The Capitalist worldview still holds sway over the Mexican American dominant Cooperative Worldview and this will change radically when the pressure cooker of overall inequality explodes. If there are no rungs of equality on the ladder for hard working Latino parents and children to move up into a better future, they will create their own and have historically done. One way or another change is going to occur and all Latinos would prefer that it happen cooperatively. Latinos are a very American bunch and will fight for their children just as they have on the battle grounds of war in defense of our great nation. Happenstance will not do in this regard or in a vibrant Republican government.
If the white population, as depicted in the graphs above, is declining in both the cities and the suburbs, where are they going? Seems to me there is an ancillary story there.
And nowhere in the article does it mention the plight of generations of urban families who are virtually ignored by DC and all the while have to pay higher and higher costs for everyone else on stagnant incomes while receiving virtually nothing in return. Prime example: the ACA. Those living in rural areas pay far more for insurance(kicking in for the subsidies that go to others) but are lucky to ever be able to use that insurance because of a lack of medical services, facilities, and professionals in their area.
This is frustrating topic for me. I bought a house in one of those gentrifying neighborhoods in Intown Atlanta in my 20s so I could reduce my carbon footprint, be in walking distance to bars (no DUI for me!) and enjoy the culture of Intown Atlanta. And I just plain didnt want to live in a McMansion. There was a lot to look past in terms of crime and general ugliness and to deal with emotionally; it's hard to live in area where there are so many poor people and not feel guilty about how lucky you are! My job with the Army forced me to move away, but not after I did a lot of work to the property by making it a multi tenant residence - again to increase the amount of people who could live affordably in an urban area. Since I've left I've had a tenant get shot on my front porch in a gang related initiation, my house and a new tenant were nearly burnt down from a squatter setting a fire in the house that was left to ruin by a family who couldn't maintain the property, and in the process of fixing my burnt house, the AC unit walked off because it wasn't properly caged. So, why do I hold on to the place? Well, after being told it was worth nothing during this recent housing crisis, its now growing in value at a pace that does amazes me. I'm about to rent it for well over my mortgage and the idea of living in that neighborhood again appeals to me.
I'm middle class and white- am I wrong for trying to do my part to make a community better, safer and more livable?
I'm middle class and white- am I wrong for trying to do my part to make a community better, safer and more livable?
2
Is this actually white flight to the cities as a reaction of poor families moving to the suburbs then?
1
To the cities? The charts above show a declining population of whites in both cities and suburbs.
Are some people just blind?
First, the suburbs by your own chart are STILL clearly majority white by a significant margin despite the increase in minorities in those areas. The demographics is vastly different than the city center.
Second, has it occurred to you that there is overall population growth in most cities (especially those in the South) since 1990? The fact that the bulge move outward does NOT tell you anything. What that may mean is that the city EXPANDED (yes, I know, to land locked citizens of the coastal cities this would not even occur to them). In the time, I have lived in the Dallas area (basically since 1990 so I actually have watched it happen), the city has sprawled outward. The more expensive sections are moving outward as the population grows and spreads out more. Meanwhile the center of the city is still has the poorest sections with the exception of a few very exclusive enclaves (these areas display the absolutely WORST income inequality in the metro area).
First, the suburbs by your own chart are STILL clearly majority white by a significant margin despite the increase in minorities in those areas. The demographics is vastly different than the city center.
Second, has it occurred to you that there is overall population growth in most cities (especially those in the South) since 1990? The fact that the bulge move outward does NOT tell you anything. What that may mean is that the city EXPANDED (yes, I know, to land locked citizens of the coastal cities this would not even occur to them). In the time, I have lived in the Dallas area (basically since 1990 so I actually have watched it happen), the city has sprawled outward. The more expensive sections are moving outward as the population grows and spreads out more. Meanwhile the center of the city is still has the poorest sections with the exception of a few very exclusive enclaves (these areas display the absolutely WORST income inequality in the metro area).
As a life-long 68 year old New Yorker who has lived through some of the darkest days of crime and some of the resurgence of New York as a great commercial and cultural center, it is hard to escape the very un PC conclusion that what makes neighborhoods better or worse here is little more than a change in the class composition of inhabitants. And I have been around long enough to see it go both ways depending upon neighborhood.
Yes, the downside is a loss of diversity and I miss much of the grittiness that I knew all over NYC over the years, but I also value the relative feeling of security and the many advantages that wealth have brought to the city. And no, not everyone is treated fairly in the process but no solution ever worked to help everyone and sadly never will.
I lived though liberals like John Lindsay succeed in nearly tearing the city asunder and I am convinced that Mayor De Blasio will fare no better with many of his ill conceived "liberal" proposals.
And I am astonished by some of the hate in some of the postings here reserved for those who do not apparently agree with them. Astonished but hardly surpised.
Yes, the downside is a loss of diversity and I miss much of the grittiness that I knew all over NYC over the years, but I also value the relative feeling of security and the many advantages that wealth have brought to the city. And no, not everyone is treated fairly in the process but no solution ever worked to help everyone and sadly never will.
I lived though liberals like John Lindsay succeed in nearly tearing the city asunder and I am convinced that Mayor De Blasio will fare no better with many of his ill conceived "liberal" proposals.
And I am astonished by some of the hate in some of the postings here reserved for those who do not apparently agree with them. Astonished but hardly surpised.
6
I've lived in Charlotte for 35 years. In 1980 I was annexed in and actually 12 miles from the center. Blacks have been forced out of the center and replaced with apartment dwelling White Singles. Apartments are going up everywhere. So are the drinking establishments, 232 of them as last counted. The original surburbs 2-3 miles out is being gentrified as Black are forced out by high resale and taxes. The next five miles is a mix of Hispanic and Black with some level of poor whites. My area is turning Black. And while people may not like what I say it is not better here. We have increased crime. A local supermarket removed the self check outs because of theft. The two banks have been robbed 5 times in two years. We are going further out no longer feeling safe. We should have left here years ago.
1
This insistence in lumping 17% of the US population as a single minority group "hispanics" is foolish and misguided.
First, that group has at least three "races". White/European-looking, Black/Mulatto, pre-colonial indian. Over time, these groups will likely self sort, for example with the White/European hispanics, simply assuming a "white" identity, white voting patterns, etc. Linguistically, as second/third generation replaces the original immigrants, language too will cease to be an identity for the younger generations.
First, that group has at least three "races". White/European-looking, Black/Mulatto, pre-colonial indian. Over time, these groups will likely self sort, for example with the White/European hispanics, simply assuming a "white" identity, white voting patterns, etc. Linguistically, as second/third generation replaces the original immigrants, language too will cease to be an identity for the younger generations.
3
As an Asian immigrant (now a US citizen) I wanted to live and raise my family where the jobs were, the crime rate was low and the schools were good. So, we lived in predominantly white suburbs. We have been treated exceptionally well by our neighbors and the community in general and my family has thrived.
7
The boundary between "white" and "Hispanic" is porous. Many resist the distinction. Recent immigrants may sensibly constitute an "Hispanic" demographic. Many however, in subsequent generations are simply white or black, in the minds of themselves and associates.
When I told my neighbors in a retirement community in Florida in 1995 that in 25 years Hispanics would have reached Washington, nobody did believe me.
1
[[On the plus side for Republicans, the influx into the suburbs of minorities and the poor – which raises the possibility of attendant tax increases, property value declines, social service demands and crime — could push local whites to the right, into Republican arms.]]
You should really be ashamed of yourself. Minorities will lead to property value declines and an increase in crime? Are you saying it's just American "blacks" that will cause this or will immigrant Indians and Jamaicans and Nigerians and Chinese who will be the cause of ruination?
After a guy drives a cab for 16 hours, you're saying he will parade around his community gangbanging and raising hell?
Shame on you.
You should really be ashamed of yourself. Minorities will lead to property value declines and an increase in crime? Are you saying it's just American "blacks" that will cause this or will immigrant Indians and Jamaicans and Nigerians and Chinese who will be the cause of ruination?
After a guy drives a cab for 16 hours, you're saying he will parade around his community gangbanging and raising hell?
Shame on you.
1
I note particularly how discrimination, high rents, and so forth, have caused people to have to move. Sadly, negative reasons often are more the case, than any positive reasons. Then today it is generally bemoaned how the police, who for goodness sake are supposed to serve the honest people (we only hope this can endure) ... are claimed to harass the good citizens, meaning anyone who drives into town I suppose.
In the wild west, they used to tell 'strangers' where to go!
Israel can keep Palestinians out. No problem with that! But here in America, land of the 'free', people are supposed to be allowed to go anywhere, no questions ever asked? Is that really good governance?
And here is what puts that test what police, government, and supposedly good liberal, tolerant society must go by: We seem to be allowing harassment (if it ever could even be proved or accepted in courts of law anymore), by people among the citizenry, illegals, willfully criminal, or whatever, done against their neighbors who may well be law-abiding and trying to be good citizens!, just because that's only 'justice'. This has amounted to a terribly wrongful misreading of what we need if civilization itself is to endure.
The foxes in other words, have been replacing the guards of the chicken houses! Shame on the so-called liberal politicians who are catering to what amounts to blatant disregard for civil conduct and decency, and acting like Americans should, to deserve even to live here.
In the wild west, they used to tell 'strangers' where to go!
Israel can keep Palestinians out. No problem with that! But here in America, land of the 'free', people are supposed to be allowed to go anywhere, no questions ever asked? Is that really good governance?
And here is what puts that test what police, government, and supposedly good liberal, tolerant society must go by: We seem to be allowing harassment (if it ever could even be proved or accepted in courts of law anymore), by people among the citizenry, illegals, willfully criminal, or whatever, done against their neighbors who may well be law-abiding and trying to be good citizens!, just because that's only 'justice'. This has amounted to a terribly wrongful misreading of what we need if civilization itself is to endure.
The foxes in other words, have been replacing the guards of the chicken houses! Shame on the so-called liberal politicians who are catering to what amounts to blatant disregard for civil conduct and decency, and acting like Americans should, to deserve even to live here.
Mr. Edsall:
The rich have always taken advantage of these dynamics. It's buy low, gentrify, get bored and leave a mess for someone else to sort out. This is not news. The problem for the Republicans is going to be how to gerrymander to take advantage of new demographic patternss.
It is wishful thinking on your part to think that the Latino vote is going to forget conservatives' stance on immigration reform. I'm sure you can find enough Latinos to run as Republicans. I'm not so sure they can get the Latino vote.
This column is a nice attempt (with graphs!) to cast a Republican problem as something that Democrats should be afraid of. The country is changing faster than conservative thought can handle. What's up your sleeves next: an updated Missouri Compromise?
The rich have always taken advantage of these dynamics. It's buy low, gentrify, get bored and leave a mess for someone else to sort out. This is not news. The problem for the Republicans is going to be how to gerrymander to take advantage of new demographic patternss.
It is wishful thinking on your part to think that the Latino vote is going to forget conservatives' stance on immigration reform. I'm sure you can find enough Latinos to run as Republicans. I'm not so sure they can get the Latino vote.
This column is a nice attempt (with graphs!) to cast a Republican problem as something that Democrats should be afraid of. The country is changing faster than conservative thought can handle. What's up your sleeves next: an updated Missouri Compromise?
1
I don't know. Seems to me, cities are continually in flux and rents go up and they go down and then there is the issue of the landlord.
People go where they can afford to live, unless other people keep them out, i.e. red lining, or they like to live near people who are like themselves.
