A new study ranks the most diverse metropolitan areas in the country:
1
|
Vallejo-Fairfield, CA
|
40.8%
|
14.2%
|
24.0%
|
15.1%
|
5.9%
|
2
|
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA
|
42.4%
|
8.1%
|
21.7%
|
23.6%
|
4.2%
|
3
|
Stockton, CA
|
35.9%
|
7.1%
|
38.9%
|
14.3%
|
3.9%
|
But Vallejo is more of a suburb of SF, with what ought to be a pretty nice location right on San Francisco Bay. And it went broke way back in 2008. It got ripped off big time by its public safety unions during the bubble. Michael Lewis wrote a Vanity Fair article about Vallejo that I commented upon in VDARE last year:
Diversity makes public affairs ripe for exploitation by highly unified groups, such as the prison guards' union and local firemen. Lewis reported on how Vallejo’s fire department is an island of cohesion in a sea of anomie.
Moreover, because the vibrant residents of Vallejo tend to set their houses on fire more frequently than the duller residents of less diverse Northern Californian communities, the Vallejo FD attracted some of the most gung-ho firefighters from all over the region.
Not surprisingly, the Vallejo fire department—a rare institution in Vallejo with a high degree of what Harvard political scientist Robert D. Putnam calls “social capital,” or espirit de corps among its employees—managed to outmaneuver the divided and listless citizenry in grabbing a slice of the pie bigger than could be afforded by the populace’s mediocre ability to generate wealth.
Posts
45 comments:
So according to the "academics" at Brown,
"A perfectly diverse place would have a population with exactly 20% of each category..."
Uh, shouldn't the races be proportionately weighted by their share of the American population? ie, if Whites make up "X %" of the population, their share of the perfectly diverse community would also be X%?
In addition, your chart's rendition of minimizing and shielding the Asian column was quite revealing.
If we can't even define "diverse" why does anything else we say about the subject matter?
Worth noting that all 3 of these cities have more Asians than blacks.
Stockton has twice as many Asians as blacks.
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont has three times as many asians as blacks.
Diversity just mean less white people.
If we can't even define "diverse" why does anything else we say about the subject matter?
We can try and make sensible definitions but you will never get a multicultist to do that.
Merely asking what is meant by diverse has got me banned from more than one Facebook group.
Just drove through Vallejo an hour ago on the way back from Napa. The Asians there are predominantly Pacific Islanders, specifically Filipinos. Nice people but not the sharpest tools in the shed.
diversity weakens unity, thus allowing Big Money to control the government. This is the age old divide et impera strategy of those at the top. Just one reason why the elite love mass immigration and why they hate secession.
"Diversity just mean less white people"
Diversity is a Code Word, for...
I was just reading this article to my father who has lived for 84 years, including a stint in the military right after WWII ended.
He was in the navy. He said that whenever they had shore patrol, they'd walk in pairs in opposite directions, meeting in the middle after every lap.
In one place, however, they walked in groups of four -- Vallejo. He said it was controlled by a Jewish mafia guy named Bugsy Seigel. All the businesses dealt with this guy's gang of thieves, who didn't like to be interrupted by clean-cut navy guys on shore patrol.
He said that Vallejo was thoroughly corrupted and that the gangsters were followed by the union guys, who were often their sons.
"Of course Vallejo is bankrupt," he said. "Only criminals can do business there, and criminals don't pay much tax."
Just an anecdote ...
Why are those all 3 areas in Northern California and not one in Southern California?
I've gotten the impression from past iSteve posts that LA is the diversity hellhole, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.
(BTW Siegel was based in LA and LV-especially LV in the period before he was killed in June '47-not SF area)
Not only that but San Fran is only 14 percent Hispanic for California city, very low. La has far more Hispanics at 48 city and 48 county is about 14 percent Asian for the county and blacks around 9 percent in the County. La is more diverse than San Fran and also as diverse and Oakland. What is interesting is that all the 20 percent and above counties of Asians are in the North part of the state. Believe or not while La County has more almost all Asian cities, Orange County has a higher percent at 18 , the Asians there are more spread out, no main Asian city.
For those who might not be familiar with the area, Vallejo was home of the large Mare Island Naval Shipyard, the first US Navy base on the Pacic coast. Mare Island closed in 1996, as far as I know nothing replaced it in the local economy. Lots of ships built there; apparently 50,000 worked at Mare Island during WWII. Like the stevedores of the waterfront of Oakland of old, it became a magnet for manual laborers, heavily african-american.
