The US Census Bureau thread

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by UrbanRevival

Also, generally Western in US geographical terms, meaning much younger housing development and much less of an entrenched history with redlining practices.

Probably, but the pretty clear variable is % AA. Heavily black metros, especially heavily black metros with large white working class, will have higher segregation. Redlining hasn't been a thing for at least 50 years.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Probably, but the pretty clear variable is % AA. Heavily black metros, especially heavily black metros with large white working class, will have higher segregation. Redlining hasn't been a thing for at least 50 years.

De jure red-lining has been gone for over 5 decades, but many legacy cities are still living with the fall-out from de facto red-lining due to the way the practice baked-in a lot of these residential patterns.

% black is obviously a big part of the equation too, but I strongly suspect that metro areas that have a higher % of their development from before 1960 have higher levels of black/white segregation.

Just compare legacy metros like NYC and Chicago against newer Sunbelt metros like Dallas and Houston.

Originally Posted by Docere

Black-White Index of Dissimilarity (Black % of MSA)

New York 73 (16.2%)
Chicago 71.5 (17.1%)
Dallas 51.6 (16.8%)
Houston 57.2 (18%)

Very similar overall percentages of blacks at the metro level, but significantly different black/white segregation index scores.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Docere

The index of dissimilarity is much higher for Blacks than for other minorities. Cities with smaller Black populations are less segregated.

The biggest factor is how much the metro area has grown since the Civil Rights movement. Generally, all of the cities that have grown the most since 1970 are less segregated than the ones that have grown the least since 1970.

Detroit (rank 2), growth: -0.9%
St. Louis (5) 11.2%
Milwaukee (1) 12.2%
Philadelphia (7) 17.4%
New York (4) 18.0%
Chicago (3) 26.4%
Baltimore (10) 36.2%
San Francisco (14) 67.8%
Los Angeles (8) 86.8%
Seattle (20) 119.3%
Washington, DC (11) 123.2%
Portland (21) 131.8%
San Diego (15) 142.9%
Denver (17) 165.5%
Miami (6) 174.4%
Dallas (13) 215.1%
Atlanta (9) 245.3%
Houston (12) 258.8%
Phoenix (16) 366.3%
Austin (18) 472.4%
Las Vegas (19) 729.0%

Miami and Atlanta are notable exceptions as they are the only two metros with triple digit growth rates that are also in the top 10 most segregated places.

Timing might also be a factor for why the UK cities diverge so much from US cities. UK cities got the bulk of their non-white immigration late enough to learn from missteps in the US. Canada, which received the bulk of its non-white immigration in parallel to the UK, will probably look more similar to the UK than the US.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Timing might also be a factor for why the UK cities diverge so much from US cities. UK cities got the bulk of their non-white immigration late enough to learn from missteps in the US. Canada, which receive the bulk of its non-white immigration in parallel to the UK, will probably look more similar to the UK than the US.

UK nonwhites tend to be South Asian. The U.S. dissimilarity index between whites and South Asians is minimal.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Crawford

UK nonwhites tend to be South Asian. The U.S. dissimilarity index between whites and South Asians is minimal.

South Asians did not migrate until mostly after the Civil Rights movement. They were banned from migrating to the US until the 1940s. Migration for educational purposes mostly started in the 1950s, which is how both Kamala Harris's parents (South Asian and Jamaican) and Barack Obama's father (Kenyan) came to the U.S.

[Docere]

Originally Posted by Crawford

UK nonwhites tend to be South Asian. The U.S. dissimilarity index between whites and South Asians is minimal.

Index of Dissimilarity between Indian Americans and Whites (2010)

New York .513
Chicago .520
San Francisco .528
Dallas .541
San Jose .428
Washington .435
Los Angeles .412
Houston .518
Atlanta .504
Philadelphia 0.470
Seattle .503

https://s4.ad.brown.edu/projects/div...b/Default.aspx

[Klippenstein]

Originally Posted by mhays

Go Pacific Northwest!

This has been obvious for a long time. Look at any dot map. There's still segregation, but much less than most regions.

You mean whitelandia? It seems there’s a certain nuance missing from this… in that, if your city is more white than the national average then it’s more segregated than the national average even if the non-white population is not limited to one part of town. The fact that the white population is so high in those cities is not just by happenstance.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Klippenstein

You mean whitelandia? It seems there’s a certain nuance missing from this… in that, if your city is more white than the national average then it’s more segregated than the national average even if the non-white population is not limited to one part of town. The fact that the white population is so high in those cities is not just by happenstance.

Yeah, Oregon literally banned Black people from settling there in the state constitution lol. But as I pointed out above, it's also timing of the city's growth.

[Docere]

Originally Posted by Klippenstein

You mean whitelandia? It seems there’s a certain nuance missing from this… in that, if your city is more white than the national average then it’s more segregated than the national average even if the non-white population is not limited to one part of town. The fact that the white population is so high in those cities is not just by happenstance.

Portland MSA is only 4% Black, just about the lowest percentage of any major American city. Even Seattle - not very Black by US standards - is noticeably much blacker.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Klippenstein

You mean whitelandia? It seems there’s a certain nuance missing from this… in that, if your city is more white than the national average then it’s more segregated than the national average even if the non-white population is not limited to one part of town. The fact that the white population is so high in those cities is not just by happenstance.

What you are saying:

White flight no longer takes the character of whites (with means) leaving a core city and decamping to the suburbs of that same city; white flight now takes the character of whites (with means) leaving one city (usually with more racial issues and a larger, more politically minority population) and moving to another altogether (usually with less racial issues, and a smaller less politically powerful minority population).

The old white flight versus the new white flight.

The best examples of these cities are Portland, Austin, Denver, Seattle, and Nashville (ish).

Yaaaaaaas call them out.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

The best examples of these cities are Portland, Austin, Denver, Seattle, and Nashville (ish).

Austin, Denver and Nashville absolutely.

But Portland's NHW growth last decade wasn't particularly strong, and Seattle surprisingly shrank on the measure.



1M+ US MSAs by NH-white population change 2010 -2020 (total MSA growth in parenthesis)

Riverside: -12.4 (+8.9)
San Jose: -11.2 (+8.9)
Hartford: -10.7 (+0.1)
Fresno: -10.7 (+8.4)
Memphis: -9.1 (+1.6)
Miami: -7.9 (+10.3)
Baltimore: -7.8 (+4.9)
Chicago: -7.3 (+1.7)
Los Angeles: -7.3 (+2.9)
San Francisco: -6.6 (+9.5)
Rochester: -6.4 (+1.0)
Milwaukee: -5.9 (+1.2)
Providence: -5.8 (+4.7)
Buffalo: -5.7 (+2.8)
Tulsa: -5.7 (+8.3)
New York: -5.6 (+6.6)
Cleveland: -5.5 (+0.5)
San Diego: -5.2 (+6.6)
St. Louis: -5.1 (+1.2)
Pittsburgh: -5.0 (+0.6)
Philadelphia: -4.8 (+4.7)
Las Vegas: -4.6 (+16.1)
Virginia Beach: -4.2 (+5.0)
Detroit: -4.0 (+2.2)
New Orleans: -3.8 (+6.9)
Boston: -3.4 (+8.5)
Honolulu: -3.4 (+6.6)
Sacramento: -3.4 (+11.6)
Washington: -2.2 (+13.0)
Louisville: -2.1 (+6.9)
Cincinnati: -1.9 (+5.6)
Birmingham: -1.5 (+5.1)
Tucson: -0.9 (+6.4)
Atlanta: -0.8 (+15.2)
Seattle: -0.5 (+16.8)

Oklahoma City: +0.1 (+13.8)
Tampa: +0.5 (+14.1)
Kansas City: +0.7 (+9.1)
Minneapolis: +0.8 (+10.7)
Indianapolis: +1.1 (+11.8)
Columbus: +1.4 (+12.5)
Portland: +1.7 (+12.9)
Dallas: +2.2 (+20.0)
Orlando: +2.2 (+25.3)
Houston: +2.5 (+20.3)
Grand Rapids: +3.0 (+9.5)
Richmond: +3.2 (+10.8)
Phoenix: +5.6 (+15.6)
Salt Lake City: +5.9 (+15.6)
Charlotte: +6.6 (+18.6)
Jacksonville: +7.7 (+19.3)
Denver: +8.4 (+16.5)
San Antonio: +8.4 (+19.4)
Nashville: +11.6 (+20.9)
Raleigh: +14.9 (+25.1)
Austin: +20.7 (+33.0)

source: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content..._-Populati.pdf


For an interesting intra-state take on this movement, just look at Nashville and Memphis on complete opposite ends of this particular spectrum.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Austin, Denver and Nashville absolutely.

But Portland's NHW growth last decade wasn't particularly strong, and Seattle surprisingly shrank on the measure.



