Race and Ethnicity: Buffalo

STEEL

September 23, 2010 3:31 PM

That is an extraordinary map. It says a lot beyond race.

[ Reply ]

Score: 3 ( 3 votes )

sho'nuff

September 23, 2010 4:10 PM

It is interesting to compare the sprawl surrounding Buffalo to other cities our size. It looks like our urban core (excluding downtown) is heavily populated when compared to cities like Pittsburgh, Toledo, and others. It looks like the greatest concentration of population lives within about 8 miles of the city center. The concentration of population (25 people per dot) drops significantly as we get outside of the first ring suburbs.

The other thing to note is that there are neighborhoods segregated by ethnicity in almost all cities. Chicago, Boston, Newark, and NY are among the worst.

[ Reply ]

Score: 3 ( 5 votes )

Sean Brodfuehrer

September 23, 2010 4:36 PM

It's amazing what GIS and a little data can do...

[ Reply ]

Score: 3 ( 3 votes )

Sally

September 23, 2010 9:28 PM

So much for the sprawl crapola. The dotless places in the midst of dots appear to be parks and railyards.

[ Reply ]

Score: -1 ( 9 votes )

Jimbuffalo

September 23, 2010 9:48 PM

This scatter map indicates to me that efforts to force integration through busing has had the opposite effect. To me, coercion like that usually does backfire.

Too bad the geniuses in power 40 years ago took the easy way out. Where are those heroes now?

Rather than improve the schools themselves, "leadership" forced kids to vacate their own neighborhoods and travel by bus to an equally underperforming school. That factor alone destroyed, in the process, whatever fabric our neighborhoods once had. Pride disappeared, self policing went away, ownership and respect became quaint euphemisms of days gone by.

South Buffalo turned into W. Seneca, East Buffalo became Cheektowaga, and the West side morphed into Tonawanda. Instead of density and hegemony, you had the "haves" packing up and the "have nots" falling farther and farther behind. Small business followed, supplanted years later by competing IDAs. Construct a few highways to bisect once beautiful boulevards and there you have it: Segregation, 2010 style.

Not only can we now separate people by race, but we can separate them by economics!! Brilliant!!!! Until, however, "they" come into downtown to kill each other.

Buffalo has not become the "2nd poorest city" overnight. Long ago most of the people with means headed for the hills (or farmlands). We made it too easy to simply drive into town, conduct business or practice law or go to a hockey game and then leave. Detroit is the same way. So is Cleveland. Nothing wrong with living in Orchard Park or Grosse Pointe Farms or Shaker Heights, by the way...but the dots don't lie.

Wonder why churches are abandoned and the Broadway Market is a ghost town save for a few days a month or at Easter?

Policies created this map. People who had the ability simply did what they could. People who didn't have ability simply didn't. And here we are wondering how we ever get "it" back.

Energy, fresh water, and young attitudes can turn it around, but this map is a direct reflection of derelict policies for which we have paid and are still paying a terrible price.

Sorry for the rant. But that's what the dots are saying to me.

[ Reply ]

Score: 5 ( 11 votes )

timvanman

September 23, 2010 10:37 PM

I don't think anyone could have said it any better. It's our turn to change things.

On a side note, look at Detroit it's just a bigger scale of things here. Houston has an interesting spoke pattern. Streets and highways really do divide people.

[ Reply ]

replied to Jimbuffalo

Score: 0 ( 2 votes )

biniszkiewicz

September 23, 2010 11:04 PM

@jimbuffalo: pretty good rant. generally liked it.

To be fair, bussing came long after the tonawandas and cheektowaga were largely built; suburbanization was in high gear prior to scholastic integration. Suburbanization was also based on transportation, mortgage, pollution, energy, industrial and tax policies to name a few. But you're generally right about bussing dramatically increasing the stampede out of the city (and where people went. I'm another east side native whose family moved over the CheektoWarsaw border in 1970 when I was ten. white flight . . .)

Public schools are the primary impediment to attracting white suburban families into the city. No other issue is even close. City Honors is highly respected. Tapestry is admired. Create another Tapestry or City Honors every year. The first few years might only attract families who otherwise would leave the city, or some who now pay high tuition at private schools. Maybe at first there wouldn't be a sufficient critical mass of good schools to be a gravitational force in attracting suburbanites. But in a half decade, when there are more good public schools in the city than you can count on one hand, watch suburbanites begin to flood back to the city for cheap real estate and cheap taxes. Only when they trust that their child can get an education equal to the suburban schools will white suburban families seriously consider the city. We would increase Buffalo's population by 100,000 over ten years just by poaching suburbanites if we only had competitive schools.

There are those who argue that we should not stratify our schools. They don't like the City Honors and Tapestry models. They don't like a system in which the best schools take the cream of the crop, leaving the lesser schools saddled without high achiever role models and only higher densities of mediocre students. It can be a pursuasive argument.

But I think the BPS needs to look at this in a different way: Buffalo schools are losing market share in a huge market, and yet they have a product that sells. All they have to do is reproduce it. They'll sell more of it. They're like a declining car company with a boring lineup, bloated costs and only one hot model which they can't seem to produce in any qauntity. Produce another Tapestry, another City Honors every year. Poach Catholic School and suburban school students by producing a competitive product. Then watch the BPS population grow instead of shrink. Watch as graduation rates rise (thanks to mirrors, mostly: just as many students will be failing, presumably; it's just that they won't be as large a percentage of the total population).

