Join 3,553 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Where we are. Who we are.
December 15, 2010 12:08 PM   Subscribe

The New York Times presents an interactive map of America's population separated by race, income, and education, according to census data from 2005 to 2009. One dot for every 50 people. (Previously)

Some examples:
New York City (Race) (Income Δ) (Housing Prices Δ) (Rent Δ)(HS Graduates)
Washington DC (Race) (Income Δ) (Housing Prices Δ) (Rent Δ) (HS Graduates)
Detroit (Race) (Income Δ) (Housing Prices Δ) (Rent Δ) (HS Graduates)
San Francisco (Race) (Income Δ) (Housing Prices Δ) (Rent Δ) (HS Graduates)
Los Angeles (Race) (Income Δ) (Housing Prices Δ) (Rent Δ) (HS Graduates)
Chicago (Race) (Income ?) (Housing Prices Δ) (Rent Δ) (HS Graduates)
Houston (Race) (Income Δ) (Housing Prices Δ) (Rent Δ) (HS Graduates)
Boston (Race) (Income Δ) (Housing Prices Δ) (Rent Δ) (HS Graduates)
Philiadelphia (Race) (Income Δ) (Housing Prices Δ) (Rent Δ) (HS Graduates)
San Antonio (Race) (Income Δ) (Housing Prices Δ) (Rent Δ) (HS Graduates)
Miami (Race) (Income Δ) (Housing Prices Δ) (Rent Δ) (HS Graduates)
New Orleans (Race) (Income Δ) (Housing Prices Δ) (Rent Δ) (HS Graduates)
Atlanta (Race) (Income Δ) (Housing Prices Δ) (Rent Δ) (HS Graduates)
posted by schmod (80 comments total) 59 users marked this as a favorite

 
Terrific post -- thanks.
posted by blucevalo at 12:16 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


As always stuff like this is fascinating to me. Especially the "% foreign born" map. Large cities make sense in my world view, but the higher percentages pockets in the middle of the Plains states are very curious. (I've seen these places in Iowa and others locales, but they are still forgotten.)

America is so fucking fascinating sometimes. And so much more complicated than anyone will ever let it be in most discussions.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 12:23 PM on December 15, 2010 [2 favorites]


oops % foreign born
posted by MCMikeNamara at 12:24 PM on December 15, 2010


In my census tract:

Median home value: +37% since 2000
Median monthly rent: +25% since 2000
Median household income: +3% since 2000

Damn, this economy is bullshit.
posted by enn at 12:24 PM on December 15, 2010 [11 favorites]


Ok, I see the sprinkles, but where is the ladybug?
posted by nzero at 12:25 PM on December 15, 2010 [8 favorites]


According to the map, there are 50 white people ON MY LAWN RIGHT NOW.

(goes out to shake cane)
posted by jscalzi at 12:26 PM on December 15, 2010 [10 favorites]


Oh and look, you can see GA Tech using the Race view.
posted by nzero at 12:28 PM on December 15, 2010


Clearly the economy can't triforce.

  ∆
∆ ∆

posted by Threeway Handshake at 12:29 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


Ten points to whoever finds the gayest census tract in America. I've found a handful of 18%s scattered around and a 22% in New Orleans.
posted by theodolite at 12:30 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


theodolite: "Ten points to whoever finds the gayest census tract in America. I've found a handful of 18%s scattered around and a 22% in New Orleans."

I was in awe of the 3% gay tracts in the middle of Nebraska and Texas. There's gotta be less than one dot's worth of people in those areas. Don't let the neighbors see this!
posted by msbutah at 12:34 PM on December 15, 2010


I really wanted there to be a tiny little blue dot at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Sadly, the NYT algorithm isn't that imaginative.
posted by schmod at 12:35 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


The really fascinating thing about these maps (at least for me) is the distribution of census tracts as an indicator of where all the people are.
posted by haltingproblemsolved at 12:36 PM on December 15, 2010


And just to be clear- I'm criticizing the current situation...
posted by nzero at 12:36 PM on December 15, 2010


Ten points to whoever finds the gayest census tract in America. I've found a handful of 18%s scattered around and a 22% in New Orleans.