1M+ US MSAs by NH-white population change 2010 -2020 (total MSA growth in parenthesis)

Riverside: -12.4 (+8.9)
San Jose: -11.2 (+8.9)
Hartford: -10.7 (+0.1)
Fresno: -10.7 (+8.4)
Memphis: -9.1 (+1.6)
Miami: -7.9 (+10.3)
Baltimore: -7.8 (+4.9)
Chicago: -7.3 (+1.7)
Los Angeles: -7.3 (+2.9)
San Francisco: -6.6 (+9.5)
Rochester: -6.4 (+1.0)
Milwaukee: -5.9 (+1.2)
Providence: -5.8 (+4.7)
Buffalo: -5.7 (+2.8)
Tulsa: -5.7 (+8.3)
New York: -5.6 (+6.6)
Cleveland: -5.5 (+0.5)
San Diego: -5.2 (+6.6)
St. Louis: -5.1 (+1.2)
Pittsburgh: -5.0 (+0.6)
Philadelphia: -4.8 (+4.7)
Las Vegas: -4.6 (+16.1)
Virginia Beach: -4.2 (+5.0)
Detroit: -4.0 (+2.2)
New Orleans: -3.8 (+6.9)
Boston: -3.4 (+8.5)
Honolulu: -3.4 (+6.6)
Sacramento: -3.4 (+11.6)
Washington: -2.2 (+13.0)
Louisville: -2.1 (+6.9)
Cincinnati: -1.9 (+5.6)
Birmingham: -1.5 (+5.1)
Tucson: -0.9 (+6.4)
Atlanta: -0.8 (+15.2)
Seattle: -0.5 (+16.8)

Oklahoma City: +0.1 (+13.8)
Tampa: +0.5 (+14.1)
Kansas City: +0.7 (+9.1)
Minneapolis: +0.8 (+10.7)
Indianapolis: +1.1 (+11.8)
Columbus: +1.4 (+12.5)
Portland: +1.7 (+12.9)
Dallas: +2.2 (+20.0)
Orlando: +2.2 (+25.3)
Houston: +2.5 (+20.3)
Grand Rapids: +3.0 (+9.5)
Richmond: +3.2 (+10.8)
Phoenix: +5.6 (+15.6)
Salt Lake City: +5.9 (+15.6)
Charlotte: +6.6 (+18.6)
Jacksonville: +7.7 (+19.3)
Denver: +8.4 (+16.5)
San Antonio: +8.4 (+19.4)
Nashville: +11.6 (+20.9)
Raleigh: +14.9 (+25.1)
Austin: +20.7 (+33.0)

source: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content..._-Populati.pdf


For an interesting intra-state take on this movement, just look at Nashville and Memphis on complete opposite ends of this particular spectrum.

I hadn’t realized that both Portland and Seattle had stable/shrinking NHW populations. On the other end of the spectrum, I hadn’t realized that San Antonio’s NHW was growing so rapidly.

[dave8721]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Austin, Denver and Nashville absolutely.

But Portland's NHW growth last decade wasn't particularly strong, and Seattle surprisingly shrank on the measure.



1M+ US MSAs by NH-white population change 2010 -2020 (total MSA growth in parenthesis)

Riverside: -12.4 (+8.9)
San Jose: -11.2 (+8.9)
Hartford: -10.7 (+0.1)
Fresno: -10.7 (+8.4)
Memphis: -9.1 (+1.6)
Miami: -7.9 (+10.3)
Baltimore: -7.8 (+4.9)
Chicago: -7.3 (+1.7)
Los Angeles: -7.3 (+2.9)
San Francisco: -6.6 (+9.5)
Rochester: -6.4 (+1.0)
Milwaukee: -5.9 (+1.2)
Providence: -5.8 (+4.7)
Buffalo: -5.7 (+2.8)
Tulsa: -5.7 (+8.3)
New York: -5.6 (+6.6)
Cleveland: -5.5 (+0.5)
San Diego: -5.2 (+6.6)
St. Louis: -5.1 (+1.2)
Pittsburgh: -5.0 (+0.6)
Philadelphia: -4.8 (+4.7)
Las Vegas: -4.6 (+16.1)
Virginia Beach: -4.2 (+5.0)
Detroit: -4.0 (+2.2)
New Orleans: -3.8 (+6.9)
Boston: -3.4 (+8.5)
Honolulu: -3.4 (+6.6)
Sacramento: -3.4 (+11.6)
Washington: -2.2 (+13.0)
Louisville: -2.1 (+6.9)
Cincinnati: -1.9 (+5.6)
Birmingham: -1.5 (+5.1)
Tucson: -0.9 (+6.4)
Atlanta: -0.8 (+15.2)
Seattle: -0.5 (+16.8)