If and when Buffalo features public schools competitive with the suburbs, Buffalo's population will grow and its racial compostion will become more complex and integrated.

[ Reply ]

replied to Jimbuffalo

Score: 2 ( 4 votes )

whatever

September 23, 2010 11:46 PM

Improving city schools makes sense of course (more charters is the best idea for that)... but if it doesn't happen and that motivates more African-American families to move to Amherst, Cheektowaga, etc. then that could be another way of WNY becoming more integrated.

Or on the other hand, if city schools do become better and more Caucasian families move into the city from burbs but mostly cluster near each other in those red-shaded neighborhoods that wouldn't necessarily improve integration.

At least Eric Holder would be proud of us for discussing this.

The question remains however, within the city where the only school system is the BPS, how to explain the ongoing very sharp diving line along Main St?
I don't know if there is a clear answer.

[ Reply ]

replied to biniszkiewicz

Score: 2 ( 4 votes )

Blackrocklifer

September 24, 2010 7:46 AM

Generally agree with your comment but I think we are blaming the schools rather than looking at the makeup of the student body. My four children have attended City Honors, Olmstead, DaVinci, McKinley, PS #51, PS #17, and Our Lady of Black Rock. I am not so sure these schools differ that much in the quality of the teachers, the building, or the administration. The demographic of the students is the driving force that determines the "quality" of the school. Involved parents are key to a childs success but the poverty that is so prevalent in Buffalo greatly impacts and undermines our public schools.

[ Reply ]

replied to biniszkiewicz

Score: 4 ( 8 votes )

sho'nuff

September 24, 2010 8:45 AM

What is driving poverty, and how is that a parent who lives in poverty is unable to be involved in their students education. Why is there such a higher rate of drop out and failure for the poor, and why is it more permissable for poor students to drop out of school knowing that it is a recipe for continued failure?

[ Reply ]

replied to Blackrocklifer

Score: -1 ( 7 votes )

Blackrocklifer

September 24, 2010 9:28 AM

Poverty is driven by those with the wealth distorting our political process to protect and expand their piece of the pie. Driving down wages, exporting jobs, and basic greed has created a wide divide between those at the bottom and those at the top. The opportunities for the poor to enter the middle class continue to decline with each passing year.

Parents living in poverty are much less likely to be educated and being poor is much more likely to result in family dysfunction. This leaves many poor children without much hope of ever rising above their circumstance. It is a vicious cycle that feeds on itself and we are naive to believe this can be addressed without getting at the root of the problem, the inequity of wealth distribution in America today.

[ Reply ]

replied to sho'nuff

Score: -1 ( 11 votes )

sho'nuff

September 24, 2010 10:49 AM

Classism and social standing in America is primarily based on education, not on wealth. Income is heavily tied to education, without education the poor student stands almost no chance of getting out of poverty. The circumstances you cite are more heavily tied to the lack of emphasis on education than on the fact that there are wealthy in America. You will find more public policy and programs designed to improve socioeconomic standing of the poor than you will for those that protect the wealth of the richest. We have program after program after program designed to assist the poor with eliminating or minimizing the things that may impede their success and improvement in their socioeconomic standing in life.

According to www.governmentspending.com, in 2010 the US Government spent about $1.2 Billion on corporate welfare and tax breaks for those earning over $250,000 per year. In 2010, the US Governent spent $750 Billion on direct welfare programs for the poor (about 11% of the population).

I guess the question would be, is that $750 Billion being spent effectively? Is it making a difference for the poor, or could it be better spent to improve the underlying conditions that are contributing to poverty. Could it somehow be used to create a higher awareness of opportunities that exist with an education, vs those that are closed without education. Could it be used to change the culture of failure and create a culture of success with our poorest?

Perhaps we could use it to further propaganda that the rich are the problem in America, that seems to be a popular stance that some like to take.

[ Reply ]

replied to Blackrocklifer

Score: 4 ( 10 votes )

Blackrocklifer

September 24, 2010 1:02 PM

Of course education is key, but as I explained the poor are stuck in a rut that only better opportunities can alleviate. I never advocated for more welfare, I would like to see decent wages for all those at the bottom of the workforce. That money would have to come from the top, where the wealth of America has been concentrated by poltical manipulation of our tax and business structure.

According to the Center on Budget Policy and Priorities the total welfare spending for 2010 will be about 482 billion. This includes the earned income tax credit, SSI for the disabled, Unemployment insurance, child care, food stamps, school meals, housing assistance, energy assistance, and programs for abused children. The direct cash aid to the poor is realtively small in comparison.

It would be very difficult to measure the amount of resources that the wealthy receive. The mortgage interest deduction, transportation subsidies (highways and air travel), tax breaks, tax shelters, are just a few. Wealthy Americans have not payed their fair share for decades and our country can no longer afford it.

[ Reply ]

replied to sho'nuff

Score: 3 ( 5 votes )

sho'nuff

September 24, 2010 1:55 PM

"Wealthy Americans have not payed their fair share for decades and our country can no longer afford it."

