New York's 6th Borough [Poll] (Hempstead, Yonkers: neighborhood, tax, moving)

[Fred314X]

Originally Posted by I'minformed2

Everyone from Syracuse westward would be dancing in the streets because we would leave you guys with Albany! You already own it anyways. That level of political importance comment is prime example of downstate ignorance of upstate.....North Dakota has a population of about 650k, there are far more people than that in Monroe County (Rochester) alone! ....Upstate NY (north of Orange/Putnam counties) has a population of over 6 million. We'd be a major swing state and probably some of the most heavily competed electorate votes in the country.

The 6th borogh of NYC is Albany.

You call it ignorance--but subtracting a third of the state's population would play havoc with your taxes. That's numbers, not ignorance.

How a loss like that would make New York a "swing state," if it isn't one now, just manages to pass understanding.

And as to that last comment, I'm afraid you're facing 180 degrees in the wrong direction. NYC does not, and has never, owned Albany. The state legislature has been historically hostile to NYC, to an extent that leads one to think they don't consider us a part of the state anyway. Evidently, you're right in line with their thinking.

If NYC was actually to secede, you'd be eating each and every word you wrote, I promise you. However, you're welcome to dance in the streets for as long as you like.

[I'minformed2]

That's a joke...where exactly do you think the big dogs in Albany are actually FROM? Almost all from Westchester, the 5 boroughs, or LI. Governor is from NYC, Senior Senator is from Long Island, junior senator will most likely be a manhattanite with NO credentials except a famous last name and who has never even been to upstate NY with the exception of her joke of a "tour" last week. Give me a break.

Suburban NYC (Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Westchester, and LI) may be screwing over the city of New York....but Upstate NY gets screwed over MUCH worse by downstate as a whole. NYC is a HUGE center of commerce for the whole world; no matter how high the taxes or cost of doing business or living there companies and people will always be MORE than willing to stay there. But those statewide mandated taxes and policies cripple upstate.

Albany is in the pocket of downstate ny, they can win No votes north of Westchester and still get elected, so who are they going to pander to?...again, it might as well be the 6th borough and they probably want to be.

[Dorian]

Originally Posted by Alex Libman

Bleh, more problems caused by government red tape... So goes NYC's hopes of staying competitive in the 21st century.

The NYC metro area would be better off if it seceded and became a state in its own right. There have been proposals for NYC secession in the past, though probably not for the whole 22+ mil mega-city involving counties from 3-4 separate states.

Other major cities in the U.S. should do that too, perhaps splitting California and Texas into several chunks. Illinois and Pennsylvania would particularly benefit from cutting out Chicago and Philadelphia, being otherwise conservative states. (Though I'm not sure what would be left of New Jersey and Maryland after the urban areas are taken out.)

All government is bad, but local government is less bad than a far-reaching centralized one because over time people can vote with their feet. Everyone would benefit from a civilized divorce: urban areas would get to keep more of their tax revenue, integrate with their immediate suburbs, get the social conservatives out of their hair, etc; and the more fiscally conservative areas would be able to cut down on the socialist spending they don't want.

That secession piece is very interesting. Before I read that I wouldn't of thought that one proposal would have been as recent as this year. If that would happen how many other areas do you think would go other than NYC and LI? Westchester? Parts of Jersey? Any of CT?

[passdoubt]

If you blindfolded somebody who'd never been across the river and dropped them off around Hamilton Park in Jersey City or Washington Street in Hoboken, they'd probably think they were in Manhattan or Brooklyn. Lots of attached rowhouses and brownstones. Active street life. Young yuppie folks about.

The same couldn't be said for Yonkers or anywhere in Nassau. Parts of Yonkers could pass for the Bronx-- the big boxy apartment buildings predominate. And Nassau looks like outer Queens of course, which is suburban-looking as well.

I guess it depends on what you think defines New York City... but as far as JC and Hoboken having some separate Jersey "vibe" which is different from NYC, I'm at a loss to what reasoning you're using to conclude that Greenwich Village is more culturally connected to Yonkers or Hempstead than it is to JC or Hoboken.

And if Manhattan really doesn't define NYC, then maybe we should be asking the opposite question: what parts of NYC should be given to Jersey? Maybe we give Manhattan below 96th Street, BK Heights, Park Slope, and Williamsburg over to NJ, 'cause they're not the "real" NYC anyway?

[Dorian]

Originally Posted by passdoubt

If you blindfolded somebody who'd never been across the river and dropped them off around Hamilton Park in Jersey City or Washington Street in Hoboken, they'd probably think they were in Manhattan or Brooklyn. Lots of attached rowhouses and brownstones. Active street life. Young yuppie folks about.

The same couldn't be said for Yonkers or anywhere in Nassau. Parts of Yonkers could pass for the Bronx-- the big boxy apartment buildings predominate. And Nassau looks like outer Queens of course, which is suburban-looking as well.

I guess it depends on what you think defines New York City... but as far as JC and Hoboken having some separate Jersey "vibe" which is different from NYC, I'm at a loss to what reasoning you're using to conclude that Greenwich Village is more culturally connected to Yonkers or Hempstead than it is to JC or Hoboken.

And if Manhattan really doesn't define NYC, then maybe we should be asking the opposite question: what parts of NYC should be given to Jersey? Maybe we give Manhattan below 96th Street, BK Heights, Park Slope, and Williamsburg over to NJ, 'cause they're not the "real" NYC anyway?

