OT: Pittsburgh again among 25 best places to retire....

[pitt-girl]

Pitt's Fact Book 2014.

I was just curious. I did a basic search and came up with the census site. I entered in 15213 and got somewhat different stats than those presented in this thread. (African-American 26%, Asian 4.4%.) Link:
http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/4203928,4261000

Two things jump out at me - first, reported is 2010 data, which may or may not be significant. Second, a census only looks at the residents, not at people specifically living in the area. For example, my kids are counted as residents of Franklin Park, not Oakland and Raleigh respectively. My thought is it is almost impossible to get a handle on the actual racial diversity in Oakland as it has such a large population of transients (students, etc.) which renders these "numbers" somewhat useless.

I'll stick with my original thought that Oakland is quite diversified. As I said earlier, I could take a picture of the mailboxes in my son's apartment building on Oakland Ave that would demonstrate that he is actually in the minority, at least in his specific building.

 

[bwh05]

Pitt's Fact Book 2014.

I don't care about Pitt's student population, I'm talking about the Oakland neighborhood. The comment was made that Oakland isn't diverse, and compared to a place like State College that's absurd.

 

[HailtoPitt]

I don't care about Pitt's student population, I'm talking about the Oakland neighborhood. The comment was made that Oakland isn't diverse, and compared to a place like State College that's absurd.

Not really. Comparing a neighborhood with about 8,000 people (Oakland) to a city with about 42,000 people (State College) aside, the demographics aren't that different. Oakland's population is 79% white, while State College's population is 82% white. And while it is true that temporary students probably factor less into demographic counts, it affects both of these areas. And oddly enough, it might affect State College's counts more than Oakland, as 10% of the people there are Asian compared to only 6% in Oakland. And I wonder if the black folks living in State College are lumped into a couple of the same neighborhoods like they are in Pittsburgh?

I agree with Souf. Pittsburgh is NOT diverse. Not even close. But to some people it seems diverse because there are more African Americans and Asians living in Oakland than in Cranberry. Heck, you don't even need to travel that far to see a better example of diversity. Go a bit south to some of the Maryland burbs where you have thriving communities similar to Cranberry with populations distributed much more diversely. Just driving around for 2 minutes makes that apparent with all of the food options from various cultures.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

Pittsburgh is the whitest city in America. Okay, at least one of them. I oft reference the lack of basketball talent in the area based that this city and region is comparatively low percentage of African Americans.

But "diversity" is such an overused word. Libs love to throw this around, like being white means you are fat, stupid, and only eat at McDonald's. One of the coolest or hippest cities in the US is Portland. Another is Seattle. And they are whiter than Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh has also one of the lowest Latino populations.

But there is more diversity. You can tell be the different and more authentic restaurants. And Pittsburgh has always been Old Europe diverse, much along the lines as many of the bigger cities. Just because the people look relatively the same, it is not "diverse". Because "color" is the only thing that counts in some people's eyes as "diverse".

 

[HailtoPitt]

Pittsburgh is the whitest city in America. Okay, at least one of them. I oft reference the lack of basketball talent in the area based that this city and region is comparatively low percentage of African Americans.

But "diversity" is such an overused word. Libs love to throw this around, like being white means you are fat, stupid, and only eat at McDonald's. One of the coolest or hippest cities in the US is Portland. Another is Seattle. And they are whiter than Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh has also one of the lowest Latino populations.

But there is more diversity. You can tell be the different and more authentic restaurants. And Pittsburgh has always been Old Europe diverse, much along the lines as many of the bigger cities. Just because the people look relatively the same, it is not "diverse". Because "color" is the only thing that counts in some people's eyes as "diverse".

The difference from Italian or Irish or Polish etc. neighborhoods and African American neighborhoods is that the first group is based on country of origin and the other is based on race. In Pittsburgh, races tend to be grouped together. That may make Pittsburgh technically somewhat diverse at the city level, but not integrated at the neighborhood level and therefore strongly segregated.

Since you mentioned Seattle and Portland as having more white people than does Pittsburgh, that is true. However, those cities are actually integrated pretty well. They both have strong positive integration/segregation index scores. Pittsburgh is in the negative, since it's black population is quite segregated.

