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.
More top 100 lists by 18Montclair... yawn. I'd rather live in a state with one of the best public school systems in the country, and be able to live pretty much anywhere, in any county, and have my child receive a good education, than live in a state of 38.8 million people all vying to get their kids into 33 private schools in the top 100 in the country that will cost $25,000 a semester to send my kid to because the public school system in the state sucks.
Haha no, those are **PUBLIC** schools, and 38 million people vying for a spot in 33 schools is much better than 12 million people vying for a spot in just 2.
Haha no, those are **PUBLIC** schools, and 38 million people vying for a spot in 33 schools is much better than 12 million people vying for a spot in just 2.
#ouch
I guess you missed the links I posted where PA is among the 10 best public school systems in the country, where CA is among the 10 worst. What's the good of having 33 good schools when the rest sucks balls.
You can't compare raw numbers of NY'ers moving to Philly and vice versa. Cities are way different in size. You compare on a per capita basis. Philly is sending a far higher % of its population to NYC than the other way round. Anecdotally this is my experience seeing many friends leave for NYC over the years. The leadership here has to change, and the large inefficient public city workforce and heavy tax burden has to be changed. The wage tax here and now real estate costs (terrible money sucking public school system) are insidious.
Where is the proof? Please post a link. Until you do I have a hard time believing it.
And btw, Boston blows Philly away in millenials. Every statistic showing change in Philadelphia is all relative to the city itself. Once stacked up against other cities, it is left lacking.
[/i]
When it comes to college-educated young people, Philadelphia is doing extraordinarily well. This discussion of grads leaving for "greener pastures" is extremely outdated. In fact, between 2000-2012, the college educated young adult population grew significantly faster in both percentage and raw number terms in the Philly area versus the Boston area (and the San Francisco area, for that matter).
As I've said in another post to you--there are certainly things that Philadelphia can definitely improve, but it is definitely closer to being on the right track than it has been in many years.
Simple. I live here and I run into them all the time. They just can't accept no one really is interested in this city but them. Go anywhere in the country and ask young people if they want to move to Philly. Laugh in your face is what you will get.
Was so funny on the local news a month or so ago to see a local tv reporter in Rome asking Europeans if they want to visit Philly. Couldn't find one single person to say yes. When asked the answers were Boston, DC, NYC, SF, LA etc etc.
Philadelphia has loads of no go areas and is quite a blue collar city with a high poverty level.
Yet Philadelphia is more White Collar than the majority of US cities. In fact, Philadelphia would probably have a lower poverty rate if it did have more blue collar jobs. Does it hurt constantly being wrong?
"White Collar" job percentages per metro
San Jose - 48.49%
Boston - 45.45%
San Francisco - 45.06%
Philadelphia - 40.29%
New York City - 39.45%
Atlanta - 38.52%
Chicago - 36.92%
Los Angeles - 35.75%
DC's housing prices were not always anywhere near this high. Go look at figures for the 1980's and 1990's. Their housing has taken off in the last decade. The Fed Govt has been in DC forever, so you can't refute that.
Back in the 80's the national debt was 900 Billion dollars. Today it's 18 Trillion. I Hope Washington DC is enjoying their newfound ivory castle, live it up, dont worry about tomorrow.
You have to realize DC's insanely high housing market is directly tied to the Federal Government right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom77falcons
Bottom line is, which Philadelphians have difficulty grasping, is that the city is not really on the radar for jobs and opportunities. Companies don't want to come here because of the workforce and tax structure. How many Wharton grads stay here and create startups? Boston, DC, Houston, SF etc are becoming more desirable, while Philly just slowly plugs along being left behind.
I agree with your point regarding Philadelphias ridiculous Business Tax structure but despite that issue Center City Philly is certainly not being left behind or plugging along. I can only assume you havent been in Center City the past couple years, its a thriving incredibly vibrant place to live and work.
Why Philadelphia Beats Boston in Retaining College Grads
More than 60 percent of Philadelphia graduates said they want to stay in the region after they graduate, higher than Boston’s 50 percent and Baltimore’s 38 percent.
You're really trying to hard to skew things in your direction without any real base. Philadelphia and Chicago have very similar costs of living but Chicago doesn't have any land to build on to the East due to Lake Michigan. Boston does have a housing shortage, which increases prices a bit, but that's not due to a of lack of buildable land.
As I noted in another post, however, zoning and environmental restrictions (e.g., building on wetlands) do play a huge role in limiting housing supply. And yes, this does included sensitive coastal areas. I don't quite understand why the notion that a city being next to a coast does, in some fashion, limit housing supply is being so dismissed. Cities like Boston and SF are also very structurally dense as it is, which makes development opportunities scarce.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmac9wr
Boston's economy is healthier than Philadelphia's, is growing faster, and has greater future prospects. This always goes a long way in increasing desirability. This is the main driver in the disparity of the cost of living.
Boston is definitely a fantastic growth period right now, as tech and biotech--for which Boston is an enviable magnet--is having its moment.
But I think you may be under-estimating the fundamentals of the Philly area to also become more globally competitive in the future (not that I blame you, I think the assets of the city are still largely unknown to people). But the synthesis between the city's cultural institutions, academic research/growth (although Boston's universities are more renowned, large institutions like Drexel and Temple in Philly, I believe, are incredibly under-appreciated), and a prime urban core all absolutely play to Philly's favor for long-term growth. That's not to say Boston will somehow become less competitive, but I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that Philly's economy will gradually "catch up" with Boston's over the coming years.
^I don't really understand your motive but you are derailing this thread pretty far.
In terms of these 3 cities, they each have their defining economies with the bay being the tech mecca, boston being one of the leaders in higher education in the entire world, and Houston being one of the major energy capitals of the world. In terms of "importance" I probably give it to Houston. We need our energy. All 3 are known for being innovative places. Oh and Houston has a boat load of companies that are growing rapidly (Texas is important), and if that got really screwed up, I feel our country might be in a bit of trouble.
For comparisons sake, Houston area is home to 46 fortune 1000 companies, SF 24, San Jose 31, Boston 23, Philadelphia 26, NYC 114, Atlanta 27. Thought that was kind of interesting.
You can't compare raw numbers of NY'ers moving to Philly and vice versa. Cities are way different in size. You compare on a per capita basis. Philly is sending a far higher % of its population to NYC than the other way round. Anecdotally this is my experience seeing many friends leave for NYC over the years. The leadership here has to change, and the large inefficient public city workforce and heavy tax burden has to be changed. The wage tax here and now real estate costs (terrible money sucking public school system) are insidious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RightonWalnut
Where is the proof? Please post a link. Until you do I have a hard time believing it.
Hilarious what I just stumbled upon while reading PhillyMag:
"As mentioned earlier, Philly's metro-to-metro inbound mobility proved in large part to be dominated by New Yorkers, with up to 26,957 per year moving to the Greater Philadelphia Metro during that time.
Greater New York, meanwhile, took in an estimated 19,336 movers from our area."
Hilarious what I just stumbled upon while reading PhillyMag:
"As mentioned earlier, Philly's metro-to-metro inbound mobility proved in large part to be dominated by New Yorkers, with up to 26,957 per year moving to the Greater Philadelphia Metro during that time.
Greater New York, meanwhile, took in an estimated 19,336 movers from our area."
You do realize that 19k from a city of 1.5M is a far greater percentage than 27k from a city of 8M. To be equivalent, NYC would have to send over 100k people here annually. Do you get it now?
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.