Oklahoma City: +0.1 (+13.8)
Tampa: +0.5 (+14.1)
Kansas City: +0.7 (+9.1)
Minneapolis: +0.8 (+10.7)
Indianapolis: +1.1 (+11.8)
Columbus: +1.4 (+12.5)
Portland: +1.7 (+12.9)
Dallas: +2.2 (+20.0)
Orlando: +2.2 (+25.3)
Houston: +2.5 (+20.3)
Grand Rapids: +3.0 (+9.5)
Richmond: +3.2 (+10.8)
Phoenix: +5.6 (+15.6)
Salt Lake City: +5.9 (+15.6)
Charlotte: +6.6 (+18.6)
Jacksonville: +7.7 (+19.3)
Denver: +8.4 (+16.5)
San Antonio: +8.4 (+19.4)
Nashville: +11.6 (+20.9)
Raleigh: +14.9 (+25.1)
Austin: +20.7 (+33.0)

source: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content..._-Populati.pdf


For an interesting intra-state take on this movement, just look at Nashville and Memphis on complete opposite ends of this particular spectrum.

Another interesting take is that the numbers would probably add up to a big negative % overall which means either the white NH population in general is shrinking or that they are generally moving from cities to smaller metros/small towns rather than to other large metros. Or probably both.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by mhays

Go Pacific Northwest!

This has been obvious for a long time. Look at any dot map. There's still segregation, but much less than most regions.

Uh, there's like what, two black people in Seattle? It's not hard to not be segregated when you have none of the history for it and such small populations. Mind you the PNW is home to some of the worst white supremacist groups in US history. Oregon was at one point the only whites only state in the country, they literally had black exclusion laws. Nothing really to celebrate.

[iheartthed]

Fast growing regions in general tend to be less segregated than slow growing places. I recall from a thread on this forum years ago that Las Vegas is the least racially segregated metro and it doesn't have discernible patterns of racial segregation, but like 90% of the city was developed within the past 40 years.

[Crawford]

I can see this, though Dallas and Houston don't really have legacy working class white populations. They're mostly newer sprawl, which is a different ballgame. There isn't much to segregate. There are white majority in-town favored quarter-type areas, almost 100% nonwhite poor-working class areas, and then a crapload of sprawl, with varying levels of diversity, though usually pretty high.

And these towns are so transient. There aren't fourth generation neighborhood cranks angry about the newcomers. Neighborhoods turn over in 20 years. There are Texas slum areas that were first developed in the 1980's. In the North, anything post-WW2 is considered pretty new. And the old northern cities are so rooted.

There's a block of Italians in the Gowanus neighborhood in Brooklyn that seem to be reenacting 1940's NYC. They're playing stickball and sitting all day on stoops smoking cigars. Meanwhile, the surrounding blocks were gentrified decades ago, and probably haven't been Italian since the 70's. Even today, I'm not sure these families would sell to outsiders. Outside of NOLA, this weirdness doesn't happen in the Sunbelt.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I can see this, though Dallas and Houston don't really have legacy working class white populations.

Right, and the reason for this is that, relatively speaking, Dallas and Houston were pretty small places back when the white ethnic working class dominated cities like NYC and Chicago (who then subsequently had one of the biggest demographic conniption fits in history during the great migration).

There was just so much more of NYC and Chicago that existed back in the red-lining era, such that they have so much more of that era's legacy still clinging to them like a bad rash that won't go away.

[Crawford]

It might just be that SA is popular with whites who may not generate Portlandia-style hype. I'm pretty sure it's popular with conservative older whites, military-affiliated whites and the like. It's a really cheap metro, where you get a lot of sprawl for your money. They probably aren't producing TikTok videos on their love of Buc-ees, or whatever. No hacker houses jumping on the AI boom, or influencers with their content.

[DCReid]

San Antonio is certainly an interesting metro to watch given this trend. I read somewhere that housing costs are now higher than Houston. I assume it is and will remain a majority minority metro but could it drop below 50% latino by 2040 or 2050?

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by DCReid

San Antonio is certainly an interesting metro to watch given this trend. I read somewhere that housing costs are now higher than Houston. I assume it is and will remain a majority minority metro but could it drop below 50% latino by 2040 or 2050?

Local white growth rates - although strong relative to other metros - are less than half that of the sum of local minority groups. Hispanic growth is still remarkably strong.

The dynamic that will drive white rates up will probably take until 2050 or 2060 to show up: racial intermarriage between Latinos and whites combined with a shift in the “color line.” There’s already evidence that many Latinos are following in the same footsteps as Italians, Irish, and others in becoming “white.” Texas is likely the place where these dynamics will be the most visible and politically important.

I doubt this would ever push San Antonio into majority white status, however.