 

[pitt-girl]

Not really. Comparing a neighborhood with about 8,000 people (Oakland) to a city with about 42,000 people (State College) aside, the demographics aren't that different. Oakland's population is 79% white, while State College's population is 82% white. And while it is true that temporary students probably factor less into demographic counts, it affects both of these areas. And oddly enough, it might affect State College's counts more than Oakland, as 10% of the people there are Asian compared to only 6% in Oakland. And I wonder if the black folks living in State College are lumped into a couple of the same neighborhoods like they are in Pittsburgh?

I agree with Souf. Pittsburgh is NOT diverse. Not even close. But to some people it seems diverse because there are more African Americans and Asians living in Oakland than in Cranberry. Heck, you don't even need to travel that far to see a better example of diversity. Go a bit south to some of the Maryland burbs where you have thriving communities similar to Cranberry with populations distributed much more diversely. Just driving around for 2 minutes makes that apparent with all of the food options from various cultures.

Again - the census numbers I linked do not say 79% white. I'm very suspicious of all the "absolute" percentages being posted in this thread, and frankly, I'm more likely to believe the actual census numbers than Pitt's fact book.

 

[pitt-girl]

Pittsburgh is the whitest city in America. Okay, at least one of them. I oft reference the lack of basketball talent in the area based that this city and region is comparatively low percentage of African Americans.

But "diversity" is such an overused word. Libs love to throw this around, like being white means you are fat, stupid, and only eat at McDonald's. One of the coolest or hippest cities in the US is Portland. Another is Seattle. And they are whiter than Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh has also one of the lowest Latino populations.

But there is more diversity. You can tell be the different and more authentic restaurants. And Pittsburgh has always been Old Europe diverse, much along the lines as many of the bigger cities. Just because the people look relatively the same, it is not "diverse". Because "color" is the only thing that counts in some people's eyes as "diverse".

Totally agree Recruits - as I said earlier is this really only about race?

 

[bobfree]

Again - the census numbers I linked do not say 79% white. I'm very suspicious of all the "absolute" percentages being posted in this thread, and frankly, I'm more likely to believe the actual census numbers than Pitt's fact book.

This!.

And....comparing Pittsburgh and Oakland to other college campuses was the originally point.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

Pittsburgh is the whitest city in America. Okay, at least one of them. I oft reference the lack of basketball talent in the area based that this city and region is comparatively low percentage of African Americans.

But "diversity" is such an overused word. Libs love to throw this around, like being white means you are fat, stupid, and only eat at McDonald's. One of the coolest or hippest cities in the US is Portland. Another is Seattle. And they are whiter than Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh has also one of the lowest Latino populations.

But there is more diversity. You can tell be the different and more authentic restaurants. And Pittsburgh has always been Old Europe diverse, much along the lines as many of the bigger cities. Just because the people look relatively the same, it is not "diverse". Because "color" is the only thing that counts in some people's eyes as "diverse".

For the record, it's not the "libs" throwing around the term.

it's the "libs" actually demonstrating diversity isn't a selling point.

Pittsburgh has more black than Portland, Portland much more hispanics and asians. So...who's eyes are only counting color, exactly?

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

This!.

And....comparing Pittsburgh and Oakland to other college campuses was the originally point.

And I did that using your own examples...which you elected to ignore.
Just saying. You're using your own perceptions and biases, rather than objective data.

 

[CrazyPaco]

Again - the census numbers I linked do not say 79% white. I'm very suspicious of all the "absolute" percentages being posted in this thread, and frankly, I'm more likely to believe the actual census numbers than Pitt's fact book.

There is no reason that Pitt's fact book wouldn't be accurate. It is how students self-identify, the same as the US census. However, the numbers posted prior either weren't accurate or up-to-date.