What constitutes their "fair share"? The average "wealthy American", top 7% of the population contribute over 50% of all charitable contributions in the US. Granted, I am sure that some of these contributions are to secure the income tax refund or credit, but overall without these donation the majority of non-profits and public foundations would be in dire straights. This is both an indirect and direct benefit to the poor. (source ABC News) The report did state that the lower middle class will donate a larger percentage of their income to charities and religious organizations, but they make up less than 5% of total charitable contributions.

According to a CBS news report from 2007, Republicans tend to give about 7% more of their income to charitable and church orgaizations than democrats. They also tend to give to more organizations and donate more often. Democrats give more to policital and environmental organizations than Republicans. (source CBS Evening News with Katie Couric).

The top tax bracket for the US is anything over $373,650. People in that bracket currently pay 35% of their income in taxes, and another 20% in other withholdings. That is scheduled to increase to 39.6% of their income in 2011, and 23% of withholdings by 2012. That is nearly half of their salary that goes back to the government. How is that not a fair share? When compared to the middle class who are paying 25% of their income to taxes and 12% - 14% withholding?

What if we take 75% of the salary from the wealthiest, what will that do for the poor?

[ Reply ]

replied to Blackrocklifer

Score: 4 ( 8 votes )

Blackrocklifer

September 24, 2010 2:20 PM

Very few of the wealthy pay the full rate, as I am sure you are aware. Some pay nothing at all with the use of various tax shelters and schemes. It looks as if The Bush tax cuts will be preserved for the rich so their rate will not increase to 39.6 as you claim. Higher end salaries are padded to offset the tax burden, low end salaries have no such benefit. BTW, top tax rate in the 1950's and 60's was 90%, a time of growth and a strong economy.
The working poor pay the very regressive sales taxes and social security on the full amount of every dollar they earn. The effective tax rate for rich and poor alike is not very far apart when considering this and all the loopholes utilized by the rich.
The tax system has been used (or abused) to move wealth upwards for the past 30 years, why shouldn't that system be used now to help those most in need?

[ Reply ]

replied to sho'nuff

Score: 2 ( 4 votes )

sho'nuff

September 24, 2010 2:52 PM

So fair share is 90%, with no shelters or tax breaks? Keep in mind that the middle class and household demographics has changed considerably since the 1950s, but that is a side note. The 1950s were a time of a post WWII manufacturing boom, and a major shift from small industry to heavy manufacturing and industry. We are not seeing that same increase in the number of workers or their economic mobility today, our economy just isn't that strong.

So the wealthy should pay up to 90% of ther income to help out the poor. What is your definition of wealthy? Does that mean income or total value of assets minus total value of liabilities?

How would you foresee this getting passed on to the poor?

[ Reply ]

replied to Blackrocklifer

Score: 1 ( 5 votes )

Sally

September 24, 2010 11:42 AM

Because the underclass devalues education. I have friends that work in City schools and have heard the horror stories of students that are trying to learn being harrassed and bullied into submission.

It is the end result of what the late Sen. Moynihan so famously predicted would happen when policies of the government are used to destroy the nuclear family. it happened first to the black families and is now happening to poor white families.

Interesting reading the Moynihan Report

[ Reply ]

replied to sho'nuff

Score: 1 ( 3 votes )

Sally

September 24, 2010 11:34 AM

To be fair when bussing started Buffalo had 452,000 people it now has 260,000. To be fair when bussing started Amherst had 85,000 people it now has 125,000

[ Reply ]

replied to biniszkiewicz

Score: 3 ( 3 votes )

Pegger

September 24, 2010 11:57 AM

I have argued the educational factor in this forum for years often having my position slammed and the BPS slammed. You made very good points. I would like to add that public schools reflect the populations they serve. It is no mystery why magnet schools which are selective in their student bodies outperform other urban schools often stripping them of role models. That creates a great educational environment for the talented students while perpetuating the culture of poverty in those that remain.

I agree that the state of public schools in the city are singularly the greatest impediment to repopulating rust belt cities.

[ Reply ]

replied to biniszkiewicz

Score: 3 ( 3 votes )

whatever

September 24, 2010 12:24 PM

Pegger>"the state of public schools in the city are singularly the greatest impediment to repopulating rust belt cities"

I'm not slamming anything you wrote - just have questions. Are you saying it's more of an issue in the Rust Belt compared to cities elsewhere (east/west coasts, Sunbelt, Midwest)?

Pegger>"public schools reflect the populations they serve"... ""the state of public schools in the city are singularly the greatest impediment to repopulating rust belt cities"

Combining those two points, are you saying the biggest impediment to cities is city residents themselves?

What practical changes would you suggest? Are you suggesting to eliminate selective/magnet-style schools such as City Honors, Olmsted, DaVinci so they can't disproportionately attract "role models" as you point out they do?
Or should the opposite be done and try to grow the number of those selective schools in the city? Or how about adding more non-selective charters filled by lottery? Good idea or bad?

It's easy for so many people here to point to education as a big problem, but realistically, what improvements and policy changes do people think should happen?

[ Reply ]

replied to Pegger

Score: 2 ( 2 votes )

whatever

September 23, 2010 11:29 PM

Jim, doesn't your focus on suburbanization somewhat ignore how divided that map shows the city to be (at least was as of the 2000 Census)?

