Decline of Whites in NYC?

[futurecity]

The NYC white population increased from 2000-2010, so I don't understand the premise of the thread.

Yes, the non-Hispanic white population decreased slightly (2% or something), but that isn't a meaningful decline. But the overall white population increased.

And I'm not sure why Hispanics are being compared. The Hispanic population growth is barely higher than the White population growth.

Only the Asian population is booming in terms of % increase. The real story is that NYC will be a much more Asian city than before.

The White and Hispanic populations are largely stable, and the Black population is decreasing slightly. Asian population is booming.

When I said White, I meant non-hispanic white. The census map I was looking at (the washington post) seperated white from hispanic.

Anyway, basically, the premise of the thread was,

It seems whites (NH) are decreasing, and they have been for decades. Now the decrease has slowed down over the past decade as more younger whites move into the city:

a) Will the white (non-hispanic) decline continue or reverse? If not, what affect will it have on the city's economy and social situation if traditional working/middle class whites are displaced by immigrant communities? Will Hispanics as a whole become the plurality by 2020 in your opinion and if so what will that mean for NYC.

Also, it appears whites are leaving the Bronx and it is becoming an hispanic area primarily. What does this mean for the future social and economic issues in the Bronx? Could the Bronx become poorer, richer, less crime, more crime, etc, etc... will it become more of a ghetto, or will it prosper with this new change in demographics.??

That's it.

[Fabrizio]

Futurecity: I looked over this thread. The problem is that you are using the incorrect language.

Whites moving into an area is considered a positive developement and a decline of whites is considered negative... but if you don't want to be labeled a racist, you have to use the proper real-estate code words.

"Gentrification" mostly means "whites moving in". The area is attracting "young professionals"... it means whites. It has become a "hipster neighborhood"... hipster = whites. "Artist types". "Creative class". Oh... and of course the word "Bohemian". "Bohemians" in the real-estate world means "white kids with wealthy parents".

(I mean hey, even gen-u-ine Bohemians from Bohemia were as white as you can get.)

"An uptick in babies and strollers" also means "more whites".

Twee gift shops replacing bodegas ... galleries...artisanal beer... it means the whites are moving in. Now of course there will be a few blacks in the mix... but let's face it: it means whites.

And yes, you are right, it is seen as a positive developement.

Below is an unintentionaly hilarious article from the NYTimes about white folk moving in and making places nice. There are even photos and interviews.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/re...l?pagewanted=1

[ZippyTheChimp]

"Whites Moving into an Area" or "Whites Leaving an Area" is not the same as "Whites Leaving NYC" coupled with "White Flight."

Gentrification has increased the most in Manhattan and Brooklyn, and yet the White population has decreased - not significantly either in these boroughs or citywide, unless you accept the premise of this thread, which most have rejected.

Other significant data that could impact economic conditions in NYC have been mostly ignored.

To the question if the White population will further decrease, it should be noted that the number of White children under 6 years old has increased while other groups have decreased dramatically. If you extrapolate this data, you can assume that the White population (or percentage) will stabilize over the next decades.

But these numbers are race data for the sake of race, and not much more. They say little about economic trends in the city.

What is economically significant is that, while the population of the city has increased, the number of people under 18 years old has decreased, and the number of families with children has dropped, even among Hispanics.

What this tells me, and should be obvious to anyone who lives in NYC, is that it's getting more expensive to live here, even in traditional family boroughs like Brooklyn. Manhattan remains a strange place to figure out, except that it's very expensive to live here. While the borough had an increase in families with children, about one-third of the Manhattan population lives alone.

Gentrification used to mean Whites moving in, put that's outdated. Not only White people have money or good jobs in NYC.

[Merry]

Because it is sad. When something like a demographic change based on many socioeconomic trends can be addressed so blithely as the "Decline of Whites" or "White Flight".

Thanks, Ninja .

Unfortunately, the use of "Blacks" and "Whites" is often intentionally offensive and it's difficult to separate that from more innocuous use of these labels. Isn't "white flight" a rather anachronistic term, too? Demography can be discussed without these elements.

Futurecity: I looked over this thread.

By Jove, I think he's got it! Entertaining as ever, Fab .

