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.
1) New York: 919,000
2) Chicago: 365,000
3) Los Angeles: 223,000
4) Boston: 151,000
5) Miami: 130,000
6) San Francisco: 129,000
7) Philadelphia: 116,000
8) Washington DC: 113,000
9) Seattle: 101,000
10) Atlanta: 68,000
11) Houston: 64,000
12) San Diego: 59,000
13) Phoenix: 59,000
14) San Jose: 55,000 15) Dallas: 53,000
16) Riverside, CA: 38,000
Immigrants from the Americas (includes Canada, the Caribbean, and Latin America):
1) New York: 2,898,000
2) Los Angeles: 2,456,000
3) Miami: 1,965,000
4) Houston: 928,000
5) Chicago: 812,000
6) Dallas: 750,000
7) Riverside, CA: 682,000
8) Washington DC: 532,000
9) San Francisco: 431,000
10) Phoenix: 418,000
11) San Diego: 388,000
12) Atlanta: 368,000
13) Boston: 323,000
14) San Jose: 197,000
15) Philadelphia: 187,000
16) Seattle: 149,000
Immigrants from the largest country of each of the above:
Mexico:
1) Los Angeles: 1,735,000 2) Chicago: 669,000 3) Houston: 606,000
4) Dallas: 601,000
5) Riverside, CA: 562,000
6) Phoenix: 344,000
7) San Diego: 337,000
8) San Francisco: 250,000
9) Atlanta: 169,000
10) San Jose: 153,000
11) Seattle: 89,000
Considering Dallas metro's size our European numbers are really pathetic. That seems to be our weakness in regards to immigrants. For some reason I thought Houston's Mexican population was a lot more than Dallas'. Considering Houston's bigger population in immigrants from the America's I'm guessing the biggest difference in both metros numbers is in Central American immigrants. Also didn't know Chicago had more Mexicans than Houston or Dallas.
Considering Dallas metro's size our European numbers are really pathetic. That seems to be our weakness in regards to immigrants. For some reason I thought Houston's Mexican population was a lot more than Dallas'. Considering Houston's bigger population in immigrants from the America's I'm guessing the biggest difference in both metros numbers is in Central American immigrants. Also didn't know Chicago had more Mexicans than Houston or Dallas.
Yeah same goes for Houston.
As far as Mexicans go, Chicagoland does have more foreign born Mexicans but not more total Mexicans. Houston has about 1.8 million total Mexicans and Dallas and Chicago have about 1.65 million respectively.
Regarding Central Americans, Houston has well over double the number of Central Americans that Dallas does. Dallas on the other hand has almost double the Central Americans that Chicago does.
Considering Dallas metro's size our European numbers are really pathetic. That seems to be our weakness in regards to immigrants. For some reason I thought Houston's Mexican population was a lot more than Dallas'. Considering Houston's bigger population in immigrants from the America's I'm guessing the biggest difference in both metros numbers is in Central American immigrants. Also didn't know Chicago had more Mexicans than Houston or Dallas.
European immigration is pretty low outside of the Northeast and Chicago as a general rule. Even LA has relatively low European immigration relative to its total immigration.
Based on this information I would consider the most international cities as follows:
Tier 1: New York City - It has it all. An extreme number of immigrants and not one group seems to dominate.
Tier 2A: Los Angeles - It has a very diverse set of immigrants though immigrants from Mexico and Central American definitely do dominate the landscape. The massive number of total immigrants from all over the world do help LA separate itself from the next tier.
Tier 2B: San Francisco/San Jose and Washington DC: These metro areas have very diverse sets of immigrants and (especially DC) seem to draw an even amount among several regions.
Tier 3A: Chicago and Miami: It seems an odd pairing but I do not feel that, even though Miami has the highest concentration of immigrants of all the above, almost 90% come from one region. There is diversity amongst Latin Americans in Miami but very little diversity amongst immigrants as a whole. Still, the sheer number of immigrants in the area as well as the fact that Miami is pretty much the American gateway to Latin America makes me feel it deserves to be ranked high. I ranked Chicago lower than the Bay Area or DC because its concentration of immigrants is lower than both of those and its immigrant growth is coming from fewer countries than DC or the Bay Area.
Tier 3B: Houston and Boston: These two are birds of a feather on the international stage. Both pull good numbers from most of the regions and continue to be immigration hotbeds.
Tier 4A: Dallas: Its kind of in limbo between the tier above and below. Though it is much more akin to Atlanta or Seattle as opposed to Houston or Boston.
Tier 4B: Seattle, San Diego, Atlanta, and Philadelphia: Similar to Dallas, but because they lack the sheer volume of overall immigrants so I place them one below.
That leaves us with Riverside and Phoenix. Riverside is mainly an extension of LA as most of the immigrants in the metro area are on the part that borders with LA. Phoenix, to be frank, I do not consider an international city. It lacks the mass from any other country other than Mexico.