Jim>"Energy, fresh water, and young attitudes can turn it around"

Our fresh water lake has been here all along. Chicago is on a huge body of fresh water too. How will fresh water cause more racially integration in city neighborhoods?
I also don't see how you can blame forced busing for North and South Buffalo being shaded so red and the east side blue. (I'm not defending forced busing, but it can't be blamed for everything. If it never happened are you saying N and S Buffalo would be more integrated now than they are? How so?)

timvanman>"Streets and highways really do divide people."

Well, yeah, areas of blue and red dots are separated very dramatically along Main Street.
But how can the street be blamed for separating people? It's just a street.

[ Reply ]

replied to Jimbuffalo

Score: 4 ( 4 votes )

Blackrocklifer

September 24, 2010 7:06 AM

Pretty good take but I would point out that integration of the schools started out as a countywide proposal until white suburbanites threw a tantrum and defeated any such idea of basic fairness. I think the city and region would be much stronger today if a reasonable plan of mixing city and suburban students had been implemented. Instead, Buffalo was forced to go it alone, as is the case to this day.

[ Reply ]

replied to Jimbuffalo

Score: 3 ( 5 votes )

sho'nuff

September 24, 2010 9:24 AM

Busing and desegregation in Buffalo was not a County wide initiative. Judge Curtin's 1976 ruling and plan only involved the City of Buffalo schools, which were much larger an much more successful than the suburban schools at that time. He even mentioned in his Arthur vs Nyquist that "although he could not consider the threat of white flight (in his verdict), he could consider record evidence that re-segregation was likely to occur under his plan". In other words, re-segregation outside of the city was likely to occur as a result of his school desegregation and busing plans; however he lad little control over the actions of individuals.

I have been unable to find any evidence of suburban schools protesting against desegregation, with the exception of a few op-ed columns from the Buffalo Evening News and Courier Express. Keep in mind that the City of Buffalo Schools were more willing to "go it alone" in terms of educational programming and sports in the 60s and 70s. There was a definite boundary created between the Buffalo Public School District, Parochial and Catholic Schools, and the Suburban Schools. These boundaries were primarily set and held by the Buffalo School District, as they still are today.

[ Reply ]

replied to Blackrocklifer

Score: -1 ( 5 votes )

Blackrocklifer

September 24, 2010 9:44 AM

Incorrect, I was a student during integration and the process began long before 1976. I was in 7th grade in 1970 and attended West Hertel Middle School, brand new and fully integrated with students bussed from all over the city. I went on to attend Riverside High School where the racial riots of 1972-73 resulted in the National Guard occupying our school. I also was in a classroom that was attacked and testified in court against one of the perpetrators. I still have the many news articles and a four page special edition about the trouble at Riverside.

My uncle from Amherst was a leader in the effort to fight countywide bussing, this was in the early 70's and he was interviewed on television. I clearly remember his rant, he said he moved to Amherst to get his children away from those people and he paid higher taxes to make sure his kids would not be forced to attend school with blacks.

Sometimes history is distorted over time, I was a witness to this period and clearly remember the debate at that time. I stand by my original comment.

[ Reply ]

replied to sho'nuff

Score: 5 ( 7 votes )

sho'nuff

September 24, 2010 10:34 AM

Sometimes one's personal recollection differs from the actual historical account.

[ Reply ]

replied to Blackrocklifer

Score: 0 ( 8 votes )

Blackrocklifer

September 24, 2010 11:25 AM

No, sometimes the historical account differs from the "actual" reality. As a student of history I have often found this to be the case.

My "recollection" is quite accurate, I lived through this period and as I noted have the newspaper articles to back it up. Going to school each day during the height of racial unrest is not something a person forgets. As I said, I was a witness to history, were you there?, if not you really don't know what took place.

My family has always been active politically and spirited debate and discussion took place in my home on a regular basis. Integration and bussing was a huge part of that conversation all through the early 70's. I was well informed of the politics, public debate, and reality of bussing and integration.

[ Reply ]

replied to sho'nuff

Score: 6 ( 8 votes )

BurchJP

September 24, 2010 11:52 AM

OOOOOOOH Sho'nuff offering up the one hitter quitter!

[ Reply ]

replied to sho'nuff

Score: 3 ( 3 votes )

Sally

September 24, 2010 11:47 AM

That's just not a true statement. There was never any discussion of the sort, there was no need for such a discussion because the schools were still over 2/3 white when integration started.

[ Reply ]

replied to Blackrocklifer

Score: -2 ( 4 votes )

Blackrocklifer

September 24, 2010 1:05 PM

What's not true?

[ Reply ]

replied to Sally

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

Dan

September 23, 2010 10:12 PM

The maps are based on Census 2000 numbers. When we get the first numbers from Census 2010, it'll likely reveal some remarkable trends. The big surprise: blacks moving to the suburbs, particularly Cheektowaga (Pine Hill and Cleveland Hill areas) and Amherst (Eggertsville, Sundridge, "Looney Acres", and other areas along Sweet Home Road, with scattered households in Snyder and Williamsville). Just as Main Street is a dividing line for Buffalo, we'll be seeing the first signs of Millersport Highway emerging as a dividing line for Amherst. We'll also probably see more dots downtown.