Cities now are very attractive and if like Manhattan, not a lot more room, or Washington DC, we don't like to build tall buildings, so that limits us and money is money. When I grew up in Detroit, the suburbs were new and exciting, now, the cities are exciting. The cities are the place to be and should continue so into the next 30.7 years and then we will be out of room and Texas will once again be popular.
People go where they can afford to live, unless other people keep them out, i.e. red lining, or they like to live near people who are like themselves.
Cities now are very attractive and if like Manhattan, not a lot more room, or Washington DC, we don't like to build tall buildings, so that limits us and money is money. When I grew up in Detroit, the suburbs were new and exciting, now, the cities are exciting. The cities are the place to be and should continue so into the next 30.7 years and then we will be out of room and Texas will once again be popular.
1
Here in Baltimore, the gentrifying neighborhoods are for the most part formerly white-working-class neighborhoods. Blacks are indeed moving out of Baltimore, but they're leaving behind street after street of decaying, abandoned rowhouses. Meanwhile, here in my neighborhood once dominated by steelworkers and dockworkers and their families, the price of housing is climbing and I can't find a parking spot if I get home after 7.
2
"Hispanics" are no different than Italians and other ethnicities that preceded them, no matter how hard the Democrats keep trying to classify them a special group.
Like these other groups, the third generation will speak English, know only a few words in their native tongue, and inter-marry with other ethnic groups. If they have white skin they will call themselves white. And many (gasp) will vote Republican.
Like these other groups, the third generation will speak English, know only a few words in their native tongue, and inter-marry with other ethnic groups. If they have white skin they will call themselves white. And many (gasp) will vote Republican.
2
Residents have always complained when new ethnic or racial groups started moving into their neighborhoods. We used to call people who complained racists.
1
What has been happening with the demographics, and where people move and settle, whether by any choice or not, and whatever kind of living they can make there ... should have all been foreseeable in terms of politician's decision-making. And sadly that was made at behest of the worst people to influence them. It proves that if government is to meddle more in peoples' affairs, to try to help, it could actually help more, if there were less of that.
And those who therefore want more government ... and give ample excuses ... are not helping either. And it feeds upon itself. The worse things get (and that's because of what they've been doing to 'help'), the more excuse they can point to, for doing this help.
We live in the worst of the ages, called in ancient India, the age of Kali Yuga. So what seems best, being rich, having everything, as claimed, is really just the opposite, a sign people have totally forsaken anything good, any real virtue. Then come the politicians, who woo the masses, to entice them saying being richer is good. In other words they are preying on peoples' propensities to give into sin. At same time, it then serves the interests of all this wrongness to relegate any religion needed to bring us away from the wrong ways of speech, thought and action ... to denounce religion, and shove it away from the public sphere ... in other words, to prevent it from serving its needed purposes.
It opens the door to ever worse tragedy upon this world.
And those who therefore want more government ... and give ample excuses ... are not helping either. And it feeds upon itself. The worse things get (and that's because of what they've been doing to 'help'), the more excuse they can point to, for doing this help.
We live in the worst of the ages, called in ancient India, the age of Kali Yuga. So what seems best, being rich, having everything, as claimed, is really just the opposite, a sign people have totally forsaken anything good, any real virtue. Then come the politicians, who woo the masses, to entice them saying being richer is good. In other words they are preying on peoples' propensities to give into sin. At same time, it then serves the interests of all this wrongness to relegate any religion needed to bring us away from the wrong ways of speech, thought and action ... to denounce religion, and shove it away from the public sphere ... in other words, to prevent it from serving its needed purposes.
It opens the door to ever worse tragedy upon this world.
1
Omitted in the article today is any discussion of the spiritual side of why people move anywhere. It is however mentioned the the cities are being populated by people who have become beholden to newer ideologies, including ideas of rights, as for 'minority' races, and different 'genders'.
As a consequence, liberal politics is helped by this.
However we should ask then if the people moving out of the cities are doing so partly because they don't fit in with such newer ideologies. It may not simply be people move for economic or financial reasons. Also important is the fact of higher costs of living in cities. Has the average wage level in cities been rising as fast as the cost of living measure (however it is to be measured)?
And we should note that since people may care about their beliefs and their cultural values at least as much as about their income levels, do politicians attend to attracting votes for such other reasons than to improve living standards as measured purely in fin'l terms.
It seems they ought to. Yet such factors are not amenable to study by sociologists, and they don't even seem to care then about things they can't measure 'scientifically'. Yet politicians should.
But today anything not reducible to value in monetary terms seems to be relegated to the wastebasket. A nation that ceases to care about anything but incomes and such standards is not on a good track. After all, why did the original colonists move to the New World?
As a consequence, liberal politics is helped by this.
However we should ask then if the people moving out of the cities are doing so partly because they don't fit in with such newer ideologies. It may not simply be people move for economic or financial reasons. Also important is the fact of higher costs of living in cities. Has the average wage level in cities been rising as fast as the cost of living measure (however it is to be measured)?
And we should note that since people may care about their beliefs and their cultural values at least as much as about their income levels, do politicians attend to attracting votes for such other reasons than to improve living standards as measured purely in fin'l terms.
It seems they ought to. Yet such factors are not amenable to study by sociologists, and they don't even seem to care then about things they can't measure 'scientifically'. Yet politicians should.
But today anything not reducible to value in monetary terms seems to be relegated to the wastebasket. A nation that ceases to care about anything but incomes and such standards is not on a good track. After all, why did the original colonists move to the New World?
1
Mr. Edsall writes today: "The nation’s urban centers are changing rapidly. Blacks are moving out, into the suburbs [etc]... Poverty is spreading from the urban core to the inner suburbs."
The question that comes to mind is whether the cities are then on the upswing and can serve to pull the economy up in the process? The rate of gains in terms of incomes and general prosperity may then be rising at rates as fast as had been happening say in the 90s, or the great period often spoken of between WW2 and the 70s. Why then is inequality still a problem? A rising tide lifts all ships.
The question that comes to mind is whether the cities are then on the upswing and can serve to pull the economy up in the process? The rate of gains in terms of incomes and general prosperity may then be rising at rates as fast as had been happening say in the 90s, or the great period often spoken of between WW2 and the 70s. Why then is inequality still a problem? A rising tide lifts all ships.
Not necessarily. Remember the people who are gentrifying are working professionals with bachelors degree or higher, and attracted to jobs which require that. One cannot seperate gentrification from the job market, or the demands of the job market. In DC, this has meant that those who lack such an education for professional knowledge class jobs, are struggling to find work at all. This has left a divided economy of the knowledge class and the lower working class, with the knowledge class taking a larger and larger portion of the city. This does not lead to gains for everybody, and in fact is at the core of inequality. The reality is the lower skilled workers are in excess of local demand, and there is still high demand for the higher skilled employees beyond local supply. Thus the displacement effect. People want to divide the labor economy from housing, but the two are interlinked. If there is no demand for your work, and there is high demand for somebody elses, this is going to impact the housing market.
1
Racial issues are fascinating, and it is refreshing to read a good report like this one, which has some actual facts and reasonable interpretations. Thanks, Edsall!
A few observations to supplement what is presented here. First, in each of the last 3 years, the number of Asian immigrants has exceeded the number of Hispanic. Since 4 billion of the 7 billion people on earth are Asian, and transportation costs are plummeting, the Asian population in the US may fairly soon exceed the Hispanic. After all, there are fewer than 1 billion Hispanics in the world (and fewer Blacks).
Second, random but extensive observation over the past twenty years in California suggests that Asian business owners often employ Hispanic workers in lower-authority positions. The Chinese grocery store with Hispanics arranging the displays is almost a cliche here. This may reflect a difference in the groups that arrive here, with more middle class Asians and fewer middle class Hispanics. It also may reflect cultural difference, with Asians famously focusing on education. I am happy to say that relationships between the two groups seem to be harmonious.
To see some actions that would enhance harmonious life in America, go to YouTube and watch Comedy Party Platform (2 min 9 sec). Then invite me to speak to your group. You will be glad you did!
A few observations to supplement what is presented here. First, in each of the last 3 years, the number of Asian immigrants has exceeded the number of Hispanic. Since 4 billion of the 7 billion people on earth are Asian, and transportation costs are plummeting, the Asian population in the US may fairly soon exceed the Hispanic. After all, there are fewer than 1 billion Hispanics in the world (and fewer Blacks).
Second, random but extensive observation over the past twenty years in California suggests that Asian business owners often employ Hispanic workers in lower-authority positions. The Chinese grocery store with Hispanics arranging the displays is almost a cliche here. This may reflect a difference in the groups that arrive here, with more middle class Asians and fewer middle class Hispanics. It also may reflect cultural difference, with Asians famously focusing on education. I am happy to say that relationships between the two groups seem to be harmonious.
To see some actions that would enhance harmonious life in America, go to YouTube and watch Comedy Party Platform (2 min 9 sec). Then invite me to speak to your group. You will be glad you did!
1
I believe that this OpEd (and other sources) have misstated Governing Magazine's methodology. The magazine identified gentrifying neighborhoods as those that had been in the lowest 40% and then had the highest growth rates in home value and educational attainment, NOT those that then reached the highest 1/3 in those categories. An important difference. "To assess gentrification, growth rates were computed for eligible tracts’ inflation-adjusted median home values and percentage of adults with bachelors’ degrees. Gentrified tracts recorded increases in the top third percentile for both measures when compared to all others in a metro area."
A very good example of what has happened to blacks is Minneapolis. About 30 years ago, young non parented blacks who had dropped out of school in Chicago started moving into the Twin Cities area, especially Brooklyn Park. Without parents, and as the gang and drug culture increased, it became a fertile ground for more non parented children who did not have fathers in their lives. These children became the wards of the state of Minnesota in the sense, that housing, food stamps, health care, etc. needed to be provided. There was an increase in crime, thus an increase in more capacity for the prisons, which has become a vicious cycle. Some of he problems of Chicago became transplanted to the Twin cities including murders among and in the black community. Increases in welfare has not done anything to change the status or welfare of black children, it has only exacerbated it. The truth is the truth. You see, this first started in young and pregnant white girls, all classes. Now, it has reached the Hispanic community which used to marry at a young age when they got pregnant, and now, they often don't, so society as a whole has descended into working people that pay taxes, plus America borrowing 30% of all we spend in this country each year to pay for not only wars, homeland security, but the education and care of non parented children. This is pretty much our country in a nutshell!
8
Well first, we do not borrow money (at the federal level) to pay for spending. That is widely believed in GOP circles, but simply is not true whatsoever. The federal gov't creates the money in the first place--why would it have to create money and then borrow it back? Republicans also tend to think we borrow from other countries, which is also not true.
Minneapolis--indeed the state of Minnesota is in a full blown economic boom.
Minneapolis--indeed the state of Minnesota is in a full blown economic boom.
Indeed the Feds create money but as more of that money heads overseas it allows its owners to place a value on it that may be detrimental to the US. The immediate need is to use less oil but what is used must be domestic since the dollar is the currency of trade in the oil economy. Treasury's continuous printing of money will come to bite us one day.
@Kevin The Fed Reserve is privately owned and does lend money. And while other countries may not cut us a check, so to speak, in the form of a loan interest, they do dabble in our dollars and our bonds and other securities through sophisticated layers of investment schemes (which all essentially amounts to us being indebted to them: https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/borr... )
What the democrats should be worried about in addition to the gentrification effect is the geriatric effect. Hillary is what? 70 years old? The average age of republican politicians is significantly less than democrat ones I suspect a result of the good ole' boy democrat central control network.
