Examples of non-white gentrification?

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Docere

Come to think of it, does NYC have an integrated Hyde Park/Kenwood type area where white and black professionals live alongside each other? I'm pretty sure all the "mixed" neighborhoods in NYC are basically made up of a much more affluent white population and a more working class or low income black population.

Fort Greene

[Docere]

Originally Posted by Segun

Harlem.

I don't think that really an equivalent. Harlem is still only 10% white and I suspect the Black population is still much less professional class than Hyde Park/Kenwood.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Segun

Feelings are not observations. This is what I OBSERVE FROM ACTUALLY GOING. TO. THE. NEIGHBORHOOD. In other words, your data don't mean s**t if its not being mirrored in real life. You need to re-evaluate your data then.

^ No. what you're expecting me to believe is that if you didn't see it, it didn't happen.

And you are just one person.

There are other observations out there too. And data. What on earth is wrong with you?

I don't care where they live, I've heard that many live in Lake Meadows.

The reason we have a census and demographic data is because professionals handle this stuff, hence I don't have to walk around and count people. It's a beautiful thing, the existence of professionals.

But believe you me, I will take their word over yours. As would be any betting man.

[Segun]

I was under the impression that the best way to understand whats going on is through experience itself. Maybe there's some statistic that proves me wrong.

[Segun]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ No. what you're expecting me to believe is that if you didn't see it, it didn't happen.

And you are just one person.

There are other observations out there too. And data. What on earth is wrong with you?

I don't care where they live, I've heard that many live in Lake Meadows.

The reason we have a census and demographic data is because professionals handle this stuff, hence I don't have to walk around and count people. It's a beautiful thing, the existence of professionals.

But believe you me, I will take their word over yours. As would be any betting man.

Its not a bet because there's nothing to bet about. And by your lack of experience, I'm pretty sure you're well versed in taking the word of professionals over getting off your ass and visiting it in person. It's easy to read about a place from afar.

[the urban politician]

Per Wikipedia:

In 2015, in Bronzeville:

White 10%
Black 70%
Asian: 14.3%

But I guess since you didn't see it on the street, it's not real. Only the Black Empire is real, right?

[Segun]

^ Only if you think that's what I said. Read again.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Docere

I don't think that really an equivalent. Harlem is still only 10% white and I suspect the Black population is still much less professional class than Hyde Park/Kenwood.

I suspect there are far more black professionals living in Harlem than Hyde Park. Harlem is a much more populous and has residents from a range of economic statuses.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Segun

Its not a bet because there's nothing to bet about. And by your lack of experience, I'm pretty sure you're well versed in taking the word of professionals over getting off your ass and visiting it in person. It's easy to read about a place from afar.

I'm sure it wasn't just one guy doing the counting and number crunching. In that Tribune article I posted they spoke about seeing more Chinese riders on the bus in Bronzeville. These are also observations. Lots of them. And probably less biased as well.

You are just one dude.

That's why data matters.

[Segun]

^ And evidence of that data beyond anecdotes also matters. I'm sure Chinese are moving into Black areas of Chicago, the numbers don't lie in that regard, but are they re-shaping that area, or just moving in as residents?

[Segun]

I studied data in college. The only thing one can gather from your data is that the Chinese and White population is increasing on the South Side of Chicago. That's it. Nothing else.

Further analysis of said data to prove a trend requires further evidence beyond the data itself. If I were a scientist, I would go out on the field to find this evidence. That evidence is determined through experience. That's how life works. Visit the South Side yourself and prove me wrong.

[the urban politician]

^ I don't have a clue what you're asking me to do.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Segun

^ And evidence of that data beyond anecdotes also matters. I'm sure Chinese are moving into Black areas of Chicago, the numbers don't lie in that regard, but are they re-shaping that area, or just moving in as residents?

I make no claim that they are reshaping anything as of 2018.

[Segun]

Good.

[Segun]

Originally Posted by Docere

I don't think that really an equivalent. Harlem is still only 10% white and I suspect the Black population is still much less professional class than Hyde Park/Kenwood.

Is there still Black wealth in the neighborhood, a la Millionnaires Row and Sugar Hill? I don't know what's really going on in Harlem today. I would think with some of those ultra wealthy benefactors who put money in the community, there would be someone who lives there, but I don't know.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Segun

Is there still Black wealth in the neighborhood, a la Millionnaires Row and Sugar Hill? I don't know what's really going on in Harlem today. I would think with some of those ultra wealthy benefactors who put money in the community, there would be someone who lives there, but I don't know.