I felt like I needed to crunch your numbers a bit more to answer your question, so what I did was broke down the makeup of the immigrant populations by region for each of the metro areas. Of course this is of limited efficacy since these are all very diverse regions with very different and distinct countries and cultures within each region, but I think it's an interesting way to look at it:
New York: 5,656,000 (28.5% of total metro area)
Africa: 231,000 4.1%
Asia: 1,594,000 28.2%
Europe: 919,000 16.3%
The Americas: 2,898,000 51.3%
Los Angeles: 4,421,000 (33.8% of total metro area)
Africa: 70,000 1.6%
Asia: 1,610,000 36.9%
Europe: 223,000 5.1%
The Americas: 2,456,000 56.3%
Miami: 2,233,000 (38.7% of total metro area)
Africa: 20,000 0.9%
Asia: 116,000 5.2%
Europe: 130,000 5.8%
The Americas: 1,965,000 88.2%
Chicago: 1,680,000 (17.6% of total metro area)
Africa: 46,000 2.7%
Asia: 453,000 27.0%
Europe: 365,000 21.8%
The Americas: 812,000 48.4%
Houston: 1,395,000 (22.5% of total metro area)
Africa: 61,000 4.4%
Asia: 338,000 24.3%
Europe: 64,000 4.6%
The Americas: 928,000 66.7%
San Francisco: 1,336,000 (29.9% of total metro area)
Africa: 26,000 2.0%
Asia: 730,000 55.1%
Europe: 129,000 9.7%
The Americas: 431,000 32.5%
Washington DC: 1,286,000 (21.9% of total metro area)
Africa: 177,000 13.8%
Asia: 458,000 35.8%
Europe: 113,000 8.8%
The Americas: 532,000 41.5%
Dallas: 1,171,000 (17.5% of total metro area)
Africa: 69,000 5.9%
Asia: 296,000 25.3%
Europe: 53,000 4.5%
The Americas: 750,000 64.2%
Riverside, CA: 941,000 (21.7% of total metro area)
Africa: 18,000 1.9%
Asia: 200,000 21.3%
Europe: 38,000 4.1%
The Americas: 682,000 72.7%
Boston: 794,000 (17.1% of total metro area)
Africa: 66,000 8.2%
Asia: 261,000 32.6%
Europe: 151,000 18.9%
The Americas: 323,000 40.3%
San Diego: 743,000 (23.4% of total metro area)
Africa: 17,000 2.3%
Asia: 275,000 37.2%
Europe: 59,000 7.9%
The Americas: 388,000 52.5%
Atlanta: 727,000 (13.3% of total metro area)
Africa: 72,000 10%
Asia: 214,000 29.6%
Europe: 68,000 9.4%
The Americas: 368,000 51%
San Jose: 700,000 (36.9% of total metro area)
Africa: 10,000 1.4%
Asia: 434,000 62.3%
Europe: 55,000 7.9%
The Americas: 197,000 28.3%
Phoenix: 626,000 (14.4% of total metro area)
Africa: 19,000 3.0%
Asia: 128,000 20.4%
Europe: 59,000 9.4%
The Americas: 418,000 66.7%
Seattle: 606,000 (17.1% of total metro area)
Africa: 44,000 7.3%
Asia: 304,000 50.8%
Europe: 101,000 16.8%
The Americas: 149,000 24.9%
Philadelphia: 598,000 (9.1% of total metro area)
Africa: 51,000 8.6%
Asia: 241,000 40.3%
Europe: 116,000 19.5%
The Americas: 187,000 31.4%
Of this list, there are only four metro areas where one part of the world does not contribute more than 50% of the immigrants: Chicago, DC, Philadelphia, and Boston. Of these metros, there are none in which all four regions each represent at least 10% of the total immigrants, but DC, Philadelphia, and Boston all come close with smallest region still representing at least 8% of all immigration. Of these four cities, DC has the highest share of immigrants at 21.9% of the metro area population. DC is also the only city besides NYC that has at least 100,000 immigrants from each region. So I think a strong argument can be made for DC having one of the most international populations, with all of the world's regions well-represented and visible due to the larger proportion of immigrants in the metro compared to other "diverse" immigration cities.
Of course, in raw numbers New York is king. The West Coast isn't very diverse proportionately with it being mostly dominated by the Americas and Asia. Seattle actually has a more diverse immigrant population based on the regions you provided than San Francisco and Los Angeles, which have much smaller proportions of European and African immigrants. But with higher raw numbers again, you could make the argument that SF and LA are still more "international", as Seattle has a lower proportion of immigrants to its total population.
Chicago is interesting as well in that it has the highest share of European immigrants relative to total immigration than any other city, and the only city with more than 20% of its immigrants coming from Europe. Still, it's only the second highest city for European immigration, and less than half of the total European immigration NYC receives.
DC and Atlanta are the only two metros with more than 10% of their immigrants coming from Africa. DC actually comes close to NYC with the total amount of African immigration.
Miami is clearly the least diverse with 88% of its immigrants coming from the Western Hemisphere.
I'm curious, based on your data, where did you lump Iranians (Persians) in the LA metro area. I could find no source with exact numbers, but a few sources estimated there were between 300,000 to 500,000 Iranians in Metro LA. The same is true for Armenians in Metro LA. I found a source in an Armenian-American article that said there were 360,000 Armenians in LA Metro. Of course I have no idea how many of those are foreign born. I ask this because I live in LA and know how integrated both groups are in the fabric of our community. The LA City Councilmen for my district in LA is Armenian-American.
I'm curious, based on your data, where did you lump Iranians (Persians) in the LA metro area. I could find no source with exact numbers, but a few sources estimated there were between 300,000 to 500,000 Iranians in Metro LA. The same is true for Armenians in Metro LA. I found a source in an Armenian-American article that said there were 360,000 Armenians in LA Metro. Of course I have no idea how many of those are foreign born. I ask this because I live in LA and know how integrated both groups are in the fabric of our community. The LA City Councilmen for my district in LA is Armenian-American.
You'll have to ask Cowboys Fan in Houston (the OP) I crunched the numbers from his data.
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.