Do the democrats really want a presidential candidate who is likely to experience mental decline?
Do the democrats really want a presidential candidate who is likely to experience mental decline?
Jacobi, your post constitutes "ageism" writ large.
2
What a vicious cycle, especially for the Black and poor who stayed through the tough times of city life when the tax base was eroding, education declining, trash not being picked up and police not responding that came on the heels of deindustrialization and deconcentration of manufacturing jobs within urban centers that facilitated the white flight of 60s, 70s, and 80s.
With the suburbs now deindustrialized and manufacturing jobs transferred to lands beyond the borders and across oceans, and young whites rejecting the isolation of the vanilla suburbs of their youth in search of high-tech careers, great public transportation, and a knowledge based-economy concentrated in urban centers, gentrification exploded, housing became unaffordable, and doggie parks became an issue to organize around.
Black and poor people moving to the suburbs in search of work and better schools now find themselves experiencing a similar world they knew before gentrification, no manufacturing jobs, poor quality schools, and declining services.
With the suburbs now deindustrialized and manufacturing jobs transferred to lands beyond the borders and across oceans, and young whites rejecting the isolation of the vanilla suburbs of their youth in search of high-tech careers, great public transportation, and a knowledge based-economy concentrated in urban centers, gentrification exploded, housing became unaffordable, and doggie parks became an issue to organize around.
Black and poor people moving to the suburbs in search of work and better schools now find themselves experiencing a similar world they knew before gentrification, no manufacturing jobs, poor quality schools, and declining services.
4
The author is throwing out a bunch of information without showing any relationship. For example, he talks about Chicago and then tosses out some data about Charlotte.
Anyone can see that the demographics are changing and people are voting for anyone who looks and talks like themselves. It's just local politics. Everyone is only interested in taking a bigger slice of the pie for himself.
There is no new story here.
Anyone can see that the demographics are changing and people are voting for anyone who looks and talks like themselves. It's just local politics. Everyone is only interested in taking a bigger slice of the pie for himself.
There is no new story here.
4
It has been interesting to watch the hand in hand "progress" of gentrification with the rise in the cost of housing and a lack of affordable housing throughout the country. More and more the middle and working classes of America, no matter what their skin color or ethnic affiliations, are being pushed to the margins of life. We can't find decent housing that doesn't eat up more than half of our take home pay. A college education, now a requirement for a working class life, costs too much and the K-12 educational system is failing to educate children so that they can get jobs out of high school. We have, in short, watched and experienced America turning into a country that serves the 1% while relegating the rest of us to the garbage heap.
4
This analysis is too simplistic because it ignores a generational political shift which is taking place that has less to do with demographics than with a general dissatisfaction with Democratic policy-making. Sadly the Democratic party no longer represents the the average worker but has fallen in with Wall Street and corporate interests. This anti-worker trend began when Clinton first started to deal with Gingrich and became a big booster of NAFTA and then continued with the repeal of Glass Steagall which Clinton also endorsed. At the time I couldn't believe that Clinton could even call himself a Democrat, but Obama and Emanuel only prove how deeply entrenched this elitist pro-corporate wing of the party proved to be. It is now time for a re-set. The average worker will no longer stand by while their so-called leaders sell them down the river.
2
So, do you think Republican policies are better? Despite everything you mentioned, the last, best hope for poor and middle class Americans is the Democratic Party.
1
"The average worker will no longer stand by while their so-called leaders sell them down the river."
They have been "standing by" for decades now. On a clear night you can see their hats floating down the river.
They have been "standing by" for decades now. On a clear night you can see their hats floating down the river.
2
So what you are saying here is that except for the reddest of red states the Republicans are going to struggle to be able to gerrymander Republican strongholds in the future.
3
It was bad when whites left the cities and now its bad that they are moving back in? What is the right percentage of whites who need to live in cities so that they are neither gentrified nor hollowed out (for their tax money?)
17
Bantustans surrounding Walmarts in the suburbs and glass palaces belted by fortified city gates. But hey, we still all get to enjoy the Superbowl, so we're all in this together!
4
It is interesting to see macro statistical long views projecting future demographic shifts with a side effect of gentrification for urban areas. But take a granular look at what is underneath statistical gentrification. In New York City, for instance, currently for the purposes of zoning and real estate development an individual whose yearly income is as much as $67,000 is classified as "Low Income." A truly perverted economic equation. What do you suppose the reaction would be if you told someone anywhere else in the nation that their $67,000 yearly income made them a low income person? Developers of new housing in New York City do not build for 'low income' residents. So this creates an economic environment where the city is actively participating in the eradication of middle class and lower-middle class residents. What will be left, as can already be seen in many Manhattan neighborhoods, is a socio-economic monoculture of the wealthy interspersed with public housing developments of mostly truly low income people. A political environment in which elected representatives and local authorities will have to govern and administer in a schizophrenic way to satisfy both extremes of the social spectrum. It is also an environment, that is already being realized in Manhattan, where there is no longer an influx of young people dedicated to culture and the arts.
2
Tom Sugrue failed to spot a third possibility: the atomization of US society into little tribes held together only by the fake community of time waster social media apps and the beer 'n' circuses US consumer economy.
As the "Bowling Alone" author learned to his great embarrassment, today's diverse communities are not communities at all.
In my Silicon Valley middle-class neighborhood, as in most US cities and near-suburbs today, hardly anyone talks to or knows the name of his neighbors. The older white descendants of the Okies (and their kids) begrudge taxes and will not support local bond measures for the schools; most of the Asian and other immigrant parents view the neighborhood as little more than a family investment vehicle; the underclass residents of cheap apartments nearby have no stake in the neighborhood and behave accordingly. Even the educated native-born families are fragmented and incapable of talking across political, religious and cultural divides.
Outside of sports teams, there are no cultural institutions in the Bay Area that appeal to more than a few old folks or else narrow ethnic niches. Here in the wealthiest metro area in the nation, the main repertory theater just went bankrupt and folded, the Ballet failed to make payroll, and there still is no sign of any professional symphony to replace the one that folded for lack of support a decade ago.
As the "Bowling Alone" author learned to his great embarrassment, today's diverse communities are not communities at all.
In my Silicon Valley middle-class neighborhood, as in most US cities and near-suburbs today, hardly anyone talks to or knows the name of his neighbors. The older white descendants of the Okies (and their kids) begrudge taxes and will not support local bond measures for the schools; most of the Asian and other immigrant parents view the neighborhood as little more than a family investment vehicle; the underclass residents of cheap apartments nearby have no stake in the neighborhood and behave accordingly. Even the educated native-born families are fragmented and incapable of talking across political, religious and cultural divides.
Outside of sports teams, there are no cultural institutions in the Bay Area that appeal to more than a few old folks or else narrow ethnic niches. Here in the wealthiest metro area in the nation, the main repertory theater just went bankrupt and folded, the Ballet failed to make payroll, and there still is no sign of any professional symphony to replace the one that folded for lack of support a decade ago.
23
In Washington D.C. gentrification had to happen. When I moved here in 1970 once beautiful prewar neighborhoods of Victorian row houses and and Beaux Arts apartment buildings were crumbling, boarded up war zones of drug dealers and prostitutes, all within walking distance of the White House, thankfully, however, too close to downtown offices to be forever neglected. Gentrification meant young, usually white, educated, liberal pioneers with just enough money to buy and painstakingly renovate, on a shoestring budget, decrepit ruined boarded up houses in hostile and dangerous neighborhoods. Occasionally a brave developer would take on a boarded up apartment building (there were dozens) and restore and recycle it. This happened in bits and pieces, house by house, block by block, despite setbacks (remember the crack epidemic) for over 30 years. The city government (the thoroughly corrupt "Barry machine") did nothing to help, it was too busy pandering to its poverty stricken base by demonizing the "evil" gentrifiers, while inflating the city bureaucracy and overseeing the almost complete destruction of the D.C.'s public services, particularly its school system. If gentrification means individuals taking on the forces of societal dysfunction and political neglect, to bring a once beautiful city back to life, then I'm all for it.
26
Wasn't the issue 30/40 or so years ago the impending death of our Urban Centers. White flight to the suburbs, the general increase in sprawl both effectively bleeding the urban centers of their vibrancy. Now that its been reversed, we now complain about displacing populations as gentrification progresses. If we want to have our cake and eat it too, we'll need some very creative urban planners to help that come to fruition. Left to itself the marketplace will aggressively displace all those that don't own property further and further away. Those that "own" will have different challenges but they will have that investment to fall back on. Renters, the poor and middle-income folk are going to have a real problem, and where will they go, where will they work - the displacement will only take them further and further from the places that employ them. We really need to come to grips with this - and soon.
8
'The growing trends of class inequality, combined with persistent segregation, have led some to suggest that trends point toward a United States that resembles Colombia or Brazil'
If this happens, it is not a good thing. The globalism that dominates world policy is funded by fabulously wealthy global corporations, which by nature seek endless growth. They avoid controversial and unprofitable policies like population stabilization.
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/142760/robert-muggah/fixing-fragi...
"fragile cities: places where the social contract binding municipal governments to their citizens has crumbled and anarchy rules.
With some exceptions, these centers of fragility are located in North, Central, and South America, which are home to a staggering 45 of the 50 most dangerous metropolises. In some ways, fast expanding cities such as Acapulco in Mexico, Caracas in Venezuela, Maceió in Brazil, and San Pedro Sula in Honduras are harbingers of what’s to come in the rest of the Southern hemisphere in the absence of decisive policy interventions...the key factor appears to be the breakneck pace and unregulated nature of urban growth, or turbo-urbanization."
If this happens, it is not a good thing. The globalism that dominates world policy is funded by fabulously wealthy global corporations, which by nature seek endless growth. They avoid controversial and unprofitable policies like population stabilization.
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/142760/robert-muggah/fixing-fragi...
"fragile cities: places where the social contract binding municipal governments to their citizens has crumbled and anarchy rules.
With some exceptions, these centers of fragility are located in North, Central, and South America, which are home to a staggering 45 of the 50 most dangerous metropolises. In some ways, fast expanding cities such as Acapulco in Mexico, Caracas in Venezuela, Maceió in Brazil, and San Pedro Sula in Honduras are harbingers of what’s to come in the rest of the Southern hemisphere in the absence of decisive policy interventions...the key factor appears to be the breakneck pace and unregulated nature of urban growth, or turbo-urbanization."
2
One of the consequences of poorer people migrating--or pushed--to the suburbs is the shortcomings of that built environment for those without cars. In a city, you walk to the corner to buy groceries. You generally have much greater access to much more mass transit. Walking and biking are more relevant. In suburbs, built with the automobile in mind, there are severe limits to mobility without them. The implications are far more problematic than who they will vote for.
8
You cannot have this both ways. When I moved to downtown Los Angeles from West Hollywood, it was very much a gritty area. It's been cleaned up a lot over the last few years. Downtown is being revitalized because people & developers have been willing to invest in it.
On the flip side, yes, I've seen the housing market explode & people are paying far more than I for far less space & building amenities. Others are complaining that it's too expensive. Others feel it's displaced Skid Row... The list goes on.
