Editorial Board:

Editor:
George H. Conklin,
 North Carolina
 Central University

Board:
Bob Davis,
 North Carolina
 Agricultural and
 Technical State
 University

Richard Dixon,
 UNC-Wilmington

Ken Land,
 Duke University

Miles Simpson,
 North Carolina
 Central University

Ron Wimberley,
 N.C. State University

Robert Wortham,
 North Carolina
 Central University
    

® 
Volume 3, Number 2
Fall 2005

    Throughout the decades, social scientists have pointed out that some people have benefited from the economic prosperity and affluence of the United States, while others are being left behind (Berube, 2000). That is to say, the last few decades have increased the disparity between highly educated, skilled workers and those who are not. Also, the immigrant population is posing several challenges for the economy through basic healthcare needs and needs of the children of immigrants such as educational, social, and political needs. Demographic changes such as an increase in single parent households and the feminization of poverty have also exacerbated some of the problems with low-income households (Danzinger et al., 2001, Risman, 2003).

    Of particular concern to demographers is the increase in the Hispanic/Latino population in the United States. During the 1990s, the Hispanic/Latino population surged nationally by a hefty 61.2%, rising from 22.4 million in 1990 to 35.3 million in 2000. Hispanic migration to the South surged in the 1990s and not just in Texas and Florida. The most startling example is North Carolina where the Census recorded a 394% growth rate for Hispanics in the 1990s (Mohl, 2002).

    On average, Hispanics are more geographically concentrated than Non-Hispanic Whites, although this trend is changing somewhat (Frey, 2000, 2001; Green 1997; Berube et al., 2001). In addition, more than two in five Hispanics have not graduated from high school, Hispanics are much more likely than Non-Hispanic Whites to be unemployed, Hispanic workers earn less than Non-Hispanic White workers, and Hispanics are more likely than Non-Hispanic Whites to live in poverty (Therrien & Ramirez, 2000).

    African Americans have declared a continued expansion of opportunity in American society coupled with the pursuit and full access of the American mainstream and have made some inroads. During the 1990s, Black unemployment fell from above 11% to below 8%—the lowest level in 30 years. Median family income rose to more than $29,000 and the rate of poverty declined to 26% of African American families. In a post-industrialized society, African Americans who are college graduates earn more and the economic expansion of the 1990s has heightened the earnings disparity for the highly skilled and educated and those who are not (National Urban League, 2002).

    However, despite their progress, Blacks are still significantly underrepresented in suburbia compared with their representation in the population. For example, in 1990 Blacks constituted just 12% of the nation’s population but only 8% of the suburban population. The establishment of Black middle-class suburban communities and the rapid expansion in the size of the black middle-class in the U.S. can be taken as evidence that the continuing suburbanization of Blacks and their increasing income levels will lead to reduction in the differences between Blacks and Whites and the kinds of suburbs in which they live. But inequality in suburbia is still the norm: Blacks tend to live in a small number of residential communities, with lower wealth, worse public finances, and poorer prospects for economic growth. Suburbs with smaller Black populations tend to fare better but Black suburbanites have yet to break through some of the barriers of racism and prejudice that are endemic to the American social fabric (Phelan et al., 1996).

    This paper will review population changes, educational attainment, employment status, and household income for the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC, Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), looking at 1990–2000 percent changes in Census data by race, gender, and ethnicity. It is expected that the economic boom of the 1990s has probably led to increases in those factors that would result in a higher standard of living overall such as increases in income and educational attainment. However, the growth in the Hispanic population has led to growth in the lower-skilled population and the economic prosperity of Hispanics is less apparent (Theerian and Ramirez, 2000, Stevenson et al., 2002, Lowell 2002). In addition, despite their influx into the Black middle class, African Americans are not experiencing phenomenal economic growth. There is also some variation among counties in the MSA. In some counties, economic globalization will continue to play a role in the erosion of manufacturing jobs and it is difficult for people who lose their jobs in manufacturing to replace them with comparable paying jobs (Danzinger et al., 2001).

