What's the deal with Staten Island? (New York, Chester: appointed, best neighborhoods, foreclosures)

[nyc0127]

Originally Posted by Marc Oh!

You're right, but I haven't just been there a few times. I have very good friends there who are like a second family to me and I spend alot of time there. I know people from SI are a little different, but I like it there. I feel at home being in any Italian neighborhood I guess.



When your neighborhood turns to crap and it's not as safe to walk down the street anymore, I'd say you're being pushed out. I've seen it happen my whole life. You can't blame white people for wanting to get out of those situations. For example, my grandmother's neighborhood turned pretty bad. 5 years before she moved out, my father advised her to get out while she still could, when it was all starting and the neighborhood was changing. She waited until the neighborhood was completely in ruins and sold her house for a mere 60K, then finding herself with a new mortgage exponentially higher than that.

It's cute that you think Staten Island is an ''Italian neighborhood'' (yet it's a suburb). One thing about assimilation that Samyn on the Green and I discussed, means cultural death. That indirectly means no matter what ethnicity you come from, you really are no longer are apart of one (unless you're an old lady living in your own world or a history major with no friends).

Were your friends who you consider your second family on the south shore? Maybe not. Would have you had such a close connection if they weren't good people? I doubt it. When you live in a place, you see both good and bad. Normally, when you have an optional connection you only see the good.

Who said such neighborhoods they lived in were becoming unsafe? Who said the places they were coming to weren't going to eventually turn out being the same way? Typically, the higher population destiny you have in a major city, crime may come along with it. This is a good representation for why I said people exaggerate about the crime of New York City. It's not all that bad.

The reason why the non-affluent Brooklyn white catholic's left to come to SI (especially the south shore) was due to economical reasons. It may sound prejudice on there behalf, but they wanted to live around there ''own kind.'' The north shore was more diverse. It was more economically competitive because the population denstiy was higher. They weren't going to move what was up to an hour (cars went slower) 40 years ago if they weren't going to get a decent home. They didn't know what to expect from Nassau, the north shore of Staten Island or places where ''there people'' weren't going.

How do you know your grandmother wasn't bias or exaggerative? Just because she's your grandmother doesn't make her noble. When your father meant it was ''changing'', maybe it went more beyond crime indexes. Maybe it meant the level of expense. Maybe it meant racial diversity and immigration. I know you wouldn't tell that half of the story. With all due respect, if she sold her house for 60K than the house probably wasn't all that desirable. Philadelphia has a horrible real estate market. People in New York City who would have that same house would have gotten 600K because of it's geography.

Because she'd old may mean she was in debt. She may have taken an equity line on her house that you haven't discussed. She may have not had the money to fix up problems in the home. Getting out would have been an economic-based decision. She really only had two options. One, sell it at top dollar and rent a nice apartment in a better part of the city or a suburb (or live with a relative). Or two, disregard economics and stay in her neighborhood. Considering that wasn't in her interests, her losses were due to her having bad luck financially. You shouldn't blame that on the entirety of the neighborhood.

[samyn on the green]

It is a sign of intelligence when two people that started on the wrong foot could find common ground. You made some valid points in your posts. I have too admit that I have been in situations where Italian Americans have made complete fools out of them selves in public. Perhaps being immersed in that situation could create some long term anger dealing with louts day after day.Too much much of anything is never good.

That being said I have only been off the highway trice in Staten Island but they where all positive experiences. Once I went to a party on Todt hill and another time I helped someone move and once in the 1980's my Mom went to a bridal shower. Other than that it is the way to the outerbridge crossing from Brklyn/Queens to Philly. The people I know from there work on Wall street and seem like decent people.


The conclusion we have arrived to is that Staten Island may be a place for New York working class whites that want to be around New York working class whites. In this huge world and huge metro area I think there is room for a place like this.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

Next I'll respond to samyn on the green. From the way you're speaking, I can tell you have a personal bias towards liking Staten Island. I'm not saying you live there, but you may have some kind of connection you are fond of. I have seen Staten Island education. Truthfully, I was only in New Jersey education for about the last two years. I lived in Florida (Tampa area) for about 2 1/2 years too. I went through 4 high schools (including technical high schools and 3 states). I had to take several state exams (in which I passed all).

[nyc0127]

Originally Posted by SeventhFloor

just to clarify things......one race doesnt destroy a neighborhood - black, white, etc.

its more who's poor and who's not poor.

because as much as u can go to any projects in nyc and see a lot of black people, u can go somewhere in the deep south and see the white trash trailer park types as well, without a pot to **** in.

so lets get it clear - the only color that really matters in the world is green....

We both aren't perfect. I don't feel like blabbing on about stupid insults we attempt to make at eachother about abbreviations or grammar.

One thing about any ethnicity's culture dates back to it's immigration days. The closest you can get to that is the enclave in which your ancestors descend from. In Bensonhurst, Italians have that. In South Philadelphia, Italians have that. All over the country, individuals have this. Even in the suburbs, like Bristol (PA) or Cinnaminson (NJ) represent the ''old world.'' You are not from Brooklyn. You've entered as an outsider. You could be who ever you want there and you'll never naturally be apart of that society. It's not so much about being of Italian descent, but rather having a common history with the population.

I'm in the same boat as you when it comes to Italian ethnicity. I have no parents nor grandparents born in Italy. There culture is historically different. There current status is. There identity is only there if it's by choice. Usually, the attempt is pitiful because the people who tend to take the most interest in there heritage are economically behind. They use it as a compensation for something they don't have. If educated individuals chose to do this it would be nice, but they usually take much less interest in this kind of stuff.

For blacks, they have a ''racial'' identity. Racial construction existed in a manner that allowed it to exist for generations. Do they represent any African culture though? Very rarely. Yes, I would tell Russians they aren't Russian. I would tell Puerto Ricans they aren't Puerto Rican (in fact, in one of my recent posts I did). Most Russians are mixed (it's hard having an ethnicity if you are full, if you're mixed you have no hope). Many of the Russians (especially in major cities) who aren't mixed are Jewish. They tend to lie on Jewish culture more than do Russian culture.

When I say racial construction, I mean physical. America got more educated during the post WWII era. However, they lost much of their individualism. Before this era, people had more culture. People thought more freely. People thought with there minds. During the post civil rights era, Americans think with there eyes. If you look different, you are different. If you look the same, you are the same. Americans brains are their eyes. Why do you think there intellects and levels of creativity are as low as they are?

As I said before, if you can't take good out of your ethnicity, why believe it exists? The best thing that has come of Italian heritage in this country is the Italian food. That is a societal aspect though. From time to time, it could be individual. It's a culinary skill. During the time of Italian immigration, people wanted to only eat from them. It's similar to how people would want Chinese food from Chinese people or Mexican food from Mexican people. In a few decades, don't be surprised if Chinese food is being more commonly cooked by whites and blacks.

All groups destiny is to bust out of economic poverty. The only groups who are economically behind for reasons that don't involve immigration are African-Americans. From time to time, the media will stigma Americans to believe in a tag-team method of saying ''Black and Hispanic.'' Truthfully, if people of Latin American background weren't immigrants, they wouldn't be economically behind. That is why the term Hispanic was created by the government in 1970. No one ever teaches you about that though.

They created that term so they could invisibly fund programs like ''Financial Aid'', scholarships, work-visa programs or anything that is favorable to immigrants. This speeds up the process of immigrants children success. This is why it's common to see the children of Mexican immigrants in California own 750 thousand dollar southern California homes. America disregards U.N. migration quotas regarding how many people could move from place to place. Mexico has too many people. They also have too many printed out dollars and not enough healthy resources for their citizens. Americans love continue to grow their population and could care less of the intelligence of the immigrants (usually the poorest come).

Honestly, people don't even realize it half the time, but legal immigration kills socialized programs that could enhance the lives of Americans in poverty (i.e. Universal health care, paid community college). The U.S. is in trillions of dollars in debt primarily due to the war in Iraq. This kills economic possibilities. Americans would rather expand it's population because it expands the economic power of our country. It also helps compensate for the decreasing military population (more citizens = more soldiers). As we saw in Hurricane Katrina, many of our citizens suffered. Citizens who's ancestors never even voluntarily chose to live on the Western Hemisphere. Yet, America would rather selfishly add to it's economic dynamism than care about human beings.

As far as south street goes, the revenue they accumulate is undeniable. I doubt most college students leave the campus (especially at night). If they do, they're probably in a car going somewhere no where near those horrible neighborhoods.

As far as gun laws go, more of the citizens do follow the law than don't. The amount of guns circulating would decrease. It would make it a nuisance on the criminals to create mischief. I'm not saying they'll stop, but it could be a start by creating similar gun laws to NY and NJ.

I believe your ideology on every white person having Italian or Irish in Philadelphia is either bias or senseless. I do agree that the majority are catholic (by title at least). However, the 1.2 percent it is represents something. Philadelphia may not represent the ethnic or cultural diversity New York does, but it is equally black and white. Philadelphia is 6% Jewish. Philadelphia has some Muslims. It is about 1/10 Latin American (about 6% Puerto Rican).

I'm not saying Philadelphia is iconic for racial harmony. I'm just saying that whites are prone to living with blacks (and visa versa). Hypothetically, if you were a bigot, and preferred isolation from people who don't look like you, you'd rather be black in Philadelphia. There are neighborhoods and schools that are entirely black. There are schools with over a thousand children where ever single child is black. Most of West Philadelphia is black. If you're a white bigot, you may get a block or two, but never a neighborhood. Usually the neighborhoods that tend to be less black (like Northeast Philly), tend to be more ethnically (Latin Americans and Asians) and religiously (Jews and Muslims) diverse.

Once again, if you want to believe the Italian ethnicity exists, you might be able to scrap out something. Don't try with Irish. You're only destroying your integrity regarding ethnic imagery. Unlike Italians, who think they're Italian to whites, and white to non-whites, people of Irish descent don't even have that. Even white people (including themselves) have no ethnic identity.

Why do you think South Philly is not black? I swear to god, nothing is more irritating. It's like people think there is an Italian ring off ''South Philly.'' Philadelphia may be more Italian descended place in the city, but they're not the dominating ethnicity. It's safe to say that African-Americans (as one group) are the leading ethnicity in every single neighborhood (average or bad) in Philadelphia. South Philadelphia is 1/3 black. I know there are racial cliques within that. It doesn't mean they don't live on the same blocks and attend the same high schools though.

They must be muttering the ''N'' word a lot, considering 1/3 of 10 percent of their city is African-American. 2.7% of south Philadelphia is also multi-racial (which is more than double of the city's normal rate - even though it's less black and has few Asians). It's not like these whites have the money to isolate themselves either, so from the way you make it sound, they really are screwed.

Why when you say ask ''someone'' in the Northeast, you subsequently meant a white person? The Northeast isn't all that white. Most of it isn't all that pretty. It is diverse. It has many Asians, Latin Americans and other immigrants. People in New York City (especially Staten Island and parts of Brooklyn), in that they over-hype Russian immigration. Get one hundred people and count how many are Russian immigrants. Get one hundred people and count how many are from Asia or Latin America. I agree that the blackest areas in Philadelphia usually turn out being the most dangerous. As you said it's reality, not racism.

I agree with your feeling about Mayor Street. He's a horrible mayor. I'm sure Philadelphia is happy to get rid of him. If you're a mayor of a city that is rated the ugliest city in America, than something is really wrong. For as many problems as New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin, he even called Philadelphia a filthy city. Philadelphia is a city that is going bankrupt. He could care less for blacks in his city that are suffering. Instead, he's rather take pictures less in the declaration of independence center (pretending he's Thomas Jefferson - yeah it sounds pathetic) less than a half a mile away.

Just because he's black, doesn't mean all black mayors suck though. The same thing applies to white mayors. It's about the person you are. African-Americans do have a united political structure in Philadelphia though. They have the power to get African-Americans like Michael Nutter dominated on the Democratic ticket (the only party that can win there).

Blacks and whites do many of the same jobs there. 73% of that city can't afford to get past the 40's in salary. I understand more of it's black, but much is white too. Septa bus drivers make below average to mediocre money. For as black as the MTA is, SEPTA is much more black. The white-collared employees are definitely more white (or just non-black). However, most of Philadelphia's white collared force is supplied by Burlington, Camden and Bucks county. The blue-collared jobs are usually in too high demand for less affluent suburbs (Gloucester, New Castle and Delaware county) to get.

My point on bringing up the situation with Geno's wasn't to prove my knowledge of Philadelphia. It was to show you that Geno is a stubborn fool who depends on people to eat from him. Have you seen the location in where it is? It's in one of the most cruddy environments possible. I do agree that many whites eat there, but tourists?

People who are know the area might (which one explain why half of them have clubs on there streering wheels). White tourists would be frightened to walk through such a filthy neighborhood. The last time I was there, all I heard were barking dogs, saw miserable people and cruddy sidewalks. It smelled horrible too (why do those subways that blow up that much steam through those sewers?).

He has good food, but not that good. Quite frankly, the guy actually is plain stupid. He said violently that he started with six dollars in 1966. How could that be possible? Six dollars back than might be 20 now. Doesn't rent cost more than that? Or an oven? Supplies? A licenses? Employees? He also called it a multi-millionare dollar business (it's one place - the value may be a million - not millions). I've never heard of something so ridiculous nor hilarious in my life.

If you love the non-ghetto parts of Philly, you must be in a desert seeing mirages. The best neighborhood in Philadelphia could be criminally average in New York (it would have to be wealthy and low-populated too). The worst New York City's crime has been in recent memory was when the homicides were over two-thousand in the early 90's. If Philadelphia has the same population than New York, they'd still have more than 400 homicides in 2006. When was the last time Philadelphia has less homicides than days in a year?

Philadelphia has unique culture, but horrible infrastructure (kind of like Staten Island). Most of the people who are in love with Philly live in the suburbs (especially the Cherry Hill area), because they can appreciate the good of it and ignore the bad. They put the on anything they can get their hands on. I'm still trying to figure out if the Eagles pay them, or they are just that in love with the Phillies and Eagles.

For the ones who cowardly left Philadelphia, they go unnoticed. Their voices is little. There racism wouldn't be tolerated in the suburbs. They may be able to afford Delaware county, but look at it. It may as well be a garbage dumb. The only nice places in Delaware and Chester cost a decent amount of money. More streamline places to go within Pennsylvania are Bucks and Montgomery.

Truthfully, if there was no media, NYC and Philadelphia would be equally as racist. Philadelphia may be worst because some poor people feel the need to create social stigmas. During the Civil Rights Movement, Philadelphia had really bad riots. NYC were more timid. Both cities are still be on the higher end of racism for America. Philadelphia is just a more integrated (for black and white) city than most cities are. Sadly, it's because most of both races are peasants (yeah, I know it sounds means). They don't have the means to residentially isolate themselves.

The New York media eggs on racism though. They want their citizens to be racist. The Philadelphia media picks its moments from time to time, but they tend to keep a lower profile to these kinds of situations. I don't think there media cares for which path their citizens choose. In New York City, most whites are educated and advanced. Where as in Philadelphia, most whites are poor and less educated.

South Philadelphia is not a place of Italian ancestry. It's a multi-ethnic influential area. Philadelphia is 6.7% Italian, so if it was double to triple of that, it may seem like they have more of a face. Philadelphia is 42% black. South Philadelphia is 33%. Get 100 human beings and count how many are Italian and how many are black. Even if the Italian ethnicity wasn't as diluted (mixed) or socially divided, it would still be more African-American.

As you described in your last paragraph, if it's this ''racism'' that keeps these neighborhoods from being a crime-riddled ghetto, than is it really worth living in? The drug usage rates on the south shore are fact (no matter how you see it). Basically, to you, there are two worlds you can raise your family in. A place with a racist backbone that has high drug-usage or the real world which your families future generations will live in (normal suburbs that are mostly white and college educated - AKA New Jersey).

Bensonhurst may not be all dangerous, but it's not as ''Italian'' as you think. Lastly, you completely contradicted yourself. South Philadelphia is a dangerous place where people commonly get shot dead. I wouldn't be surprised if the the crime-index of whites in south Philadelphia is more than blacks nationwide.
Even the crime-index of the south shore is above the normal American percentage in a city that isn't all that dangerous. If you'd rather raise your child a bigot in the fake world just to have a little ''flavor'', than maybe you're the one using the south shore kid's doobie.

[nyc0127]

To seventh floor, my last post wasn't to you. I accidentally clicked the quote mark on your page, rather than the Philly guy's. I completely agree on what you said. I think it's pathetic that people care for black and white. The more educated we get though, the more of individual people we become. That makes people less reliant on generalizing themselves. Within black and white, there will always be good and bad.

Green is the only color that determines what kind of life you'll live in capitalism. It's sad that it is that way, but it's important to know that's the world we live in.

[nyc0127]

Samyn on the Green, I'm glad we made good progress on finding common ground in this situation. There is good and bad to know about Staten Island. I'm sure who has ever kept up with these posts over the last few days may have gone from knowing nothing to too much. To most throughout the large metro area, that is all Staten Island really is.

Although Staten Island is the place for ''working class'' whites, much of this society is changing. I disagree with the conclusion you came to. It would be nice for there to be a place for the ''working class whites'', but it shouldn't matter what ethnicity or color you are. They always shouldn't be as hostile or in denial of the reality of the culture they live in. Staten Island has 491,000 people. It's not designated for an individual of any color, nor any occupation or educational status.

We are all know who we are on here though. Most of us who have been writing on here are likely white with white-collared aspirations. This web-site is designed to give you a feel for a place by relating one's personal experiences mixed with facts. Staten Island doesn't relate to most of the world. Most whites in the NYC area are not working class. Most non-white civil service workers don't want to endure this kind of prejudice. Therefore, how much of the overall population's interests does Staten Island (the south shore especially) really fit? Not a whole lot. That is the total conclusion we have come to.

[MattSiggs]

Sure, you didn't ask for me to respond, but this is an internet forum. People are going to respond to you. A forum post isn't a job application; I don't need to know the requirements.

I'm 19 years old. I attend the Macaulay Honors College at the College of Staten Island. I only attacked your grammar because you were bashing the anti-intellectual crowd, yet your typing was stereotypical of the said crowd.

I don't think you got my point. I said I hated hypocrisy. Your grammar made it seem as if you weren't very bright, yet you were bashing the anti-intellectual crowd. See the hypocrisy there? I only hate when idiots call other people idiots.

I'm an English major. I can't help it. I realize you're not perfect, neither am I, but you should at least make the attempt at cohesive paragraphs and grammar. I read over my posts to ensure that my point gets across in an understandable, intelligent way. Perhaps you should do the same.

See, here's your problem. You're putting facts on the table that aren't facts all. You made blanket statements and gave some weird history of the island. People, like mead and syman, have proven your facts wrong and have shown that some of your opinions have no basis or logic behind them. Deliver the facts all you want, but you should make sure they're correct first. People have shown you that Richmond County is the fastest growing county in New York. Obviously, people are getting involved with Staten Island and are liking it. Your ghetto analogy doesn't hold any water. No other suburbs want anything to do with Staten Island because people like you uphold myths that aren't true. We're not all dumb, we're not all on drugs, and we don't all have fake tans.

As I said before, outsiders are coming to Staten Island. I'll admit the South Shore can get a little too Soprano-esque, but as long as you stay above the Korean War Vets Parkway(Great Kills, Bay Terrace), it's not that bad.

I'll tell you why it's great for the middle class. It has an urban touch as well as a suburban one. I can walk to a deli, yet I can still go to bed in peace and quiet. If I want the extreme urban taste, I'll take the ferry to Manhattan. If I want that suburban feel, Jersey isn't that far away. I don't have any polls, but I think the mixed feel of the borough is what attracts the middle class and working class to it.

You're forgetting how important the sanitation workforce is, and perhaps the main reason why it's so large. Snow. Who plows and salts the whole city? You guessed it, the garbagemen you despise. Suppose they should shift to a private force. Could you imagine how much it would cost to have a private company handle a blizzard?

Where on earth did you get Monmouth County from? What evidence do you have to suggest that the educated on Staten Island moved to Monmouth county? I've been here for 19 years of my life. I went to Tech, a bastion for the educated. Not once did I hear, "Oh, my family is moving out to Monmouth County where all the smart people are." And yes, a lot of parents didn't hold city jobs. I don't even know one person who has moved to Monmouth County.

I think your posts would be given more credence if you wrote less. Be succinct. It helps your argument along better.

[nyc0127]

I'm not saying you shouldn't respond (although it'd be nice if you fully read what you were responding to). We both are the same age and have a brain. I go to a community college just like yourself (mainly because it's cheaper - probably going to Rowan or Rutgers in a 1 1/2 years). I'm not going to go over each and every sentence over and over. I definitely go over the content though. I know my grammar isn't perfect. In comparison to most others on here, I'm not all that bad.

We aren't on here to talk as if we are teachers. I have put many facts out on the table. I should do a better job at separating the facts from my opinion though. I have had a habit of mixing them together. I've relied too much on people's ability to decipher information on here. It's not like there is a clear understanding of the intelligence of the crowd I'm speaking to.

Mead and syman didn't prove all that much to me. Through arguing, syman and I have come to a common understanding. We both came to the common understanding that Staten Island is a lower-middle class (or working class) place that is heavily of civil-service oriented whites. There was a post on here that stated that the central and southern parts of Staten Island were ''affluent''. You can't be affluent without enhancing the education, economics and individualism of a society. For someone to tell people who are considering moving to the south shore of Staten Island that it's affluent is purely bias ignorance. I felt the need to step in to put things into perspective.

The guy who I gave credit for proving something to me was neonwattagelimit. I didn't know how many people lived in Staten Island in 1960. I said I went with biased hearsay. I'm glad he brought that to my attention. I like to know as much correct information as I possibly can. Just because I was wrong about the 1960 demographics doesn't refute my argument about the class of Staten Island.

The income map that was shown to me didn't prove anything. I explained that Staten Island was a streamline suburb. It lacks the immigration or population density that upper Manhattan (above 96th street) and the Bronx have. It lacks the large fertility rates. More women have careers. However, no one ever showed me a comparison of Nassau, Monmouth or Westchester counties. They couldn't, because it's factual (and common knowledge) that Staten Island is behind the suburban New York world.

Technically, it may be the fastest growing country though? That's the better question is why? The reason why it's fastest growing it because it much open land. Much of the increasing population is due to immigration. No one who is better than Staten Island moves there. Most people who move are lower middle-class immigrants (Russians, Dominicans, Chinese) move to places like south beach, Port Richmond and Clifton. Most Americans that move were formerly lower-middle class in the environment they use to reside in. When we moved out of Staten Island, we sold our house to a white cop from Brooklyn. Moving to Staten Island may get them closer to middle class, but it doesn't mean they're getting a better life (socially, intellectually).

Find people who move from North Jersey, Connecticut or Long Island. It's not common. People who are better or on the same page want nothing to do with SI. Count how many people on your block were born in Brooklyn. Than count how many were born in Monmouth or Middlesex counties. Moving to Staten Island would probably be even more economical for those from other suburbs than it would be to lower-middle class inner-city residents.

The facts I'm showing about Staten Island are true. There is even more I haven't discussed (such as people getting crammed into over-expensive small town-house communities). The drug-usage is very high. The foreclosure rates are high. Staten Island doesn't have the ability to tax. They get stiffed on a lot of New York City tax (the amount of money they receive is disproportional to their population to this city - i.e. the bad pot holes). You like to brag about ''low crime'' (Why don't you compare it to ''suburbs'' such as Westchester?). You consider it both urban and suburban, yet you only like to compare to urban places so it doesn't look so bad. Isn't that bias?

I know not everyone one is on drugs or has fake tans. However, if you take one hundred people in an affluent suburb and one hundred from Staten Island, they'll be more people on Staten Island who are. The affluent suburban kids need to cut it out because they are put on a higher esteem (graduating from good universities). Where as for a south shore kid on drugs, the worst case scenario is the NYPD (it used to be a not as bad life - not it'd be lucky if it was mediocre). Although not all individuals have problems on SI, the infrastructure and reputation is below-average to most NYC suburbs. That is undeniable.

I'm saying that all of you can do better than Staten Island. For who is on Staten Island, try to make the best of it. Why settle for a place that has as many problems as it does? I do agree that if you do settle for the below-average suburb of Staten Island, than staying above the Korean War Vets parkway is preferable.

What's great for the middle-class though? Aren't you the one who's basing on opinion now (a bias one considering you live on Staten Island and go to CSI). Even samyn on the green would likely disagree with that. He said it's the place for the working-class (lower middle-class) whites. Just because it's normal to be a working-class white in Staten Island doesn't make it middle class. It's normal to be a construction worker in the Bronx who can't afford real estate, yet that isn't middle class.

Staten Island has more of a suburban touch than an urban touch. The only people who have remained an urban touch are on the north shore. It used to be a semi-urban enclave that partly transformed into a suburb. There are urban aspects to it (i.e. apartment buildings). The south shore descends mostly from Brooklyn (a real city element - not semi-urban enclave), yet by all means they are suburban. Just because it is a suburb with a horrible infrastructure doesn't mean it's ''urban.''

This is why I and many believe the south shore was a suburban failure (that is why I rated it a 1 on a 1-10 scale). Staten Island as a whole is below-average, yet tolerable (that is why I rated it a 3 on a 1-10 scale). Maybe not everyone agrees with that conclusion, but more people who share a neutral perspective agree with myself rather than your bias view.

I'm not saying you can't go to bed in peace and quiet. I'm saying if you're in a better suburb, you'll have more of it. You'll also have the comfort on knowing your children won't be hanging out with drug-addicts in their high-school years. You'll be able to avoid outward racism. You'll be able to make your children believe that an education is more necessary to make it in the real world. Your children will become more independent individuals if you pick a better suburb.

The educated on Staten Island moves everywhere. Monmouth county is one of the hot spots. Many articles are published about it. The part of Staten Island that tends to exercise this option the most is the south shore (since they're geographically closest). You may not live on the south shore, so the ''hearsay'' you may have received in your life may be different than a south shore resident. Most of the ''behind'' Staten Islanders stay in Staten Island. If they leave, places like Old bridge are the most common (if they plan on staying in the same area).

Most of cold areas in America seem to do just fine with snow plowing. Private corporations are ready for this.
This is why they exist. Personally, waste-management would do the tax-payers better (maybe not the tax receivers like the sanitation department). They'd pay at market value. It would improve the work ethic of the employees (they'd actually come home feeling like they worked a whole day).

The NJ Turnpike has a similar problem to the NYC Sanitation (too many workers). However, turnpike employees (non-management) only peaks up to the low 50's in salary. They also can't retire until 55. They plow all the snow on the highways too. Why overpay, if you don't have to? Did you know that the New Jersey turnpike is in the process of being sold to a private corporation? Maybe those sanitation workers should think twice before they vote Republican. I doubt the Turnpike workers do.

You are right about Staten Island Tech. It is a great school for who can handle it. I know civil-service isn't the only profession people have utilized. Entrepreneurship, retail, sales and business are too.

However, on the south shore, civil-service is more popular. It feels like everyone either has a friend who's dad is a cop. It was common for every one to have a relative who was a cop. It was common to have multiple neighbors who were cops. I'm not saying cops aren't honest people. I'm saying that it isn't normal for that much of society to be cops. It's unhealthy. This isn't the Soviet Union. Not enough people have the mentality to be cops(especially in such a hot-headed controversy ready area).

By the way, your last post wasn't so ''succinct.''

[Marc Oh!]

Originally Posted by nyc0127

How do you know your grandmother wasn't bias or exaggerative? Just because she's your grandmother doesn't make her noble. When your father meant it was ''changing'', maybe it went more beyond crime indexes. