Allen,
Naperville is not the best argument or the North Shore. Naperville has over 140000 people. 5500 people is statistically insignificant. Same for 175 people in Highland Park.
I don't pretend to know the exact ethnographic tipping point (probably varies based upon demographics for area) but unless a group represents much more than 10 percent you will not see much change in an area.
Also, when white flight happens the first arrivals are generally middle class, not welfare class. Conversely, when an area gentrifies you usually start with artists, not yuppies. Yuppies come later. The first wave of new residents more closely mirror those they are replacing (regardless of color of skin). It is the later arrivals that really bring the area up or down.
Yeah, I thought about adding "adjusted for inflation" but for splicity and Allen's understanding's sake, I kept it simple. If adjusting and accounting for the standard home value inflation over the past 10 years or so, that may make answering this question even more difficult for Allen.
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.
