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 don't think most people do and even within the areas lower on that list, you have many people still doing fine or aren't struggling. So, at the end of the day, people have to take the opportunity, regardless of location, that best suits them. For instance, I doubt that the people involved with this Pittsburgh chapter are doing just fine: https://jackandjillpittsburgh.org/
I interpret parity as to mean that blacks nearly have as much opportunity as whites. That, however, does not necissarily mean that there is opportunity for blacks. There can be parity with both groups doing relatively badly relative to the national scale.
I think the number one thing that people should be looking for, in relocation, is economics, as a general rule. Go to the place where you will get the most bang for the buck. That is the first "sort criteria". Then of those places that gives you the most bang for the buck, sort by those places that have your other desirable, like climate, culture, recreation, scenery, etc. The primary sort should always be economic interest....unless one is super rich or retired. There are exceptions to that rule.
I interpret parity as to mean that blacks nearly have as much opportunity as whites. That, however, does not necissarily mean that there is opportunity for blacks. There can be parity with both groups doing relatively badly relative to the national scale.
I think the number one thing that people should be looking for, in relocation, is economics, as a general rule. Go to the place where you will get the most bang for the buck. That is the first "sort criteria". Then of those places that gives you the most bang for the buck, sort by those places that have your other desirable, like climate, culture, recreation, scenery, etc. The primary sort should always be economic interest....unless one is super rich or retired. There are exceptions to that rule.
Yes, in terms of the first part, as that is what I trying to refer to in parts of post #23.
I also agree with the second part, as a lot of times, the places with the best or one of the best "bangs for the buck" are so due to income possibilities. For instance, looking at the Annual Average Wage can help give an idea as to income for an area and by industry within an area: https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oessrcma.htm
Yes, in terms of the first part, as that is what I trying to refer to in parts of post #23.
I also agree with the second part, as a lot of times, the places with the best or one of the best "bangs for the buck" are so due to income possibilities. For instance, looking at the Annual Average Wage can help give an idea as to income for an area and by industry within an area: https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oessrcma.htm
I agree. Everyone is in to these lists and they are bs.
If you love mountain biking dont go to Memphis. If you like beaches, dont go to Albuquerque. If you are from Chicago, dont move to Mobile and complain about the lack of transit. If you are accustomed to a robust black American community, it may take some getting use to in Portland Maine
Black culture is different in every city. White culture is different in every city. That has to be considered when deciding where to live.
High pay areas = high cost of living areas. Most of those cities I wouldn't live in for a million dollars, especially Baltimore, DC, Chicago, Atlanta, and Detroit. In fact, I wouldn't live in an area with a high concentration of minorities. And I'm one myself. I'd rather live in a rural community where the crime is low, the lifestyle is better, and it's peacefully quiet.
High pay areas = high cost of living areas. Most of those cities I wouldn't live in for a million dollars, especially Baltimore, DC, Chicago, Atlanta, and Detroit. In fact, I wouldn't live in an area with a high concentration of minorities. And I'm one myself. I'd rather live in a rural community where the crime is low, the lifestyle is better, and it's peacefully quiet.
There isn't anything wrong with that, but just saying that could have stood on its own.
Also, you can have such communities with a high concentration of "minorities". For instance, this Long Island community is a little over 10% black and 30% Hispanic(2010-2014 info., about 12% and 25% according to 2013-2017 census info.(Amer. FactFinder) and has a low/below average crime rate: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.1024...6!9m2!1b1!2i37
There isn't anything wrong with that, but just saying that could have stood on its own.
Also, you can have such communities with a high concentration of "minorities". For instance, this Long Island community is a little over 10% black and 30% Hispanic(2010-2014 info., about 12% and 25% according to 2013-2017 census info.(Amer. FactFinder) and has a low/below average crime rate: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.1024...6!9m2!1b1!2i37
Yeah he definitely showed his hand and thought the "I'm a minority" line would justify it. Give me a break.
Yes, in terms of the first part, as that is what I trying to refer to in parts of post #23.
I also agree with the second part, as a lot of times, the places with the best or one of the best "bangs for the buck" are so due to income possibilities. For instance, looking at the Annual Average Wage can help give an idea as to income for an area and by industry within an area: https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oessrcma.htm
That's a hugh factor on the individual level. Career/Entrepreneurship & Location. People tend to aim for the quantity factor, ex: large metro equal surplus of those jobs, moreso than location quotient ( job per capita). Including lifestyle too.
That's a hugh factor on the individual level. Career/Entrepreneurship & Location. People tend to aim for the quantity factor, ex: large metro equal surplus of those jobs, moreso than location quotient ( job per capita). Including lifestyle too.
Exactly and they could be leaving areas off the table that have jobs waiting to be filled and may even have a higher Annual Average Pay. For instance, an area like Albany NY has a higher Annual Average Pay than areas like the bigger Southern metros and almost all of the bigger Midwestern metros except for Chicago(and it isn't that much higher), but people may not think about it due to what they may assume about the area. This is an area that still allows a person to take a train into NYC, go to the mountains, lakeside beaches or other nearby major areas within a reasonable time. So, sometimes I do wonder if people disregard areas that may be a pleasant surprise, if they are open to seeing what they offer.
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.