    Much has been written about the increasing inequality between those people at the top of income ladder and those people at the bottom of the income ladder (Campbell, 2003, Danzinger et al., 2001). Economic challenges are ahead for the United States as we grapple with increasing wage disparity, demographic changes, and a polarization of the political system. The challenge for public policy makers will be how to reverse some of the economic trends of the past and move everyone along in the process of economic prosperity and fortune. Chances are that with increasing demands for educational and health care services, allocation of resources will be a topic of concern in the next few decades. This trend will be coupled with family and cultural changes that will impact the effectiveness of social programs in general (Danzinger et al., 2001).

    Using the 1990 and 2000 Census data, tables were compiled by the categories available for population, educational attainment, employment status, and income for Non-Hispanic Whites, African Americans, and Hispanics. In some cases, the data was merged by the researcher to keep the data consistent from 1990–2000.

    After all tables were compiled by county and region for the MSA, the percent changes as a proportion of regional population from 1990–2000 were computed to measure the changes in the 10-year period. The net change in the period is used to quantify a summary of the changes for each category.

    Tables are constructed by county and region to illustrate the overall changes and highlight the important developments in population, educational attainment, employment status, and income in the Charlotte MSA.

    There is some concern that the 1990 and 2000 Census data are not comparable because respondents were able to choose more than one racial category or other race in 2000 and those choices were not available in 1990. However, an analysis of the Census data in 2000 show that the overwhelming majority of people in 2000 chose only one race (97.6%). Of those that chose only one race, 75% were White, 12.3% were Black, and 3.6% were Asian, American Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders, totaling less than 1% of the population. Those who gave their response as Other race were about 5.5% of the population. Hispanics comprise about 12.5% of the population (Singer, 2000).

Population Characteristics

    In 2000, the Hispanic male population ages 19–64 comprised 73.9% of that population. Hispanic children less than 18 years of age were 24.8% of the male population and a very small proportion of Hispanics (1.3%) were 65 years or more of age (Figure 1). The Hispanic population contrasts with that of the African American population where only 60.9% of the population is of working age. In addition, African Americans have a much higher proportion of those less than 18 years of age (34%) than Non-Hispanic Whites and Hispanics. Among the Non-Hispanic White male population, almost 10% of that population is 65 or more years of age.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 and 2000.

    Figure 2 shows that in 2000, the Hispanic female population less than 18 years of age is 34.2% of that population. This is not surprising considering the higher fertility rates of Hispanic women in the United States. Once again, the female Hispanic population comprises a very small proportion of those 65 or more years of age (2%). African American females less than 18 years do not make up as high a proportion of the Black population as females in the Hispanic population (28.5% versus 34.2%). However, almost a third of the African American population is less than 18 years of age. Interestingly, the Non-Hispanic White females 65 or more years of age are almost 14% of that population.
 
 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 and 2000.

    Table 1 shows the population change in the region by race and Hispanic origin for African Americans, Hispanics/Latinos, and Non-Hispanic Whites in each county in the region. As these data indicate, many counties in the Charlotte MSA experienced tremendous growth in the Hispanic population between 1990 and 2000. African-American population also increased in most counties, with the exception of Lincoln where it declined by .071%. The largest increase in Africa-American population was in Mecklenburg County, where the increase was 43.7%.

    In Table 2, county data shows that the White Non-Hispanic population decreased somewhat as a proportion of regional population in Gaston, Mecklenburg, and Rowan counties from 1990–2000. The African American proportion of the population decreased in Cabarrus, Gaston, Lincoln, Rowan, Union, and York counties. However, the African American proportion of the regional population increased for Mecklenburg County by 5.0%. As a proportion of regional population, Hispanics declined in Mecklenburg and York counties but increased in Cabarrus and Union counties. Other counties experienced small net gains in the proportion of the Hispanic population from 1990–2000.