The actual % for the Pittsburgh campus (grad, professional and undergrad students) are the following (out of 28,649 total Pittsburgh campus students) for the 2015-2016 year:

White 67.24%
International 10.74%
Asian 8.00%
Black 4.66%
Unknown 3.21%
Hispanic/Latino 3.17%
2+ races 2.88%
Native 0.10%

To get a true look at diversity for "Oakland", at least from September through April, you'd need to get the census figures not only for Oakland (which comprises four designated neighborhoods whose boundaries aren't likely what you think), but also for Squirrel Hill North where CMU is located and which everyone considers to be Oakland but technically is not. Then you'd need to add the student numbers from Pitt, Carnegie-Mellon, and Carlow on top of that to get a better feel for the demographics during the school year. Of course, that still won't tell the story because many students from Duquesne also live in South Oakland and also wouldn't be counted as residents in a US census (and it all assumes there is no overlap between residents and students, and that is largely true but not exact). Then add to that, during the day at least, that the area is also flooded by faculty and staff that work at Pitt, CMU, Carlow, UPMC, and the Carnegie Museums, etc. So what you observe on a Wednesday from 8am to 6 pm in October in North Oakland could be fairly different than what you see at 8pm on a Sunday in July in South Oakland.

 

[bwh05]

I think what Paco is saying, and I agree, is that just throwing up the census data for the 8,000 people that live in the neighborhood isn't an accurate representation of what you see on and around the Pitt campus on a daily basis.

 

[CrazyPaco]

I think what Paco is saying, and I agree, is that just throwing up the census data for the 8,000 people that live in the neighborhood isn't an accurate representation of what you see on and around the Pitt campus on a daily basis.

US Census data for Oakland is absolutely not be representative of what you see during a standard day in Oakland.

Actual census-counted Oakland residents would skew much older and whiter than the actual population that resides in Oakland most of the year, not to mention works and studies in Oakland during the day.

 

[bwh05]

Right, which is why saying things like Oakland is 8% Asian just isn't true.

 

[CrazyPaco]

Right, which is why saying things like Oakland is 8% Asian just isn't true.

8.00% of the Pitt student population identifies as Asian according to its latest Fact Book.

However, that doesn't account for the percentage of international students that are actually Asian...so some portion of the 10.74% international students are also Asian. A quick count shows about 74 to 75% of international students at Pitt main are Asian which gets you to, about, the point where Pitt's total student population being at least 16% Asian.

Nor does it account for the proportion that one might count asian among the 2.88% that identify as 2 or more races, or the 3.21% unknown race.

None of this includes faculty or staff, Carnegie Mellon, or the actual residential population. What the final % is in Oakland, I don't know. Someone would have to combine the numbers and do the math.

 

[pitt-girl]

There is no reason that Pitt's fact book wouldn't be accurate. It is how students self-identify, the same as the US census. However, the numbers posted prior either weren't accurate or up-to-date.

The actual % for the Pittsburgh campus (grad, professional and undergrad students) are the following (out of 28,649 total Pittsburgh campus students) for the 2015-2016 year:

White 67.24%
International 10.74%
Asian 8.00%
Black 4.66%
Unknown 3.21%
Hispanic/Latino 3.17%
2+ races 2.88%
Native 0.10%

To get a true look at diversity for "Oakland", at least from September through April, you'd need to get the census figures not only for Oakland (which comprises four designated neighborhoods whose boundaries aren't likely what you think), but also for Squirrel Hill North where CMU is located and which everyone considers to be Oakland but technically is not. Then you'd need to add the student numbers from Pitt, Carnegie-Mellon, and Carlow on top of that to get a better feel for the demographics during the school year. Of course, that still won't tell the story because many students from Duquesne also live in South Oakland and also wouldn't be counted as residents in a US census (and it all assumes there is no overlap between residents and students, and that is largely true but not exact). Then add to that, during the day at least, that the area is also flooded by faculty and staff that work at Pitt, CMU, Carlow, UPMC, and the Carnegie Museums, etc. So what you observe on a Wednesday from 8am to 6 pm in October in North Oakland could be fairly different than what you see at 8pm on a Sunday in July in South Oakland.

Thanks CP. I agree that Census figures would not tell the whole story, but the Census itself had the percentage of African Americans at 26%, far above the numbers bandied about here. My guess is that even if Pitt's Fact Book AND the Census figures are accurate, there is a % of those that live in the area that don't reach either of those tallies.

