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.
Here are the numbers for what I did by Metropolitan Division. Oddly a few of them like Houston and San Jose don't have any metropolitan divisions, so I put MSA after those
Percentage of non-South Asians living in census tracts with 10% or more South Asian population, by Metropolitan Division 1. San Jose MSA: 1,969,897 total population | 27.1%
2. New Brunswick-Lakewood, NJ (NYC): 2,387,854 total population | 19.82% 3. Oakland-Berkeley-Livermore, CA (San Francisco): 2,753,293 total population | 13.4%
4. New York-Jersey City-White Plains, NY-NJ (NYC): 12,087,633 total population | 8.97%
If I recall correctly, MDs are usually created after an MSA has more than 2.5 million people-Houston doesnt have? That's odd.
Anyhow, again SJ is tops and thd East Bay is 3rd. Anyone who lives or works in the South Bay is not surprised. And South Asians in the East Bay generally live in top tier suburbs with some of the best schools in the entire state of CA.
Looking at the CMSA numbers in 1990 for Asian Indians alone (if someone else can find the other South Asian nationalities in 1990, that would be great) -
New York CMSA: 199,010
Los Angeles CMSA: 68,887
Chicago CMSA: 59,046
San Francisco CMSA: 53,404
Washington DC CMSA: 35,533
Houston CMSA: 26,599
Philadelphia CMSA: 26,120
Dallas CMSA: 17,831
Boston CMSA: 16,149
The Chicago South Asian population has been a lot more settled for longer, so I'd give the #3 spot to them. DC isn't settled at all. What is striking is how slowly the LA South Asian population has grown in comparison to how fast the Bay Area's has grown.
This shows that the Bay Area South Asian community is relatively recent compared to the other metros, and why there isn't a "Little India" yet. Not only was the Bay Area not only not #1 on the West Coast, but it wasn't even #2. Somewhere in the last 30 years, this has changed.
Last edited by Bubb Rubb; 02-19-2019 at 09:54 PM..
Looking at the CMSA numbers in 1990 for Asian Indians alone (if someone else can find the other South Asian nationalities in 1990, that would be great) -
New York CMSA: 199,010
Los Angeles CMSA: 68,887
Chicago CMSA: 59,046
San Francisco CMSA: 53,404
Washington DC CMSA: 35,533
Houston CMSA: 26,599
Philadelphia CMSA: 26,120
Dallas CMSA: 17,831
Boston CMSA: 16,149
This shows that the Bay Area South Asian community is relatively recent compared to the other metros
Not really. Chicago and the Bay Area had nearly the same amount and LA only had 15 thousand more.
Quote:
and why there isn't a "Little India" yet.
What does having an ethnic neighborhood do that as a group reaching the pinnacle of success not do?
And Asians are the largest racial group in Santa Clara county(Pop 1.938 Million) having surpassed whites. Santa Clara County, CA
Asian 36.2%
Non Hispanic White 31.3%
Hispanic 25.5%
Black 2.4%
Something tells me the need to have a Little India is probably not at the top of the priority list for Indians in Silicon Valley.
Not really. Chicago and the Bay Area had nearly the same amount and LA only had 15 thousand more.
What does having an ethnic neighborhood do that as a group reaching the pinnacle of success not do?
And Asians are the largest racial group in Santa Clara county(Pop 1.938 Million) having surpassed whites. Santa Clara County, CA
Asian 36.2%
Non Hispanic White 31.3%
Hispanic 25.5%
Black 2.4%
Something tells me the need to have a Little India is probably not at the top of the priority list for Indians in Silicon Valley.
Sigh...I was actually trying to give the Bay Area credit for being such a Desi draw despite there 1) not being a "Little India" type place, and 2) other metros on the West Coast that had a larger Desi population, though in raw numbers, maybe not so much so. It's insulting to say that an ethnic population is recent when it is. The fact that it went from a mere 50k to now over 400k says volumes about the draw of Silicon Valley.
The Bay Area basically went from being the #3 on its own coast to the undisputed #2 in the US and #3 overall in North America. Is that a fair statement?
Sigh...I was actually trying to give the Bay Area credit for being such a Desi draw despite there 1) not being a "Little India" type place, and 2) other metros on the West Coast that had a larger Desi population, though in raw numbers, maybe not so much so. It's insulting to say that an ethnic population is recent when it is. The fact that it went from a mere 50k to now over 400k says volumes about the draw of Silicon Valley.
The Bay Area basically went from being the #3 on its own coast to the undisputed #2 in the US and #3 overall in North America. Is that a fair statement?
Sorry Im the first to admit that I can be dense in interpreting posts.
What’s being overlooked is the topic is specific to South Asians. While SF has a large Indian presence, the other countries are lacking. Meanwhile, over 50% of South Asian immigration to NY is from non-Indian countries. That is truly impressive and rather atypical vis a vis the rest of the country.
SF does not have an official enclave but will probably be 20% South Asian in the next decade if the current country cap bill passes.
LA is relatively low. Just around Artesia and parts of Orange County but not so much in LA itself.
Oh 2 counties within the NY metro are higher than Santa Clara. Guess this settles it then. Thanks diamondpark! Btw what character are you playing today? The elderly Samoan? Lol. Bottom line, NY has over 900k South Asians, vast majority who reside within the city proper or surrounding counties. South Asians have an actual culture and history with thriving neighborhoods. San Jose has a bunch of H1B1 tech visa workers who will return home in a year or two - or move to NY which is taking tech capital away from the valley in droves. Facts are facts old man/young woman/or whatever character you decide to play today. Lol
My observation is that the east coast communities are stables and most of the rapid growth is in CA. Are there plans to decentralize tech. The Bay Area has a massive housing shortage and New York is more po-growth. I have heard hype about Silicon Beach in LA but that is still very small.
SF does not have an official enclave but will probably be 20% South Asian in the next decade if the current country cap bill passes.
LA is relatively low. Just around Artesia and parts of Orange County but not so much in LA itself.
I don't think mraza was bringing up LA at all. I don't think LA or Southern California is known at all for having a large South Asian population whatsoever. For its size, LA's South Asian population is relatively tiny.
I don't think mraza was bringing up LA at all. I don't think LA or Southern California is known at all for having a large South Asian population whatsoever. For its size, LA's South Asian population is relatively tiny.
The thing about Socal is that the community is much more spread out. I think it will grow in the future based on immigration trends and Silicon Beach.
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.