Either cities/towns in decline need investment or you will progressively see a place that becomes more uninhabitable & crime ridden by the day. Where is the happy medium? IS there a happy medium? Unfortunately, in order for a city to have resources, money is required. Complain of gentrification all you wish, but in the end something must give. You can't have it all in my opinion.
On the flip side, yes, I've seen the housing market explode & people are paying far more than I for far less space & building amenities. Others are complaining that it's too expensive. Others feel it's displaced Skid Row... The list goes on.
Either cities/towns in decline need investment or you will progressively see a place that becomes more uninhabitable & crime ridden by the day. Where is the happy medium? IS there a happy medium? Unfortunately, in order for a city to have resources, money is required. Complain of gentrification all you wish, but in the end something must give. You can't have it all in my opinion.
18
It is funny, with the main story today being Google over running Mountain View. I work in Mountain View, (not at Google) but have to commute from San Jose because there is no housing.
So here is my question to all those against "gentrification". You have a town that is in decline. The city offers incentives for new businesses/housing opportunities. People and businesses come in and start to revitalize. New people means more money to invest in the city. People actually want to live/work in said city. This makes property there very valuable as it is a finite resource.
So what do you want? Do you want a revitalized city with resources or do you want a crumbling city without them?
Or are you Mountain View, who want the taxes from the businesses but all of you "Tech people" get out! No homes for you! We just want your money.
You can't have it all ways.
So here is my question to all those against "gentrification". You have a town that is in decline. The city offers incentives for new businesses/housing opportunities. People and businesses come in and start to revitalize. New people means more money to invest in the city. People actually want to live/work in said city. This makes property there very valuable as it is a finite resource.
So what do you want? Do you want a revitalized city with resources or do you want a crumbling city without them?
Or are you Mountain View, who want the taxes from the businesses but all of you "Tech people" get out! No homes for you! We just want your money.
You can't have it all ways.
21
Harlem was considered a dangerous place to live until about 10 years ago, when Whites started to flee lower parts of Manhattan. Now there is more services for the public but who can afford to live there? What was once the center of Black America is now better policed, cleaner, overpriced and very White.
Improvements to cities is awesome but the problem is too often the poor and people of color get pushed out because their neighborhood is trending. And its the small mom and pop stores, the ethnic makeup of some areas that make it quaint, gets destroyed and homogenized.
The resentment based on obvious preferential treatment of one ethnic group over another for better services and quality of life needs, on top of the outright push out of the area has made many people of color indignant and downright livid. When they see young hispsters doing a bar crawl in a once blighted and neglected area that the city chose to not to support, even when the original residents advocated hard, its glaringly apparent that some groups needs have more priority than others.
The residents who resided there prior, did they not deserve better services?
Do they not have a right to nice housing, good schools and streets?
You can't blame the victim (residents) when its the cities cater to one group at the expense of everyone else. Seems that when the changes occur they do not get to benefit from those changes, thus the irritation. And rightfully so.
Improvements to cities is awesome but the problem is too often the poor and people of color get pushed out because their neighborhood is trending. And its the small mom and pop stores, the ethnic makeup of some areas that make it quaint, gets destroyed and homogenized.
The resentment based on obvious preferential treatment of one ethnic group over another for better services and quality of life needs, on top of the outright push out of the area has made many people of color indignant and downright livid. When they see young hispsters doing a bar crawl in a once blighted and neglected area that the city chose to not to support, even when the original residents advocated hard, its glaringly apparent that some groups needs have more priority than others.
The residents who resided there prior, did they not deserve better services?
Do they not have a right to nice housing, good schools and streets?
You can't blame the victim (residents) when its the cities cater to one group at the expense of everyone else. Seems that when the changes occur they do not get to benefit from those changes, thus the irritation. And rightfully so.
3
I want the kind of city Toronto tried to be 40 years ago before wealth and power were the be all and end all. I want the Toronto that tried to provide affordable housing so that a million didn't buy you a small garage any walking distance from its core.
Today Toronto and Vancouver are rated among the top five cities in the world in which to live. Unfortunately it is always organizations like Forbes that do the rating and wealth worship is part of globalization.
Today Toronto and Vancouver are rated among the top five cities in the world in which to live. Unfortunately it is always organizations like Forbes that do the rating and wealth worship is part of globalization.
8
"The residents who resided there prior, did they not deserve better services? Do they not have a right to nice housing, good schools and streets? "
Streets perhaps, but as for housing, no. Housing is largely a private good, and "nice" housing is expensive and paid for by those who can afford to live there. Good schools are a different matter, but the reality of it is that schools are only as good as their students, and students who come from secure homes that place a priority on education do better. It's not about "deserving" anything.
Streets perhaps, but as for housing, no. Housing is largely a private good, and "nice" housing is expensive and paid for by those who can afford to live there. Good schools are a different matter, but the reality of it is that schools are only as good as their students, and students who come from secure homes that place a priority on education do better. It's not about "deserving" anything.
12
The mixture of the electorate is changing. This may or may not mean that the desires of the people of various geographic spots is changing. In any event, the politicians will say whatever they think they have to in order to get elected. Once elected the politicians will do what they have been doing -- to wit: the donkeys and elephants will tag team the public.
Look at how asset distribution has changed over the past fifty years.
This is not an accident.
America is in a class war, and hardly anyone can see it. They're all distracted by abortion, gun control, and homosexual marriage. Moreover, they have been taught to believe that all taxation is evil. So, while they pay for the means of their servitude and live through a decline in their quality of life, war on their dime has been privatized and the Apples and Exxons can hide their record profits in the Cayman Islands.
Look at how asset distribution has changed over the past fifty years.
This is not an accident.
America is in a class war, and hardly anyone can see it. They're all distracted by abortion, gun control, and homosexual marriage. Moreover, they have been taught to believe that all taxation is evil. So, while they pay for the means of their servitude and live through a decline in their quality of life, war on their dime has been privatized and the Apples and Exxons can hide their record profits in the Cayman Islands.
11
The overgeneralisations in this article are amazing. For one thing, 'gentrification' does NOT mean the same thing as 'well-off whites moving in, poor blacks moving out'. It's a matter of money, not race. There's a whole world outside of Manhattan and its 'exclusive' co-ops, and anyone who thinks there are no affluent blacks (mostly very hard-working professionals or entrepreneurs) or very poor whites hasn't spent much time in today's South.
Then again, 'gentrification' means different things in different places. In most of this country it has more to do with professionals and business people who are on the above-average side of middle class than it does to do with the frankly rich. THOSE are concentrated mainly in the coastal big-money enclaves: New York, Boston, San Francisco and Silicon Valley, and Los Angeles. You'll find some in Chicago, but not nearly at Manhattan affluence levels. Manhattan and its trendy satellites, where every co-op seems to have turned into an 'image' building and some condo boards are almost as bad, is unique. Mercifully.
Then again, 'gentrification' means different things in different places. In most of this country it has more to do with professionals and business people who are on the above-average side of middle class than it does to do with the frankly rich. THOSE are concentrated mainly in the coastal big-money enclaves: New York, Boston, San Francisco and Silicon Valley, and Los Angeles. You'll find some in Chicago, but not nearly at Manhattan affluence levels. Manhattan and its trendy satellites, where every co-op seems to have turned into an 'image' building and some condo boards are almost as bad, is unique. Mercifully.
8
The country is going to run into a Catch-22 soon enough: low wages are not sufficient to own individual, personal transportation, yet low wage jobs are broadly scattered over suburbs that are designed for individual, personal transportation. How can poorer people relocate to a suburb when they don't earn enough to own the means of transportation required to live there?
34
Bottom line..people have the right to move anyplace they want as long as they can afford it.
Also, make sure the people at the bottom rung of the economic ladder have the minimum they need to insure a livable situation.
Also, make sure the people at the bottom rung of the economic ladder have the minimum they need to insure a livable situation.
6
"The relatively upscale city-dwelling wing of the national Democratic Party already wields great power, ensuring that same-sex marriage, green initiatives, gender equality and reproductive rights are stressed as much, or more, than issues like wages and jobs."
Edsall seems to think those issues don't matter to people of color. He's also confused about the reason the Democratic establishment is resonating with those liberal social issues. Many of the Dems big, high-profile benefactors support the liberal causes, but even more importantly, the Dems realize that their support of liberal social issues won't alienate their huge corporate donors.
The Democratic establishment has a free hand on social issues with which to appeal to an electorate that mostly supports liberalism. But when it comes to economic issues, unless broad public support forces their hands, as happened with internet neutrality, they stick closely to the corporate consensus: trojan horse free "trade" pacts, expansion of oil and natural gas production along with avoiding any serious substantive action on climate change, carte blanche for big pharma and the health insurance sector, stalling on increases to the minimum wage, etc.
Democratic party loyalists may argue that the party is liberal on some economic issues, but if you look carefully, you'll see that the alleged "support" does not rise above the level of rhetoric. And the media does its best to insure that the public doesn't look too carefully.
Edsall seems to think those issues don't matter to people of color. He's also confused about the reason the Democratic establishment is resonating with those liberal social issues. Many of the Dems big, high-profile benefactors support the liberal causes, but even more importantly, the Dems realize that their support of liberal social issues won't alienate their huge corporate donors.
The Democratic establishment has a free hand on social issues with which to appeal to an electorate that mostly supports liberalism. But when it comes to economic issues, unless broad public support forces their hands, as happened with internet neutrality, they stick closely to the corporate consensus: trojan horse free "trade" pacts, expansion of oil and natural gas production along with avoiding any serious substantive action on climate change, carte blanche for big pharma and the health insurance sector, stalling on increases to the minimum wage, etc.
Democratic party loyalists may argue that the party is liberal on some economic issues, but if you look carefully, you'll see that the alleged "support" does not rise above the level of rhetoric. And the media does its best to insure that the public doesn't look too carefully.
15
Others look toward a post-racial America where intermarriage and intermixing will destroy the “ethnoracial pentagon,” which rigidly classifies all Americans as African, Asian, Latino, Native American, or white.
Thomas B. Edsall - NYT.
There is little intermarriage and intermixing with groups that practice segregation and support race based public policy. The Race 'everything for the race and nothing for those outside the race. And, those groups (public education, NAACP etc.) that see an inherit value in diversity of skin color which is nor more or less than basic racism !?
Thomas B. Edsall - NYT.
There is little intermarriage and intermixing with groups that practice segregation and support race based public policy. The Race 'everything for the race and nothing for those outside the race. And, those groups (public education, NAACP etc.) that see an inherit value in diversity of skin color which is nor more or less than basic racism !?
2
I lived my first twenty years in the village of Hempstead, an inner suburb of New York City. The population of that village is now nearly entirely minority, with blacks slightly over half the population and people of Central American origin most of the remainder. The village is now being burdened with a substantial number of unaccompanied children from Central America. Immediately adjacent to Hempstead is the village of Garden City, an almost entirely white upper middle class community. Garden City has a long history of discrimination, starting with an effort to prevent Jews from moving into the community. For a long time the police there had a policy of stopping all cars with black passengers driving through the village. I don’t know to what extent these abuses continue. The injustice of having Hempstead bear the entire cost of these children while letting Garden City get off completely free as a reward for its past bad behavior is obvious. Will this be the future suburban pattern?