[ Reply ]

Score: 3 ( 7 votes )

Greg

September 23, 2010 11:21 PM

It'll really be interesting to see the shift of Whites. It's getting to the point that if they move too far away from the city center, they might be too far away. It's getting to the point where they either accept longer commutes or move back in to the middle of it all.

[ Reply ]

replied to Dan

Score: 3 ( 3 votes )

Dan

September 24, 2010 7:31 PM

Greg> It'll really be interesting to see the shift of Whites. It's getting to the point that if they move too far away from the city center, they might be too far away.

I don't think it'll ever be as bad as in Detroit, where the entire city is black, with only a few whites holding out in Corktown and Palmer Woods. Southfield, a major suburban employment center that was once the equivalent of Amherst on 'roids, is now 60% black. Whites working in downtown Detroit face very long commutes.

Seen Main Street, Transit Road, North Forest Road, or Hopkins Road in Amherst during rush hour lately? A cross-Amherst commute can take longer than a commute from Amherst to downtown.

Buffalo's black population really isn't increasing, as many believe. As among whites, the median family size for blacks is shrinking, and those that can are leaving troubled neighborhoods in the inner city. Why live in the 'hood when you can afford an apartment off of Niagara Falls Boulevard, or a modest house off of Sweet Home Road or Walden Avenue?

[ Reply ]

replied to Greg

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

grad94

September 24, 2010 5:41 AM

let's get it on the table. to white middle class parents, 'improving the schools' is code for resegregating them. any school that is at least 80% white will be considered 'good.' any school that is more than 30% black will be considered 'bad.' same calculus is at work when it comes to neighborhoods.

[ Reply ]

Score: 1 ( 7 votes )

osirisascending

September 24, 2010 7:25 AM

grad94, there aren't very many times I agree with you, but in this case, you and I are definitely on the same page.

I am black, and grew up in the suburbs (Amherst), lived in a good neighborhood (Willow Ridge) and attended a good school district (Sweet Home).

The reason my parents chose to live in Amherst, and not in the city near the rest of the family? (most of whom live in North Buffalo on the "white" side of Main Street)

Five words: Predominately White Suburban School District.

In the 70's and 80's, those words were a euphemism for "Better public schools than the City of Buffalo"

When I attended Sweet Home High School in the early 80's, the school's racial makeup was less than 10% black.

Today, it's somewhere in the ballpark of 50% black.

Why is that?

Simple... families are fleeing the city, not to get away from the city, but to get away from the schools, and to give their kids a fighting chance at a better education.

At least grad94 has the stones to come right out and say what we are all well aware of.

[ Reply ]

replied to grad94

Score: 3 ( 3 votes )

sho'nuff

September 24, 2010 8:52 AM

The migration continues in 2010, as most suburban schools are still considered "Better public schools than the City of Buffalo".

We cannot ignore crime as a factor as well. Parents who fear for the welfare of their child as they travel to and from school due to crime will look to move to a safer neighborhood. This goes for North Tonawanda, Cheektowaga, and Buffalo. The same goes for parents who fear the gangs and bullies who are left unchecked in many schools. It only takes one incident of violence in the school, violence against their child, or severe bullying, for the parent to look to move. Those families with means will move, those without may try their best to enroll their child in other schools and will go through extraordinary measures to protect and educate their child.

We need to address the crime, the ambivelence of the community, and the values that are driving down the quality of our public schools, if we want serious change.

[ Reply ]

replied to osirisascending

Score: 4 ( 4 votes )

sho'nuff

September 24, 2010 8:35 AM

Does that mean that you need white students in order for a school to be successful? Are African American students in schools where they are the majority going to benefit from more Caucasian students? Where to Asian students fit in to the equation?

I guess the question is, why are schools with the majority of white students somehow more successful than schools with the majority of African American students, when resources and spending are higher in the majority African American schools? Is it an issue of values, culture, community, or something else?

Does the city need "whites" integrated into the neighborhoods in order to be successful? It sounds a bit racist to me, almost as though some are saying that African Americans are incapable of making it on their own and require whites to make the neighborhood or schools successful.

(disclaimer, I am just asking a question, this is by no means a backhanded racial remark).

[ Reply ]

replied to grad94

Score: 4 ( 4 votes )

Blackrocklifer

September 24, 2010 10:28 AM

The answer is quite simple, black children make up the majority of the poor in Buffalo (and America). Black children from middle class homes perform at the same level as white children.
So yes, poverty does create issues with values and community, it has nothing to do with the color of the students skin.

[ Reply ]

replied to sho'nuff

Score: 3 ( 7 votes )

sho'nuff

September 24, 2010 2:14 PM

If it has nothing to do with the color of the child's skin, then why do African Americans make up nearly half the poor in America (and Buffalo), as you claim? If it is due to overt or passive racism, then that does have to do with the color of the skin. Is this the case in your opinion?

[ Reply ]

replied to Blackrocklifer

Score: 0 ( 4 votes )

Blackrocklifer

September 24, 2010 2:40 PM

African Americans have not been able to accumulate wealth for a variety of reasons. They started as slaves, were then kept out of the political process and denied employment for the next century. They were denied housing and segregated to the poorest neighborhoods which kept them from building wealth through home ownership. They were segregated in inferior schools (some would say this is still true) and denied credit. There different skin color has not allowed them to assimilate as many other ethnic minorities were able to do. Finally, all we have to do is look at the tea party and the other right wing crazies that continue to portray black people as inferior and different.