Santa Clara is the worst difference between Asians and blacks, Asians about 32 percent and Blacks 3 percent. Orange County is next. Asians 18 percent and blacks 2 percent. This I believe is at the current 2010 Census on the US Census website.
"Why are those all 3 areas in Northern California and not one in Southern California?"''
Probably just a coincidence.
If you read through the rest of the list, all of California is generously represented on it - which we should expect because California is the most diverse large state in the union. So there are not just northern and southern California cities on the list, but large and small cities both on the coast and, most surprisingly, the interior.
Who would have guessed that some of small, dull California cities of the interior like Fresno (22nd), Yuba City (24th), Merced (34th), Modesto (35th), and Salinas (42nd) could be held up as models of diversity? They aren't what most Americans think of when they speak of diversity's "vibrancy". I grew up in California's great interior valley, and I mostly think of these places as more dichromatic than diverse, with Hispanic Mestizos and Non-Hispanic Whites making up the bulk of their populations. But according to the authors of this study, they were looking for balance among the five population groups they identified and measured when ranking the diversity of U.S. cities.
What about a scientific way of measuring diversity? Use Salter's Fst numbers. A diverse city is one where the average genetic distance between two persons is a high FST number.
When the Mare Island Shipyard shut down, that was it for Vallejo.
However, to the rescue of at least one section of town with some run-down Victorians come....you guessed it, gays.
"Why are those all 3 areas in Northern California and not one in Southern California?"''
San Bernadino is on the brink or has already filed for bankruptcy.
East Asians usually evade taxes. Forget the model minority image. White taxpayers can't carry on their backs not only their own financial burdens but that of an entire city. I've noticed once a city goes below 35-42% white there are financial problems. A system has been created where the East Asians can financially pay for college because they don't pay taxes and further distancing themselves from whites in pay and education. White people are being pushed down the economic ladder.
I've noticed once a city goes below 35-42% white there are financial problems.
Honolulu's white population is less than 20%. It is majority asian: japanese and filipinos mostly. It is a well run, prosperous city with a low crime rate. It is also very heavily Democrat.
Btw, Obama was born in Honolulu and graduated from the best high school there...
Well studies lumped La to Santa Ana, I would separate La and Orange more interesting since Orange in the over 30 crowd still has more whites than Hispanics and has a lot less blacks.
Hawaii has a large tourism industry to sustain itself. Whenever someone asks for a successful black-run place the answer is always Barbados, which is a small island with a big tourism industry. East Asians are leaching and preying upon what white people created.
Low wages and low productivity means low revenue.
Low skills and high unemployment and loads of kids means high spending, not to mention crime etc.
Result?
Outgoings exceed income and thus deficit.
Who woulda thunk it, apart from the 'intellectual hyper brains of the WSJ and 'The Ecnomist'.
Hawaii government at all levels is machine driven. It's corrupt in the sense that someone's nephew is always the one to get the plum government job or contract, and in exchange giving votes.
We will have achieved diversity when everyplace is exactly the same as everyplace else.
Hawaii has two reasons why the Democratic do so well. The Asians and pacific Islanders in the old days worked in the sugar cane and Pineapple fields. So, the Democratics supporting the worker looked good. Two as Steve states how cost of housing usually drives people leftward.
A: Diversity is good (as we are told over and over and over).
B: "Diversity" is code for "less white."
A+B = Less-white is good.
Next time a zealot screams "diversity is strength!" or some other inane pro-multicultural slogan at you, simply reply: "Since diversity means the ethnically cleansing of whites from a particular area, are you implying that such ethnic cleansing is a good thing?"
Notice New York-Long Island-Northern New Jersey is number 5, a lot of each and more blacks than the Ca cities of course- its known as diverse area for over 50 years. Most of these places vote heavily for Democratics, that is no surprise.
Also, Flagstaff only has 13 percent Hispanics and is maily white so both Tucson around 33 percent hispanic and Phoenix around 32 are more diverse. Also, Phoenix is probably closed to 4 percent Asian while Flagstaff is 1 or 2 percent. So, someone made a big error here. Also, both areas have a little more blacks Phoenix at about 4 percent and Tucson about 3 percent while Flagstaff is about 2 or less. Maybe, native Americans are factored in but still Flagstaff is not that diverse.
"East Asians usually evade taxes. Forget the model minority image. White taxpayers can't carry on their backs not only their own financial burdens but that of an entire city. I've noticed once a city goes below 35-42% white there are financial problems. A system has been created where the East Asians can financially pay for college because they don't pay taxes and further distancing themselves from whites in pay and education. White people are being pushed down the economic ladder."
