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.
I would have no problem whatsoever meeting you and participating in this experiment. My only objection would be the use of friends - on both sides. That would almost seem like too much like a setup. For instance, either of us could tell one of our upstanding friends to dress differently or act differently to “fool” the other one. I’m not saying you would do that, but I just think the use of friends isn’t really fair.
I don't at all agree that it's not fair, though. The claim is that you can tell what people are like by the way they look. If that's true, you should be able to tell by whatever they look like, otherwise you're invalidating your own claim. It's also why I made a comment about myself. Sometimes I quite literally look like a bum when I go out.
Quote:
To make it as fair as possible, maybe we could do this in Newark, or Linden, or Roselle, etc. Somewhere where neither of us could use friends. I think using complete strangers is the only fair way to go. And I want to assure that I don’t “judge a book by its cover.” What I will do is ascertain the motives of someone as it pertains to their current environment.
The primary claim was that you can see someone and know they're a "scumbag", by which you said you meant that they're the type of person who would commit a crime given half a chance. That would be the main thing I'd test for.
I don't at all agree that it's not fair, though. The claim is that you can tell what people are like by the way they look. If that's true, you should be able to tell by whatever they look like, otherwise you're invalidating your own claim. It's also why I made a comment about myself. Sometimes I quite literally look like a bum when I go out.The primary claim was that you can see someone and know they're a "scumbag", by which you said you meant that they're the type of person who would commit a crime given half a chance. That would be the main thing I'd test for.
I think using friends would upset the “test environment.” Your friend could purposely or subconsciously dress down that day just to prove your point. Hence, the testing environment will have been tainted. Now doing this with total strangers ensures that there is no predetermined action on the part of the subjects.
As far as finding people who would fit this profile, believe me you will find plenty in Newark, Elizabeth, etc. There will absolutely be no shortage of subjects. But let me clarify, when I say “scumbag,” I’m not referring to someone who is struggling to get by or down on their luck, or even a drug addict, necessarily. I’m referring to someone who will commit a crime or do another bodily harm if given the opportunity. A true “bad” person, so to speak. And it’s my assertion that one with “instincts” can differentiate this type of person from someone who is down on their luck, but is still a decent person.
I think using friends would upset the “test environment.” Your friend could purposely or subconsciously dress down that day just to prove your point.
Yes, but that can't matter or you're negating your own claim.
Your claim is that just by looking at people, you can tell things like whether they're likely to commit crimes.
My claim was that just looking at someone is not sufficient for that.
Your claim wasn't something like, "Just by looking at someone, so long as they dress in x way, have y and z mannerisms, AND that is a normal way for that kind of person to dress and behave . . ."
One of my points was that people can appear to be the same "type" of person to you, yet in reality be very different from your typing.
So that someone could fool you is EXACTLY the point, and if you can't tell the kinds of things you say you can tell merely by looking at someone, then you're simply wrong. Or, you'd at least need to forward some kind of revised claim.
Yes, but that can't matter or you're negating your own claim.
Your claim is that just by looking at people, you can tell things like whether they're likely to commit crimes.
My claim was that just looking at someone is not sufficient for that.
Your claim wasn't something like, "Just by looking at someone, so long as they dress in x way, have y and z mannerisms, AND that is a normal way for that kind of person to dress and behave . . ."
One of my points was that people can appear to be the same "type" of person to you, yet in reality be very different from your typing.
So that someone could fool you is EXACTLY the point, and if you can't tell the kinds of things you say you can tell merely by looking at someone, then you're simply wrong. Or, you'd at least need to forward some kind of revised claim.
I’ll clarify it by saying this: I could not properly identify a bad guy in a crowd if he knew beforehand that this was my intention and decided to dress like a businessman that day.
In my opinion, Irvington is by far the worst. Simply stated, the city is a war zone, especially the eastern edge. It appears to me that as Newark struggles to clean up its act, its worst riffraff have relocated to Irvington. It's ungovernable. My heart goes out to the city's law-abiding citizens who are, for one reason or another, incapable of getting themselves and their kids out of there.
