One dot = one person. A visual look at the racial demographic of the US

from the link
The Roanoke Times
"If you want to really understand the State of the Commonwealth, we refer you to the latest population estimates from tYuphe Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service at the University of Virginia. They paint a much truer picture of what’s really happening..."

Yup, people who say they are not interested in race sure seem to be interested in race.

 

As much as this map is interesting and adds valuable insight, I think it is also (not intentionally) misleading in more ways than one.

Since most of the population is in the very densely populated areas, where the dots overlap, it's hard to get an accurate appearing display of exactly what the population distribution truly looks like.
Those deeper colored areas have far much more color than that map can show.
If they made a 3D version of this map, placing all the overlapping dots on top of each other, there would be really tall spikes in all the city areas.

Just an example, in that map viewed from a distance, California seems to look like it has fewer people than Tennessee, but obviously that's not true.

As you zoom in, it starts to display a fairer comparison, but even then I do not think it fully compensates.

 

It just could easily give people wrong impressions.


However, I do think it's very useful to zoom in and view the self-imposed segregation in city areas.

I notice in New York, Asian seems to mix more easily with Hispanics or Whites than it does with Blacks.
I presume these are Asians with different origins? (Northeast Asia versus Southeast Asia)

 

You would not be curious to see where illegal aliens are residing?

 

The color display changes as you zoom in.

From a distance, the map can't accurately display the true coloration because many of the dots are so close together (in high density) they overlap.

If there was an algorithm in the map to expand out the dots until all of them were visible, the map would look very different.

 

Why do I have the feeling you're trying to bait someone into making a comment you can attack?

 

I zoomed in on my old stomping grounds of Fort Lee, NJ, which is just across the George Washington Bridge from Manhattan. Not only has the demographic significantly changed to large areas of nearly solid red, when I zoom in to Northern Bergen County, there's a lot of red dots sprinkled in. My family tells me those red dots represent Koreans and Filipinos. And looking around the country, I've noticed that the red dots are living large on some pretty valuable real estate.

 

Which is located in Charlottesville.

Segregation and Jim Crow laws[edit]
After Reconstruction ended, Charlottesville's black population suffered under Jim Crow laws that segregated public places and limited opportunity. Schools were segregated by race and blacks were not served in many local businesses.[13] Public parks were planned separately for the white and black populations: four for the whites, and one, built on the site of a former dump, for blacks.[14] The Ku Klux Klan had chapters in the Charlottesville area beginning at least in the early twentieth century,[15] and events such as lynchings and cross burnings occurred in the Charlottesville area. In 1898, Charlottesville resident John Henry James was lynched in the nearby town of Ivy.[16] In August 1950, three white men were observed burning a cross on Cherry Avenue, a street in a mostly African-American neighborhood in Charlottesville.[17] It was speculated that the cross burning might be a reaction to "a white man [who] had been known to socialize with one of the young Negro women in that vicinity."[17] In 1956, crosses were burned outside a progressive church[18] and the home of white integration activist Sarah Patton Boyle.

In the fall of 1958, Charlottesville closed its segregated white schools as part of Virginia's strategy of massive resistance to federal court orders requiring integration as part of the implementation of the Supreme Court of the United States decision Brown v. Board of Education. The closures were required by a series of state laws collectively known as the Stanley plan. Negro schools remained open, however.[19] The first African American member of the Charlotteville School Board was Raymond Bell in 1963.[20]

In 1963, later than many southern cities, civil rights activists in Charlottesville began protesting segregated restaurants with sit-ins, such as one that occurred at Buddy's Restaurant near the University of Virginia.[21]

 

Overall though, the country is 77.7 percent "blue"...

 

Except when you look at the younger generation.
Then it's a very different story.

thread that goes into more detail about that here:
Whites will become a minority in the U.S. in 14 years

 

The world evolves.

 

Of course. I was just saying how that map can be very misleading, since when you look at the map display it appears mostly all blue.


Most parts of America are blue, but most of America is not.
It's because most people do not live in most areas. (If you can understand that seeming paradox)

 

The right makes multiple daily threads about race .
Some all by themselves
An obsession i guess

 

and the left doesn't?

I bet if we counted up all the threads about race (excluding me) in this forum, most of them were started by someone from the left.

I think the left just doesn't like this map because it inconveniently shows how all the big city areas that are held up as jewels by those on the left are practically racially segregated.
In fact even cities in the South don't look as racially segregated as New York or Boston now.

 

What’s wrong with this thread other than you can’t seem to intelligently contribute to It?

 

They’re trying to bait us when they should be learning something about their country.

 

The left doesn't. Well 1?

 

Ok .pink polka dot

 

Just to make everyone else aware, the poster above me dairyair has been noted for his crashing into threads and trolling in very subtle ways that it can be hard for many to tell he's doing it.

 

Did you see the article I posted from the Los Angeles Times?

Just because some places are "segregated" that doesn't mean it's a good thing or that's what everyone wants or chooses.

I don't like or dislike the map.

At this point, other than it's "interesting", what difference does it make?

 

I'm sure it could be interpreted in a lot of different ways, by different people, to support different arguments.

 

What arguments?

 

That some folks self segregate.

 

I know my area is super heavy with Asians. Going to any store proves that.

What annoys me most about the Chinese there is how they stop to gawk. They clog us an aisle and are gawking as if they see something. But they are not looking at Merchandise. I talk to local people here who also notice it. I have stood still back of one blocking the Aisle as if he owned the entire store. A lot of times.

I do not see blacks shopping at the store much at all. I can't recall the last time I saw a black shopping there.

I can go to Chipotle for a Burrito and not see a black at all. I see Mexicans though.

 

You don't find it interesting that there are some seemingly inexplicable and bizarre patterns that emerge with the distribution of those dots on the map?

For something like this, how it works is you take the data and then figure out the reasons for it, what it means.