Interesting Map--US Census American Community Survey

[adaniel]

http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010/explorer

Interesting results.

One note. When clicking on the link, it automatically zooms in on NYC/Tri State Area, but you can focus it on OKC and other parts of the country.

[circuitboard]

Wow, this shows exactly what I try to explain about Tulsa, Tulsa is less diverse and more divided with black people. If you look at the OKC map, it looks more mixed. Wow it does look like south OKC has exploded with an hispanic population. Dallas map is interesting, really green in the core rich areas, then it turns into a rainbow all around. Really neat one is San Fran, Red and green, looks like Christmas!

[OKCisOK4me]

I like this map better. There was one released a couple of months ago that was just grids or cities. This is cool cause it's like Google Maps in that you can drag the image around.

[dmoor82]

Wow OKC's Black and Hispanic population is about the same!This map is one of the best I've seen!

[okclee]

Select the different map colors, Tulsa and Okc look about the same for segregated parts of the city.

[Spartan]

Wow, this shows exactly what I try to explain about Tulsa, Tulsa is less diverse and more divided with black people. If you look at the OKC map, it looks more mixed. Wow it does look like south OKC has exploded with an hispanic population. Dallas map is interesting, really green in the core rich areas, then it turns into a rainbow all around. Really neat one is San Fran, Red and green, looks like Christmas!

Eh, I don't really think Tulsa looks that much more diverse than OKC. OKC just has more segregated areas (Penn/122nd, NE OKC, S OKC). Granted, Tulsa's nice areas are a slightly less diverse than OKC's nice areas. A nice area in OKC is probably on average between 80-85% white, in Tulsa the nice areas probably average between 85-90% white. Hardly any difference.

Far S OKC has a significant Asian population, though. 18% around where my parents live, along SW 119th.

[circuitboard]

Yeah you guys are right, it looks EXACTLY the same, expect for the fact that on the Tulsa map, the blacks are all the Northside and on the OKC map, they are more spread out in various parts of the city.

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[dmoor82]

Select the different map colors, Tulsa and Okc look about the same for segregated parts of the city.

^^back out on the view finder and look at OK and Tulsa counties and you will see that OK county is more diverse! I agree that the segregated ares look about the same!

[dmoor82]

Yeah you guys are right, it looks EXACTLY the same, expect for the fact that on the Tulsa map, the blacks are all the Northside and on the OKC map, they are more spread out in various parts of the city.

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

Look at that area along NW Expwy!I think they have that shaded wrong!Lyrewood Lane is South of NWExpwy off of Wilshire,not North!There are nice neigborhoods North of NWExpwy but South of it along Wilshire there is a big concentration of Apartments and African Americans!I might be wrong but I have routes in that area frequently!

[circuitboard]

I see what you mean dmoor82, that does seem in accurate.

[Spartan]

The only thing I don't like is that all of those areas circled are still bad areas. So it doesn't mean more minorities are living in better areas in OKC. Just that bad areas are more spread around.

[circuitboard]

The only thing I don't like is that all of those areas circled are still bad areas. So it doesn't mean more minorities are living in better areas in OKC. Just that bad areas are more spread around.

Spartan, I think Tulsa keeps the bad areas contained more and OKC not so much. When I moved from Tulsa, to OKC, it felt very mixed racially to me. My family in Tulsa, hate to say this, but the are raciest, my dad told me it goes back a long ways in Tulsa, and that blacks were supposed to stay on the North side and leave them alone on the south.

[adaniel]

The reason you see a little more diversity, especially in the SE/4 of the county, is due to Tinker. The military has been desegregated since the days of Truman. I grew up an Air Force brat and I really took for granted the colorblind aspects of growing up in a military town. Also, I feel as a minority that OKC is way more integrated than Tulsa, and I've yet to meet a person that has said otherwise when the subject came up.

To change gears a bit. After looking at that map, one thing that stuck out to me was how low Oklahoma County's median household income was at about 41.8K. It was a bit disappointing to see after all of the "recession-proof" declarations this area's income was still that low; I would have figured this area had made more progress than that. In fact, I could only find one county in this entire region with a comparable population (at least 500K) that had a lower income. That was El Paso County, Texas. I guess that explains why OKC is always at the bottom of most retail shops' expansions.

[Spartan]

Spartan, I think Tulsa keeps the bad areas contained more and OKC not so much. When I moved from Tulsa, to OKC, it felt very mixed racially to me. My family in Tulsa, hate to say this, but the are raciest, my dad told me it goes back a long ways in Tulsa, and that blacks were supposed to stay on the North side and leave them alone on the south.