31
It seems to me that when people move here from other countries to find a better life, they tend to band together, carrying on the same cultural norms that caused them problems in the first place. They tend to separate themselves from those in the new country and remain in communities in which they feel more secure - kind of like home. Perhaps economics force them there also. But often it seems to gives rise to "us" and "them." At least, if individuals are moving to different areas, they have a better chance of becoming integrated with those of other cultures. There will still be problems and resistance encountered, but maybe it's a start toward unity. Of course, those with established cultures of their own have to be willing to bend and accept new ways, also, but it may be easier with individuals than with groups.
I think we stress the importance of cultures (the past) to our own detriment as a nation. Recognizing where you came from is interesting. But insisting on carrying them into the future can be be detrimental to all.
I think we stress the importance of cultures (the past) to our own detriment as a nation. Recognizing where you came from is interesting. But insisting on carrying them into the future can be be detrimental to all.
9
Edsall's column today is really thought provoking and no more so than when he quotes Thomas Sugrue. His admission of social science's failure in forecasting the future when it comes to the outcomes of shifting demographics is both virtuous for its honesty, but sobering as well. For what is the importance of painstaking analytic study if it is not to advance core human values such as respect for diversity , compassion for the unfortunate, quality education and healthcare for all and adequate income maintenance throughout the life cycle? Of course these values may be in theory subscribed to by many, derided by many and for a significant percentage, namely those most in need of having these values applied to their lives, so hopelessly outside their grasp as to be no more than a distant star. What we need now are applied social scientists , describing trends, but more importantly advancing assertively ideas and methods flowing from them to ensure positive outcomes. The only way I'm aware of creating this dynamic is through ceaseless and relentless small group dialogue at and across all levels of society, not to establish a specific outcome but to create an ongoing process steadily establishing and re-establishing the shared values characterizing its ongoing evolution. To establish the mechanics of this unprecedented dialogue I leave to social scientists, who are all too well aware of the problems that need to be addressed. I suggest modeling it after the human heart.
2
The urban underclass has been supplanted in Washington DC by the real estate revolution that moved the poor out. Where did they go? Prince George's County.
4
This is going to make it really difficult for the democrats to figure out exactly who to pander to in order to get elected. I'm sure that they will still be able to find plenty of "victims" to save though. As long as there is plenty of other people's money to give away, they will always have their "base".
8
My hope is that the volume of racists and bigots in both parties continues to shrink as respect for diversity and the ideal of liberty and justice for all continues its march to a stronger America. Nothing weakens true conservative principles faster than bigoted diatribes and codes that poison the Republican brand while other conservatives silently look on.
21
Yeah let's not bother about the unemployed, the elderly, the disabled, the young. And let's not bother with raising the minimum wage or taxing the rich. I realize that catering to the rich is not considered "pandering." Only trying to improve the lives of people is considered "pandering."
2
The standard response--charging bigotry and racism--has now become exceedingly thin. As time goes on, it will melt away into a willingness to look at real problems, not ideological ones.
"Blacks are moving out, into the suburbs or to other regions of the country. Poverty is spreading from the urban core to the inner suburbs. "
Just read those two sentences together 5 times. Very interesting that he tied them together like that.
Just read those two sentences together 5 times. Very interesting that he tied them together like that.
19
I was personally struck by this:
"On the plus side for Republicans, the influx into the suburbs of minorities and the poor – which raises the possibility of attendant tax increases, property value declines, social service demands and crime — could push local whites to the right, into Republican arms."
Not sure Charles Blow would approve.
"On the plus side for Republicans, the influx into the suburbs of minorities and the poor – which raises the possibility of attendant tax increases, property value declines, social service demands and crime — could push local whites to the right, into Republican arms."
Not sure Charles Blow would approve.
2
To Ben. I did read it a couple of times. Uhg! This makes it seem as though blacks just "drag" poverty everywhere with them.
4
There is no more an Hispanic/Latino "race" than there is an Anglo "race". Having a Spanish language or cultural heritage has nothing to do with either race or national origin or any combination of the two. Any more than having an English language or cultural Anglo heritage has anything to do with race or national origin. Unlike most Hispanic/Latino American natives and immigrants Cruz, Rubio and Menendez are all white Cuban Americans.
But for America having a Black African American and Brown/Black native and immigrant population America would be aging and shrinking as the white birth rate sinks well below replacement levels. And the American whites still having babies come from the bottom of the socioeconomic educational heap.
The international gentrification effect sees a shrinking aging Europe, Japan and South Korea facing a growing younger America, China and India.
At the end of his life Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was trying to unite Americans along socioeconomic educational political class lines instead of race, color, and caste.
But for America having a Black African American and Brown/Black native and immigrant population America would be aging and shrinking as the white birth rate sinks well below replacement levels. And the American whites still having babies come from the bottom of the socioeconomic educational heap.
The international gentrification effect sees a shrinking aging Europe, Japan and South Korea facing a growing younger America, China and India.
At the end of his life Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was trying to unite Americans along socioeconomic educational political class lines instead of race, color, and caste.
5
What ever happen to the plain old human race?
As always, as you say, it's about money.
People are real. Money is made up stuff.
As always, as you say, it's about money.
People are real. Money is made up stuff.
FYI, China has the fastest-aging society (not the oldest) due to its one child policy, which has turned out to be more easily implemented than reversed.
4
"At the end of his life Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was trying to unite Americans along socioeconomic educational political class lines instead of race, color, and caste."
Publications like The Times can't have this. Division breeds controversy. Controversy breeds readers. So forth & so on..
Publications like The Times can't have this. Division breeds controversy. Controversy breeds readers. So forth & so on..
3
The one statement that left me reeling was the rather benign, "...the poor are moving", as if by choice and acts of will the poor are picking up their families and worldly goods to seek a better life in the inner suburbs or wherever. The harsh truth is that the poor are being displaced -- no -- pushed out of the cities because there is no longer any place for them. The rich who are paying what is now in excess of $1 million a bedroom for a condominium in downtowns won't have the unsightliness and unpleasant redolence of homeless people sleeping on grates as they wend their way around them to walk into their newly polished marbled lobbies in imported soft leather shoes. There is nothing in this analysis that gives even a nod to the suffering humanity beneath the facts and figures of gentrification, and for that reason it has its own peculiar stench.
113
Yes, I found this analysis appalling- as if the only thing that mattered is Democratic electoral fortunes.
11
Riley Temple
Thank you for pointing out this obvious omitted fact. The poor are not moving to the low rent suburbs for opportunity. They are being pushed out by the developers and city mayors who see a cash cow from increased property taxes. Nashville is a prime example of this.
Thank you for pointing out this obvious omitted fact. The poor are not moving to the low rent suburbs for opportunity. They are being pushed out by the developers and city mayors who see a cash cow from increased property taxes. Nashville is a prime example of this.
4
I don't see the poor working to save the crown molding in some of Detroit's turn off the century mansions. They can make do just fine with the flimsy interior doors and attached garages that are found just down the interstate.
1
The Atlanta metro area has followed this pattern. From a majority white population in the city itself in the 60's, it declined to around 30 percent white in 1990 but since then has rebounded to close to 40 percent. In Fulton county, which encompasses the areas closest to downtown, the white population now slightly out-numbers the black population. The city's slight black majority is maintained by the 10 percent of the city that lies within Dekalb county (which is where I live). In the meantime, Dekalb's black population has steadily increased to a majority.
Most of the white influx in the city has been very precisely due to 'gentrification' of several neighborhoods which are now mostly upper middle class white people. The city itself remains largely segregated. In Dekalb, there has been much more integration, but those are almost all working class to middle class neighborhoods. Many rural white southerners have also moved into Dekalb to seek better jobs and generally tend to end up in those integrated neighborhoods and inevitably there is a lot of inter-marriage.
I know a young man who would cheerfully self-describe himself as a 'redneck' who married a black woman and is raising a family. When I asked him once how his parents reacted, he said, "heck, if they wanted me to marry a white girl, they shouldn't have moved here." The bottom line is that it appears that real progress in integration here seems to be largely happening among working class people.
Most of the white influx in the city has been very precisely due to 'gentrification' of several neighborhoods which are now mostly upper middle class white people. The city itself remains largely segregated. In Dekalb, there has been much more integration, but those are almost all working class to middle class neighborhoods. Many rural white southerners have also moved into Dekalb to seek better jobs and generally tend to end up in those integrated neighborhoods and inevitably there is a lot of inter-marriage.
I know a young man who would cheerfully self-describe himself as a 'redneck' who married a black woman and is raising a family. When I asked him once how his parents reacted, he said, "heck, if they wanted me to marry a white girl, they shouldn't have moved here." The bottom line is that it appears that real progress in integration here seems to be largely happening among working class people.
40
Why this comment isn't an NYT Pick is beyond me. Perhaps it's just a bit too cheerful & positive. Gotta keep people angry, I suppose.
2
I am glad to read this for it give me hope. Having recently visited the town where I spent most of my childhood, Greenville, SC up the road from Atlanta, I was pleasantly surprised to see that downtown was filled with people of many colors, including many interracial couples with children. My sister, a professional who lives in a gentrified neighborhood bordering downtown, tells me that the old country club guard is dying out and so our their elitist notions of race and class. Yes, downtown Greenville is very expensive but it possesses a thriving arts community and is a hub of culture for the entire area. Likewise my sister tells me that people are drawn downtown for sports and recreational activities, many of which such as Cleveland Park, Swamp Rabbit Trail, the Greenville Museum, and the Public Library are free for the public to enjoy.
2
"The bottom line is that it appears that real progress in integration here seems to be largely happening among working class people."
That's what I see in the Detroit Metropolitan area. However insofar as racial integration goes, the true signs are the demographics in the public school systems. In this respect New York, Chicago and Detroit are complete failures. But don't tell New Yorkers, they'll just turn up the rhetoric about Walmart Shoppers and Southern Strategy.
That's what I see in the Detroit Metropolitan area. However insofar as racial integration goes, the true signs are the demographics in the public school systems. In this respect New York, Chicago and Detroit are complete failures. But don't tell New Yorkers, they'll just turn up the rhetoric about Walmart Shoppers and Southern Strategy.
1
Thomas Sugrue is correct in that the "'ethnoracial pentagon,' which rigidly classifies all Americans as African, Asian, Latino, Native American, or white" will no longer be relevant. America has always fancied herself to be a melting pot but in more instances than not she has been a fruit salad that had distinct chunks, sometimes blending but just as often standing apart. In the next two decades or so, however, she may finally become the melting pot.
In a companion column Frank Bruni noes that there are seven states - Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, West Virginia, South Carolina, Tennessee and Kentucky - that have a large share of white evangelical Protestants who oppose gay marriage. this general trend there will be pockets where the old 'ethnoracial pentagon' may still apply. So even though America may become a "brown-hued nation" - as Thomas Sugrue notes - she may still have some "white spots" still left behind.
In a companion column Frank Bruni noes that there are seven states - Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, West Virginia, South Carolina, Tennessee and Kentucky - that have a large share of white evangelical Protestants who oppose gay marriage. this general trend there will be pockets where the old 'ethnoracial pentagon' may still apply. So even though America may become a "brown-hued nation" - as Thomas Sugrue notes - she may still have some "white spots" still left behind.
3
Let me be this first to say this is overly simplistic, but a point needs to be made here: demography is not (political) destiny.
Edsall's analysis is useful, but perhaps too much so in this sense: If those who aspire to political office do not develop a politics that appeals to all Americans, not just sub-groups, they will always lag a step behind demographic change.
That is why a message that takes on inequality, infrastructure disinvestment including in human infrastructure, education, health and an American future of truly shared prosperity is what's needed now. With specifics, please.