[ Reply ]

replied to sho'nuff

Score: 0 ( 4 votes )

sho'nuff

September 24, 2010 2:47 PM

So skin color does have a lot to do with it.

[ Reply ]

replied to Blackrocklifer

Score: 2 ( 4 votes )

jag

September 24, 2010 10:50 PM

Course skin color has a lot to do with it. I think blackrocker and you are just pointing out two different things:
1. Urban african americans are, by and large, caught in a vicious circle due to a multitude of issues that I assume everyone's at least familiar with - poverty, racism, school funding being directly connected to property values, etc.
2. African americans, urban and otherwise, who aren't caught in the vicious cycle prove that skin color itself doesn't affect a student's ability to succeed (duh).

So, depending on the light, race can mean everything and race can mean nothing. Both are good points and certainly not mutually exclusive.

[ Reply ]

replied to sho'nuff

Score: 2 ( 4 votes )

Dan

September 24, 2010 7:49 PM

sho'nuff> Does the city need "whites" integrated into the neighborhoods in order to be successful? It sounds a bit racist to me, almost as though some are saying that African Americans are incapable of making it on their own and require whites to make the neighborhood or schools successful.

The Cleveland area has many stable, livable majority black neighborhoods and suburbs. However, the black community in Cleveland also has a much larger percentage of middle class households than in Buffalo, where the black middle class is very small.

Why? There were two waves to the Great Northern Migration; before WWII started, and after the war started. Those that migrated north before the war tended to be more educated and entrepreneurial, often having useful skills and trades. Those migrating after the war began tended to be rural, poorly educated, and unskilled, traveling north to take advantage of wartime factory jobs. Cleveland and Chicago had a roughly even split of blacks from both waves of the Great Northern Migration. Buffalo had only a very small black community before WWII, and the majority of blacks in the area have their roots in the second wave. As a result, after deindustrialization, Buffalo's blacks suffered far more than those in Cleveland and Chicago.

The same split can be seen in the migration of other ethnic groups; well-off, mostly Reform German Jewish immigrants who arrived in 1800s and their conflicts with poorer, more Orthodox Russian and Polish Jews who immigrated in the early 1900s; and educated urban Mexicans from central Mexico who immigrated to the United States and the less educated from rural northern and southern Mexico that arrived in later years.

[ Reply ]

replied to sho'nuff

Score: 2 ( 2 votes )

emslieclinton

September 24, 2010 6:37 AM

I guess that accounts for the City of Buffalo Parks Department being able to come in to the Emslie/Bristol Street neighborhood; destroy our community playground and get away with it. We live in the wrong part of town.

[ Reply ]

Score: 2 ( 4 votes )

FredOak

September 24, 2010 8:57 AM

What would be really interesting would to be able to see the results in comparison to the 2010 data once it's available.
To be able to compare shifts because this is ten year old data and ten years ago I lived in the city in a neighborhood that has an entirely different demographic since I left.

[ Reply ]

Score: 2 ( 2 votes )

sho'nuff

September 24, 2010 9:36 AM

Here is a good overview on busing and desegregation in Buffalo. One citation that I found very interesting is:

"Almost ten years, later the New York Times noted that Buffalo is considered "a model of integration". There has been no white flight, and scores on standardized achievement tests are up. Educators come from around the world to see how the Buffalo school system works" This is an astonishing phenomenon in a city that had been called "the most segregated city in the Northeast" and which supported school board tactics designed to further segregation within the school system for decades"."

http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__review_of_law_and_social_change/documents/documents/ecm_pro_066576.pdf

[ Reply ]

Score: 2 ( 6 votes )

JSmith

September 24, 2010 1:34 PM

The Buffalo school integration program was considered a success for the first few years. There were no violent riots like those that took place in Boston and other cities, and for a while, the magnet schools were successful in drawing middle-class families.

Since then, though, there has been substantial white flight from the city schools, to the point where the district student population is only 25% white, while the general city population was 54% white as of the 2000 census. I think part of that (in addition to the usual reasons for suburban sprawl) was a snowball effect of decreasing test scores as the proportion of children from poverty and broken homes grew. There was a tipping point where people started saying "This is a bad school" even though the actual educational quality may not have changed at all.

But another part is that the suburban schools have historically been much better funded and equipped, with better facilities and able to offer a wider range of programs. I'm very hopeful that the ongoing schools reconstruction program will put the city schools back on a level playing field in that respect and give all students equal opportunities for learning, regardless of their economic status.

[ Reply ]

replied to sho'nuff

Score: 3 ( 5 votes )

rubagreta

September 24, 2010 12:50 PM

Please stop with the poverty excuse. How many American-born Asian kids who are doctors, nurses, teachers, etc. were raised by parents who spoke poor English, and who worked in crappy Chinese restaurants or dry cleaners?

When segments of the African American community get it together and start emphasizing hard work and education, and the girls stop having babies when they have absolutely no way to financially support them, they will be successful. Sadly, I don't see that day coming in the near future.

And by the way, the best anti-poverty programs don't cost the taxpayers a dime. Two words - job and marriage.