 

[bobfree]

And I did that using your own examples...which you elected to ignore.
Just saying. You're using your own perceptions and biases, rather than objective data.

I didn't ignore your data I'm attempting to ignore you.

This is classic you. You won't use Pittsburghs demos because it doesn't suit you but you use all of Charlottesville or all of Madison vs Oakland. University is every bit of shadyside or squirrel hill than Wisconsin is all of Madison.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

I didn't ignore your data I'm attempting to ignore you.

This is classic you. You won't use Pittsburghs demos because it doesn't suit you but you use all of Charlottesville or all of Madison vs Oakland. University is every bit of shadyside or squirrel hill than Wisconsin is all of Madison.

You recognize that Pittsburgh as a whole is no more diverse than Oakland right?
Still negligible Hispanic and minimal Asian populations in the whole city.

 

[Old School1]

The difference from Italian or Irish or Polish etc. neighborhoods and African American neighborhoods is that the first group is based on country of origin and the other is based on race. In Pittsburgh, races tend to be grouped together. That may make Pittsburgh technically somewhat diverse at the city level, but not integrated at the neighborhood level and therefore strongly segregated.

Since you mentioned Seattle and Portland as having more white people than does Pittsburgh, that is true. However, those cities are actually integrated pretty well. They both have strong positive integration/segregation index scores. Pittsburgh is in the negative, since it's black population is quite segregated.

Since you mentioned the Segregation Index Score per the US Census here are the numbers for cities with a population over 500,000.
0= totally integrated 100= totally segregated
The highest index is Milwaukee WI at 82.
The lowest index is Provo UT at 22
Pittsburgh 66 - close to the avg. & trending in the right direction
Portland 46
Seattle 49
Average of all cities with a population over 500,000 is 56

Black-White Segregation Index For Cities With Population over 500,000
Rank (2010) 1990 2000 2010

Pittsburgh, PA 70.8 68.9 65.8
Portland OR 63.2 51.8 46.0
Seattle WA 56.5 52.4 49.1

These cities are higher than Pittsburgh:
Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA
Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL-IN-WI
Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI
Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY
St. Louis, MO-IL
Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA
Syracuse, NY
Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT
Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA
Dayton, OH
Indianapolis-Carmel, IN
Birmingham-Hoover, AL

 

[drunkinoakland]

You recognize that Pittsburgh as a whole is no more diverse than Oakland right?
Still negligible Hispanic and minimal Asian populations in the whole city.

I award both sides of this "debate" 0 points and a giant "wtf".

 

[bobfree]

You recognize that Pittsburgh as a whole is no more diverse than Oakland right?
Still negligible Hispanic and minimal Asian populations in the whole city.

That's incorrect. Pittsburgh is 66 percent white compared to 78 you cited about Oakland earlier.

Also in 1970 was 78 percent white so we are certainly moving in a more diverse direction.

This will be my last post on this topic....

 

[Old School1]

Here's the simple answer to this ridiculous thread.
The US national averages based on 2014 estimates are:
White 62%, Black, 12%, Hispanic 18%, Asian 6%, other 2%
So if a city resembles the national average its diverse.
The national average is the make-up of the country!
By trying to say it has to have more blacks, Hispanics, or Asians than the
national average to be diverse is incorrect.
That just a personal view of what some of the posters would prefer.
If you don't like the national averages well than you have a more serious
personal problem.

 

[HailtoPitt]

Here's the simple answer to this ridiculous thread.
The US national averages based on 2014 estimates are:
White 62%, Black, 12%, Hispanic 18%, Asian 6%, other 2%
So if a city resembles the national average its diverse.
The national average is the make-up of the country!
By trying to say it has to have more blacks, Hispanics, or Asians than the
national average to be diverse is incorrect.
That just a personal view of what some of the posters would prefer.
If you don't like the national averages well than you have a more serious
personal problem.