And you can't have that, effectively at least, unless you do a far better job of confronting demagogues who twist facts and ride fringe issues to their own narrow benefit.
That's what political parties have to learn, much more than chasing the votes of sub-groups as they migrate across the urban/suburban landscape.
And this is why the pundits and political consultants need to be kept in their place in these conversations, instead of being allowed to steer the ship.
Edsall's analysis is useful, but perhaps too much so in this sense: If those who aspire to political office do not develop a politics that appeals to all Americans, not just sub-groups, they will always lag a step behind demographic change.
That is why a message that takes on inequality, infrastructure disinvestment including in human infrastructure, education, health and an American future of truly shared prosperity is what's needed now. With specifics, please.
And you can't have that, effectively at least, unless you do a far better job of confronting demagogues who twist facts and ride fringe issues to their own narrow benefit.
That's what political parties have to learn, much more than chasing the votes of sub-groups as they migrate across the urban/suburban landscape.
And this is why the pundits and political consultants need to be kept in their place in these conversations, instead of being allowed to steer the ship.
5
I think the point of the article is that predictable outcomes of the past are no longer in the realm of predictability because of shifting populations. Things are in a place of rapid shift, and the reality is political parties are historically slow to change in some ways. But over time they do change to fit changing circumstances.
I'll make a demographic prediction that has never failed. Whenever poor and working class blacks move in, whites move out. Call it migration, call it white flight, call it displacement, or call it social mobility. The real name for it is racism.
9
Might one also call it crime and decreasing property values? Also, there are many that don't leave. And simply put: in this country there are many different cultural values and each person is entitled to their own preferences. For example I want my kids to go to school, and on to college with as little interference as possible. I live in a diverse neighborhood and I worry about the appeal of rap culture and "gangsta" culture. Am I not entitled to steer my kids away from this, what I believe to be a lower form of culture? It's only my belief and it only pertains to my children. Does that make me intolerant? I don't think so. Yet another family of immigrants wants the same thing, avoids all of the same things, and yet they are a success. So, I believe people will go where the most opportunity is. This does not make them racists.
11
The reverse is happening in DC, wealthy and affluent whites are moving into traditionally black neighborhoods, and pricing out poor blacks. The pattern that you describe is only holding in the center of the country, on the coasts, the pattern is flipped.
2
michjas, I can only assume you put your money where your mouth is, right?
1
Every single one of the groups described by Mr. Edsall can increase its political clout in every single geographical area through the simple mechanism of voting.The real challenge to both major political parties is to develop genuine policy initiatives and not merely sound bytes and talking points that will motivate people to vote. Barack Obama won two national elections despite losing most of the Confederacy, large chunks of the Midwest, and pieces of the Mountain West because he won northern and coastal urban areas by huge margins. it remains to be seen whether the demographic changes described by Mr. Edsall weaken or strengthen these Democratic strongholds.
4
Interesting times. Changes are coming, sure hope our humanity becomes all-embracing, all seated at the same table, finally a social democracy that is just and compassionate, and where labor trumps capital, a renaissance of sorts, and become a beacon for all to emulate. Wishful thinking? Well, before we see a paradigm, a reality we all need acknowledge and improve, it must be thought- out first. And only then, mount the courage to see it through.
1
Noone mentions rent regulations that are causing US urban areas to follow the model of Paris. Dowtown city centers are only the wealthy while the poor are pushed to the suburbs.
6
My thought after reading this well-researched piece (thank you!) is that we are slowly reverting to the medieval pattern of settlement -- powerful city-states that are clusters of wealth and knowledge, with beltways and freeways taking the place of city walls, and outside the hinterlands where the peasants scratch out an insecure living with none of the amenities of the metropolis.
In the Rust Belt city where I live, "traditional" white flight to the suburbs is still going on and the suburbs continue to grow as the population continues to decrease. Middle-class kids leave town for college and never come back. Property values are declining sharply. People talk of being "stuck" here, despite a thriving grassroots arts scene and a developing waterfront. It is hard to find work, regardless of your qualifications, and pay scales reflect the low cost of living. I venture that this scenario is the "new normal" for smaller cities outside the major metro areas.
In the Rust Belt city where I live, "traditional" white flight to the suburbs is still going on and the suburbs continue to grow as the population continues to decrease. Middle-class kids leave town for college and never come back. Property values are declining sharply. People talk of being "stuck" here, despite a thriving grassroots arts scene and a developing waterfront. It is hard to find work, regardless of your qualifications, and pay scales reflect the low cost of living. I venture that this scenario is the "new normal" for smaller cities outside the major metro areas.
54
Excellent point. I've been wondering if rural/small town resentment toward the wealthy (relatively speaking), well-educated, multi-cultural metropolitan areas isn't powering the red state voters tendency to vote against their best economic interests. Voting Republican is their way of flipping off the urban, largely Democratic voters. If so, then what you envision will only increase our political divide.
6
I agree with your thoughts. I'll add, the idea of the suburb is a relatively new one. Historically, the poorest have always been outside of the center, or an urban core. We are simply reverting to that layout now that the love affair with the commute (trains, cars) is waning. What will they do in the suburbs, rural areas in the future? Not sure. Farming would work but that is a far fetched possibility with how the world does commerce today.
As for arts scenes: the ubiquity of the media and its constant selling of bigger and better places to be leaves artists and arts scene participants with a hard road to build upon as well as a self esteem issue. The media will only present what the media wants to present. So, artists are often times subject to mass migration patters of what is hip.
As for arts scenes: the ubiquity of the media and its constant selling of bigger and better places to be leaves artists and arts scene participants with a hard road to build upon as well as a self esteem issue. The media will only present what the media wants to present. So, artists are often times subject to mass migration patters of what is hip.
2
This is a very accurate assessment of what is happening. I live in DC, which is becoming one of the beneficiary cities. Needless to say the situation is different out here, and there is more of an upwardly mobile element to those who are educated who are pushing more and more into the city. Those who are not educated though are increasingly pushed out, and the job market is not as robust for those without a bachelors or higher. As somebody else noted, they are mostly going to PG county, but some are being pushed out the region entirely, either heading south, or to Baltimore. The result is a very bifurcated economy between the educated haves, and the lower skill have nots. It has a very upstairs/downstairs feel to it, as the have nots are often in service level jobs in resturants, hotels, etc. In terms of the midwest, yeah, I see it all the time, there is a very real brain drain happening with the kids with an education heading to SF, DC, NYC, etc. The low pay and low number of opportunities makes the midwest an unattractive place even with the low cost of living. Either way the country is re-shuffling, and some of us saw this coming years ago. I am just happy I ended up as a home owner in NW DC, and not stuck in the rust belt.
3
Thank you Mr. Edsall. These projections show why is important to attract and convince Hispanics to vote. I don't know how to do it. But I suspect many of them feel alienated and rejected by the rest of society, and I think some kind of amnesty, even if partial or limited, or some kind of legalization for the illegal population, would make them feel more accepted. That would be another reason besides the logistical, economic and moral reasons to legalize the illegal population.
1
Great article, thanks. Here in Birmingham the only two council districts that have had growing populations are the two that are gentrifying.... the giant downtown medical center being the primary cause. Interestingly, black political leaders have been champions of gentrificaton, so far. We have very strong neighborhood associations and the neighborhood leaders have welcomed new investments in areas that never have recovered from red-lining..... areas that make up the poorest census tracts in the nation.
I would love to see age folded into this analysis.
I would love to see age folded into this analysis.
5
The more that diversity mixes with tribal Whites R Us suburbia and rural areas, the higher the chances that reason, logic and common sense will overcome the traditional tribal white spite, cognitive dissonance and proud regressivism that is the hallmark of the Republican voter base.
The GOP will be forced to move to the center if they want to win elections instead of just scare-mongering, fear-mongering and pandering to their traditional white and rural voters.
Reality has a liberal bias, and even the Republicans will have to surrender to it eventually....but not before doing their propagandized best to strip-mine every last ounce of profit from the masses first.
It's quite unlikely that the next generation of Americans and its new demographics will fall for the last 35 years of GOP tripe that the Old Confederacy caucus has fallen for hook, line and sinker.
The GOP will be forced to move to the center if they want to win elections instead of just scare-mongering, fear-mongering and pandering to their traditional white and rural voters.
Reality has a liberal bias, and even the Republicans will have to surrender to it eventually....but not before doing their propagandized best to strip-mine every last ounce of profit from the masses first.
It's quite unlikely that the next generation of Americans and its new demographics will fall for the last 35 years of GOP tripe that the Old Confederacy caucus has fallen for hook, line and sinker.
96
Alas, the Republican Party will never surrender to reality. They will always find new hot-button issues that frighten low-information voters. The GOP will be there to dress those issues in scary masks to ensure those voters vote in large enough numbers to keep them in power.
11
Reality has a liberal bias? When you say reality you mean like supporting social programs whose costs will eventually bankrupt the country?
5
It's the tax breaks to the rich and never ending wars that bankrupt the country. Oh I know, you don't want a penny of your tax dollars going to feed hungry children, house the elderly, or support the unemployed in any way.
4
It's long past time to stop relying on increasingly useless race and ethnicity categories in America. No one realizes that more than "Hispanics."
We're presumably mostly white (Euro-(Spain to Mexico)-American, light skin tones). But then again, we all undoubtedly are black (Our beginnings as a species are in a region on Earth where darker skin tones prevailed; check your DNA, fellow humans, we're essentially the same).
Hispanic? That's as legitimate for someone whose parents or great-great-great grandparents came from South of the Border or the Caribbean as it is for whoever has $25 to change their nondescript last name to a sexier Spanish-sounding one at the local courthouse.
In other words, using the nonsensical distinctions of race or ethnicity is a bad foundation for social science. As a human, I check all boxes when necessary -- or I write in "human."
That the GOP has more self-professing "white" voters, and the fact that more self-professed whites by sheer numbers are poor and rely on those very government poverty programs that the GOP disdains, is a matter for trained psychologists and psychiatrists.
Take the blue eyes/brown eyes mumbo-jumbo out of the equation, Mr. Edsall, instead of promoting the views of those who try to divide us into opposing teams by "race" or "ethnicity."
We're presumably mostly white (Euro-(Spain to Mexico)-American, light skin tones). But then again, we all undoubtedly are black (Our beginnings as a species are in a region on Earth where darker skin tones prevailed; check your DNA, fellow humans, we're essentially the same).
Hispanic? That's as legitimate for someone whose parents or great-great-great grandparents came from South of the Border or the Caribbean as it is for whoever has $25 to change their nondescript last name to a sexier Spanish-sounding one at the local courthouse.
In other words, using the nonsensical distinctions of race or ethnicity is a bad foundation for social science. As a human, I check all boxes when necessary -- or I write in "human."
That the GOP has more self-professing "white" voters, and the fact that more self-professed whites by sheer numbers are poor and rely on those very government poverty programs that the GOP disdains, is a matter for trained psychologists and psychiatrists.
Take the blue eyes/brown eyes mumbo-jumbo out of the equation, Mr. Edsall, instead of promoting the views of those who try to divide us into opposing teams by "race" or "ethnicity."
16
Much of the new housing being built in Washington DC is designed as contemporary, edgy and compact priced to attract the"Millennials." to some degree replacing renting in a group house. The new units are not housing that could transition into space for family. So it appears to me that the turnover in population will cycle thru people who will not be vested voters. Washington DC has a reputation for people coming and going and not truly making the city "home." The new housing stock may be building a concrete guarantee that people move in and on without being invested in the city's future.