Except that misses gay people living alone or with people other than a partner.
posted by iknowizbirfmark at 12:41 PM on December 15, 2010


I believe the software just randomly distributes the correct number of dots within each census tract (or county, if you're zoomed out) -- for example, nobody actually lives on Theodore Roosevelt Island, but every time you load that link you get a different assortment of dots spilling over from the (inhabited) part of the district that it's connected to. Don't put too much stock in the actual location of each dot.
posted by theodolite at 12:42 PM on December 15, 2010 [2 favorites]


Could someone please explain why the seemingly large, widespread increases in median home values, even in places like Florida and Nevada?
posted by arveale at 12:42 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


Ten points to whoever finds the gayest census tract in America. I've found a handful of 18%s scattered around and a 22% in New Orleans.

If their criteria for that is "two unmarried dudes living together," college towns and the bum economy are likely to skew those numbers considerably. Having a roomate is pretty much the norm for the city-dwelling unmarried, under-35 crowd these days.

My roommate's a pretty tolerant and accepting guy, but I don't think he'd like the insinuation that I'm sleeping with him.
posted by schmod at 12:42 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


Wow, this is amazing. Looking at my hometown of Savannah, GA (31401), I'd say it gets the race exactly right.
posted by nomadicink at 12:44 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


Except that misses gay people living alone or with people other than a partner.

I think it actually misses legally married gay couples as well (but "whoever finds the highest percentage of unmarried same-sex households" didn't have the same ring)
posted by theodolite at 12:45 PM on December 15, 2010


Could someone please explain why the seemingly large, widespread increases in median home values, even in places like Florida and Nevada?


Because its Price in 2009/Price in 2000. In lots of those places price are still up from 2000, but down a shit ton from 2005. Also the data doesn't correct for changes in dwelling quality. If you throw up a bunch of mcmansions in what was once rural FL then median price goes up even if your shack's value didn't
posted by JPD at 12:49 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


Amazingly, nobody living on campus at Rice University has a bachelor's or master's degree. Just thought it was funny.

I poked around the Houston maps for a bit and realized that some of the income increases are a result of gentrification. My neighbourhood had an income increase of 145%.
posted by redyaky at 12:50 PM on December 15, 2010


I wonder if I could use this to convince my mother that it's true that most Americans are actually "fake Americans" in her book, as a gigantic percentage of the American population lives in or near major urban areas, with the highest populations concentrated in states like New York, New Jersey, and California which apparently don't count as "Real America" at all.

No, wait, it's the New York Times. She'll just assert that the whole thing is completely made up.
posted by Sara C. at 12:51 PM on December 15, 2010 [4 favorites]


My tract on the Upper West Side has lower rents than San Francisco, and 0% black population.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:54 PM on December 15, 2010


as a gigantic percentage of the American population lives in or near major urban areas, with the highest populations concentrated in states like New York, New Jersey, and California which apparently don't count as "Real America" at all.

Yeah, there's like no one in the midwest, sheesh!
posted by nomadicink at 12:54 PM on December 15, 2010


It's amazing to see how racially segregated Boston still is. Cambridge and Somerville are still majority white, yeah, but the distribution is much more mixed.

Some of the obvious correlations are made even more obvious here. Lowest incomes are in the same areas as lowest education levels and lowest home prices (in Boston, that would be Dorchester).

Never realized there was such a large Hispanic population in East Boston and Chelsea, though. And how's this for a stereotype - largest concentration of Asians are in Chinatown and right around MIT.
posted by backseatpilot at 12:56 PM on December 15, 2010


This is old, I saw it awhile ago. Doesn't make it less fascinating...
posted by femmme at 12:57 PM on December 15, 2010


I think it actually misses legally married gay couples as well (but "whoever finds the highest percentage of unmarried same-sex households" didn't have the same ring)

Since it's based on the Census Bureau survey data from 2005 - 2009, I don't think that there is a way for same-sex couples to be identified as married. It seems that will change with the 2010 Census data.

"For the first time in the centuries-long history of the census, [in 2010,] the number of same-sex couples who self-identify as married—license or no license—will be tabulated and released to the public." source
posted by iknowizbirfmark at 12:57 PM on December 15, 2010 [2 favorites]


Yeah, there's like no one in the midwest, sheesh!