Here is a hypothetical question for you or anyone else. Suppose there was a city with a population of 100,000 people. 12,000 of those people are black and live in one neighborhood. 62,000 are white and live in several different neighborhoods. 12,000 of the hispanic people live in one neighborhood and 6,000 of the Asians live in one neighborhood.

Is this city diverse? I say no, because it is very segregated.

 

[Pitt69]

Here's the simple answer to this ridiculous thread.
The US national averages based on 2014 estimates are:
White 62%, Black, 12%, Hispanic 18%, Asian 6%, other 2%
So if a city resembles the national average its diverse.
The national average is the make-up of the country!
By trying to say it has to have more blacks, Hispanics, or Asians than the
national average to be diverse is incorrect.
That just a personal view of what some of the posters would prefer.
If you don't like the national averages well than you have a more serious
personal problem.

From the Cheap Seats; nice reply, this thread was hijacked from the get/go. I think I was the only one that actually posted something about retirement. I'm sure of the stats where I live, 100% are over 55 years old, and 75% play golf, tennis, or ride a bicycle. Enjoy life while you can everyone, because Tomorrow is promised to no one.
H2P

 

[BuffetParrothead]

Here is a hypothetical question for you or anyone else. Suppose there was a city with a population of 100,000 people. 12,000 of those people are black and live in one neighborhood. 62,000 are white and live in several different neighborhoods. 12,000 of the hispanic people live in one neighborhood and 6,000 of the Asians live in one neighborhood.

Is this city diverse? I say no, because it is very segregated.

You're trying to make your point by settting up a situation that doesn't happen.
You can make up situations to support your opinion/agenda but that's not how things work in the real world!
People don't live in neighborhoods according to race or country of origin unless they want to.
Most people will choose neighborhoods according to their financial resources, safety, quality of life, school systems, etc. not according to race or country of origin.Some people ( of all races/country origins) with limited resources, education, and skills who make entry level wages or are on welfare will live in an inner city neighborhood where rental properties are available.
In my neighborhood of homes from $ 500k - 1 million people of all races and countries of origin occupy the homes and the population distribution is close to the national average.
Again people with limited financial resources may live in one low income area but that's a melting pot of lots of many races and countries of origin. Those people need to make changes to be able to select a different place to live!

 

[HailtoPitt]

You're trying to make your point by settting up a situation that doesn't happen.
You can make up situations to support your opinion but that's not how things work in the real world!
People don't live in neighborhoods according to race or country of origin unless they want to.
Most people will choose neighborhoods according to their financial resources. Some people ( of all races/country origins) with limited resources, education, and skills who make entry level wages or are on welfare will live in an inner city neighborhood where rental properties are available.
In my neighborhood of homes from $ 500k - 1 million people of all races and countries of origin occupy the homes and the population distribution is close to the national average.
Again people with limited financial resources may live in one low income area but that's a melting pot of lots of many races and countries of origin.

I used that example because it is very much the truth in many cities. Neighborhoods are certainly segregated by race, and Pittsburgh is no exception. I don't accept the notion that this is a function of wealth, because other cities/places are certainly more integrated (and some are certainly more segregated than Pittsburgh). But make no mistake, Pittsburgh is more segregated than integrated as shown in the link I previously included.

Care to tell us your neighborhood that you keep mentioning?

 

[BuffetParrothead]

I used that example because it is very much the truth in many cities. Neighborhoods are certainly segregated by race, and Pittsburgh is no exception. I don't accept the notion that this is a function of wealth, because other cities/places are certainly more integrated (and some are certainly more segregated than Pittsburgh). But make no mistake, Pittsburgh is more segregated than integrated as shown in the link I previously included.
If its like you explain in your area you must live in a terrible area.
So you're telling me wealthy minorities are forced to live in one area with low income or welfare dependent minorities??? They're not allowed to buy a home in a wealthy integrated area????Think about that one cowboy!
Care to tell us your neighborhood that you keep mentioning?

