The article examines the urban mobility and experienced isolation of students in major metropolitan areas, using detailed GPS location data. Key findings include: 1. **Racial and Economic Isolation**: Students experience more racial and income isolation than adults, with higher-income students visiting more amenities and exploring more unique locations. Students from lower-income families spend more time at home and visit fewer restaurants and retail establishments. 2. **Urban Mobility**: Students spend more time at home and in their neighborhood, stay closer to home when they do leave, and visit fewer restaurants and retail establishments. However, they also explore more unique locations, spend more time in parks and at civil, social, and religious establishments, and visit areas with higher socioeconomic status. 3. **Neighborhood Characteristics**: Urban mobility is positively correlated with home neighborhood characteristics such as distance from the urban core, car ownership, and social capital. Higher-income neighborhoods have higher urban mobility, and areas with greater social capital also have higher mobility. 4. **Income and Mobility**: Higher-income students are more mobile, visiting more entertainment venues, parks, and unique locations, and spending less time at home. The differences in mobility attenuate when controlling for neighborhood characteristics. 5. **Conclusion**: Lower-income youth in urban areas appear to benefit less from urban life, despite having access to dense amenities and public goods. Income seems to condition the benefits of urban living, highlighting a paradox in urban America. The study underscores the importance of considering income and neighborhood characteristics in understanding urban mobility and isolation, particularly for younger and disadvantaged populations.The article examines the urban mobility and experienced isolation of students in major metropolitan areas, using detailed GPS location data. Key findings include: 1. **Racial and Economic Isolation**: Students experience more racial and income isolation than adults, with higher-income students visiting more amenities and exploring more unique locations. Students from lower-income families spend more time at home and visit fewer restaurants and retail establishments. 2. **Urban Mobility**: Students spend more time at home and in their neighborhood, stay closer to home when they do leave, and visit fewer restaurants and retail establishments. However, they also explore more unique locations, spend more time in parks and at civil, social, and religious establishments, and visit areas with higher socioeconomic status. 3. **Neighborhood Characteristics**: Urban mobility is positively correlated with home neighborhood characteristics such as distance from the urban core, car ownership, and social capital. Higher-income neighborhoods have higher urban mobility, and areas with greater social capital also have higher mobility. 4. **Income and Mobility**: Higher-income students are more mobile, visiting more entertainment venues, parks, and unique locations, and spending less time at home. The differences in mobility attenuate when controlling for neighborhood characteristics. 5. **Conclusion**: Lower-income youth in urban areas appear to benefit less from urban life, despite having access to dense amenities and public goods. Income seems to condition the benefits of urban living, highlighting a paradox in urban America. The study underscores the importance of considering income and neighborhood characteristics in understanding urban mobility and isolation, particularly for younger and disadvantaged populations.