There are entire counties in Nebraska which, looking at the race breakdown dot map, have less than 25,000 inhabitants.

My census district in Brooklyn comprises like two blocks, completely paved over with dots. The census district that includes the house I grew up in, in relatively densely populated Houma, LA, takes up several square miles and has like 5 dots in it.

Less people live in the middle of the country. It's. Just. True.
posted by Sara C. at 1:00 PM on December 15, 2010 [2 favorites]


This is old, I saw it awhile ago.

I'm sure you saw something similar, but this data was released yesterday.
posted by exogenous at 1:03 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


Ten points to whoever finds the gayest census tract in America.

Yeah, sometimes I think I'm the only straight person in my neighborhood, but it comes up as only 2% same sex households. My neighbors aren't nesters, it seems.


This is old, I saw it awhile ago.

This is updated with the newer census numbers. Kudos to the Times, but they did steal the idea from that Flickr guy.
posted by CunningLinguist at 1:03 PM on December 15, 2010


Ten points to whoever finds the gayest census tract in America.

Hee, we got a couple of blocks over 8% in Savannah, which we've coined "The gayborhood".
posted by nomadicink at 1:07 PM on December 15, 2010


Census tract 6260 in DC lists as "low population zone" but I happen to know it should say: Blacks: 100%*, and don't you forget it!

*at least until these people move in
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 1:09 PM on December 15, 2010 [3 favorites]


I think my 'hood broke the median home value-o-meter, since it is showing $1,000,001. (Noe Valley in SF)
posted by poe at 1:11 PM on December 15, 2010


Wow, Edgefield in East Nashville is 16% gay, and +15% since 2000?
posted by ghharr at 1:12 PM on December 15, 2010


Yeah, sometimes I think I'm the only straight person in my neighborhood, but it comes up as only 2% same sex households. My neighbors aren't nesters, it seems.

Having noticed that Chelsea and the West Village in Manhattan rate shockingly low percentages of same-sex households, I'm guessing that the gay vibe of an urban neighborhood has a lot more to do with businesses that attract regular visitors from all over the city (and beyond). Lots of gay people hang out in Chelsea. But not a lot of gay couples actually live in Chelsea.

I'd be curious as to how this compares to suburban and rural areas, where there are few if any businesses catering to a gay clientele but more same sex couples actually making a life for themselves.

*goes off to look at how the Castro rates compared to the rest of the Bay Area...*
posted by Sara C. at 1:14 PM on December 15, 2010


If their criteria for that is "two unmarried dudes living together...

It's not. Assuming that the community surveys are substantially similar to the 2010 Census Form (which I recall that they are, but who knows), it's "two people of the same sex, one of whom indicates he or she is the "husband or wife" or "unmarried partner" of his or her unmarried partner or husband or wife completing the form.

However, I think that methodology also missed couples of which neither member is the person filling out the form, as I don't see a way to provide this information on the form, but maybe they deal with that through follow-up surveys and interviews.
posted by iknowizbirfmark at 1:14 PM on December 15, 2010


Wow, Hispanics really do own Miami, but I was surprised by how few "white" people there are there. I mean I hardly ever run into a non-Hispanic person when I'm back there, but I always figure it was the result of a kind a confirmation bias. I guess not, there really just hardly any non-Hispanic people in Miami.
posted by oddman at 1:17 PM on December 15, 2010


Census Tract 4234 represent!

Looking at my hometown of Savannah, GA (31401), I'd say it gets the race exactly right.

I'd bet most of the eastern half of the US looks like Savannah. Take a step across 9th St. in Louisville (40203).
posted by mrgrimm at 1:21 PM on December 15, 2010


(I would also like to compare the high school graduation map to the standard red/blue electoral map.)
posted by Sara C. at 1:29 PM on December 15, 2010


I live in a cheap-ass, reasonably-educated, dot-of-every-color-diverse neighborhood. Chicago, have I told you lately how much I love you?
posted by phunniemee at 1:35 PM on December 15, 2010 [2 favorites]


So basically if I moved two blocks north my rent would drop $300?
posted by shakespeherian at 1:36 PM on December 15, 2010


My census tract is 32% foreign-born, something apparently quite normal for a mature suburb in southern California. And now I live abroad, with dozens of friends from home traveling long-term or working abroad too.

