WalletHub' List of 2021’s Most Diverse Cities in U.S. And the winner is...

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by pj3000

I'm just talking about the hard numbers, not the soft living and interacting part of it.

As Steely said above, the only sensible way to look at a ranked system in this case is to consider it on a metro area basis.

Yeah no argument from me about metro being a better measure.

[DMX]

Originally Posted by pj3000

NYC boroughs are not cities.

They are counties, tho.

Originally Posted by homebucket

Whoa DMX! Big fan. You back from the dead bruh? Where's Tupac hiding btw?

Marin City, California

[wwmiv]

If they don’t have the good sense of doing it by metro area, the whole list is useless.

As others have rightly said.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

If they don’t have the good sense of doing it by metro area, the whole list is useless.

As others have rightly said.

Metro Area measures Metro Areas but it's perfectly appropriate and relevant to compare neighborhoods, cities, suburbs, counties if you want to get an idea of what that place is like compared to others. Metrowide data has it's usefulness and so do the others.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

Metro Area measures Metro Areas but it's perfectly appropriate and relevant to compare neighborhoods, cities, suburbs, counties if you want to get an idea of what that place is like compared to others. Metrowide data has it's usefulness and so do the others.

When comparing nationally, metro is the most appropriate. Comparing within metro areas, cities/municipalities are appropriate. Within certain states, it might be more useful to use one or the other (or something else entirely), depending upon development patterns.

In this case, metro would be the most useful because the list is comparing nationally. Another useful metric would be to use counties and be all encompassing with some series of graphics as well. You could also overlay metro area boundaries on the county maps if you use counties, which would have its own set of inferences.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

Metro Area measures Metro Areas but it's perfectly appropriate and relevant to compare neighborhoods, cities, suburbs, counties if you want to get an idea of what that place is like compared to others. Metrowide data has it's usefulness and so do the others.

I don't find there to be much of any utility in comparing geographies of a handful of square miles and 50,000 people with geographies of hundreds of square miles and millions of people and then ranking them according to some metric.

You seem fairly convinced that there is something meaningful to be learned from doing so, so we probably won't convince each other of our respective positions. Time to agree to disagree.

[wwmiv]

I think the underlying point you’re trying to make is more like this:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

I don't find there to be much of any utility in comparing geographies of a handful of square miles (or of any size, really, including small urban enclaves) and 50,000 people that are largely dependent upon larger neighbors for employment and entertainment options with geographies of hundreds of square miles and millions of people that are regional employment centers anchoring urban geographies which necessarily influence the neighboring municipalities and then ranking them according to some metric.

You seem fairly convinced that there is something meaningful to be learned from doing so, so we probably won't convince each other of our respective positions. Time to agree to disagree.

[bolded edits mine]

Some places, suburbs, don’t exist independently (at least in their current form) of the city that they are tied to and should not be ranked on the same national lists as those cities which anchor their regions, regardless of the size of either type UNLESS you are comparing different municipalities within that region only.

[bilbao58]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

Another ranking based solely on racial diversity

https://www.city-data.com/top103.html

Be careful! That list has Gaithersburg, Maryland as #16 and doesn't have Los Angeles in its top 100 at all!

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by bilbao58

Be careful! That list has Gaithersburg, Maryland as #16 and doesn't have Los Angeles in its top 100 at all!

Which only means both lists are incorrect.

[bilbao58]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Which only means both lists are incorrect.

You know, in 2017 the LA Times declared Houston was "The most diverse place in America." Not sure I necessarily believe it, but it was an interesting read.

https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na...htmlstory.html

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

When comparing nationally, metro is the most appropriate.

This is your opinion, which you are entitled to, but plenty of people find usefulness in other rankings as well, not specifically metro-based.

[ChiSoxRox]

I've got to get to Houston at some point. It's the largest metro area in the US I have not been to yet.

I have a conference in New Orleans this December, and Houston would be a natural follow on from that. Going in December also means avoiding the summers; that level of heat and humidity frightens me.

[bilbao58]

Originally Posted by ChiSoxRox

I've got to get to Houston at some point. It's the largest metro area in the US I have not been to yet.

I have a conference in New Orleans this December, and Houston would be a natural follow on from that. Going in December also means avoiding the summers; that level of heat and humidity frightens me.

Before you go, do A LOT of research about what you want to see and do because it's not a city that reveals its charms readily to the casual visitor. And New Orleans is an impossible act to follow.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by bilbao58

You know, in 2017 the LA Times declared Houston was "The most diverse place in America." Not sure I necessarily believe it, but it was an interesting read.

https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na...htmlstory.html

FTR, I never took any issue with the listicle that started this thread for having houston #1 in diversity. I think just about any observer of US cities knows that houston is a very diverse place.

Is it the definitive #1? No, of course not. No place is, because it depends on what you're measuring and how you're weighting the various factors, but houston being in the conversation for most diverse is no surprise.

I only took issue with the listicle for ranking tiny little fly-speck suburbs alongside major cities with millions of people. That makes no sense to me and I doubt it ever will. "Metro area" is the proper level to use for this metric, IMO.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by bilbao58

Before you go, do A LOT of research about what you want to see and do because it's not a city that reveals its charms readily to the casual visitor. And New Orleans is an impossible act to follow.

Yeah, I think this is good advice. Houston is a big, interesting city with a lot to do... but without a little planning or having a local tour guide, you can kinda just get that "I don't get it" feeling about Houston. And after spending time in New Orleans, nearly any city is going to pale in comparison in terms of unique charms and joyful, yet moody atmosphere.