Harlem has black wealth, which never left (Strivers Row, Hamilton Heights, Mt. Morris Park and Sugar Hill), but the bulk of professional blacks have been in Brooklyn and Queens since the 50's. I suspect Bed Stuy had (and has) more black wealth than Harlem ever had, and SE Queens has had considerable black wealth since the late 50's or so.

Re. Harlem's racial breakdown, I suspect the decennial numbers are pretty inaccurate in 2018. Keep in mind that Harlem's white population has basically been tripling in recent decades, so 2020 will be very different from 2010. Also, the posted numbers are only for Central Harlem. West and East Harlem haven't been plurality black in decades. There's still a decent black population uptown, but it's pretty geographically constrained, with Dominicans pushing in from the North, and white gentrifers from every other direction.

But Harlem will always have a black population, though, not just for cultural reasons, but due to rent control and public housing. It would take easily 100 years for Central Harlem to lose its identity.

Keep in mind there are still working class Italians in the Village and Puerto Ricans in the East Village, a half century after those neighborhoods became ridiculously expensive. Hell, there are rent controlled Puerto Ricans and Irish in Midtown, still, in the few remaining rent-controlled side-street tenements, sharing streets with billionaires.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Harlem has black wealth, which never left (Strivers Row, Hamilton Heights, Mt. Morris Park and Sugar Hill), but the bulk of professional blacks have been in Brooklyn and Queens since the 50's. I suspect Bed Stuy had (and has) more black wealth than Harlem ever had, and SE Queens has had considerable black wealth since the late 50's or so.

I doubt Bed-Stuy ever had more professionals than Harlem, or many professionals period. Harlem has pretty much always had affluent areas, such as Strivers Row, but Bed-Stuy has pretty much always been thoroughly working class to poor. Most of the more affluent black areas in Brooklyn are further west towards Manhattan (Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Prospect Heights), or south in Lefferts Gardens and Flatbush.

I would guess the only neighborhood in NYC that probably would ever have rivaled Harlem for the number of affluent black residents is Flatbush. The neighborhood is actually the location of the Huxtables brownstone in the early episodes of the Cosby Show. It was changed to Brooklyn Heights in later episodes, probably to strengthen the image of the Huxtables as an upper-middle class family with a diverse social network.

[llamaorama]

The premise of this thread assumes there is some force which would cause a lot of affluent non-white people to cluster in a certain area. I would imagine gentrifying groups are usually diverse. There might be comparatively few african americans at a higher socioeconomic level but there will still be a few.

The only circumstance that would lead to non-white gentrification might be if a suburban chinatown spilled over into a really poor white suburb. But can anyone think of a location in a US metro area where that could happen?

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I doubt Bed-Stuy ever had more professionals than Harlem, or many professionals period.

Bed Stuy had pretty vast areas of middle class black stability, all through the worst years. Harlem had no such thing; it was more isolated enclaves. Also, Harlem was like 95% renters while Bed Stuy had a large homeownership population. And Bed Stuy probably has like 10x as many nice brownstone blocks as Harlem, which is mostly apartment blocks.

So I find it very hard to believe that Bed Stuy had fewer professionals. It probably had like 5x as many as Harlem in the "bad years".

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I would guess the only neighborhood in NYC that probably would ever have rivaled Harlem for the number of affluent black residents is Flatbush.

Flatbush was/is to an extent a Carribean black neighborhood, which isn't really what we're talking about. And it was never affluent, unless you're talking the narrow corridor of victorian homes (which was always majority white) or Prospect Lefferts Gardens (which is like 2% the brownstone stock of Bed Stuy and probably also majority white).

I would wager that Bed Stuy had more professional blacks than anywhere in NYC from about WW2 to the 1980s. By that point SE Queens probably had more.

[Crawford]

And re. "does NYC have an Hyde Park/Kenwood type neighborhood", I would say not really, but closest would be Flatbush, which transitioned from white to black in the 1970's, but never really lost its affluent white population, and, while the racial dynamics have shifted again, remains pretty integrated. I have friends in Prospect Lefferts Gardens and it feels like 1980's Cosby Show. But this is slightly different because almost all Flatbush blacks are of West Indian descent.

Fort Greene would be another option, but Fort Greene feels less kumbaya. It has lots of affluent people (black and white, though more white these days) and poor blacks in public housing. It's also extremely expensive and bougie these days. It's also kinda creative and "Hollywood" (tons of people are involved in entertainment industry). People like Erykah Badu.