My flatmate, born in England and now residing in Portugal for summers and holidays when he's not working with me in the large central European country where we work during the academic year, and quite satisfied with how internationally aware he is, frankly couldn't believe the number was so high in a place where average household income and the number of people who'd finished high school or had a bachelor's degree was also relatively high, at least compared to places a few miles away.

The very idea that high rates of poverty and an utter lack of education are not always concurrent with ethnic diversity is something that, I think, one person who identifies himself as a cosmopolitan, pro-European expat might have learned tonight.

Me? I already knew.

I knew because it was in the place I grew up, the languages my friends' parents spoke, the food they brought to festivals at school, the newspapers I read in the foreign language I was required by the state to study if I wanted to go to a public university, the songs on the radio I loved to attempt to decipher, the nametags on the supermarket checkers and the college outreach coordinators and the cops and the desk of the principal of my middle school, the wedding invitations half a world away I received, the "press 1 for English" before you even find out who you have called, and, of course, in my own body, itself a product of immigration to the United States just three generations ago, a blink of an eye in historical time.
posted by mdonley at 1:37 PM on December 15, 2010


I don't think it's fair that they only measure unmarried gay couples. F'in' NY Times provencialists.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 1:39 PM on December 15, 2010


Hmm. Do rents max out at $2k/month?
posted by schmod at 1:44 PM on December 15, 2010


Do rents max out at $2k/month?

At the county level, there are probably no counties in the US with a median rent higher than $2k. Even the median rent in Manhattan is only $1200. The option is on the map for reference, just like the high school education map has "under 20%" for reference despite the fact that no counties in the US have a high school graduation rate below around 50%.

At the census district level, however, there are districts with median rents above $2000. Still probably not a whole hell of a lot - you'll probably find them in vacation rental areas (I don't even have to look at the Hamptons to know the median rent there is above $2000), as well as in upper class urban areas like the Upper East Side and Beverly Hills.
posted by Sara C. at 1:54 PM on December 15, 2010


I don't think it's fair that they only measure unmarried gay couples. F'in' NY Times provencialists.


The times isn't doing anything. They just took a bunch of data (that you can get at census.gov btw) and cribbed someone's pretty cool visualization methodolgy.
posted by JPD at 1:55 PM on December 15, 2010


Weird. On closer inspection it seems like the rents really do max out at $2001. I wonder why that is?
posted by Sara C. at 2:01 PM on December 15, 2010


It's weird to see things I know (because I observe them, but have not measured them) laid out in such bare numbers.

In my census tract, the race breakdown is:

White 33%
Black 1%
Hispanic 52%
Asian 11%

The census tract just the other side of the freeway from mine:

White: 41%
Black: 27%
Hispanic: 16%
Asian: 7%

There are no housing projects in my tract. The one east of me is home to the Potrero Terrace-Annex housing projects. It's like looking at the map in this fpp about segregation and realizing that almost all the black people in Marin are there because they're locked up at San Quentin.
posted by rtha at 2:02 PM on December 15, 2010


I was confused about how the number of kids in private schools in the next county south of here was so high, until I remembered that's where these folks live.

(I would also like to compare the high school graduation map to the standard red/blue electoral map.)

I'd like to see this, too, because the didn't-finish-high school demographic went 2:1 for Obama and I imagine the big variable is whether you live in an urban or rural area.
posted by jackflaps at 2:02 PM on December 15, 2010


I cannot say I am surprised but the SE Michigan data (Detroit and environs) is eye-poppingly stark. Just wow.
posted by joe lisboa at 2:07 PM on December 15, 2010


This is old, I saw it awhile ago.

This is updated with the newer census numbers. Kudos to the Times, but they did steal the idea from that Flickr guy.


to be fair, Eric Fischer riffed on Bill Rankin's Chicago map of race and income. Of course, he said so on every map. The NYT doesn't mention their influences.
posted by oneirodynia at 2:07 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


I'd like to see this, too, because the didn't-finish-high school demographic went 2:1 for Obama and I imagine the big variable is whether you live in an urban or rural area.