[ Reply ]

Score: 4 ( 14 votes )

biniszkiewicz

September 24, 2010 3:40 PM

I agree. When upwards of 70% of African American children are born to single mothers there is little hope for future scholastic or financial success for the majority of that population. This casual relationship between sexual reproduction and intact family unit is a cultural weakness within America's black community, not an externallity foisted upon it by racist whites. This reproductive laxness is enabled by government welfare programs. Those expensive experiments fail in their goal of lifting the indigent from the clutches of poverty because they incentivize irresponsible behavior. Without welfare, teenagers could never afford to have so many babies. "Job and marriage". That covers 90% of the resources sufficient to break the poverty chain.

[ Reply ]

replied to rubagreta

Score: 3 ( 7 votes )

jag

September 25, 2010 10:43 PM

"Sadly, I don't see that day coming in the near future."
The black community has made great strides in dramatically reducing crime rates, lowering the poverty rate, increasing home ownership, increasing small businesses ownership, increasing college attendance, etc. I think it's important to recognize this and to understand that we're talking about a community that is only a generation past being granted even the most basic of civil rights. Inequalities are still very much imposed on the community today (just read the other comments on this article if you don't believe that - BR can't delete all the racism fast enough). Of course the black community needs to do more and needs to continue progressing, but your overly simplistic outlook on the world makes clear that you haven't given any real thought to the issues at hand. Poverty's an excuse? Seriously? Jobs are the answer? Wow, I'll let the secret out. Oh, wait, black people don't value hard work, darn. Honestly, the fact that you got any thumbs up proves the white community has plenty far to go as well.

[ Reply ]

replied to rubagreta

Score: 0 ( 6 votes )

Sally

September 24, 2010 5:29 PM

you do all realize that this chart iscjust made up right? If each dot represents 25 people there would have to be about 40,000 dot just for erie county , this chart has no wherw remotely close to that number of dots

[ Reply ]

Score: -1 ( 1 votes )

Dan

September 24, 2010 8:00 PM

Did you count the dots? I made similar maps for my graduate thesis, to illustrate the changes in population density in Buffalo's neighborhoods over several decades.

[ Reply ]

replied to Sally

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

Greg

September 24, 2010 7:54 PM

I would definitely think there are around 40,000 dots. However, I should point out that it doesn't show the entire Erie county. I noticed Angola and Brant aren't shown. Not to say it's a lot, but it's still dots.

[ Reply ]

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

MrGreenJeans

September 24, 2010 10:00 PM

If you download the largest image & adjust the gamma setting, it's much easier to read (shows the roads clearly). It also confirms that he's got dots inside both Delaware Park and Forest Lawn Cemetery, which is a bit odd.

I might point out that the apparent integration of the West Side (particularly 14213) is due to whites moving out & blacks moving in, at a rate which will soon put the West Side whiteys in the minority. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[ Reply ]

Score: -1 ( 1 votes )

300miles

September 25, 2010 1:29 PM

There are also dots in the Buffalo Harbor.
Are there that many house-boats in Buffalo, or are they counting fishes?

[ Reply ]

Score: -1 ( 3 votes )

whatever

September 25, 2010 2:26 PM

It looks as though in a few cases the GIS didn't translate addresses to proper spots on the map.

However, the graph would look very random without patterns if it made frequent mistakes like that. So I don't think a few misplaced dots in the harbor or Forest Lawn discredit the map.
Sally's claim that there's too few dots looks due to how they overlap when scaled to fit in a web page. Downloading and zooming the image as Greenjeans suggested reveals a lot more dots.

[ Reply ]

replied to 300miles

Score: 0 ( 4 votes )

Dan

September 25, 2010 5:21 PM

300miles> There are also dots in the Buffalo Harbor.

The dots represent population in a Census tract or block, but not the exact location. The dots on such thematic maps will be scattered all around the tract or block. 2000 Census data more granular than block level will remain unavailable until 2062.

[ Reply ]

replied to 300miles

Score: 1 ( 3 votes )

whatever

September 25, 2010 4:53 PM

Today's UK Daily Mail has a big article about these maps, showing a few more cities.

Check out how the capitals of progressivism, NYC and D.C., look so much more dramatically separated by race than Houston or San Antonio. Interesting.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1315078/Race-maps-America.html

[ Reply ]

Score: 0 ( 4 votes )

Armchair MBA

September 25, 2010 10:52 PM

No riots or red lining in non-progressive San Antonio and Houston. Interesting...

[ Reply ]

replied to whatever

Score: 0 ( 2 votes )

whatever

September 27, 2010 11:23 AM

pit, riots and red lining? You're saying that's why lefty residents of NYC are so sharply separated themselves still in 2010? Really?

Earlier comments blamed sprawl and suburbanization. Well, in NYC where there's very low sprawl (less than WNY where sprawl is also low), and yet in the highly dense areas there....
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/09/25/article-1315078-0B576A63000005DC-200_634x576.jpg

[ Reply ]

replied to Armchair MBA

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

Sally

September 25, 2010 8:14 PM

how come all of the cities that BR posters say we should be more like such as Portland, Denver, and Seattle have hardly any blue dots but the ones we act like are in worse shape then us are coered in blue. Almost looks like some sort of correlation.