You must live in a terrible area if its like you explain.
So you're telling me wealthy minorities are forced to live in one area with low income/welfare minorities? They're not allowed to buy a home in an integrated areaThink about that one cowboy!
Sure its in the Lehigh Valley not Pittsburgh 80 miles north of Philly.
Most places I go are just like where we live very integrated.
We have various areas that have different home prices and all are well integrated.
There is also an inner city that houses whites, blacks, Hispanics, etc.who cant buy a house and take advantage of the lost cost rental properties.
Like it or not where you live is a function of wealth unless you don't want it to be.You can be a wealthy person and choose to live in a ghetto. But you can't be poor and choose to live in a neighborhood with $ 500k homes.
Have a nice day!
.

 

[HailtoPitt]

You must live in a terrible area if its like you explain.
So you're telling me wealthy minorities are forced to live in one area with low income/welfare minorities? Think about that one cowboy!
Sure its in the Lehigh Valley not Pittsburgh 80 miles north of Philly.
Most places I go are just like where we live very integrated.
We have various areas that have different home prices and all are well integrated.
There is also an inner city that houses whites, blacks, Hispanics, etc.who cant buy a house and take advantage of the lost cost rental properties.
Like it or not where you live is a function of wealth unless you don't want it to be.You can be a wealthy person and choose to live in a ghetto. But you can't be poor and choose to live in a neighborhood with $ 500k homes.
Have a nice day!
.

I'm familiar with the Lehigh Valley. What suburban enclave do you live in? And most places there are not well integrated. They are fairly segregated and therefore not truly diverse. I think you must be making the same mistake that others are making. Rolling into Allentown proper or Bethlehem (outside of the very limited historic district) where there tend to be lots of non white folks doesn't mean that the Lehigh Valley is diverse. It means it is segregated.

Where I live is a function of it being very convenient for commute to either downtown and Oakland, where I need to often work.

 

[BuffetParrothead]

I'm familiar with the Lehigh Valley. What suburban enclave do you live in? And most places there are not well integrated. They are fairly segregated and therefore not truly diverse. I think you must be making the same mistake that others are making. Rolling into Allentown proper or Bethlehem (outside of the very limited historic district) where there tend to be lots of non white folks doesn't mean that the Lehigh Valley is diverse. It means it is segregated.

Where I live is a function of it being very convenient for commute to either downtown and Oakland, where I need to often work.

How ridiculous and you just gave yourself up! You have an segregation agenda and you're not worth the time to discuss anything!
Have fun!

 

[HailtoPitt]

How ridiculous and you just gave yourself up! You have an segregation agenda and you're not worth the time to discuss anything!
Have fun!

In other words, I called you on it when you starting talking about your $500K-1 Million neighborhood being diverse, and now you're gonna run away.

Seems about right.

 

[pitt-girl]

From the Cheap Seats; nice reply, this thread was hijacked from the get/go. I think I was the only one that actually posted something about retirement. I'm sure of the stats where I live, 100% are over 55 years old, and 75% play golf, tennis, or ride a bicycle. Enjoy life while you can everyone, because Tomorrow is promised to no one.
H2P

Sounds wonderful Pitt 69 - glad you are enjoying life! I'm currently in the process of getting my parents into the Longwood Retirement Community in Oakmont. Nice place - very expensive. They'll be fine, but I'm kind of worried we haven't saved enough. Thought we were until I saw how much this place costs. Yikes. Dang kids - sucking us dry.

 

[BuffetParrothead]

You didn't call me on anything! You're a waste of my time! The Lehigh Valley is more than Bethlehem and Allentown.
Where we live its that way. Lots of upscale neighborhoods with homes in that range, all the neighborhoods are well integrated and people get along. In fact most of the new home construction is over $ 500k with a lot of NJ and NY relocating out here!
You drive thru a town and decide if its segregated or integrated? You're a joke!
You're agenda is lite up in RED as shown in my previous post!

 

[HailtoPitt]

You didn't call me on anything! You're a waste of my time! The Lehigh Valley is more than Bethlehem and Allentown.
Where we live its that way. Lots of upscale neighborhoods with homes in that range, all the neighborhoods are well integrated and people get along. In fact most of the new home construction is over $ 500k with a lot of NJ and NY relocating out here!
You drive thru a town and decide if its segregated or integrated? You're a joke!
You're agenda is lite up in RED as shown in my previous post!