My thought was more that pretty much the entire south has a graduation rate significantly below the north and west coast. Though the "red" midwest has higher graduation rates and they still voted Republican in 2008.
posted by Sara C. at 2:23 PM on December 15, 2010


Try mousing over census tracts in northern Minnesota for "Other". Start around zip code 56601 and move out.

("Other" = "Native American", apparently.)
posted by gimonca at 2:43 PM on December 15, 2010


It's unfortunate that they've colored the dots for White, Black, and Other such that they're barely distinguishable from one another wherever they're not in big, single-race clumps.
posted by Sys Rq at 2:44 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


Heh. And on the Black Population map, they've used a nice watery blue, so on first glance, you're all like, "Whoa! Salt Lake City is 40% Black?" And then you realize you're just looking at the lake (duh) and you get a concussion from slapping your forehead.
posted by Sys Rq at 3:04 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


I think they should have given people the option to overlay these maps with 2008 and 2010 election returns.

It does seem, at first glance anyway, that we vote strongly alone racial and religious lines here in the .U.S, with urban whites being slightly more likely to vote Democratic than rural whites. I think this bodes poorly for our future.
posted by Avenger at 3:12 PM on December 15, 2010


Sys Rq, I grew up in a very watery part of the country, so when I was checking out my "home" census district for all the maps that used shading, I was all, "what district is that way down the bayou with over 20% same-sex couples??? Oh, right, that would be the swamp. Hello, gay swamp!"
posted by Sara C. at 3:21 PM on December 15, 2010 [4 favorites]


Less people live in the middle of the country. It's. Just. True.

66 million people live in the Midwest alone, excluding the South and the Mountain West. That's a fifth of the country. More than the Northeast's 53 million people, and more than the West Coast's 49 million.

And it's a little unfair to compare Brooklyn to rural Nebraska. How about comparing Brooklyn to Wicker Park and rural New York State to rural Nebraska?

Brooklyn: 36,356/sq mi
Wicker Park: 19,126.3/sq mi

Yates County, NY: 73/sq mi
Seward County, NE: 28/sq mi

Sure, people are more spread out in the middle of the country than on the coasts. But in absolute terms more people live there than on the coasts, and in roughly similar population densities in urban and rural areas.
posted by dd42 at 3:29 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


I wish that there was a map like this for Canada as well so that I could see to what degree my observations of the demographic-distribution differences between Philadelphia and Toronto are true and to what degree I'm just projecting my assumptions about urban-Canada-in-general vs. urban-USA-in-general.
posted by 256 at 3:32 PM on December 15, 2010


Tract 4054 represent!

Median income: $26,766 — down 27%
Median home value: $352,900 — up 71%
Median rent: $942 — up 22%

No wonder all my neighbors are hurting.
posted by Lexica at 3:35 PM on December 15, 2010


dd42, my original point was this:

as a gigantic percentage of the American population lives in or near major urban areas

You weren't part of the conversation I had with my mom wherein I discerned that she doesn't think I'm really an American, but trust me when I say that the woman believes that the majority of Americans live in rural areas far away from the influence of City Folk. I had trouble even explaining to her that most people who live in Texas live in the Houston and Dallas metro areas and are suburbanites with, like, recycling programs and montessori kindergartens and all that evil librul elite stuff she doesn't think "real Americans" like.
posted by Sara C. at 3:45 PM on December 15, 2010 [2 favorites]


As with any government stats, the extra-terrestrials are completely omitted.
posted by mmrtnt at 4:20 PM on December 15, 2010 [1 favorite]


Could someone please explain why the seemingly large, widespread increases in median home values, even in places like Florida and Nevada?

If people are asked to provide their own home values, or if they're based on local gov't data, it might be due at least in part to re-evaluation of properties for tax estimates. I know our local government decided that it needed to update the values to increase property taxes, as it hadn't done so in over 10 years. Given that part of that motivation was financial, it could be common in other areas. Otherwise the value you know for your home depends on any recent appraisal, which everyone doesn't have.
posted by bizzyb at 5:01 PM on December 15, 2010


Sara C., sorry to jump on you before. I bet we agree with each other on a lot of things culturally and politically, and I too left the rural part of the country I grew up in. I also would like to believe that people like us are the majority in this country. I just want to point out that your mother, though wrong to think that most Americans live in rural areas, is not being entirely unreasonable.

