Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Topics

Topics

The End of 'White Flight?'


Year after year, decade after decade, New York City was home to a rapidly changing and increasingly diverse population. Whites were seen as fleeing the five boroughs, while blacks, Hispanics and immigrants replaced them. At the same time, the median incomeof city family was barely growing and often declining. Now according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s huge 2006 American Community Survey, as well as the census’ own estimates, most of these trends seem to have ended. There even are signs that they may have been reversed:

Some highlights:

* The African American population is declining. The proportion of non-Hispanic African Americans dropped from 24.5 percent of the city’s population in 2000 to 23.7 percent in 2006. The number declined from 1,962,154 to 1,947,328.

* Hispanic growth has almost ceased. The proportion of Hispanics in New York barely grew from 27.0 percent in 2000 to 27.6 percent in 2006. In the last year for which estimates are available, the Hispanic population in the entire city increased by only 911people.

* The non-Hispanic white population is no longer declining. The proportion of Non-Hispanic whites declined from 51.9 percent of the population in 1980 to 35.0 percent in 2000 -- a drop of about 17 percent. From 2000 to 2006, the proportion dropped by only 0.2 percent.

* The increase in the number of foreign-born New Yorkers has slowed from a stream to a trickle. After rising from 18.2 percent of the population in 1970 to 35.9 percent in 2000, the percent of foreign-born grew only an additional 1.1 percent from 2000 to 2006.

. The Asian population continues to grow at a rapid pace. The proportion of Asians in New York City grew from about 19.6 percent to 23.3 percent and increased by over 350,000 in six years. This is one trend that continues.

* There remains little growth in income. In constant 2006 dollars, the median income of a New York City family was $53,105 in 1970. Since then, it has gone up and down a bit and in 2006 was $51,830. During the past 36 years, there has very little net change in median family income in New York City.

Reversing the Trends

The reversal of many long-standing demographics trend is particularly pronounced in Manhattan, as Table 1 shows. The proportion of foreign born, Hispanics and non-Hispanic blacks all declined in the borough, while the percentage of non-Hispanic whites increased. But Manhattan differed from the rest of the city when it came to income. Rather than remaining stagnant, median family income there soared from about $61,000 in 2000 to $71,000 six years later.

The trends embody a shift in attitudes about the city. In the 1970s and 1980s, many middle-class people and whites left New York City, and even Manhattan was considered a “difficult” place to live. Now New York City -– particularly Manhattan -- is becoming a sought after venue, at least for those who can afford it.

For instance, in 2000 the median house value for all owner-occupied housing in Manhattan was $423,000. By 2006 it had risen to $787,000, an increase of 86 percent. In the city as a whole, the median value of homes occupied by their owners climbed from $259,000 in 2000 to $496,000 in 2006, an increase of 91 percent.

The increases in income and the declines in the percentage of foreign-born, black and Hispanic New Yorkers, particularly in Manhattan, seem to indicate that the people who have come to the city recently are more affluent than those who left or decided not to not come at all. More analysis will elucidate this.

The real question is whether the trends that shaped New York City for much of the latter half of the 20th century historic will reemerge, whether the trends will substantially reverse or whether the city will experience little change. In Manhattan the trends already have reversed, with the borough becoming increasingly white and affluent. The rest of the city could follow. This already seems to be the case in some “Manhattanesque” neighborhoods, such as Brooklyn Heights, Williamsburg and Astoria.

On the other hand, the recent changes may simply be the result of the recent boom in finance and real estate. If that boom ends, then the demographic change of the first years of the 21st century could simply represent a blip in the continued long-term trends. Or some other trend or trends may emerge.

Only the future will reveal the answer. But one thing is certain; the demographic and population changes in New York City will likely be both unexpected and fascinating.

Andrew A. Beveridge has taught sociology at Queens College since 1981, done demographic analyses for the New York Times since 1993, and been in charge of Gotham Gazette's demographics topic page since 2000. The opinions expressed are his alone.

Feeling the Effects of a Housing Bust


The soaring values of apartments and houses in the city gave many New Yorkers a major real estate obsession during the first part of this decade. After residential real estate prices took over a decade to climb back to their levels of 1987 (the beginning of the last real estate crash), property values began to soar in 2000 and continued their heady ascent until recently. Now, of course, real estate price increases are yesterday's news as buyers dry up, inventories of unsold properties mount, sub-prime mortgages readjust and foreclosures increase.

This fall in the housing market will have many effects in New York City. But some New Yorkers, particularly lower-income people, blacks and Hispanics, will feel more pain than others.

The End of the Boom

The 2000 census reported that the median property value was $258,966 (in 2006 dollars) for all owner occupied housing in New York City. By 2006 the value had risen to $496,400 an increase of $237,434 or 91.7 percent. By 2005, though, much of the escalation had run its course, and from 2005to 2006, the median increased by a mere $32,916 or 7.1 percent.

Meanwhile, according to U.S. Federal Reserve chair Ben Bernanke, losses from sub-prime mortgages (higher interest loans taken out by people who cannot qualify for conventional mortgages) have far exceeded "even the most pessimistic estimates."

These will probably mean pain for the New York City. As residential real estate prices decline, tax revenues will fall. Some residents will lose their homes, and others will be strained near the breaking point to pay their mortgages or will take advantage of various state and federal loan "stretch-out" or "work-out" provisions that have yet to be enacted.

The rise in housing prices was fueled by new mortgage products that allowed people to buy homes with no down payment upfront. Many of these loans did not require income verification. Then the mortgages were packaged and sold as securities to financial institutions. The failure of many people to repay their loans set off the recent credit crunch.

The Big Losers

What does the housing bubble and likely bust mean for New York City. Which residents are most affected?

For one, the credit crunch and its reverberations on Wall Street could ultimately affect the bonuses of Wall Street traders and brokers.

The effects, though, go far beyond that. New York City, despite many claims to the contrary, actively participated in the housing bubble of 2000 to 2006. Data from the Census Bureau’s 2006 American Community Survey, released on September 12, 2007 provides a view of the many ways that New Yorkers are vulnerable to any meltdown in real estate value and accompanying credit crisis in the mortgage industry.

In New York City in 2006, almost half of all those with mortgages spent more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs, including mortgage, taxes, insurance and utilities. More than one quarter paid over 50 percent. Of those who purchased homes with a mortgage in the last two years, half were paying at least 32 percent of their income for housing costs, and one quarter were paying 55 percent or more.

For Hispanics, African-Americans and Asians, the figures were even higher. Half of Hispanics paid at least 37 percent and one quarter spent 81 percent or more. Among non-Hispanic African Americans the figures were 44 percent and 71 percent, and for non-Hispanic Asians the figures were 38 and 63 percent. On the other hand, for non-Hispanic whites half were paying at least 24 percent and one quarter 40 percent or more. Plainly, non-Hispanic whites are not straining their budgets to the same extents as Hispanics, blacks and Asians to buy a piece of the American dream.

The high home ownership costs often reflect the introductory terms of loans that make them "affordable," for the first few years. When such loans readjust, the costs increase.

The picture looks particularly difficult for people purchased homes in 2005 and 2006. They made their purchase at what appears to be the top of this particular housing bubble. They may be in for a serious financial loss, as mortgages readjust while the underlying value of their properties decline. Those who have been in their houses for years generally do not pay as much of their income for housing costs, and though they may lose paper value, they will be able to continue to live in their home, as long as they did not refinance it using a new mortgage product.

Those most at risk of losing their homes because of high housing costs are more than proportionally minority, less educated, either very young or very old, and most especially with much lower incomes than those living in affordable situations. (See Table for the results.) The median income of those paying less than 30 percent of their income on housing is $120,900. For those paying between 30 and 50 percent of their income, though, the median is $74,390, and for those paying over 50 percent the median income is $39,900.

Not surprisingly, the areas with the highest proportion of income going for home ownership costs are in Queens (especially Jackson Heights, East Elmhurst and Corona), Brooklyn (notably Borough Park, Greenpoint/Williamsburg, Bushwick, East New York, Ridgewood, Cypress Hill, Highland Park and New Lots) or the Bronx (in particular Morris Heights, University Heights and Fordham.) Manhattan homeowners do not appear to be spending more than they can afford to anywhere the extent of those in the other boroughs. (See map.)

In short, the housing bubble, fueled in part by sub-prime mortgages affects New Yorkers in different ways. However. even many New Yorker who do not work on Wall Street or have a sub-prime mortgage may feel the pinch. As residential property values decline and tax revenues fall, all New Yorkers who depend on city services or who work for the city or state will face stringencies. Thought the housing bubble may have been exciting for many, particularly those selling mortgages or moving into houses they probably could not afford, its hangover is likely to affect everyone.

(Note on sources: This analysis was largely based upon the Public Use Micro Data Sample, or PUMS, from the 2006 American Community Survey, while some data are drawn from tabulated data from that survey and the 2005 survey and the 2000 Census. All responses are based upon self-reports of income, house value, race, education, etc. The data are subject to sample variation.)

Andrew A. Beveridge has taught sociology at Queens College since 1981, done demographic analyses for the New York Times since 1993, and been in charge of Gotham Gazette's demographics topic page since 2000. The opinions expressed are his alone. 

Women of New York City


New York women are different, especially those who live in Manhattan. They are much more likely to be single, earn more money, and have more education than women living in the rest of the United States. And while the same percent of New York women are working as women elsewhere in the country, the jobs they are doing are much different. These are some of the significant results from an analysis of data from the 2005 Census.

About 45 percent of New York City women ages 25 to 64 ever married. In Manhattan, it’s just 37 percent. Elsewhere in the country, however, some 61 percent of women live with a spouse. Manhattan is one of the counties with the highest percent of those living on their own in the United States. Table 1 shows the proportion living with a spouse for men and women in two age ranges. As is plain from that table, those living in Manhattan and the outer boroughs follow a very different pattern than those in the rest of the United States.

Among those 25 to 64, while 63 percent of all Manhattan women have at least four years of college, slightly less than 30 percent of outer borough and other women in the United States have that level of educational achievement. When it comes to holding a job, 69 percent of Manhattan women, 60 percent of outer borough women, and 67 percent of women living elsewhere were working. When one looks at the type of jobs held by women in Manhattan compared to the rest of the United States the differences are striking. Though relatively small proportions, Manhattan women are much more likely to be actresses (about 14 times), authors(about 9 times); lawyers and judges (about 9 times), as well as dancers, photographers, stock and bond salesmen, psychologists, editors and reporters, architects, artists, economists, designers, physicians and surgeons and a range of other professions than in the rest of the United States.

Considering earnings, Table 2 present some information for women working full time in various occupations. In most occupations, men out-earn women. But this is especially true in Manhattan for law, medicine and stock and bonds salesmen. In each of these areas men out-earn women by more than two to one. Even the very high levels of education for Manhattan women do not wipe out this disparity. But female secretaries, designers and authors in Manhattan do earn more than men in those fields.

Women with a spouse in Manhattan have much higher household income, but have lower earnings than those who do not have a spouse. For men, however, those with a spouse have much higher earnings and household income than those without. The pattern is much less marked for those living in the outer boroughs or in the rest of the United States. This suggests that some women in Manhattan though working do not contribute to the family or household income as much proportionately as do their male spouse. This is directly related to the occupational income gaps between men and women in Manhattan. Remember, the very high income professions, such as law and financestill are predominantly male, at least at the highest income levels, even if more women are in them in Manhattan than any where else.

Andrew A. Beveridge has taught sociology at Queens College since 1981, done demographic analyses for the New York Times since 1993, and been in charge of Gotham Gazette's demographics topic page since 2000. The opinions expressed are his alone. 



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years