I named the two largest cities as examples, and I didn't just drive through. Used to live close by.

No agenda here.

My original point was that a city like Pittsburgh, or Allentown can't be considered diverse simply because the African American population is higher than the national average, since much of that population lives in the same neighborhoods and therefore segregated.

I'm not sure why you seem to dispute this and why you even brought up your neighborhood.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

Here's the simple answer to this ridiculous thread.
The US national averages based on 2014 estimates are:
White 62%, Black, 12%, Hispanic 18%, Asian 6%, other 2%
So if a city resembles the national average its diverse.
The national average is the make-up of the country!
By trying to say it has to have more blacks, Hispanics, or Asians than the
national average to be diverse is incorrect.
That just a personal view of what some of the posters would prefer.
If you don't like the national averages well than you have a more serious
personal problem.

It's that Pittsburgh is well below those averages in Hispanics and below average in Asian which was my barometer .

 

[NTOP]

Pittsburgh is the whitest city in America. Okay, at least one of them. I oft reference the lack of basketball talent in the area based that this city and region is comparatively low percentage of African Americans.

But "diversity" is such an overused word. Libs love to throw this around, like being white means you are fat, stupid, and only eat at McDonald's. One of the coolest or hippest cities in the US is Portland. Another is Seattle. And they are whiter than Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh has also one of the lowest Latino populations.

But there is more diversity. You can tell be the different and more authentic restaurants. And Pittsburgh has always been Old Europe diverse, much along the lines as many of the bigger cities. Just because the people look relatively the same, it is not "diverse". Because "color" is the only thing that counts in some people's eyes as "diverse".

Just got to Portland & Seattle last month...first time. The "Keep Portland weird" signs are appropriate. Didn't spend enough time to really get around, but it didn't impress me greatly.
Seattle is much more interesting...the waterfront, ferries and size were more impressive. Too damn wet, though. Lots of Asians in both towns, generally nice people in both. Seem to be fairly prosperous. Wouldn't mind going back......might be there next year as my granddaughter grads from Duck U.

 

[HailtoPitt]

Just got to Portland & Seattle last month...first time. The "Keep Portland weird" signs are appropriate. Didn't spend enough time to really get around, but it didn't impress me greatly.
Seattle is much more interesting...the waterfront, ferries and size were more impressive. Too damn wet, though. Lots of Asians in both towns, generally nice people in both. Seem to be fairly prosperous. Wouldn't mind going back......might be there next year as my granddaughter grads from Duck U.

Lots to do in Seattle, and outside of Seattle. National Parks to the west and the east. The San Juan Islands to the North. Fantastic area of the country.

Portland has it's perks too, but I get the feeling that you have to live there to appreciate what is going on.

 

[NTOP]

Lots to do in Seattle, and outside of Seattle. National Parks to the west and the east. The San Juan Islands to the North. Fantastic area of the country.

Portland has it's perks too, but I get the feeling that you have to live there to appreciate what is going on.

Good analysis.....too many hippy types for me....I hate flea markets.

 

[Swervin27]

It's that Pittsburgh is well below those averages in Hispanics and below average in Asian which was my barometer .

would more Asians and Hispanics in Pittsburgh make you happy?

 

[Pitt69]

Just got to Portland & Seattle last month...first time. The "Keep Portland weird" signs are appropriate. Didn't spend enough time to really get around, but it didn't impress me greatly.
Seattle is much more interesting...the waterfront, ferries and size were more impressive. Too damn wet, though. Lots of Asians in both towns, generally nice people in both. Seem to be fairly prosperous. Wouldn't mind going back......might be there next year as my granddaughter grads from Duck U.

From the Cheap Seats; friend of mine grew up in Seattle. Very pretty country, like most of the PNW, but way too much rain. Couldn't retire there, but a visit is nice. Good food as well.

 

[pitt-girl]

From the Cheap Seats; friend of mine grew up in Seattle. Very pretty country, like most of the PNW, but way too much rain. Couldn't retire there, but a visit is nice. Good food as well.

I love the PNW.