[ Reply ]

Score: -2 ( 8 votes )

bobbycat

September 25, 2010 8:42 PM

You're darn right. There is a direct correlation between the blue dots with their welfare grabbing single moms with five kids from different daddies high school drop outs and drug slinging gang banging don't snitch and its ok to kill someone as long as you don't talk and do your time mentality. Denver and Portland thrive because they don't have the burden of a heavily concentrated black community to bring them down. That's our white burden that we have to shoulder without any help from the black community.

[ Reply ]

replied to Sally

Score: -5 ( 13 votes )

Sally

September 25, 2010 9:31 PM

Or it could be that their black and hispanic populations are not concentrated enough to warrant blue dots. Perhaps the minority population is more integrated into the whole community so that the dots remain red but the minirities are interspersed throughout the metro. Metro Buffalo is about 10% black. If the metro were fully integrated you would see very few blue dots at all. It does not mean blacks are not in Portland it means they are not limited to a small geographic area.

[ Reply ]

replied to bobbycat

Score: 2 ( 4 votes )

Armchair MBA

September 25, 2010 10:37 PM

Do groups of am 930 Buffalo hating crybabys have there own dots? Remember its not important which groups get tracked by dots, its important that the politically conservative entitled dots be heard.

[ Reply ]

replied to Sally

Score: 0 ( 4 votes )

https://me.yahoo.com/a/.9qmNQEgnYN6Sl_DxYgVVb0pX_w-#b128c

September 25, 2010 10:45 PM

Poodle 101: Attack the person not the arguement. You go girl

[ Reply ]

replied to Armchair MBA

Score: -1 ( 3 votes )

Armchair MBA

September 25, 2010 10:56 PM

Glad your following me crusty. You'll show em you'll show em indeed.

[ Reply ]

replied to https://me.yahoo.com/a/.9qmNQEgnYN6Sl_DxYgVVb0pX_w-#b128c

Score: 1 ( 3 votes )

Mike Puma

September 30, 2010 7:21 AM

Bobbycat I'm not sure if you're aware of how ignorant you are, but let me clear some things up for you. Do a little research you'll find that there are plenty of white people on welfare and in fact if I remember correctly the vast majority of single mothers are a result of WHITE men walking out not black men. It's a common misconception and the perpetuation of racial insensitive and ignorant comments such as yours only make the problem worse. Also how in the hell do you think the minorities of this or any city got to where they are? By the shear fact that they have different skin color, means that they are meant to always be a burden as you say? That is absolute garbage. Pick up a book and you'll find that a the main reason for any minority group being in the position that they are is do to a long history of white aggression and policy making to keep those people down. They work just as hard as you and me and sometimes even more so because they do not have the advantages you were presumably born with, being white. So before you go on another rant bashing those of a different race maybe you should look at yourself and realize that you sir, are part of the problem. Take your ignorant self to the library get a book.

[ Reply ]

replied to bobbycat

Score: 0 ( 2 votes )

Armchair MBA

September 25, 2010 10:31 PM

What about the cities the crybabys say we should be like ie: Detroit, Newark, Sodom, Ghmora, etc.

[ Reply ]

replied to Sally

Score: 0 ( 2 votes )

https://me.yahoo.com/a/.9qmNQEgnYN6Sl_DxYgVVb0pX_w-#b128c

September 25, 2010 9:34 PM

I'm not an economist but it would appear on the surface cheaper to kill off the poor than to sustain them all. Again, I'm looking at this strictly from a numbers standpoint.

[ Reply ]

Score: -1 ( 3 votes )

Pegger

September 26, 2010 1:04 AM

It is nice for me personally to see the issues of demographics, education, and urban sprawl meet on the playing field. They are all areas of my interest, study, and some expertise that don't often intersect in this forum.

The issue of desegreagtion was and remains a hot topic. After so many decades it is increasingly less so. Fot the most part, I believe, it was a failure or at best a marginal victory. One consideration I don't recall hearing in this discussion this time around revolves around the largest barrier to desegregation. Taxes. It had to do with the way public schools were funded.

Not all districts allocated the same number of taxpayer's dollars to the education in a per capita sense. Most certainly parents in high tax suburban areas would not stand quietly or willingly if their chidren were assigned to another that was unequal. Imagine the accounting nightmare if there was an attempt to achieve parity in that sense alone. That is the case with Erie County.

Desegregation in the county could only occur realistically within the confines of each district's own boundaries. There would be no exchange of students beyond those limits no matter how willing all parties involved were. Just try to enroll a student across those barriers today and you would find it nearly impossible.

That made it much easier for political entities to rest assured that there would be no real desegregation. And convenient as well. The tempests could swarm around them in all kinds of arenas while they had the confidence knowing that it would never be implemented.

[ Reply ]

Score: 2 ( 2 votes )

Jesse

September 27, 2010 6:06 AM

Blackrock: I knows what I heard dad gummit! My witness testimamony is unrepoachable! Like a egg what got poached once already!

Alls we gotta do is get the gummint to force people to do shit against their will - neighborhood sk00ls is bad! - oh, and let's force 'em to not move neither, Buffalo's populatin' would be explodin if we done never let noone leave!! - and then we have a integrated you topia! It'll be awesim!

(note to self: question why blackrock sounds like a po' white southern hick...)

[ Reply ]

Score: -4 ( 4 votes )