Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hmm...well how about the fact that Boston is 48 square miles, and Philadelphia is 135? I'm simply talking about leveling out the playing field a bit. I know Philadelphia's Mainline burbs are gorgeous and very safe. However if you're going to say it's "exactly as true for Philly as it is for Boston", then you're also mistaken since you've got a little wort called Camden sitting across the river.
I hate bringing stuff like that up, because I love Philly...as I've said in other threads it's either my second or third favorite city in the country. However, one department where Philadelphia has a tough time is crime. I think even most from Philadelphia will agree with me here.
Crime in Philly is higher, but the hard part about comparing is that Philly has way worse really bad neighborhoods where the VAST majority of volent crime is taking place and is EXTREMELY isolated to. For example any random comparison on neighborhoods would likely yield similar statistics. Quite frankly to the average person who is not involved in the drug trade in North Philly or residing there etc the chances of such crime are roughly equivelent. The thing about crime to me is while yes the rates can vary it is almost a non factor for 95% of the populace. On whether Boston has less just flat out horrible areas the answer is most definately yes.
Camden is just a subway stop on PATCO, it has a nice waterfront which draws plenty of tourists. If crime in the ghetto was a reflection of crime in the city overall, Camden would not have a concert venue, baseball stadium, aquarium, and a museum ship on a restored waterfront, and a highly successful diesel-electric light rail line to Trenton. Camden precisely speaks to the notion that one can be safe in a city with a statistically high (even the highest!) crime rate. Camden is small and easy to ignore.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmac9wr
Hmm...well how about the fact that Boston is 48 square miles, and Philadelphia is 135? I'm simply talking about leveling out the playing field a bit. I know Philadelphia's Mainline burbs are gorgeous and very safe. However if you're going to say it's "exactly as true for Philly as it is for Boston", then you're also mistaken since you've got a little wort called Camden sitting across the river.
I hate bringing stuff like that up, because I love Philly...as I've said in other threads it's either my second or third favorite city in the country. However, one department where Philadelphia has a tough time is crime. I think even most from Philadelphia will agree with me here.
Camden is just a subway stop on PATCO, it has a nice waterfront which draws plenty of tourists. If crime in the ghetto was a reflection of crime in the city overall, Camden would not have a concert venue, baseball stadium, aquarium, and a museum ship on a restored waterfront, and a highly successful diesel-electric light rail line to Trenton. Camden precisely speaks to the notion that one can be safe in a city with a statistically high (even the highest!) crime rate. Camden is small and easy to ignore.
I agree on many fronts but honestly the bad areas of Philly are worse, definately an area that Philly could improve upon relative to Boston
If Philly ever got its act together totally some areas of Camden actually could be attrective similar to areas in Jersey along the Hudson relative to NYC on much smaller scale but still has a long way to go...
You don't have to tell me that, I just reminded myself last night. Coming back from Ardmore on Lancaster Ave I had my GPS on for fun. As I marveled at the urban blight on Lancaster, the GPS got the urge to cut over to Market St. via North 42'nd. I glanced right, just to see what hell TomTom would send me to. Looked clogged with open-air dealers. Here's a daytime street view grab. Much less of this in Boston, I agree. The blighted zones are epic in Philly.
I agree on many fronts but honestly the bad areas of Philly are worse, definately an area that Philly could improve upon relative to Boston
If Philly ever got its act together totally some areas of Camden actually could be attrective similar to areas in Jersey along the Hudson relative to NYC on much smaller scale but still has a long way to go...
I agree on many fronts but honestly the bad areas of Philly are worse, definately an area that Philly could improve upon relative to Boston
If Philly ever got its act together totally some areas of Camden actually could be attrective similar to areas in Jersey along the Hudson relative to NYC on much smaller scale but still has a long way to go...
That is, if all of Camden doesn't get demolished first.
Exactly. In terms of attractions, the area that I really see DC besting Boston and Philly on is the amount of museum attractions and monuments -- which is certainly not insignificant.
However, in terms of interesting neighborhoods/nabes and unique events, DC is not nearly as strong of a performer as Philly and Boston. That's not to say that DC doesn't have some really great and interesting neighborhoods, but there's more of an exciting, organic nature in Philly and Boston that is much harder to find in DC.
For example, you'd never find something like this in DC:
Of course you wouldn't because this event is a Philly thing. I can show you multiple events in DC that you wouldn't see in either city! No city does festivals, protest, marches and celebrations like DC.
Hmm...well how about the fact that Boston is 48 square miles, and Philadelphia is 135? I'm simply talking about leveling out the playing field a bit. I know Philadelphia's Mainline burbs are gorgeous and very safe. However if you're going to say it's "exactly as true for Philly as it is for Boston", then you're also mistaken since you've got a little wort called Camden sitting across the river.
I hate bringing stuff like that up, because I love Philly...as I've said in other threads it's either my second or third favorite city in the country. However, one department where Philadelphia has a tough time is crime. I think even most from Philadelphia will agree with me here.
You're absolutely right. The level of violent crime in some neighborhoods of Philly is downright insanity. I think the city is slowly but surely making progress, but it's so endemic to the culture in some areas that it's going to take tons of time and resources to make really dramatic improvements in the worst areas. Camden, unfortunately, has it really bad because it doesn't have anywhere near the kind of resources of a large city like Philly. It is an issue that still needs to be consistently addressed, though, no matter how stubborn the improvements may be. If New York can do it, so can Philly.
Still, as bad as crime is in some areas, the worst of it is by and large very isolated and "gang on gang." I don't say that in a way intending for Philly to be redeemed, but it does put it into perspective in terms of its impact on the average person -- or lack thereof.
You're absolutely right. The level of violent crime in some neighborhoods of Philly is downright insanity. I think the city is slowly but surely making progress, but it's so endemic to the culture in some areas that it's going to take tons of time and resources to make really dramatic improvements in the worst areas. Camden, unfortunately, has it really bad because it doesn't have anywhere near the kind of resources of a large city like Philly. It is an issue that still needs to be consistently addressed, though, no matter how stubborn the improvements may be. If New York can do it, so can Philly.
Still, as bad as crime is in some areas, the worst of it is by and large very isolated and "gang on gang." I don't say that in a way intending for Philly to be redeemed, but it does put it into perspective in terms of its impact on the average person -- or lack thereof.
I agree 100%. I hope they can corral the crime in those troubled areas, and I'm sure in time they will.
I don't think Philadelphia's crime would ever be a reason to not move there...heck I'm about to move to a city with a considerably worse crime problem than Philadelphia (São Paulo, Brasil). As it is with most cities, the crime is focused in certain areas and if you're not involved in shady business, odds are you won't ever be faced with any serious troubles in this department.
My previous post talking about the crime in Philadelphia was simply addressing one posters claim that the crime comparison between Philadelphia and Boston are basically a wash...and that's because they're not.
Unless you live in the ghetto, Boston is not that much safer than Philly. Thats the bottom line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmac9wr
I agree 100%. I hope they can corral the crime in those troubled areas, and I'm sure in time they will.
I don't think Philadelphia's crime would ever be a reason to not move there...heck I'm about to move to a city with a considerably worse crime problem than Philadelphia (São Paulo, Brasil). As it is with most cities, the crime is focused in certain areas and if you're not involved in shady business, odds are you won't ever be faced with any serious troubles in this department.
My previous post talking about the crime in Philadelphia was simply addressing one posters claim that the crime comparison between Philadelphia and Boston are basically a wash...and that's because they're not.
I agree 100%. I hope they can corral the crime in those troubled areas, and I'm sure in time they will.
I don't think Philadelphia's crime would ever be a reason to not move there...heck I'm about to move to a city with a considerably worse crime problem than Philadelphia (São Paulo, Brasil). As it is with most cities, the crime is focused in certain areas and if you're not involved in shady business, odds are you won't ever be faced with any serious troubles in this department.
My previous post talking about the crime in Philadelphia was simply addressing one posters claim that the crime comparison between Philadelphia and Boston are basically a wash...and that's because they're not.
I agree, T-Mac.
You simpy can't throw out certain undesirable neighborhoods and say that "they don't count": you take the bad with the good and make judgements.
North Philly, and parts of West Philly, are much worse than Roxbury, Dorchester and Mattapan, and as a result, Philly on the whole suffers a little bit by comparison.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