[Ninjahedge]

You can't live in Manhattan with kids w/o a nanny.....

Or, at least, that is what I have been seeing as I tour the city on job visits.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Isn't "white flight" a rather anachronistic term, too?

Absolutely, at least in NYC.

[ZippyTheChimp]

You can't live in Manhattan with kids w/o a nanny.....

Part of that is a social phenomenon, with one spouse not willing to forego a career.

[Fabrizio]

Gentrification used to mean Whites moving in, put that's outdated. Not only White people have money or good jobs in NYC.

We all figured out long ago that not only white people have money or good jobs in NY... but in the meantime: Gentrification still mostly means "whites moving in".

[ZippyTheChimp]

First of all, you are talking about neighborhood gentrification, the impact on the local population, what happens to the retail mix.

If you applied that to the city, the decline of the White population would mean NYC is becoming less gentrified. Does anyone believe that?

Secondly, neighborhood gentrification has a minor impact, when compared to other factors, on the overall city economy.

[Ninjahedge]

Part of that is a social phenomenon, with one spouse not willing to forego a career.

I know. It is still an odd shift seeing that in the city and being that most of the people who do the same in the 'burbs either have a relative helping or bring their kid to day care.

Seeing these women strolling kids around that bear no resemblance to them is still a bit of a mind bender when you are used to seeing mommy pushing baby around.



As for Fab's comment, I think he is being sarcastic, and he is valid in saying that although "Gentrification" means, literally, an up-scaling and "smoothing out" of a region, it has become almost synonymous with applying a "healthy" amount of Mayo to your Pumpernickel.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Neighborhood gentrification has another factor not associated with economics - cultural heritage. There is a feeling of loss among particular ethnic groups when places such as Little Italy and Harlem are ethnically transformed.

If you applied that to the scope of this thread, it would be like saying that New York City was founded by White people, and should remain majority White. I don't think anyone is saying that.

Economically, the recent movement of Whites does not have the major economic impact it once did. My neighborhood and Tribeca still have a White plurality, but it is much less so than in 2000. If you look at the neighborhood maps at places like Central Park West, White plurality has also declined.

Does that mean these neighborhoods have declined?

[ASchwarz]

Economically, the recent movement of Whites does not have the major economic impact it once did. My neighborhood and Tribeca still have a White plurality, but it is much less so than in 2000. If you look at the neighborhood maps at places like Central Park West, White plurality has also declined.

Does that mean these neighborhoods have declined?

I think most folks would agree that Southern (non-Brownstone) Brooklyn and most of Queens have gotten wealthier and "better" in recent years, yet they've also gotten much less white (in contrast to Brownstone/Yuppie Brooklyn and Western Queens, which have gotten much whiter).

So, for example, areas like Flushing, Elmhurst, Bensonhurst, Bay Ridge, etc. are less "white" than in past years, but are (IMO) much more vibrant and prosperous.

Bensonhurst, to take one example, was declining and not a really nice place to live 20 years ago. Now you see luxury condos, super-busy retail strips, improved schools, nicer parks, and the like. Immigrants, mostly non-white, revitalized the place. Flushing is an even more extreme example of racial change and increased prosperity.

Also, we shouldn't just think in the stereotypical carictures. Whites aren't just "yuppies" or "hipsters" or "outer-borough ethnics". There's the massive and growing Hasidic/Orthodox Jewish populations, large white immigrant communities (Russians, Poles, Albanians, etc.), and regular folks that defy easy race-based characterization.

And this obviously goes for all races. There's very little in common between a longtime NYC Puerto Rican and a newcomer from Mexico or Central America, or a longtime African American and someone from the West Indies.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Large parts of Bensonhurst have become Asian plurality, and the area has improved, not declined.

What further dilutes all of this is - what it means in the US today to be White or Black or Hispanic or Asian.

We're a long way from 1967. Nationwide, something like 8% of marriages are interracial; it must be even higher in major population centers. In the future, a significant portion of the population is not going to be able to racially identify itself.

[Merry]

In the future, a significant portion of the population is not going to be able to racially identify itself.

Maybe that was Nature's grand evolutionary intention for us all along .

[ZippyTheChimp]

Certain segments of our political demographic would dismiss you as a heathen, since you said Nature instead of God.