CNN Money, August 2009
CNNMoney’s Best Places database of 1,800-plus U.S. cities includes towns with populations 8,500 to 50,000 with satisfactory education and crime scores, where income is below 200% of the state median, and that are no more than 95% white—as well as cities with populations 90,000 and up.
Original article
(Posted on July 14, 2009)
Comments
I looked at the list, and all the places on that list are at or very near 95% white, and the biggest minority in cities that aren’t too close to that white are Asians.
What strikes me about these lists of best places to live is that no place ever repeats on those lists year over year. The reason is that everybody flocks there because they think it’s such a great place, not realizing that the reason it was such a great place was that they (assuming they’re certain “theys”) weren’t there.
What a very odd thing to mention. How gratuitous.
I had to read this a couple of times to figure out what they meant, but I don’t think they’re saying that “too white” is a bad thing. On the contrary, I think the implication is that being more than 95% white would give a town an unfair advantage, within the confines of this study.
Note that they also eliminated towns with a mean income of more than twice the state average. Again, I don’t think they are implying that making good money is a bad thing, just that it tips the balance of their study in seeking the “best” of small town America.
CNN’s stupidity is also funny.
When they first started listing best places to live and worst places to live it became obvious that the best places to live had a high concentration of whites and the worst places to live had a high concentration of blacks. So now they change the criteria—just like affirmative action—and presto, problem solved. The list is now politically correct.
What a joke CNN has become.
This is the email I sent them - and I would encourage the rest of you to also send similar polite emails:
“You wrote:
“…and that are no more than 95% white”. It is time to give up the hatred and be tolerant of white societies. There is nothing wrong with societies that are 100% white. Do you also have a problem with areas that are 100% black? What about 100% Hispanic? Did you set the bar at 95% because y’all live in communities that are 85% white?
I really do think organizations like CNN need to re-examine their attitudes toward (read “against”) whites and be more objective and fair. You only have the luxury of hating white society because you live in white society.”
The non-Hispanic white racial break-down of the top ten cities picked are as follows:
The last city on the top 10 had the lowest proportion of whites. No top 10 city had less than 80.6% whites. Taken all together they had a combined average of 88.3% white. So it seems a Best Place also has a lower limit for percentage of whties.
I think I know where the next waves of Hmongs and Somalians are heading.
LOL. I live in one of those cities listed. From what I can tell of the cities I know, these are all major White flight havens. What happened to those crazy lists from a few years back that listed Atlanta, Philadelphia, Denver and a whole host of other ethnic sewers as the best places to live?
I completely support CNN’s sentiment. White towns are terrible to live in. No one but white people should live there. ;)
Does anyone else besides me think these lists are published so blacks can move into areas they haven’t yet considered? I mean; These towns are obviously too white, so they need a little diversity to straighten them out….you know bring them down to the level that most of the rest of us have to deal with. Just a thought…..
I think I know where the next waves of Hmongs and Somalians are heading.
Believe this…better all the Hmongs here than ONE muslim Somali.
So if Clanhassen, MN (93.4% white) or Lake St. Louis, MO (94.8% white) were to slightly improve to being 95% caucasion they would no longer be considered good places to live and be dropped from the list?
Imagine the extent of liberal whining outrage if the text had read “…and that are no more than 5% non-white”
It was perfectly reasonable to exclude communities that had average incomes exceeding 200% of the state median. After all, it is hardly news that estate areas are nice places to live, and irrelevant to those of us looking for a place where we can afford to move.
But they really tipped their hand when they excluded places that are over 95% white. That amounts to an admission that being overwhelmingly white gives a community an “unfair advantage” when it comes to crime, education, arts, and overall livability. In short, that diversity is our weakness. Join the club, CNN. Come over here and post on Amren.
In other words, these cities are not quite gentrified enough.
It’ll be interesting to see what these cities look like in ten years.
“If a towns too white, it’s not a “best place” to live.”
Well, in that case, I guess I grew up deprived without even knowing it.
Whitey Ford wrote:
Isn’t THAT the truth! Our (formerly) “89% white” section of town has, in the past 7 years, been subject to an influx of blacks. Prior to this, the few blacks who lived in our area barely caused a ripple in crime statistics.
Some of these new arrivals are resettled black Africans, thanks to the Catholic Social Agency, while others are “US-grown” black HUD recipients from Newark or Philadelphia.