Small businesses, e.g. landscaping , residential construction, food service, are the best places to hide income as well as to hide illegal aliens. I bet most of the people in these counties are non-union, small business owners and employees.
Judges and building inspectors are always more permissive with foreigners than whites. I think educated people are embarrassed when they are conducting long conversations with people in broken English, so they let them slide. They reserve the letter of the law for whites. I imagine tax auditors do the same.
"I've noticed once a city goes below 35-42% white there are financial problems.
Honolulu's white population is less than 20%. It is majority asian: japanese and filipinos mostly. It is a well run, prosperous city with a low crime rate. It is also very heavily Democrat.
Btw, Obama was born in Honolulu and graduated from the best high school there..." - We aren't getting many Japanese immigrants these days.
East Asians usually evade taxes. Forget the model minority image. White taxpayers can't carry on their backs not only their own financial burdens but that of an entire city.
It's pretty difficult to evade taxes for very long if you have a legitimate job.
Believe or not while La County has more almost all Asian cities, Orange County has a higher percent at 18 , the Asians there are more spread out, no main Asian city.
True: L.A. County Asians are concentrated in San Gabriel Valley cities like Monterey Park (67% Asian) and Arcadia (59%). You don't hear about these cities much — always a good sign in SoCal.
"
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Worth noting that all 3 of these cities have more Asians than blacks"
Sssssssssssssssssh!
You fool. do you want to be hunted down?
Most orientals I see work for themselves or other businesses owned by orientals. They have their taxes done by other orientals if they don't do themselves. I guarantee they aren't paying the minimum legal taxes and I guarantee IRS doesn't bother them very much as long as they aren't too blatant about it.
They have been avoiding taxes for millennia.
"Honolulu's white population is less than 20%. It is majority asian: japanese and filipinos mostly. It is a well run, prosperous city with a low crime rate. It is also very heavily Democrat."
This is when Putnam's social capital theory kicks in. Asians in Hawaii consider it an Asian Island. They treat the state, not as an immigrant would, but as a native. The probably vote democratic with the idea that democrats will shake down the continent-based companies, hotels, airlines, chain restaurants, etc. for taxes and squeeze the federal government for their piece of the pie. Asians on the continent, where they see themselves as a minority, are less concerned about the commonweal and probably try to avoid taxes.
#5 - that group is very poorly defined. It looks like it is 10 times the size of the others on the list.
Hi, I don't know a lot about the actual on the ground demographics of Vallejo even though I live in the Bay area and have driven through it a few times. But the statistics in the study shown (41% white , 14% black, 24% hispanic) seem off; perhaps my intuition is wrong because its the druggies that make the news... Although now that I look at
it twice, they are probably gerrymandering by combining Vallejo and Fairfield.
For Vallejo itself, the 2010 census puts it around 33% White, 22% Black, 21% Filipino, 23% Hispanic, the remaining 1-2% various Asians.
These numbers make it more likely to be considered "most diverse", that is even-steven balanced, I guess.
A guess is that the large Filipino community is due to ships (aren't a huge chunk of modern commercial seamen Filipino?) and the Navy's connection to the Philipines.
I worked with a youngish fellow who I believe was part of this community. Very little "book learning", though a junior college degree, but a lot more involved at a practical applied level in ham radio and amateur astronomy, the sort of things a modern seaman might find life saving, than probably most of us blogging here. A good skill-set for sailing datacenters through the clouds, actually, no BS in various "studies" required...
Sailer:
-----------------------
Diversity makes public affairs ripe for exploitation by highly unified groups, such as the prison guards' union and local firemen
----------------------------------------
Actually greedy white unions have been exploiting taxpayers for years, in mostly white cities, long before they became "diverse". White teachers unions for example have fed quite well from the public trough in mostly white areas, as have mostly white municipal unions.
Anonymous:
--------------------------------
A: Diversity is good (as we are told over and over and over).
B: "Diversity" is code for "less white."
A+B = Less-white is good.
Next time a zealot screams "diversity is strength!" or some other inane pro-multicultural slogan at you, simply reply: "Since diversity means the ethnically cleansing of whites from a particular area, are you implying that such ethnic cleansing is a good thing?"
-----------------------------------
Anonymous is naive. "Diversity" proponents sometimes want MORE whites, provided they are liberal ones, and will use the cover of "progressivism" to reduce the presence of minorities.