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

FTR, I never took any issue with the listicle that started this thread for having houston #1 in diversity. I think just about any observer of US cities knows that houston is a very diverse place.

Is it the definitive #1? No, of course not. No place is, because it depends on what you're measuring and how you're weighting the various factors, but houston being in the conversation for most diverse is no surprise.

I only took issue with the listicle for ranking tiny little fly-speck suburbs alongside major cities with millions of people. That makes no sense to me and I doubt it ever will. "Metro area" is the proper level to use for this metric, IMO.

Houston is most definitely made up of a diverse population -- I do think it would surprise the casual visitor who still thinks of Texas as cowboys and blondes with big hair.

In my experience, I guess I don't feel the full effect of global diversity that one gets in NY and DC, for instance. Those are the two places that I feel are the most diverse, not simply in terms of census race check box classification, but from the perspective of experiencing a seemingly much fuller, blended range of race, ethnicity, cultural, nationality, and religious variation. Granted, the types (older, much more dense and vibrant) of cities they are certainly lend themselves to increasing visibility of and interaction with their citizens, vs. a city lke Houston.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Yeah, I think this is good advice. Houston is a big, interesting city with a lot to do... but without a little planning or having a local tour guide, you can kinda just get that "I don't get it" feeling about Houston. And after spending time in New Orleans, nearly any city is going to pale in comparison in terms of unique charms and joyful, yet moody atmosphere.



Houston is most definitely made up of a diverse population -- I do think it would surprise the casual visitor who still thinks of Texas as cowboys and blondes with big hair.

In my experience, I guess I don't feel the full effect of global diversity that one gets in NY and DC, for instance. Those are the two places that I feel are the most diverse, not simply in terms of census race check box classification, but from the perspective of experiencing a seemingly much fuller, blended range of race, ethnicity, cultural, nationality, and religious variation. Granted, the types (older, much more dense and vibrant) of cities they are certainly lend themselves to increasing visibility of and interaction with their citizens, vs. a city lke Houston.

For the casual visitor, you will probably see more of NY/ DC's diversity than Houston but being a Houston resident for 20+ years, I see it all the time and know where to look.

[edale]

Originally Posted by pj3000

In my experience, I guess I don't feel the full effect of global diversity that one gets in NY and DC, for instance. Those are the two places that I feel are the most diverse, not simply in terms of census race check box classification, but from the perspective of experiencing a seemingly much fuller, blended range of race, ethnicity, cultural, nationality, and religious variation. Granted, the types (older, much more dense and vibrant) of cities they are certainly lend themselves to increasing visibility of and interaction with their citizens, vs. a city lke Houston.

Interesting that you include DC with NY here. I lived in DC for a couple years, and it didn't feel super diverse to me. Certainly nothing like New York or Los Angeles. Fairly small and not very visible Hispanic population, not a ton of Asians (compared to NY, LA, SF). The white population in DC feels decidedly less ethnic than the other big cities in the Northeast corridor. There is a substantial African population- especially Ethiopian and Somali (I think), and that was definitely noticeable while living there. Of course a large AA community, too.

I've not been to Houston, so I can't comment on it. But to me, the cities that feel the most diverse in the US are 1) NYC and 2) LA, and then a big gap to the next 'tier' of DC, Chicago, SF.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

I don't find there to be much of any utility in comparing geographies of a handful of square miles and 50,000 people with geographies of hundreds of square miles and millions of people and then ranking them according to some metric.

You seem fairly convinced that there is something meaningful to be learned from doing so, so we probably won't convince each other of our respective positions. Time to agree to disagree.

Well, the only few people complaining about this seem to be on message boards. The entities that make these lists and have been doing it for years must be receiving positive feedback from lots of people who find this useful, else why keep putting out data?

Like I said, you can choose to look only at larger populated areas only on a list and not look at smaller ones, it's really very easy tp do.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

else why keep putting out data?

for clicks.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by edale

Interesting that you include DC with NY here. I lived in DC for a couple years, and it didn't feel super diverse to me. Certainly nothing like New York or Los Angeles. Fairly small and not very visible Hispanic population, not a ton of Asians (compared to NY, LA, SF). The white population in DC feels decidedly less ethnic than the other big cities in the Northeast corridor. There is a substantial African population- especially Ethiopian and Somali (I think), and that was definitely noticeable while living there. Of course a large AA community, too.

I've not been to Houston, so I can't comment on it. But to me, the cities that feel the most diverse in the US are 1) NYC and 2) LA, and then a big gap to the next 'tier' of DC, Chicago, SF.

I think the majority of DC's diversity is located outside of DC proper, in Montgomery county (that's whay all these places like Gaithersburg, Rockville, Olney, Wheaton, Germantown, Silver Spring, etc. always pop up on these "diversity" lists) and to a somewhat smaller extent throughout Northern VA.

It's a very suburban population, with a majority of the non-white/black population being foreign-born. The DC metro area is estimated to have over 1.5M immigrants currently. That is one of the big things I notice that gives a diverse international flavor to NYC and DC, that I at least have not experienced to the same extent in other large US cities (i.e., I don't think of 10th generation Mexican-Americans in California as "diverse").

Gotta say that I'm somewhat surprised that you didn't recognize much of an Hispanic population... it's certainly not small, and definitely visible throughout the area. I believe it is around 1M people. That's significant any way you look at it.