Educational Attainment

    Looking at the population 25 and over, educational attainment for less than 9th grade, 9th –12th grade, and high school graduates/GED moved in the expected direction for Non-Hispanic Whites: 9.8% in 1990 and 5.1% in 2000, 15.5% in 1990 and 11.2% in 2000, and 26.4% in 1990 and 25.2% in 2000, respectively. In addition, Non-Hispanic Whites gained in all other categories except an associate’s degree, 7.9% to 7.1%, a small difference in the two periods. Non-Hispanic Whites with some college and no degree increased from 19.2% to 22.0%, with bachelor’s degrees, from 15.8% to 21.2%, and with graduate and professional degrees from 5.6% to 6.3% of the population (Figure 3).

    Similar to Non-Hispanic whites, fewer African Americans aged 25 and over have less than a 9th grade education—14.2% in 1990 to 6.8% in 2000. Those with a 9th–12th grade education or no diploma also decreased during that period from 24.5% to 18.5%. High school graduates increased a small amount from 27.7% to 29.0% and African Americans with some college/no degree increased from 17.1% to 23.2%. During the period, there was very little change in the number of African Americans earning associate’s degrees (5.97% to 5.98%), but those earning bachelor’s degrees increased from 7.6% to 12.5%. Those earning graduate and professional degrees increased from 3.0% to 4.0% during the period (Figure 4).

    The proportion of the Hispanic population with less than a 9th grade education actually increased from 1990–2000—from 14.5% to 31.3%. In addition, Hispanics earning a 9th –12th grade education increased from 16% to 20.1%. High school graduates or a GED equivalent increased modestly from 19.6% to 20.9%. All other categories of higher education decreased, associate’s degrees from 7.1% to 3.3%, bachelor’s degrees from 13.2% to 7.9%, and graduate and professional degrees from 6.7% to 4.0% (Figure 5).

    Table 3 shows county data for proportional change in educational attainment by race and Hispanic origin is consistent with the aggregate data showing decreases among the lowest levels of educational attainment and increases among most higher levels for Non-Hispanic whites and African Americans during 1990–2000. Hispanics on the other hand, show changes in the opposite directions.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 and 2000.

Employment Status

    The employment status of Non-Hispanic White males changed very little from 1990–2000, from 80.3% to 79.0% (Figure 6). 

    Non-Hispanic White females changed from 61.8% to 61.9% (Figure 7).

    African American males' percentage in the labor force declined from 75.0% to 70.5% (Figure 8).

    And very little changed for African American females, 67.1% to 67.2% (Figure 9).

    Fewer males of Hispanic origin are in the labor force today, from 88.5% in 1990 to 78.4% in 2000 (Figure 10).

    Hispanic females also declined in the labor force from 65.7% to 57.4% (Figure 11).

    County data for employment status by sex, race, and Hispanic origin shows that Non-Hispanic Whites changed very little in most counties. Among African Americans, fewer males were in the labor force in Cabarrus (1.9%), Gaston (10.7%), Mecklenburg (3.9%), Rowan (4.3%), Union (8.1%), and York Counties (6.0%). Among African American females, those in the labor force decreased in Cabarrus (10.5%), Gaston (6.5%) Lincoln (2.1%), Rowan (4.3%), Union (9.0%), and York counties (0.63%). Hispanic males experienced declines in the labor force for Cabarrus (14.9%), Gaston (15.4%), Mecklenburg (8.7%), Rowan (14.6%), Union (16.6%), and York counties (10.5%). Hispanic females experienced declines in the labor force for Cabarrus (13.9%), Gaston (8.9%), Mecklenburg (12.5%), and Union counties (7.9%) but gained in employment status from 1990–2000 in Lincoln (13.9%), Rowan (5.7%), and York counties (4.7%) (Table 4).