Sadly, the behavior of the African immigrants seems better than the black HUD recipients.
I come from Boston.
The “best places to live” are affordable only for the top 3-4% of income earners.
the town I grew up in is absolutely ideal, but is now full of Mcmansions, and the average house price is over one million $.
if you are white and rich, there is no problem.
but keeping house prices at insane levels is not an efficient method for helping white people in general escape black and Hispanic degeneracy.
whites who are NOT superrich needs white enclaves they can afford.
It looked like most of the towns were yuppie suburbs close to large cities. Many of them had very high housing prices, and the cost of living was not low. Not the type of place that average whites afford could live.
95% is an interesting choice because I have always thought when blacks become about 5% of the population is when they start to become a problem.
To jewamongyou, who wrote “You only have the luxury of hating white society because you live in white society.”
Thanks for writing that. It states things perfectly.
Check out a town’s crime index. Also check out the percentage of certain privileged minorities. Notice the correlation?
“and that are no more than 95% white”
?????
I couldn’t believe what I was reading! So, according to CNN Money, anywhere that is more than 95% white has something wrong with it. I guess they are trying to guide non-whites into the ‘best’ places (the majority white areas) without putting them off by saying “it’s 100% white people living there”.
It’s so simple: white people move away from non-whites because we want to live among our own people. Non-whites follow us. They emigrate to our countries, uninvited, and unwanted, and then complain about how much we don’t want them - (they call this “racism”), and yet STILL the insist on coming to our countries and living around us. And yet WE are made out to be the ‘bad’ ones…
I went to high school at #86 Bryant, AR, a suburb of Little Rock and the CAPITAL of white flight (along with Cabot). It used to be over 95% white but since a few blacks and Hispanics have moved in, I guess it has dropped just below. I wonder what city here has a non-white population of 50% or more, 25% or more, 15% or more… None I suspect.
The non-Hispanic white racial break-down of the top ten cities picked are as follows:
The last city on the top 10 had the lowest proportion of whites. No top 10 city had less than 80.6% whites. Taken all together they had a combined average of 88.3% white. So it seems a Best Place also has a lower limit for percentage of whties.
If you want to see where you have the most whites/blacks/Hispanics/whatever, there’s zipskinny.com.
I heard that East St. Louis, IL, had a pretty high crime rate, and when I looked on Zip Skinny, I found that it was around 97% black.
No wonder.
I also looked at East St. Louis on Google Earth and it looks like a war zone.
Interesting list. I was born, and lived until my teenage years, in Mt. Airy MD, no. 53 on the list, which is all of ten miles away from Eldersburg MD, no. 47.
It is no coincidence that both towns are in Carroll “Cow” county, which even now is well over 90% white (96% in the 2000 census).
Both towns are unrecognizable now from the way they looked when I was growing up. Years of being flooded with everyone in Baltimore and DC who could afford to get out will, for better or worse, do that. Interestingly though, I think that this migration has actually made the these towns more white, since that’s been the bulk of the Balto-DC refugees (which are still mostly unwanted, P.I.T.A. upper class twit types, but they don’t increase the crime rate much).
Despite their penchant for branching out and destroying new neighborhoods, non-whites don’t seem much interested in Cow County. As one poster on the Eldersburg page put it:
“if i was white, i’d still live there! unfortunately, not enough color there even still.”
Nothing against the young black lady who posted this, but I’m sure the nice white people of Cow County aren’t really heartbroken by this attitude prevailing amongst her peers.
Alexandra:
I think it’s almost all black. As a matter of fact, I have never met a white person who is currently from ESL. That being said, ESL has been just about all black for quite awhile, but its total population is decreasing. What is happening is that blacks are pouring into Belleville, ruining that once perfectly good Kraut town.
60 Minutes did a hatchet job on Belleville in the early 1990s, for the gates it had on certain streets that crossed into the ESL city limits. The DOJ made Belleville take them down. Not that the gates would have helped, but the symbolism is all the more saddening.
Question Diversity:
Yep, 97%.
I remember my dad saying Detroit was bad because it was mostly black. Right now it’s around 80% black if I remember right.
No wonder houses there are only going for a dollar….
Whitey Ford wrote:
We don’t need to believe it. So what? That’s irrevelant!
