The NYT had an article recently about vibrant cities(read cities with walkable, trendy, with farmer's markets, sidewalk cafes, lofts, etc) having most everything but missing children. Reminds me of the story of the Pied Piper. Except this time what is driving the children out along with their parents are the rising real estate prices in these suddenly trendy cities.
San Francisco it turns out has the lowest percentage of persons below 18 (only 14.5%) among cities with a population more than 300,000. Portland is at #7 (21.1%).
"New York and Los Angeles, because of their large immigrant populations, have maintained their base of children". According to Phillip Longman, a senior fellow at the New America Foundation, a public policy research organization in Washington,"If you took immigrants out of the equation, the United States would be like the rest of Europe."
The article talks mostly about Portland, a city that is fast becoming aware of the problem of low child populations as officials called in March for the closing of six schools after a drop of 10,000 students over the last decade. At the current rate the city expects to close 3-4 elementary schools per year over the next decade. The school district website shows about 63 elementary schools at this time.
I am not sure what to make of the declining birthrate--having always believed that a population explosion is a strain on resources and counterproductive to progress. But I would like to live in a city where there is more diversity in terms of age.
As more and more of my friends join the baby brigade I hope to post more about the "state of the child" in today's world.
Leave a comment