That's exactly how I feel, some parts of jersey feel like NYC to me, but maybe that is just me. I feel like some people in NYC say NJ is nothing like New York, but never really spend anytime in jersey, but assume it has nothing to offer and is nothing like NYC when the city effects the whole area.

[DITC]

Your logic is flawed. You basically state that because an area has brownstones and is yuppy, that it should be inside NY city limits. Why dont you annex downtown Boston too since that looks like Manhattan?

Manhattan is more connected to Yonkers and Nassau simply because people inside the city tend to look to the island or Westchester to move first, the same way people in the NJ cities of Newark, Jersey City, Elizabeth look to move out into the NJ suburbs.

People in Manhattan and Yonkers and Nassau are affected by the governor's taxing, Caroline Kennedy as a potential senator, etc. These issues do not affect NJ residents.

Please give up this useless argument.

Originally Posted by passdoubt

If you blindfolded somebody who'd never been across the river and dropped them off around Hamilton Park in Jersey City or Washington Street in Hoboken, they'd probably think they were in Manhattan or Brooklyn. Lots of attached rowhouses and brownstones. Active street life. Young yuppie folks about.

The same couldn't be said for Yonkers or anywhere in Nassau. Parts of Yonkers could pass for the Bronx-- the big boxy apartment buildings predominate. And Nassau looks like outer Queens of course, which is suburban-looking as well.

I guess it depends on what you think defines New York City... but as far as JC and Hoboken having some separate Jersey "vibe" which is different from NYC, I'm at a loss to what reasoning you're using to conclude that Greenwich Village is more culturally connected to Yonkers or Hempstead than it is to JC or Hoboken.

And if Manhattan really doesn't define NYC, then maybe we should be asking the opposite question: what parts of NYC should be given to Jersey? Maybe we give Manhattan below 96th Street, BK Heights, Park Slope, and Williamsburg over to NJ, 'cause they're not the "real" NYC anyway?

[openheads]

Originally Posted by passdoubt

If you blindfolded somebody who'd never been across the river and dropped them off around Hamilton Park in Jersey City or Washington Street in Hoboken, they'd probably think they were in Manhattan or Brooklyn. Lots of attached rowhouses and brownstones. Active street life. Young yuppie folks about.

The same couldn't be said for Yonkers or anywhere in Nassau. Parts of Yonkers could pass for the Bronx-- the big boxy apartment buildings predominate. And Nassau looks like outer Queens of course, which is suburban-looking as well.

I guess it depends on what you think defines New York City... but as far as JC and Hoboken having some separate Jersey "vibe" which is different from NYC, I'm at a loss to what reasoning you're using to conclude that Greenwich Village is more culturally connected to Yonkers or Hempstead than it is to JC or Hoboken.

And if Manhattan really doesn't define NYC, then maybe we should be asking the opposite question: what parts of NYC should be given to Jersey? Maybe we give Manhattan below 96th Street, BK Heights, Park Slope, and Williamsburg over to NJ, 'cause they're not the "real" NYC anyway?

Ehh, I hear what you are saying, but.................
The recent influx of white yuppies to Jersey City, Hoboken & the realization that NJ has a true urban core by the willfully ignorant does not change the fact that most of Jersey city is more culturally connected to Newark & its little boroughs (east orange, Irvinton) than it ever will too NYC.
A "mental barrier" has been created by, well, I won't name names, but you understand.

Elizabeth to North Bergen should be one big ass city. But being next to the biggest city in the country left no need for such a place.

These cities are all different, but share a common bond under NJ's urban core. Just like Ozone Park, Queens shares little with the Upper West Side, but still are willing to fall under that NYC umbrella.
Essex & Hudson are brothers. NJ & NY are cousins. Should it be that way???? I don't know. I guess that's provincialism for you.

[K.O.N.Y]

Originally Posted by passdoubt

If you blindfolded somebody who'd never been across the river and dropped them off around Hamilton Park in Jersey City or Washington Street in Hoboken, they'd probably think they were in Manhattan or Brooklyn. Lots of attached rowhouses and brownstones. Active street life. Young yuppie folks about.

The same couldn't be said for Yonkers or anywhere in Nassau. Parts of Yonkers could pass for the Bronx-- the big boxy apartment buildings predominate. And Nassau looks like outer Queens of course, which is suburban-looking as well.

I guess it depends on what you think defines New York City... but as far as JC and Hoboken having some separate Jersey "vibe" which is different from NYC, I'm at a loss to what reasoning you're using to conclude that Greenwich Village is more culturally connected to Yonkers or Hempstead than it is to JC or Hoboken.

And if Manhattan really doesn't define NYC, then maybe we should be asking the opposite question: what parts of NYC should be given to Jersey? Maybe we give Manhattan below 96th Street, BK Heights, Park Slope, and Williamsburg over to NJ, 'cause they're not the "real" NYC anyway?

Did u say we should consider what parts of nyc we should annex to new jersey? Thats ridiculous. A person blindfolded might think they are in manhattan, they just might. But once you actually take that person to manhattan than they'll know the differance. Any real new yorker knows that jersey has a differant vibe than nyc come on. U dont feel like your in new york till u get pass that lincoln tunnel or that GW. The real nyc is the five boroughs. Some of these transplants need to get their head out of manhattan. lol. Theres alot of nyc they need to discover

[Fred314X]

Originally Posted by K.O.N.Y

The real nyc is the five boroughs.

Quite literally! If it's not one of the five boroughs, then it isn't New York City, and fuhgeddabout everything else.

[riverdaleny]

New Jersey will never become NY'S 6th borough, its a state and jersey is not going to give up any of it, if anything it should be Nassau, or Westchester.