Elitist wrote: The “best places to live” are affordable only for the top 3-4% of income earners. If you are white and rich, there is no problem. But keeping house prices at insane levels is not an efficient method for helping white people in general to escape black and Hispanic degeneracy. Whites who are NOT superrich need white enclaves they can afford.
Absolutely. As more and more blacks, through the workings of Affirmative Action and deliberate government/corporate policies, are artificially boosted into executive level positions, those formerly well-to-do white enclaves which have thus far been exempt from the problems of integration, are going to come under the gun, and their beleaguered white populations — except for the VERY rich — are going to experience what they have all along been forcing on the less-fortunate whites of this country. It will be nice to see them get their turn.
28 — Question Diversity wrote at 7:30 PM on July 15:
I think it’s almost all black. As a matter of fact, I have never met a white person who is currently from ESL. That being said, ESL has been just about all black for quite awhile, but its total population is decreasing.
———————————-
Just more internal refugees, probably. We in the USA constantly read about the world’s refugee problem, as they flee violence and mayhem from place to place, country to country. But we DON’T read or hear about our own INTERNAL REFUGEES who are also fleeing from African-style violence and mayhem. Just like the Palestineans, Tamils, Ethiopeans, Sudanese, etc., etc, we Americans have ALSO had our own refugees for many decades now. But they are internal, not a UN problem, so we don’t hear anything about it.
In fact, white flight is not only an awkward topic and an embarassment to the USA, it is considered rather immoral … so people who refuse to integrate are deserving of no attention or sympathy. While refugees from some African country or another are splashed on our television screens nightly, with their pitiful stories and appeals for help, white flight refugees from violence in the USA receive no publicity whatever. It is covered up.
I took a look at the list and noticed that the first California city to appear comes in at #70. (Walnut, which is 21% White, 20% hispanic and 52% Asian and 3.9% black).
I assume the city is broken up into racial enclaves of super-wealthy Asians and Whites with dirt-poor hispanics on the outskirts. Many cities in California seem to be like this now. The Asians, Whites and increasingly Armenians, Russians and Iranians in my city are retreating behind 9-foot high fortress-like barriers built around their entire properties.
Asians, Armenians and especially Russians are the most racist groups I’ve ever encountered in my life. They may be extremely ethno-centric, but they will keep blacks and hispanics out of any neighborhoods where they settle because they despise them.
“…who are also fleeing from African-style violence and mayhem… [it is] not a UN problem, so we don’t hear anything about it…”
Whites are being hunted down and slaughtered in SA and Zim (are there any Whites left?) but the UN and English-speaking press ignore this utter genocide against Whites. Yet the UN continues to relentlessly pressure the US and other White countries to accept ever more unassailable 70-IQd somalis.
Bon
“Many cities in California seem to be like this now. are retreating behind 9-foot high fortress-like barriers built around their entire properties.”
When I visit California (where I am now), I see this disturbing phenomenon. It’s something rather new, I think. There are whole tracts and new subdivisions surrounded and shut off from the outside world by high masonry walls! It’s bizarre, often ugly, and looks decidedly unfriendly. I lived in California, years ago, as a teenager and young adult, and I don’t recall ever seeing this then. I see it now in Arizona and Nevada too (both being “suburbs” of California). I don’t like it! This does not speak well of where we are heading.
Oh, and speaking of California, which is now becoming a Third World basket case on the brink of collapse, I saw on television just last night that it is now credit-rated second worst, right behind Puerto Rico.
Well, when you import the Third World, you’re going to end up as part of the Third World. What else could they expect? You don’t have to be brilliant to figure that out (but somehow our politicians can’t grasp it). Even despite the spectacle before them, some of these fools are continuing to advocate more of the same!
“Even despite the spectacle before them, some of these fools are continuing to advocate more of the same!”
People should do some research on the “Catholic Social Agency” and other “Christian” agencies resettling non-whites into the middle of quiet, White areas. Most of the time it turns out these agencies have either been told, by the govt etc, to engage in this ‘work’ or risk losing tax exempt status, or they are in fact not even run by “Catholics” etc, instead it’s some red-diaper grandkids running the show, carrying on their parent’s dream to destroy Whites and the US, and the term “Catholic” or “Christian” is window dressing.
they are in fact not even run by “Catholics”, etc, instead it’s some red-diaper grandkids running the show, carrying on their parent’s dream to destroy Whites and the US; and the term “Catholic” or “Christian” is window dressing.