17
Illinois placed an “advisory” minimum wage referendum on last year’s general election ballot. Twenty years ago, the conservative Chicago suburbs could be counted on to reject a minimum wage increase.
But not this time. Three of the top 7 seven countries supporting a minimum wage increase were large suburban collar counties – Lake -65%, Will-65% and Dupage-64%. The referendum passed statewide with 67% with rural downstate countries significantly bringing down the statewide average, --- not the suburbs.
There are low wage service jobs in the suburbs as well as the inner city. It’s natural that minority workers will follow where the job growth leads them.
But not this time. Three of the top 7 seven countries supporting a minimum wage increase were large suburban collar counties – Lake -65%, Will-65% and Dupage-64%. The referendum passed statewide with 67% with rural downstate countries significantly bringing down the statewide average, --- not the suburbs.
There are low wage service jobs in the suburbs as well as the inner city. It’s natural that minority workers will follow where the job growth leads them.
4
The cause and effect due to gentrification is neatly laid out in Mr. Edsall's op-ed. As urban areas become playgrounds of the wealthy elite, the rich cultural fabric that once defined the attraction of these very population centers becomes lost. Diversity is what makes our country a model for the rest of the world. If, due to gentrification, culture, ethnicity & religion become economically homogeneous, the cities will slowly lose their unique vibrancy.
If wealth is the primary driver of these same cities, the arts will slowly wither. The opera will soon become a faint memory of the past as it is deemed economically unuseful. In Silicon Valley, a concentration of high tech workers will eventually replace those whose skills involve non-computer activities like the arts. If wealth & technology are prized above all else, the arts will begin to be considered puerile. Cultural diversity will be painted over by technological hologram facsimiles without any need to be sensitive to the plight of the downtrodden.
The good news in this op-ed is that a blossoming suburban landscape replete with bi-cultural and economic exiles from the cities will occur in the suburbs. Much like the shining example of Brazil, these groups will begin to organize to pressure the government to reform their outdated social & economic policies. The majority in the suburbs will demand that the government be accountable for deteriorating infrastructure, lack of jobs, and representation in government.
If wealth is the primary driver of these same cities, the arts will slowly wither. The opera will soon become a faint memory of the past as it is deemed economically unuseful. In Silicon Valley, a concentration of high tech workers will eventually replace those whose skills involve non-computer activities like the arts. If wealth & technology are prized above all else, the arts will begin to be considered puerile. Cultural diversity will be painted over by technological hologram facsimiles without any need to be sensitive to the plight of the downtrodden.
The good news in this op-ed is that a blossoming suburban landscape replete with bi-cultural and economic exiles from the cities will occur in the suburbs. Much like the shining example of Brazil, these groups will begin to organize to pressure the government to reform their outdated social & economic policies. The majority in the suburbs will demand that the government be accountable for deteriorating infrastructure, lack of jobs, and representation in government.
22
It's hard to find the sweet spot. In DC, some of the gentrified neighborhoods at first enjoyed a renaissance. 10/20 years ago along 14th st above Thomas Circle, what wasn't literally rubble was a fried chicken shack or a payday loans establishment. Then beginning in the late 90s, there was a middle class creative gentrification and the neighborhood became vibrant and alive. The bars came off the windows; people could and did walk the street at all hours. It was kind of a sweet spot. Alas, that attracted the uber-wealthy and now, in the last five odd years, it's become trust-fund baby-land.
41
I would not make Tech/Arts a binary choice. I'm a software development manager; once a programmer, and most of my disposable income over the years has gone to books, music (recorded and live classical), theater, and original art for my walls (from new, unknown artists).
Our children were raised with art, dance, and music lessons from local instructors, and weekends out with our friends are based around concerts and art shows, etc. Some cultural event of some sort.
Our children were raised with art, dance, and music lessons from local instructors, and weekends out with our friends are based around concerts and art shows, etc. Some cultural event of some sort.
3
In DC, prior to gentrification, many of the neighborhoods were blight and rubble, plain and simple, and the city was for the most part crime ridden. Do not fool yourself, it is not that simple. Sometimes gentrification improves a city, and the cultural fabric that is present is not beneficial. Sometimes gentrification replaces the bad with the good. This was the case with DC, unless you call payday loan places, open air drug and prostitution markets, and rapant crim culture. I don't. Especially considering that gentrification in DC brought jazz clubs, rock clubs, a variety of resturants and bars, bookstores, and small businesses. It is not always so simple, and I think what is happening in SF is third wave gentrification displacing some of the creative aspects of the first two waves. In DC gentrification brought more culture than it displaced. It should also be noted, our opera company is doing as well as it ever has, same goes with our orchestra. Both of which perform at the kennedy center.
4
It is hard to see Hispanics as a monolithic minority group. They are more like the 19th-century Irish or 20th-century Italian immigrants. They will stick together for a while in the big cities, but over a few decades they will gradually advance in society, while losing their distinctive characteristics.
Right now, the only common feature is that they speak Spanish. As their kids go to school in the US, the language will become less prominent, and the second generation will speak mostly English at home. In 50 years, there will be nothing to distinguish them from everyone else. They just be a part of the regular middle-class population. Today, nobody considers someone of Irish or Italian descent a member of a 'minority group', and that's the same fate that awaits today's Hispanics. However, it will happen much faster, like everything does nowadays.
Right now, the only common feature is that they speak Spanish. As their kids go to school in the US, the language will become less prominent, and the second generation will speak mostly English at home. In 50 years, there will be nothing to distinguish them from everyone else. They just be a part of the regular middle-class population. Today, nobody considers someone of Irish or Italian descent a member of a 'minority group', and that's the same fate that awaits today's Hispanics. However, it will happen much faster, like everything does nowadays.
39
This might be true if the immigrant population was static. But Hispanics just keep coming and with "immigration reform" will be encouraged to immigrate before the next "reform". There will be a unbroken stream of non-English speaking immigrants pouring into the country into the foreseeable future. Do you really think that when the US population of Hispanics exceeds 40% there will be no pressure to make the country bi-lingual?
11
There is one big difference between Hispanics and ethnic immigrant groups of the past. More people in the world speak Spanish as their native language than speak English. And there have been more accommodations for that made by government and business across the country than was ever made for another group of immigrants. I believe it is just as likely that in 50 years they will be changing the US as much or perhaps even more profoundly than the US changes them. Not that there's anything wrong with it.
10
It is a mistake to think of Hispanics as a monolithic group. They rare very diverse culturally. To be from Mexico is not at all the same as to be from Peru or Costa Rica and even less than to be from Haiti.
6
So, cities aren't " dead " and people are moving to the cities to take advantage of publicly-provided infrastructure ?
21
You could make a good case that it is the suburbs that are dead while the cities are vibrant by their nature. See Jane Jacobs.
1
pottree - Indeed; unfortunately, we didn't have access to an emoji conveying the deep irony that so many 1%-ers and 1/10th%-ers are clustered in such areas, but want such things provided with taxes applied to others.
1
Class inequality is already visible in New York. The fastest growing groups over the past decade have been wealthy whites and poor Hispanics. Numerically, the biggest group is poor Hispanics, which now number over 1 million and are the only group to do so. Middle class groups of all colors, including whites, have declined by 30-40%.
This change is already playing out in racial segregation of schools. It is playing out in young white people competing with poor and middle class blacks for housing, such as in Bed Stuy.
One of my children tells me that large apartments are being covered into glamorized dorms or boarding houses, with 6 bedrooms and a large central living area and kitchen.
This will have profound effects not just on the color or race of city inhabitants, but on who is raising families in cities, and their children's education, housing, and futures.
This change is already playing out in racial segregation of schools. It is playing out in young white people competing with poor and middle class blacks for housing, such as in Bed Stuy.
One of my children tells me that large apartments are being covered into glamorized dorms or boarding houses, with 6 bedrooms and a large central living area and kitchen.
This will have profound effects not just on the color or race of city inhabitants, but on who is raising families in cities, and their children's education, housing, and futures.
25
This is a helpful overview. It would be great if it just didn't matter if populated by blacks or whites, the level of education and gentrification would be the same. The fact that gentrification now marginalizes minorities is the tragedy. And if this country did something to give a helping hand to those that need it would be even better, so that neighborhoods didn't end up being ghettos to house the down and out. The hierarchy of color economically and socially, persists as this article shows. The human race needs to become color blind, as it misses the great opportunities of the value/contribution each and every human brings to us all.
4
Yes Carolyn, you alone - almost - name those SES variables economic level, educational level. My comment just below yours says that in more complicated ways.
Larry
Larry
Thomas Edsall, I think I have found in you, the best NYT OpEd writer to write a column in which you pose a question using The Gentrification Effect as your example.
The question would be: What will happen to all discussions such as the one you put forth here if in the 2020 Census Kenneth Prewitt (see below) succeeds in his proposed transformation of the archaic USCB system of race and ethnicity classification (archaic his term)?
Readers: If you have never visited this site, I suggest you do so to learn how non-scientifc and non-logical the USCB system is: http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdf
I nominate you, Thomas Edsall, because if my memory is right, you have written the same kind of criticism of the USCB system as I write in comments.
Kenneth Prewitt, former USCB Director (therefore expert), proposes in Ch. 11 of his "What Is Your Race?" to eliminate race/ethnicity "data" and replace with real data consisting of SES information.
So in the present case, what happens if we simply look at the people in the geographic areas you use, using only SES data. Easiest example: How is the level of education changing in Washington and the suburbs.
I know I am posing a question too complex to be understood or treated here, but Kenneth Prewitt should not be left alone as the only American posing it.
Certified American
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
The question would be: What will happen to all discussions such as the one you put forth here if in the 2020 Census Kenneth Prewitt (see below) succeeds in his proposed transformation of the archaic USCB system of race and ethnicity classification (archaic his term)?
Readers: If you have never visited this site, I suggest you do so to learn how non-scientifc and non-logical the USCB system is: http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdf
I nominate you, Thomas Edsall, because if my memory is right, you have written the same kind of criticism of the USCB system as I write in comments.
Kenneth Prewitt, former USCB Director (therefore expert), proposes in Ch. 11 of his "What Is Your Race?" to eliminate race/ethnicity "data" and replace with real data consisting of SES information.
So in the present case, what happens if we simply look at the people in the geographic areas you use, using only SES data. Easiest example: How is the level of education changing in Washington and the suburbs.
I know I am posing a question too complex to be understood or treated here, but Kenneth Prewitt should not be left alone as the only American posing it.
Certified American
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
4
Yes, but it does not have to be that way. One of the greatest factors aiding inequality has been the majority of the country that does not live in inner cities to witness poverty, have no understanding of it and therefore more able to blame the poor for their stupidity for being poor. The new poverty is job based not color based. Anyone who loses their job can find themselves on the bottom. This all means more people are having a brush with poverty and inequality first hand. The old GOP scare tactics behind white flight are increasingly useless to them as poverty and inequality become more equally experienced by everyone. The shift to cities by whites who see inner city poverty and those who see the effects of poverty everywhere from schools to dollar stores springing up does not have to mean whites running to the GOP for cover--where there is none. Gentrification of cities is one thing but more importantly the new economy is growing more people at the bottom. The single force keeping this from being felt politically is the amount of money by a few to buy government. Even this though will have lessened effect against a population increasingly affected one way or another by poverty.