Household Income

    Household income by race and Hispanic origin shows that among Whites there was an overall trend of increasing from lower to higher income levels. Specifically, for the entire MSA, the number of Whites earning less than $10,000 declined by 4.9%, $10,000–$14,999 by 3.1%, $15,000–$24,999 by 7.6%, $25,000–$34,999 by 5.3%, and $35,000–$49,999 by 3.5%, but increased by 4.6% for the $50,000–$74,999 range, 6.5% in the $75,000–$99,999 range, and by almost 10% (9.97%) for those in the $100,000 or more income category (Table 4).

    Among African Americans a similar pattern of income mobility is observed. Overall, the number of African Americans earning less than $10,000 declined by 9.2%, $10,000–$14,999 by 3.9%, $15,000–$24,999 by 5.4%, $25,000–$34,999 by 0.89% with increases in the higher income categories for $35,000–$49,999 of 2.2%, $50,000–74,999 of 4.1%, and $100,000 or more of 2.4% (Table 4).

    Hispanics increased proportions in all categories but the largest gains are observed in the higher income categories, with less than $10,000 up 1.8% , $10,000–$14,999 up 1.3%, $15,000–$24,999 up 2.5%, $25,000–$34,999 up 2.6%, $35,000–$49,999 up 4.3%, $50,000–$74,999 up 4.3%, $75,000–$99,999 up 1.9% and for $100,000 or more an increase of 4.0% (Table 5).

    The mean income increased for Non-Hispanic Whites from $31,289 to $49,184, for African Americans from $20,156 to $31,821, and Hispanics from $25,888 to $37,599 (Table 6). (The data excludes York County mean income because this data was not available.) 

    Overall, the data do confirm the trends observed in the general population. For example, demographers argue that the dependency ratio, the ratio of the working age population 19–64 to those people not working–children less than 18 years old and 65 or more–helps determine the economic prosperity of that population and can provide insight into population characteristics that interact with cultural changes. Among the Non-Hispanic White male population, almost 10% of that population is 65 or more years of age, reflecting an aging of the Non-Hispanic White population. Interestingly, Non-Hispanic White females 65 or more years of age are almost 14% of that population indicative of the increase in the aging population and higher life expectancy rates for females.

    County data for educational attainment by race and Hispanic origin is consistent with the aggregate data showing decreases among the lowest levels of educational attainment and increases among most of the higher levels for Non-Hispanic Whites and African Americans during 1990–2000. Hispanics, on the other hand, show changes in the opposite directions.

    During the 1990s, the Hispanic population did experience growth in the MSA and some of that growth will not be captured until the 2010 Census is taken so the reader is advised to interpret the educational attainment of Hispanics with some caution. However, the proportion of the Hispanic population aged 25 and over with less than a 9th grade education actually increased from 1990–2000, from 14.5% to 31.3%. In addition, Hispanics earning a 9th–12th grade education increased from 16.0% to 20.1%.

    These patterns are consistent with the literature in terms of a growing number of Hispanics who lack the educational background needed to obtain a good-paying salary in the United States. The employment status of Non-Hispanic White males and females changed very little from 1990–2000. African American males’ percentage in the labor force declined from 75% to 70.5% and changed very little for African American females. Fewer males of Hispanic origin were in the labor force in 2000. Hispanic females also declined in the labor force from 65.7% to 57.4%.

    Household income by race and Hispanic origin shows that among Whites and African Americans, there was an overall trend of increasing from lower income levels to the higher income levels. Hispanics increased proportions in all categories but the largest gains are observed in the higher income categories. In addition, the mean income increased for Non-Hispanic Whites by $17,895, for African Americans by $11,665 and for Hispanics by $11,711.

    This paper reviewed population changes, educational attainment, employment status, and household income for the Metropolitan Statistical Area looking at 1990–2000 percent changes in Census data by race, gender, and ethnicity. As expected, the economic boom of the 1990s has probably led to increases in factors such as increases in income and educational attainment that would result in a higher standard of living. However, the growth in the Hispanic/Latino population has led to increases in the lower-skilled population, and the economic prosperity of Hispanics will require investments in their human and social capital needs as well as provisions for their children. (Theerian and Ramirez, 2000; Risman, 2003). In addition, despite their movement into the Black middle class, African Americans experienced lower overall changes in mean income trailing that of Hispanics although this data should be interpreted with caution. Economic globalization will also continue to play a role in the erosion of manufacturing jobs, the competitive position of the American economy and the assimilation of immigrants and their families (Danzinger et al., 2001).