Of course it's true that the vast majority of Americans live in metropolitan areas. But I don't think you can start inferring cultural attitudes from that fact: certainly not all suburbanites are good liberals, or Democrats would be winning just about every election in the country by a landslide. Houston County, for example, went red in 2008 by a substantial margin. I bet not all those people recycle or send their kids to Montessori schools.

That is to say, it's just as much a mistake to think that the country is made up of good liberals as of "Real Americans." New York and the Bay Area are exceptions, not the rule.
posted by dd42 at 6:12 PM on December 15, 2010


I don't at all think that all suburbanites are politically liberal. I'm talking about culture. It's one of the classic lies of the media - that we can be easily divided into two camps, Liberal Elites and Salt Of The Earth Heartlanders. With Salt Of The Earth types vastly outnumbering the Liberal Elites.

Except, of course, that my small Bible Belt hometown has a Montessori now. You can buy arugula at Wal Mart. Most people live in or near cities and enjoy both the social advantages and real-life constraints of city life.

People like Sarah Palin are in the minority, maybe not politically, but certainly culturally. And this map shows that quite clearly.
posted by Sara C. at 7:18 PM on December 15, 2010


Wow, Dallas is amazing. There's a really great mix of races and income levels in the north/northwest section....but the southern section is either all black or mixed black and hispanic, and that's where you see almost no money spent on public services and education. Then there are places like Highland Park, where Bush now lives...90% white, and all the dollars are locked up tight inside their little DiamondAge enclaves...even though their kids go to private schools, they're still fighting the Robin Hood laws that try to give some of their school funding to the kids without shoes. Ah Dallas, when the revolution comes, prepare for the hungry to toast their potatoes on the embers of your mansions.

The census shows that the area where I just left had an increase of 30% in housing value...but I can tell you that I'm selling the house for almost 100k less than I paid to build it ten years ago; there are a ton of foreclosures in that neighborhood, and I don't know anyone who lives there who is still above water that bought/built in 1999-2000. The only way that property values in that area increased, is if they are counting the eminent domain purchases that killed the wildlife preserve to run a tollway through it.
posted by dejah420 at 7:30 PM on December 15, 2010


It's amazing to see how racially segregated Boston still is

It's disgraceful how racially segregated just about every major city is. Look at NYC, look at DC, look at Atlanta, Philly, St. Louis, LA, Detroit...

This may be the most meaningful data representation I've seen to date about cities, the US, people.

(and this is without even talking about density vs. representation issues)
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 8:08 PM on December 15, 2010


So what you're saying is..... The Rent is Too Damn High?
posted by schmod at 8:41 PM on December 15, 2010


The segregation for Brooklyn and Queens, and then as you go farther out on long island is fascinating.

And you can practically see the seething from the tiny little square that is Bridgeport, Chicago. Also interesting to see the conventional wisdom of "the South Side of Chicago is segregated" sort of turned on its head. True, it is almost 100% black. But the edges are much softer than they are in other areas.
posted by gjc at 8:54 PM on December 15, 2010


It's disgraceful how racially segregated just about every major city is. Look at NYC, look at DC, look at Atlanta, Philly, St. Louis, LA, Detroit...

This may be intentional on some level, and perhaps not a necessarily-bad thing. As well-off minorities leave the city for the suburbs, they still do tend to cluster together. Is anyone bothered by the fact that lots of Italians live in Little Italy?

Similarly, many of the ethnic neighborhoods in New York City have origins in immigrant communities. Again, I'm not sure that I'd argue that this would necessarily be a bad thing. The population numbers don't tell the whole story.

As long as there is not a major economic or social disparity, I'm finding it difficult to be outraged.

(On the other hand, the statistics on that map representing the portions of DC and Prince George's county east of the Anacostia River are downright tragic. Things have actually gotten worse for those residents over the past 10 years, which is quite a feat, given how horrible those areas already were at the end of the 1990s.)
posted by schmod at 9:05 PM on December 15, 2010


Sara C., you're so much cooler than your Mom, it's, like, great!