I think Tulsans' attitude toward black people changed on one day that the white people went over to their side and caused some issues. I think the black community up there has gotten really strong and unified, and there are some decent neighborhoods in north Tulsa contrary to popular opinion. I definitely agree with you though, that Tulsa is much more elitist than OKC.

[PennyQuilts]

You could take out the whole racial element and Tulsa would still have elitist attitudes. We had discussions like this from the time I was a kid and race wasn't even considered an issue to us (as kids we didn't even know about the racial history). The reason given for the attitudes had to do with Oklahoma City being built in a day in the land run. It was filled with opportunists, poor people, people wanting to make a fresh start, entrepreneurs, Boomers, outlaws, etc. Tulsa, in contrast, was founded by folks from Pennsylvania with the culture and attitudes that came with that. Much more "old money" and people who held onto their oil money as a result as compared to wildcatter/white trash OKC.

[semisimple]

To change gears a bit. After looking at that map, one thing that stuck out to me was how low Oklahoma County's median household income was at about 41.8K. It was a bit disappointing to see after all of the "recession-proof" declarations this area's income was still that low; I would have figured this area had made more progress than that. In fact, I could only find one county in this entire region with a comparable population (at least 500K) that had a lower income. That was El Paso County, Texas. I guess that explains why OKC is always at the bottom of most retail shops' expansions.

Those low income levels are largely offset by the low cost of living. Still, other metropolitan areas in this region, such as Austin, have considerably higher income levels despite comparable costs of living. It's probably little surprise that OKC also lags much of the nation in areas like educational attainment.

This is perhaps best seen from a report by the Brookings Institution, which compiled a more comprehensive set of data originally collected by the Census Bureau (from the 2009 American Community Survey) for the 100 largest metropolitan areas in the US.

For median household income, the OKC MSA ranked 85th out of 100. Tulsa was 73rd. For educational attainment (fraction of population over 25 years old with a bachelor's degree or higher), OKC ranked 67th and Tulsa was 80th.

http://www.brookings.edu/metro/State...zoom=0&x=0&y=0

[BG918]

Those low income levels are largely offset by the low cost of living. Still, other metropolitan areas in this region, such as Austin, have considerably higher income levels despite comparable costs of living. It's probably little surprise that OKC also lags much of the nation in areas like educational attainment.

This is perhaps best seen from a report by the Brookings Institution, which compiled a more comprehensive set of data originally collected by the Census Bureau (from the 2009 American Community Survey) for the 100 largest metropolitan areas in the US.

For median household income, the OKC MSA ranked 85th out of 100. Tulsa was 73rd. For educational attainment (fraction of population over 25 years old with a bachelor's degree or higher), OKC ranked 67th and Tulsa was 80th.

http://www.brookings.edu/metro/State...zoom=0&x=0&y=0

Austin is much more expensive than OKC and Tulsa if you want to live in the city. Austin benefits from having a large concentration of high-paying tech jobs, something OKC and Tulsa do not have.

Interesting things I found were the higher % of Asians in the Asian District (I always suspected if there were really that many Asians still living in the neighborhoods around NW 23 & Classen) and affirmation of the higher % of same sex couples in the NW 39 & Penn/Putnam Heights area which is has always been considered a heavily gay neighborhood. Also interesting that Tulsa does not have the same concentrations of Asians and gays. I thought the far east side would have more Asians that it shows and thought Brady Heights and Riverview neighborhoods would show more same sex couples.

[Spartan]

Their stats are really off. Check out the income map. That's all wrong.

[adaniel]

Those low income levels are largely offset by the low cost of living. Still, other metropolitan areas in this region, such as Austin, have considerably higher income levels despite comparable costs of living. It's probably little surprise that OKC also lags much of the nation in areas like educational attainment.

For median household income, the OKC MSA ranked 85th out of 100. Tulsa was 73rd. For educational attainment (fraction of population over 25 years old with a bachelor's degree or higher), OKC ranked 67th and Tulsa was 80th.

Austin does have a higher cost of living, but they are a bit of the exception. Thats why in my quick "analysis" of the map I purposely looked at this part of the country because of comparable COL's. Yes I know that OKC's COL is one of the lowest in the nation, but the examining the difference between this area and others in this part of the world is really a matter of splitting hairs. So its a little cringe inducing to see places like Pulaski County, AR (Little Rock), Sedgewick County, KS (Wichita), Shelby County, TN (Memphis), Polk County, IA (Des Moines) or Douglas County, NE (Omaha) all have higher household incomes, in some cases significantly higher, even with comparable COL's.

