Your city's social greography

[Docere]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Also, I always thought the west side of the GTA was the favored side, but doesn't appear so. The region's wealth seems pretty evenly divided by Yonge. Maybe in terms of urbanity, west is best, but not in terms of socioeconomics.

Yeah, the east/west socioeconomic difference is hard to simplify. A visitor to Toronto may get that impression. It's a smoother transition from the CBD to vibrant urban neighborhoods going west. To the east of downtown you have the city's "skid row", public housing projects etc. (though it includes prosperous Cabbagetown as well). The low income areas on the western side of the downtown is basically Chinatown/Kensington Market/university students (and one smaller public housing project, Alexandra Park) - so even if there seems to be an equal distribution of low income tracts immediately east and west of the CBD, it's really rather different.

As one goes west of Kensington Market and Bathurst St., the inner west end is clearly the most "hip" part of town. Quite mixed income with a hipster/student/renter demographic with a lot of affluent professionals in the mix too. More bars, nightlife etc. You really get a sense of the vibe heading west along Queen from City Hall - quite vibrant all the way out to Parkdale.

East of the Don River is less "hip" but more middle to high income, more SFHs, more families, more of a mature professional population. The Don River was also a barrier to development for many years (the opening of the Bloor Viaduct in 1918 spurred development, so the east end developed a little later than the west).

Among the two small transitional urban/suburban former municipalities of York and East York, York is clearly more working class and low income, while East York is more middle class.

Etobicoke is clearly more affluent overall than Scarborough - in line with "west is best." But the difference is really found in the southern halves. Toronto's northwest (basically York/Weston, Downsview/Jane-Finch and north Etobicoke) is in many respects the most troubled part of the city, and is the city's main Black concentration.

Then when you get to the 905 suburbs, the western lakeshore is the most affluent sector (Oakville is the wealthiest GTA suburb), while Durham Region (Pickering, Ajax, Whitby) to the east is very "average" middle income working class.

[muppet]

London rich West, poor South, hip East

[Chef]

Minneapolis has gotten a lot simpler in the last few months:

Downtown: worried yuppies
Uptown: worried yuppies
Southwest Minneapolis: very worried boomer professionals
Everywhere else: preparing for the revolution

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by muppet

London rich West, poor South, hip East

Never really thought about it before, but NYC and London have gentrified in similar patterns. The city of Westminster is somewhat analogous to Manhattan below 34th St, and Shoreditch is analogous to Williamsburg. Shoreditch is east of Westminster, and Williamsburg is directly east of Manhattan.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Crawford

For the Toronto map, I'm surprised that the northern reaches of North York are in the low-income tertile. The area seems pretty middle class. Immigrant heavy but not really different from areas south to the 401.

Those might be skewed by the high density of apartment blocks along Bathurst Ave., north of Finch, which are low income in an otherwise affluent, predominantly Jewish area.

I'm playing loose with stereotypes, here, but back in the day, those places were where Russian Jews who lived in the low density SFH neighbourhoods just across the city boundary in Thornhill put their elderly, non-income earning parents.

There's probably equivalent apartment neighbourhoods in NY.

[suburbanite]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Also, I always thought the west side of the GTA was the favored side, but doesn't appear so. The region's wealth seems pretty evenly divided by Yonge. Maybe in terms of urbanity, west is best, but not in terms of socioeconomics.

The West side of the GTA for sure, but not the West side of the city of Toronto which is what the map shows. The worst areas of the city have always been at the Northwest corner where Mississauga, Brampton, and York all converge just East of the airport.

Once you're past that area the West of the metro along the waterfront is obviously more affluent than in the other direction towards Whitby and Oshawa.

[muertecaza]

Phoenix:

North/Northeast - Rich
East - Poor but gentrifying
West - Poor & Industrial
Near South - Really Poor
Further South - Encroaching Suburbia

[Docere]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Those might be skewed by the high density of apartment blocks along Bathurst Ave., north of Finch, which are low income in an otherwise affluent, predominantly Jewish area.

I'm playing loose with stereotypes, here, but back in the day, those places were where Russian Jews who lived in the low density SFH neighbourhoods just across the city boundary in Thornhill put their elderly, non-income earning parents.

There's probably equivalent apartment neighbourhoods in NY.

Yeah, that red patch in North York is big apartments/Russian Jews.

[Docere]

Originally Posted by muppet

London rich West, poor South, hip East

What about North London?

[bnk]

Northside.

[ThePhun1]

Originally Posted by JManc

Houston:

Historically wealthier west of downtown while poorer/ working classes east of downtown; plants and refineries.

The industrial Southeast side.

[muppet]

Originally Posted by Docere

What about North London?

I shoulda pointed out west and east are north of the river

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by bnk

Northside.

According to that map, I live in "Married Nerds" territory.

If the shoe fits..........

[bnk]

[Docere]

London.

West = posh, East = poor, South = rough, North = intellectual

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics...le-four-cities

Though I the stereotypes break down as you move into outer London I guess.

Outer North London seems to be the "Queens" of London with its polyglot population (large ethnic minority, immigrant and Jewish communities), while outer south London is semi-suburban "white English."

[ilcapo]

Just a huge generalisation of Stockholm, Sweden:

Inner-City: Rich Seniors, Rich Yuppies. Low ethnic diversity. Votes for the Moderate Party

Inner-City South: Upper middle class, Yuppies, Young hipsters. Low ethnic diversity.. Votes Left-party

Northeast: Rich and upper middle-class families. Low ethnical diversity. Votes for the moderate party.

Northwest: Working Class, Immigrant Families. Diverse ethnicities. Votes for the Socialdemocrats.

South of inner-city: Middle Class, medium ethnic diversity. Mixed voting.

Southwest: Working Class, Immigrant Families, high ethnic diversity. Votes Social Democrats.

Voting-results tells alot about the charachters of the different areas.

Rich areas: Moderate Party
Poor urban Areas: Social Democrats
Poor and middle class rural Areas: Swedishdemocrats
Middle-class urban areas adjacent to Poor areas: SwedishDemocrats
Young hipster areas: Left Party & Green Party

[Docere]

Interesting. Contrasts with the "favored west" pattern of most European cities.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by ThePhun1

The industrial Southeast side.

Houston:

[ilcapo]

Originally Posted by Docere

Interesting. Contrasts with the "favored west" pattern of most European cities.

It could be because the water and archipelago is to the east here. In Gothenburg where the water is to the west it's the opposite.

Not sure though.

Heres a map from 2014 where it shows the two biggest political partys. Very generally speaking you can say that blue = upper middle class and above. Red = lower middle class and below.

The inner-city is the blue cluster in the middle.

[Docere]

Class politics still trumps questions of cosmopolitanism and culture in Sweden. Though the political divisions make sense, the "woke" left is the radical middle classes mostly.