Elizabeth, Paterson, and Jersey City all have neighborhoods you'd be wise to avoid, but likewise, they also have neighborhoods that are very nice. Sometimes, those neighborhoods change quite quickly. (For example, I avoid North 5th Street in Paterson yet just four blocks away, North 9th Street is quite nice.)
Though Linden and Union City are far from crime-free, they really don't compare with the others on your list.
That's my opinion. Others may feel free to disagree.
I completely agree. Linden and Union City are nowhere near the same league as Irvington, not even close. JC, Elizabeth and Patterson have their rough areas, but also have decent ones as well, whereas Irvington, well, good luck finding even a decent street there.
MOST people have no idea how awesome Downtown JC is. Simple reason is, they haven't been here in the past 5-6 years. Things have changed DRASTICALLY. Most people in NJ wouldn't even know what is considered Downtown JC (Van Vorst, Paulus Hook, Hamilton Park, Harsimus Cove neighborhoods). They just think Hoboken is the coolest place ever (and it is if you're all about Suburbia, since Hoboken is 97% NJ suburban kids living in brownstones thinking that they are "livin' the city life").
Tell me more about the rejuvenation of downtown JC. What exactly did they do? Was it once a no go zone?
It was basically once an abondoned railyard/factory type place. Once Manhatten became way to over priced along with other outter boros Jersey City began popping up "luxury" condos given its proximity to NYC. Tommyc tends to get really excited over Downtown Jersey City , why? we have yet to figure that one out. Dont get me wrong its a great place to rent an apartment if you need an easy commute into NYC but other than that theres really nothing going on in the area (pretty quite at night). As for the "Drastic" changes over the past few years, well mainly they just built more condos and maybe opended a coffee shop or two to caiter to the yuppies buying the condos. So basically Downtown Jersey City is a commuters dream place but most of the people go into NYC or if your a college type person Hoboken for their fun. Oh and alot of the buildings on the water front are financial buildings that came over here from NYC, since most of the workers leave tehre around 5 or 6 it is probebly the reason why the area is kinda dull at night. Personally I like the otehr areas of JC, aside from the crime they have a much more "real city" type feel
Quote:
Originally Posted by eastwestman
Tell me more about the rejuvenation of downtown JC. What exactly did they do? Was it once a no go zone?
It was basically once an abondoned railyard/factory type place. Once Manhatten became way to over priced along with other outter boros Jersey City began popping up "luxury" condos given its proximity to NYC. Tommyc tends to get really excited over Downtown Jersey City , why? we have yet to figure that one out. Dont get me wrong its a great place to rent an apartment if you need an easy commute into NYC but other than that theres really nothing going on in the area (pretty quite at night). As for the "Drastic" changes over the past few years, well mainly they just built more condos and maybe opended a coffee shop or two to caiter to the yuppies buying the condos. So basically Downtown Jersey City is a commuters dream place but most of the people go into NYC or if your a college type person Hoboken for their fun. Oh and alot of the buildings on the water front are financial buildings that came over here from NYC, since most of the workers leave tehre around 5 or 6 it is probebly the reason why the area is kinda dull at night. Personally I like the otehr areas of JC, aside from the crime they have a much more "real city" type feel
Wow!!!! What a negative view of Downtown Jersey City. Could it use more nightlife? Yea, sure. Is it an urban bedroom community? Yea, for now.
Everything takes time & JC is well on its way.
Downtown is just a catalyst to the cities overall transformation.
I agree though, the rest of Jersey City is far more interesting than the yuppified Downtown section, But Downtown serves an important purpose.
Have you seen what they have proposed for the "new" Journal Square? What they are doing to the old Medical Center?
Yuppies = revenue & a solid tax base. Let them go to NYC all they want. Let their tax dollars fund more police patrols & improved infrastructure for the rest of JC.
If they are too scared to live in the rest of the city, good......... The rest of JC gets all the benefits without the gentrification. EVEN BETTER!!!!!
Life is a process & this is all a part of Jersey City's evolution.
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.