[MikeOKC]

Austin does have a higher cost of living, but they are a bit of the exception. Thats why in my quick "analysis" of the map I purposely looked at this part of the country because of comparable COL's. Yes I know that OKC's COL is one of the lowest in the nation, but the examining the difference between this area and others in this part of the world is really a matter of splitting hairs. So its a little cringe inducing to see places like Pulaski County, AR (Little Rock), Sedgewick County, KS (Wichita), Shelby County, TN (Memphis), Polk County, IA (Des Moines) or Douglas County, NE (Omaha) all have higher household incomes, in some cases significantly higher, even with comparable COL's.

You make an excellent point. Has anyone ever come up with a some kind of ratio system for Cost Of Living versus Household Income? I'm sure it has been done, but if not, it should be. Good thoughts, adaniel.

[ljbab728]

This all looks very familiar to me and I believe it was in a previous thread. I'm not going to take time looking for it but I definitely remember seeing the maps here before.

I lied. I looked for it anyway and here is the previous thread about this map.

http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.ph...+ethnicity+map

[Spartan]

You make an excellent point. Has anyone ever come up with a some kind of ratio system for Cost Of Living versus Household Income? I'm sure it has been done, but if not, it should be. Good thoughts, adaniel.

It doesn't really matter for retail. Even if you're paying more or less or who cares for housing, the bottom line is that retailers charge the same for an item at all their locations and wouldn't be too excited about having to adjust their prices just to enter the OKC market. $28,000 in OKC is $28,000 in New York, when it comes to retail.

[TheTravellers]

Those low income levels are largely offset by the low cost of living. ....

Tying in with Spartan's point about retail prices being the same, I have always thought the "OK has such a low cost of living" statement to be BS. Gasoline, groceries, pretty much all retail, cars, restaurant meals, almost anything you buy costs the same here as it does everywhere else in the USA (generally). Utilities aren't that much cheaper than in other cities, I've found. I have no idea about property taxes since we currently rent (hoping to change that soon, though). So the only thing that I believe that's *really* lower than in other places is housing, which could be substantial, but that's nowhere near the "everything's cheaper in OK" that a huge amount of people believe.

Also found out that the cost-of-living calculators on the web are about 2-3 (or more) quarters out of date, so if you use one of them, be sure to check the disclaimers...

[PennyQuilts]

It doesn't really matter for retail. Even if you're paying more or less or who cares for housing, the bottom line is that retailers charge the same for an item at all their locations and wouldn't be too excited about having to adjust their prices just to enter the OKC market. $28,000 in OKC is $28,000 in New York, when it comes to retail.

Not entirely true. You get a much bigger volume/demand for certain items depending on the location. Moreover, in places of higher demand, you have more competition. You also have more or less overhead costs, depending. In a given city it doesn't make all that much difference but there is a world of difference in costs, depending on the item, between here and NYC, for example.

[Spartan]

The only thing that makes that true is that, okay, we have Wal-Mart and Lower Manhattan might not. If you are out late one night in NYC or Chicago and go to get some items from the Walgreens at the nearest intersection, the price on a bottle of Tums and a bag of chips will be the exact same. Same goes for any item in there.

When you go shopping, the Old Navy and GAP have the exact same prices as the ones in OKC. H&M is even cheaper. If OKC had better shopping, it would be just as expensive. Gas is actually the same price too, the only difference is that IL has a much higher gas tax than OK, second lowest in the nation. Actually, St Louis is a considerably more urban and more expensive city than OKC, yet they have cheaper gas than OKC because MO has the nation's lowest gas tax, I think maybe 5 cents less than OK even.

The cheapness of housing is also overrated. If you go in the suburbs of most cities, you can find a 3 bedroom ranch house for $150,000. You can even buy the house, put up an Oklahoma flag in front of it, and it doesn't change what city it's in. Kansas City, Omaha, St Louis, Memphis, Little Rock, Tulsa, DFW--all these Mid-America metros have very cheap real estate on their fringes and more expensive real estate inside the cities themselves, in some cases even inner burbs are more expensive (ie Mission Hills, Clayton, Park Cities) if it's a desirable neighborhood (so cancel out a lot of Memphis). The difference is just that all of OKC practically resembles the suburbs of some of these cities. And if what you brag about that you have going for you is cheapness, that's pretty sad, actually.

There are a lot of smaller cities in the Midwest that are even cheaper than OKC, and much nicer and more urban at the same time. Sioux City, IA.. Dubuque, IA.. Lima, OH.. Toledo, OH.. Youngstown, OH.. Ft Wayne, IN.. and so on. Some of them are nice, some kinda crappy, but you can get a decent 3 bedroom ranch house for $90,000 -- BEAT THAT OKC! Lol