     Future research should focus on rising inequality and exploring public policy solutions such as guaranteed wages, tax changes, and income redistribution. Other areas could examine increases in the earned income tax credit which raises the income of the working poor, socialization of medical costs to protect citizens against unforeseen tragedies, and the creation of good paying jobs. Research in these areas can address programs that will raise the levels of human and social capital (Danzinger et al., 2001, Risman, 2003) and help close some of the gaps in economic prosperity.
 
 

Berube, Alan and Benjamin Forman. 2001. “Living on the Edge: Decentralization Within Cities in the 1990s.” Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy. The Brookings Institution. October 2001.

Berube, Alan and William H. Frey. 2002. “A Decade of Mixed Blessings: Urban and Suburban Poverty in Census 2000.” The Brookings Institution. August 2002.

Campbell, Harrison S. 2003. “Unearned Income and Local Employment Growth in North Carolina: An Economic Base Analysis.” Southeastern Geographer. Vol. 1. May 2003, pp. 89–104.

Carlson, Alvar W. 1994. “America’s New Immigration: Characteristics, Destinations, and Impact, 1970–1989.” Social Science Journal, 1994. Vol 31:3, pp 213–237.

Census Report. American Demographics, Jan 1, 2002 ps1.

Census 2000. American Demographics, June 2001.

Danzinger, Shelton H. and Robert H. Haveman. 2001. Understanding Poverty. MA:Harvard. 2001.

Frey, William H. 2001. “Melting Pot Suburbs: A Census 2000 Study of Suburban Diversity.” Center on Urban & Metropolitan Policy. The Brookings Institution. June 2001.

Frey, William H. 1995. “Immigration and Internal Migration ‘Flight’ From US Metropolitan Areas: Toward a New Demographic Balkanisation”. Urban Studies. May 95, Vol.32:4/5, pp 733–758.

Frey, William H. and Roderick J. Harrison. 2002. “The New White Flight.” American Demographics. June 2002.

Greene, Richard P. “Chicago’s new immigrants, indigenous poor, and edge cities.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. V551. May 1997, pp. 178–191.

Lowell, Lindsay B. 2002 “Recession Pounds U.S. Hispanics.” Population Today. Vol 30:3, April 2002.

Mohl, Raymond A. 2002. The Nuevo New South: Hispanic Migration to Alabama. Migration World Magazine. March-April 2002. v30:13, pp 14–19.

National Urban League. “The State of Black America: 2002”.

Phelan, Thomas J. and Mark Schneider. 1996. “Race, Ethnicity, and Class in American Suburbs.” Urban Affairs Review. Vol 31:5, May 1996. pp 659–680.

Risman, Barbara J. 2003. “The Causes and Consequences of Children’s Poverty.” Quality of Life In North Carolina. NC State University. Vol 3:1.

Singer, Audrey. 2002. “America’s Diversity at the Beginning of the 21st Century: Reflections from Census 2000.” The Brookings Institution, April 2002.

Stevenson, Mary Huff and Barry Bluestone. 2002. “Changing Faces: How the Demographic Revolution Plays Out in New England’s Largest Metro Area.” New England Board of Higher Education. Fall 2002.

U.S. Census Bureau. “Coming to America: A Profile of the Nation’s Foreign Born (2000 Update) Census Brief: Current Population Survey. February 2002.

U.S. Census Bureau. “The Hispanic Population in the United States.” Current Population Reports by Melissa Therrien and Roberto R. Ramirez. March 2000.

U.S. Census Bureau. “The Foreign Born Population in the United States.” Current Population Reports by Lisa Lollock. March 2000.