Booo, Mom!
posted by TSOL at 9:10 PM on December 15, 2010


It's disgraceful how racially segregated just about every major city is. Look at NYC, look at DC, look at Atlanta, Philly, St. Louis, LA, Detroit...

Once again, census tract 4234 represents! 41% white; 29% black; 11% hispanic; 11% asian; 7% other. No majority, no minorities. Slighter higher black population and lower hispanic population, but not that far off from nationwide percentages, I wouldn't think...*

What's that ...? Berkeley's not a major city, you say? We pretend we are. And we claim Phil Dick. Call it SF Bay Area (not on your list, but still fairly racially segregated, most of it) ... my last 3 tracts in SF were ... 64%, 79%, and 45% white (Sunset, 45% asian).

(Yes, but how many Melungeons or Brass Ankles?)

I sorta agree with schmod. Ethnicities tend to group together for cultural and other reasons. People in families often tend look like each other.

However, that probably leads to the big problem, imo, the public schools, where "minority" students make up 99.5% of some of them.

As long as there is not a major economic or social disparity, I'm finding it difficult to be outraged.

Rage on, brother.

* does anyone know which census tract is the "most integated" i.e. closest to the racial demographics of the nation at large? my guess might be 3 square blocks of Kansas City, Kansas ... (census tract 3 is pretty close, but too many asians.)
posted by mrgrimm at 11:15 PM on December 15, 2010


Tract 4054 represent!

Median income: $26,766 — down 27%
Median home value: $352,900 — up 71%
Median rent: $942 — up 22%


Yikes. I just looked at mine.

Median income: $43,366 — down 11%
Median home value: $545,900 — up 63%
Median rent: $986 — up 15%

What's interesting is that although our median rents are similar, our median housing prices are not.

Also interesting is that if I walk a few blocks north of Dwight St. the median income for tract 423 jumps to over $70K (up 25%!) ... as the percentage of white people increases from 41% to 61%. The education business must be doing well.
posted by mrgrimm at 11:25 PM on December 15, 2010


As an Australian, viewing the Median Household income is fascinating, because every major city looks like a donut - light coloured low incomes in the centre, with a dark ring of high incomes around it. Our cities don't really work that way.

And not just a little bit of difference - in Detroit there is $25K median in the city, and $100K median in the suburb 3 miles away.

It's incredible how much the white flight of the 1960s and 1970s has shaped, and continues to shape, American cities.
posted by dave99 at 2:16 AM on December 16, 2010


Is anyone bothered by the fact that lots of Italians live in Little Italy?...I'm finding it difficult to be outraged.

Ok, now take that to the level where it's, "Oh you're ####? Go live in Little ####" for every ethnicity for every city in the country. That's why I'm outraged.

Also, if someone created an overlay of government investment in these neighborhoods I think you'd reconsider as well.
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 4:54 AM on December 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


Also, to clarify my last post, I'm not intending that every location decision is motivated by a third party (although sometimes it is), but like I said, this says something significant about all of us.
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 4:56 AM on December 16, 2010


This sort of information and maps would be interesting to see for Mefites.
posted by nomadicink at 6:55 AM on December 16, 2010


does anyone know which census tract is the "most integated" i.e. closest to the racial demographics of the nation at large?

There are a lot of census tracts which are actually more integrated than the racial demographics of the nation at large. The census tract I lived in during most of the period of this study, #195 in Brooklyn, NY, comes in with 30% white residents, 47% African-American residents, 15% Hispanic residents, 5% Asian residents, and 3% "Other". These aren't "segregated" figures, though the majority of the neighborhood is non-white.

The official figures for the "demographics of the nation at large" is 74% white, 15% Hispanic, 12% African-American, 5% "Other", 4.5% Asian. In which case there are probably lots and lots of census tracts that match these figures - 75% white is still really, really white.
posted by Sara C. at 9:05 AM on December 16, 2010


Okay, I've been able to find a 17% of all households for unmarried same sex couples in San Fran's Census District 205 (near Market & Castro). Are there any over 17%?
posted by jeanmari at 10:49 AM on December 16, 2010


Martin county, Texas - median monthly rent = $178.
posted by gregor-e at 12:17 PM on December 16, 2010


« Older Menagerie...  |  Today the Internet affords you... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments