Nutley or Livingston (Newark, Clifton, Passaic: salons, crimes, how much)

[tahiti]

Originally Posted by kalim2008

With regards to your idea about "free thinking", is it "free thinking" to think the world is flat and ignore all the scientific data that points otherwise just because it suits your personal agenda? Is it "free thinking" to think GM always builds great cars because YOUR GM car runs ok, even though broad statistical evidence seems to show GM does not build as good a product as Toyota? Of course not. You're confusing personal bias and opinion with hard evidence based on statistical data.

aren't you the one who was looking to move to watchung but since NJ Monthly ranked Cranford higher, you're not going to move? and now you're pontificating about "free thinking"?

[kalim2008]

Originally Posted by tahiti

aren't you the one who was looking to move to watchung but since NJ Monthly ranked Cranford higher, you're not going to move? and now you're pontificating about "free thinking"?

1. My brother lives in Watchung, so we were looking there

2. We're still looking to move (whether Randolph, Watchung, etc, who knows), but WAITING since all indications are the market will be really bad by Fall/Winter 2008. Why waste our money now when I see the homes we are looking at dropping by $50k every couple months?

3. I'm moving NOT because of a ranking in a magazine or because of some anonymous poster's info, but because I liked the view up in the mountains.

[AnesthesiaMD]

Originally Posted by kalim2008

You're confusing personal bias and opinion with hard evidence based on statistical data.

I'm not confusing anything. I read REAL scientific studies on a daily basis. You are basing your "hard evidence" on flawed data. The statistics may even be correct, but the flaw is the weight given to each statistic. Therefor, if each statistic is given a particular value given by the magazine, then each statistic's importance is based on opinion, AND ONLY OPINION, making the study completely worthless. It seems that most people's opinions differ from the magazine's.
Also, it is not fair to compare two towns that are thousands of miles apart. Someone who works in the area, or has family in the area, or for whatever reason is in the area can choose between Livingston or Nutley, Irvington or Saddle River. They cannot choose between Livingston and Phoenix. So it is fair to look at property values in a given area to determine overall desirability. This is as plain as day. There is nothing that you can say to make anyone believe otherwise. There are people who have a different set of criteria, but we are looking for consensus, not the exceptions. If someone says, "I want an artsy town" or an "Urban atmosphere" then the suggestions will be different. If someone wants a suburb with good schools, and money isn't an issue, people will suggest the suburb with better schools. In some cases it is obvious, like this one. In others it is a little more difficult.

[kalim2008]

Originally Posted by AnesthesiaMD

I'm not confusing anything. I read REAL scientific studies on a daily basis. You are basing your "hard evidence" on flawed data. The statistics may even be correct, but the flaw is the weight given to each statistic. Therefor, if each statistic is given a particular value given by the magazine, then each statistic's importance is based on opinion, AND ONLY OPINION, making the study completely worthless. It seems that most people's opinions differ from the magazine's.
Also, it is not fair to compare two towns that are thousands of miles apart. Someone who works in the area, or has family in the area, or for whatever reason is in the area can choose between Livingston or Nutley, Irvington or Saddle River. They cannot choose between Livingston and Phoenix. So it is fair to look at property values in a given area to determine overall desirability. This is as plain as day. There is nothing that you can say to make anyone believe otherwise. There are people who have a different set of criteria, but we are looking for consensus, not the exceptions. If someone says, "I want an artsy town" or an "Urban atmosphere" then the suggestions will be different. If someone wants a suburb with good schools, and money isn't an issue, people will suggest the suburb with better schools. In some cases it is obvious, like this one. In others it is a little more difficult.

Firstly, you are COMPLETELY WRONG in saying that property values are the only factor when determining any town rankings. Watchung is significantly more expensive than Cranford, and yet many people might prefer Cranford over it because of the lively downtown in Cranford that is missing in watchung, or the fact that medical crews could probably get to Cranford homes much quicker than to the isolated Watchung homes. Again, only fools would limit themselves to looking at one factor in a complex environment. The more factors you can place into your model, the more accurately it will be able to predict the environment. You imply you are a researcher, and I'll note that I was one too (albeit my focus, molecular biology, did not do lots of statistics), so even you should know the importance of relying on more data rather than less.

Now....I agree that the the weighting of the data WILL affect the results, which is why i said they have to remain consistent in the data they use (which btw, are all hard data instead of being subjective) and the way they weight it. From what they say in their methodology though, it looks like they weighted everything equally, which obviously cuts down on any individual bias by any one researcher.

So, their list remains much more useful than any given opinion voiced by posters here, the reason being that it is based on hard numbers and not subjective and biased opinion, and considers many factors simultaneously (I already noted down why i think just depending on housing property values is nonsense in the real world). The weighting will affect the results, but equally weighting the indicators cuts down on problems here too.

The good thing about this project is that given their data and computer program one could dynamically create his/her own personal lists based on what THEY personally are biased for. One useful thing these researchers in the college could do would therefore be to create a website where people could manipulate the weighting based on their personal bias. Now that would be useful indeed.

[AnesthesiaMD]

It's only more useful if you happen to weigh everything equally, which NOBODY does. This makes for many variables. This makes for many false assumptions. Look, I really am not looking to get into this whole argument again. Once is enough.

As a scientist, I can tell you that no matter what you say, there is NO WAY to scientifically prove that one town is better than another. It is like trying to prove that green is better than red. It is like trying to prove that boxers are better than briefs. In fact, it is very hard to prove that ANYTHING is "better" than ANYTHING. It is too broad. I cant prove that Nexium is better than Prilosec. I can prove that Nexium has a specific quality that is more desirable than Prilosec. Or that Nexium is more efficacious at a specific action than Prilosec. THAT is provable, but to prove it is BETTER is impossible. There are going to be people out there that dont react well to Nexium but are fine with prilosec. To those people Prilosec is better. Better = Opinion PERIOD! An opinion CANT be proven.

[kalim2008]

Originally Posted by AnesthesiaMD

It's only more useful if you happen to weigh everything equally, which NOBODY does. This makes for many variables. This makes for many false assumptions. Look, I really am not looking to get into this whole argument again. Once is enough.

As a scientist, I can tell you that no matter what you say, there is NO WAY to scientifically prove that one town is better than another. It is like trying to prove that green is better than red. It is like trying to prove that boxers are better than briefs. In fact, it is very hard to prove that ANYTHING is "better" than ANYTHING. It is too broad. I cant prove that Nexium is better than Prilosec. I can prove that Nexium has a specific quality that is more desirable than Prilosec. Or that Nexium is more efficacious at a specific action than Prilosec. THAT is provable, but to prove it is BETTER is impossible. There are going to be people out there that dont react well to Nexium but are fine with prilosec. To those people Prilosec is better. Better = Opinion PERIOD! An opinion CANT be proven.

You ignored my jab at you about being foolish enough to think property values by themselves are sufficient to determine the desirability of a town. Here's other friendly jabs:

1. In any research it is possible to weight factors equally, assuming the factors are based on raw data. Personal bias has nothing to do with it.

2. You seem to be operating on a false assumption and basing the entire argument above on this false assumption....

Did I ever say it was possible to scientifically prove one town is better than the other? All I said was that their study is much more useful than the biased opinions of anonymous posters on an internet forum because it examines multiple factors and is based on hard data that can be manipulated statistically.

I also said that one way they can make it more useful would be to enable people to manipulate the weighting of the indicators against the data, thus PERSONALIZING the list for each person's biases. THIS POSSIBILITY ALONE is enough to make their study extremely useful, which is why I fight against anyone here who seems to so readily dismiss it and depend instead on the biased opinions of anonymous posters (some of whom may have hidden agendas).

[AnesthesiaMD]

...Sorry, not gonna bite. I'll let my posts stand on their own.

BTW, "Which is more useful" is another opinion.

[marymagda]

Originally Posted by Zarah19

Do research Livingston definitely. There was a study done in Nutley about how they really dislike new comers. People there are closed minded and in-breeds. Warning Caution Stay Away from Nutley!!

Nutley is one of the friendliest towns there are. Are there alot of third and fourth generation people from Nutley? Absolutely. Alot of us come back after living elsewhere but only because we are looking for a great place to raise our children. We want a hs that will prepare our children well for college. We want a place where our kids can ride their bikes and be safe. I wouldn't let my kids ride their bikes in Livingston. I drive in Livingston at night and I am scared to death. You can't even see street signs. In Nutley your kids are safe, everyone looks out for everyone else's children, there are a million activities from free summer camp, to every sport imaginable. A park every few blocks. There is a reason Nutley real estate holds it's value and people who live here know it. I know Livingston well and Nutley in my opinion is the better place to live. Somehow NJ Monthly got that right. Nutley was also ranked very high in Money magazines poll of best places to live. Again these polls are flawed for sure but somehow they got it right in this case.

[marymagda]

Originally Posted by AnesthesiaMD

It's only more useful if you happen to weigh everything equally, which NOBODY does. This makes for many variables. This makes for many false assumptions. Look, I really am not looking to get into this whole argument again. Once is enough.

As a scientist, I can tell you that no matter what you say, there is NO WAY to scientifically prove that one town is better than another. It is like trying to prove that green is better than red. It is like trying to prove that boxers are better than briefs. In fact, it is very hard to prove that ANYTHING is "better" than ANYTHING. It is too broad. I cant prove that Nexium is better than Prilosec. I can prove that Nexium has a specific quality that is more desirable than Prilosec. Or that Nexium is more efficacious at a specific action than Prilosec. THAT is provable, but to prove it is BETTER is impossible. There are going to be people out there that dont react well to Nexium but are fine with prilosec. To those people Prilosec is better. Better = Opinion PERIOD! An opinion CANT be proven.

I agree with you 100%. There is no scientific way and the magazines tend to portray these variables as concrete. Same with those best hs and college rankings. Of course they lucked out and got it right with this particular ranking but noone can argue with you that there are many subjective variables that go into the decision to choose a town.

[marymagda]

Originally Posted by kalim2008

You ignored my jab at you about being foolish enough to think property values by themselves are sufficient to determine the desirability of a town. Here's other friendly jabs:

1. In any research it is possible to weight factors equally, assuming the factors are based on raw data. Personal bias has nothing to do with it.

2. You seem to be operating on a false assumption and basing the entire argument above on this false assumption....

Did I ever say it was possible to scientifically prove one town is better than the other? All I said was that their study is much more useful than the biased opinions of anonymous posters on an internet forum because it examines multiple factors and is based on hard data that can be manipulated statistically.

I also said that one way they can make it more useful would be to enable people to manipulate the weighting of the indicators against the data, thus PERSONALIZING the list for each person's biases. THIS POSSIBILITY ALONE is enough to make their study extremely useful, which is why I fight against anyone here who seems to so readily dismiss it and depend instead on the biased opinions of anonymous posters (some of whom may have hidden agendas).

Hmmmmmm very good point. Hard to argue with that one.