33
Our population of poor increases, and they expand their traditional boundaries: drawing geographical distinctions between city and suburb is becoming less and less relevant. But if the concentration of poor continues to increase generally, it won't matter whether they're designated as city-dwellers or suburbanites, will it? Their votes will remain susceptible to manipulation by those who target such populations for ideological reasons.
If suburbs are becoming majority-poor by population pressure forcing them out of city-centers where more services are available more conveniently, why call this gentrification? It will represent an on-going process of urbanization, and state governments simply will site services facilities more frequently in suburbs than in center-city venues.
Much of this piece draws these comparisons in aid of the thesis that black influence will wane as it becomes more diffuse. But blacks remain at only a bit over 13% of our overall population and if anything that number is diminishing. Hispanics now represent over 17% of our population and that number is climbing. How much does it really matter where they live? Neither the U.S. Senate nor the presidency really depend on concentrations of votes in a state.
The real issue here isn't black or Hispanic ... it's poverty. If we can't halt the rise of poverty, it will be the interests of the poor, of any color or ethnicity and regardless of where they live, that will disproportionately drive our governance.
If suburbs are becoming majority-poor by population pressure forcing them out of city-centers where more services are available more conveniently, why call this gentrification? It will represent an on-going process of urbanization, and state governments simply will site services facilities more frequently in suburbs than in center-city venues.
Much of this piece draws these comparisons in aid of the thesis that black influence will wane as it becomes more diffuse. But blacks remain at only a bit over 13% of our overall population and if anything that number is diminishing. Hispanics now represent over 17% of our population and that number is climbing. How much does it really matter where they live? Neither the U.S. Senate nor the presidency really depend on concentrations of votes in a state.
The real issue here isn't black or Hispanic ... it's poverty. If we can't halt the rise of poverty, it will be the interests of the poor, of any color or ethnicity and regardless of where they live, that will disproportionately drive our governance.
59
@ Richard Luettgen - Your last paragraph gets my vote since you and Carolyn both point to SES factors as do I in recommending Professor Kenneth Prewitt's changing the USCB to focus on SES.
Keep making that point.
Larry
Keep making that point.
Larry
1
For once Richard, I heartily agree with you. And the way to eliminate poverty is not through welfare, but by providing a decent job or paid training for such a job to every American.
21
I pressed the recommendation button your comment because I believe it contains truth -- that is, if poor people move to the suburbs and/or rural areas in sufficient numbers, the body politic in those areas will have to pay greater attention to their problems. The way you phrase it, however, sounds more like a warning than a recognition of what can only be characterized as growing political power -- and with more and more people falling from the ranks of the middle-class, it is likely they will become more dominant more rapidly than you may think. This -- growing dominance --'would be a good thing, in my opinion, maybe bruising the arrogance and sense of entitlement held by many (but by no means, all) suburbanites and break what amounts to a Republican head-lock on the population in the ex-urban portions of the country.
It has been a very long time since the national Republican Party made any appreciable investment in our major cities, which has had the effect of ceding to the Democrats what the 2012 GOP ticket termed "the urban vote." Republicans realized a couple of decades ago that they could, absent a year of electoral calamity such as 2006, reasonably expect to have a good chance of controlling the House of Representatives without seriously contesting almost any black-majority district. This neglect is especially problematic for a nation of only two major political parties. Republicans seem at once mystified and intimidated by the power of the city vote to deny them Electoral College votes of Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Michigan to name but three, and occasionally Florida and Ohio. They're left darkly muttering about voter turnout, insinuating fraud, and less inclined than ever to engage the people of these communities, beyond token efforts such as those of Rand Paul. One might think that the increased Hispanic presence in major cities would lead the GOP, which has not *yet* alienated that community to the extent it has thumbed its nose at the black community, to reconsider its outreach efforts. Yet, look at what they refuse to do on immigration (or, more to the point perhaps, what they would like to do) or infrastructure repair, or health care. They're making the same errors they made in the 1960s and there's no 89% white electorate to save them anymore.
13
You seem bewildered that the GOP hasn't learned from its mistakes. Don't be. They never have. If you are a reactionary, the "truth" of anything lives in a mystical - and perhaps mythical - past to which you long to return. What is happening right now is a nuisance in the path to that return, nothing more.
Luckily for them, the road to the past is for sale. Congress has been helping them get there. They have gutted almost all of the Great Society programs since Reagan came to power. (Who under the age of fifty has any idea of what the OEO was?) Now, they are dismantling as far as possible the benefits of the New Deal while neatly ensconcing themselves in a new Gilded Age.
I expect that along with the rest of their amnesia they will forget what happens in terribly unequal countries: they destabilize and produce revolutions. The New Deal was a counter-balance to those very forces. It was a give-some-or-loose-it-all situation. The present GOP is incapable of giving anything. We may eventually see them loose it all.
Luckily for them, the road to the past is for sale. Congress has been helping them get there. They have gutted almost all of the Great Society programs since Reagan came to power. (Who under the age of fifty has any idea of what the OEO was?) Now, they are dismantling as far as possible the benefits of the New Deal while neatly ensconcing themselves in a new Gilded Age.
I expect that along with the rest of their amnesia they will forget what happens in terribly unequal countries: they destabilize and produce revolutions. The New Deal was a counter-balance to those very forces. It was a give-some-or-loose-it-all situation. The present GOP is incapable of giving anything. We may eventually see them loose it all.
5
One important point is that Washington DC was majority white until the 50's - in fact 60% white - whole Anacostia, Barry's heartland was close to 80% white until the 30s
A big factor in the changing demographics is middle class black flight. At least in DC my middle class black friends generally move to the suburbs when the have children (as do many whites), not just because of better schools, but out of a desire to distance their children from the cities social problems, i.e., gangs, etc. Thus a rising black middle class is mirroring what the white middle class did in the 50s
The areas undergoing gentrification at lest in DC often were, before the riots, quite middle class areas. Meridian Hill was the most upmarket area of DC when built, plunged post the 1970s with the park becoming a near open air drug market, but has moved back up based on the quality of the housing stock. A bug factor in the gentrification is that it is heavily childless households, white and black.
A big factor in the changing demographics is middle class black flight. At least in DC my middle class black friends generally move to the suburbs when the have children (as do many whites), not just because of better schools, but out of a desire to distance their children from the cities social problems, i.e., gangs, etc. Thus a rising black middle class is mirroring what the white middle class did in the 50s
The areas undergoing gentrification at lest in DC often were, before the riots, quite middle class areas. Meridian Hill was the most upmarket area of DC when built, plunged post the 1970s with the park becoming a near open air drug market, but has moved back up based on the quality of the housing stock. A bug factor in the gentrification is that it is heavily childless households, white and black.
33
Except for the fact the city has had a decline in single parent households in general, replaced by just singles. Single parent households used to be 36% of the city, now it is 14%. Many of these people are professionals that are replacing these single parent households, which in many cases were not professionals. Single parent households tend to be poorer. But you are right, it is the childless replacing those with children in the city, as a result the city itself is changing significantly. About 80% of the households in DC now do not have children between childless singles and married couples, and that number is increasing. This used to be about 57%. http://districtmeasured.com/2015/02/23/how-d-c-s-neighborhoods-have-chan... This is a huge change over a ten year period in DC. It practically happened overnight. The trend is likely to continue though, and it would not be surprising if in 10 years from now, those with children were a very small fraction of this city.
1
The typical pattern in Los Angeles is that the childless urban pioneers move into conveniently located areas with lower housing prices and higher crime rates and indifferent or worse schools and then gradually transform these areas into ones perceived to be safe enough for young couples planning a small family. The total density of children probably remains lower than in previous incarnations but these gentrified neighborhoods will typically develop desirable elementary schools and then become magnets to affluent couples with children.
Transportation is also a big issue in economic levels. Suburbs have hardly any public trans. In cities you can take a bus to get to work or to look for a job, and trains in the largest cities.
People stuck out in isolated suburbs have problems getting to services, shopping, child care, etc. They depend on a car and have long commutes. If it breaks down and no savings, it’s big trouble.
Often the lower the income, the older the car, the more frequent breakdowns. So this is 1 way lower classes get stuck.
According to Obama, ½ of Americans have no form of transportation, period. He stated this amazing fact in a speech last spring on our lack congressional funding for infrastructure/transport. This woeful fact has many effects on our society and economy.
Millions of jobs sent away over years, and no public trans for millions of citizens. What a combination to increase lower living standards.
Are we heading to 3rd world status for the many? If our politicians can try to more closely follow American founding ideals and the bill of rights, we have less chance of ending up like Columbia or Brazil. Our history is different in that it’s explicitly against hierarchy. even if we don’t live up to it.
But didn’t I read that Brazil has made recent progress in class equality? A positive example, then?
People stuck out in isolated suburbs have problems getting to services, shopping, child care, etc. They depend on a car and have long commutes. If it breaks down and no savings, it’s big trouble.
Often the lower the income, the older the car, the more frequent breakdowns. So this is 1 way lower classes get stuck.
According to Obama, ½ of Americans have no form of transportation, period. He stated this amazing fact in a speech last spring on our lack congressional funding for infrastructure/transport. This woeful fact has many effects on our society and economy.
Millions of jobs sent away over years, and no public trans for millions of citizens. What a combination to increase lower living standards.
Are we heading to 3rd world status for the many? If our politicians can try to more closely follow American founding ideals and the bill of rights, we have less chance of ending up like Columbia or Brazil. Our history is different in that it’s explicitly against hierarchy. even if we don’t live up to it.
But didn’t I read that Brazil has made recent progress in class equality? A positive example, then?
27
@ Meredith-I support your fine statement on the sorry state of mass transit in my USA (I see it every time I want to get from Logan Airport to somewhere in New England-New York State). The Swedish system that brought me a few days ago from Linköping to an island off the west coast (west of Göteborg) and that took me all over the place in metro Göteborg is my standard.
Against that New England may not be 3d world but it definitely is no better than 2d world, if that.
Will look into the Brazilian story since we have a lot of Brazil connections in this family.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Against that New England may not be 3d world but it definitely is no better than 2d world, if that.
Will look into the Brazilian story since we have a lot of Brazil connections in this family.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
3
The difference between England and the United States when it comes to social class is that the English have a class system and everyone know it. The US also has a class system, but everyone denies it.
5
Warehousing the poor in cities exclusively is not a valid choice either. It lead to the deterioation of many cities in the US, and the reality is gentrification is cities coming back from the damage of the policy of warehousing the poor in cities, rather than there being geographic dispersion. Remember other people should be living in the city as well for it to be economically healthy, and when the poor are in too high of a concentration in dense areas it just leads to blight and crime in far higher numbers. It also leads to poverty becoming edemic and intergenerational. Part of the reason poverty has become endemic is because of these negative network effects. We have tried this in the past, it was a massive failure. High concentrations of poverty should not be something we should be preserving.
2
The lesson I take is that ethnicities are constantly blending, and ethnic stratification will therefore persisit so long as the economic circumstances of group members are different. Once there is equality among groups, differences are just differences, and not class differences.
So, will we someday look like Colombia or Brazil? We already do. How to avoid ethnic inequality? Raise the estate tax to 100%, and use it to fund universal education, and a 40-acres-and-a-mule grant to every graduate. We have to face the fact that class is perpetuated by the intergenerational transfer of wealth, and nothing else.