wild goose chase
Active Member
I've been told that many South Indians, such as Tamil speakers, in India are some of the most ardent proponents of using English as a common language based on feeling that Hindi does not represent them.
|
|
|
Income Polarization in Toronto - The Three Cities study
- Thread starter SP!RE
- Start date
I've been told that many South Indians, such as Tamil speakers, in India are some of the most ardent proponents of using English as a common language based on feeling that Hindi does not represent them.
Memph
Active Member
The United States don't really have Indian enclaves from what I can tell though. It seems like the most Indian areas are in the NYC region, around southern Richmond Hill in Queens, which is right next to Jamaica, Queens and apparently has a mix of West Indian and East India/South Asian residents, with around 30-35% South Asians, 20-30% Blacks. There's also many Indians just north of Jamaica, as well as in suburban central NJ, but no more than 30-35% (unlike Canadian enclaves that can be 50%+).
As for the black immigrant groups of NYC, Africans seem to live in similar neighbourhoods to African Americans. Dominicans live in Hispanic neighbourhoods. Haitians sort of in African American neighbourhoods, but often at their edges. Jamaicans are focussed on African American neighbourhoods, but mainly the more recent enclaves like Jamaica, Queens and Eastchester, Bronx/Mt Vernon, and less so in Bed-Stuy and Harlem. Trinidadians mostly live in African American neighbourhoods, but also in Richmond Hill alongside the South Asians.
Indian enclaves outside of the NYC region are much of enclaves, usually just 10-30% Indian and over a relatively small area, or maybe 5-15% Indian over a larger area.
As for the black immigrant groups of NYC, Africans seem to live in similar neighbourhoods to African Americans. Dominicans live in Hispanic neighbourhoods. Haitians sort of in African American neighbourhoods, but often at their edges. Jamaicans are focussed on African American neighbourhoods, but mainly the more recent enclaves like Jamaica, Queens and Eastchester, Bronx/Mt Vernon, and less so in Bed-Stuy and Harlem. Trinidadians mostly live in African American neighbourhoods, but also in Richmond Hill alongside the South Asians.
Indian enclaves outside of the NYC region are much of enclaves, usually just 10-30% Indian and over a relatively small area, or maybe 5-15% Indian over a larger area.
wild goose chase
Active Member
As I suspected, the common ground appears to be that as in Toronto, the West Indian background of the Black and South Asian demographics. Since the Caribbean countries of Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago have both African and Indian descended people, I suppose it kind of makes sense that some of the community might live with some other diaspora African or Indian communities (though it is notable that sometimes groupings follow racial lines rather than country of origin and other times cultural, including linguistic ones -- for instance Hispanics of all races, or for instance in Toronto Brazilians and Angolans with Portuguese). I wonder what history of settlement by neighbourhood lead to people grouping by race rather than nationality/region if not for historical segregation (which might be the case depending on how early West Indian/African immigration came to the city relative to African Americans).
So, the NYC area and GTA likely have similar Indian populations by total number, but in NYC the South Asians don't form GTA-style enclaves. Overall, if trends continue (though to be fair, I don't know how immigration from South Asian to NYC is trending), Toronto might have the highest concentration of South Asian North Americans in any one city/metro in the near future, wouldn't it?
I also notice an odd set of demographic coincidences overall in Queens -- it's interesting that the place called Jamaica in Queens really does have many Jamaicans. As well, since Queens was brought up as similar to Toronto, I find it also curious that there are a pair of similarly named places in both cities -- the Forest Hills have Jewish communities and the Richmond Hills have diverse Asian and other visible minority communities.
King of Kensington
Senior Member
Queens is the "Toronto" of the USA.
Memph
Active Member
Here's a map I made superimposing income diversity over the 3 cities income map.
Red = lowest diversity
Orange
Green
Blue
Purple = highest diversity
Looks like the wealthy are more segregated than the poor, the most segregated neighbourhoods are the upscale neighbourhoods of central Toronto as well as those of certain suburbs like Oakville, Lorne Park, Georgetown.
The most diverse areas include what I'd describe as Toronto's "gentrification fringe" east and west of downtown, as well as some post-WWII areas that usually have a diversity of housing types. I do wonder if some of those are more of a temporary phenomenon though - having a diversity of incomes because they're either in the mid-stage of gentrification or of decline.
Red = lowest diversity
Orange
Green
Blue
Purple = highest diversity
Looks like the wealthy are more segregated than the poor, the most segregated neighbourhoods are the upscale neighbourhoods of central Toronto as well as those of certain suburbs like Oakville, Lorne Park, Georgetown.
The most diverse areas include what I'd describe as Toronto's "gentrification fringe" east and west of downtown, as well as some post-WWII areas that usually have a diversity of housing types. I do wonder if some of those are more of a temporary phenomenon though - having a diversity of incomes because they're either in the mid-stage of gentrification or of decline.
King of Kensington
Senior Member
Well, more money = more choices, no? So rich people CAN live in more mixed neighborhoods, but obviously poor people can't live in rich neighborhoods.
Memph
Active Member
Well... my map shows the rich people are less likely to live in mixed neighbourhoods than the poor. IE there's more mixing of middle class and poor than middle class and rich.
King of Kensington
Senior Member
Which is my point...every neighborhood is "available" to the rich, which isn't true for people with lower or middle incomes.
I think you've shown before is what makes most Toronto neighborhoods "low income" is the relative absence of high income earners, not a lack of middle income earners.
I think you've shown before is what makes most Toronto neighborhoods "low income" is the relative absence of high income earners, not a lack of middle income earners.
Memph
Active Member
So Markham is now the GTA municipality with the lowest median incomes for individuals aged 15 and over...
Bottom 5 are
Markham: $28,106
Brampton: $29,092
Richmond Hill: $30,038
Toronto: $30,089
Mississauga: $31,311
By other measures Markham is not the poorest, the basically depends how you adjust for different household and family structures, although it's still bottom 3 by most measures. Looking at % Low income, Brampton has a smaller proportion than Markham although Brampton also has a smaller proportion of people that are wealthy.
Bottom 5 are
Markham: $28,106
Brampton: $29,092
Richmond Hill: $30,038
Toronto: $30,089
Mississauga: $31,311
By other measures Markham is not the poorest, the basically depends how you adjust for different household and family structures, although it's still bottom 3 by most measures. Looking at % Low income, Brampton has a smaller proportion than Markham although Brampton also has a smaller proportion of people that are wealthy.