A better question that could be asked is how come white liberals who preach about "diversity" have been successful in "ethnically cleansing" many areas of minorities via government controls such as restrictive zoning, as Thomas Sowell shows many times?
And how come white liberals who find diversity all the rage use the cover of "diversity" to advance their own agendas, such as securing special preferences and treatment for white homosexuals? Since when for example does making a special allowance for gays to march as such in some totally unrelated municipal parade become a "civil rights issue"?
Another question that should be asked is how come inefficient mostly white unions get to drain the public purse long before any significant "minorities" show up, and why they get to keep out minorities using a subtle web of controls and barriers, all the while fooling the gullible with talk bout "diversity"? Do people already knowledgeable in their fields for example really need 100 semester hours of vapid "education" courses before they can even get a foot in the door to teach? These aDo you really have to have had a prior relative be a union member to get a union card? Do you "need" to be a union member to perform this or that job, or isn't the union card just another job protection mechanism for union cronies, buddies and friends? These and other barriers are used by white unions to keep out new competition, not only by minorities but by other non-union white people.
Conservative economist Walter Williams in his recent book Races and Economics shows such job and income protection rackets in a variety of venues. And it is not only unions. White business syndicates using the power of the state lock out competition and ensure the goodies circulate among themselves, protecting their privileges and incomes, all the white using pious language bout "protecting the public:, "high quality service" and laughably- "diversity."
In short, many whites who play the "diversity" card are not primarily interested in helping minorities at all. Their agenda is to manipulate the "diversity" meme to expand or protect their privileges and incomes, or enhance their "psychic capital" - i.e. feeling good about themselves as so much better than those "mean" conservatives...
When predicting the performance of a municipal government, is it more useful to know how diverse the community is, or what fraction is NAM?
"Diversity just mean less white people."
And maximum "diversity" means no white people at all.
I think we're lacking in a real Diversitard voice here at iSteve, so I'm going to pull double-duty until a real Diversitard shows up:
Just drove through Vallejo an hour ago on the way back from Napa. The Asians there are predominantly Pacific Islanders, specifically Filipinos. Nice people but not the sharpest tools in the shed.
RACIST!!! Lulz, like you can really assess the mean IQ of Filipinos while driving past at 75 MPH? This is why I tell my friends all racists are idiots!
"When predicting the performance of a municipal government, is it more useful to know how diverse the community is, or what fraction is NAM?"
I think it's a balance between size of engine and amount of friction.
(Where the engine is IQ and various pro-commonweal traits and friction is anti-commonweal traits especially those which are directly proportional to diversity.)
As an equation it would be something like
DI = (the sum of) IQ*c1*p
(where IQ is IQ of a group, c1 is the proportion of their IQ the average individual of that group will commit to the commonweal and p is their proportion of the total population and DI is the Denmark Index.)
So country A
- average IQ 100
- c1 of 10% (or 0.1)
- homogenous (p = 1)
would have a DI of 10.
Country B
- average IQ 200
- c1 of 1%
- homogenous
would have a DI of 2.
complicated if the level of diversity itself effects the values for c1 e.g. a group's value for c1 is halved if they are less than 60% of the total population.
I'm guessing an equation literally as simple as that could be constructed which mostly fits most of the data if those two elements are combined.
I think that means you could estimate the c1 values too (although personally i don't think those are strictly racial. I think there will be a lot of national scale variation within.)
The HBD things you learn. I am supposed to be calling them "sea-based migrant Filipino workers". And the largest single group of merchent seamen, world-side, are indeed Filipino:
"There are around more than 200,000[4] to 250,000[5] Filipinos employed as seamen worldwide, more than any other nationality... one out of every five seamen in the world is a Filipino. ... the Philippines is the world’s main supplier of seamen since 1987... the "single biggest nationality bloc" in the shipping industry."
Heh, factoids, it seems 70% of Japan's seamen are Filipino and 1/6 of the seamen on the USN's command ship in the Pacific in 2007 were Filipino..
1 out of 3 isn't bad.
That's batting above .300.
"I'm guessing an equation literally as simple as that"
With the 60% rule you could even have six populations A to F with identical characteristices of average IQ of 100 and c1 of 0.1 and a DI when homogenous of 10 who, if they all moved around so that each country was now 50% of the original group and 10% each of the other five groups, would all have a DI of 5 because all their c1values would be halved by being below 50% of the population.
Most orientals I know work for giant conglomerates just like they have back home. I don't know how they'd evade taxes doing that
Post a Comment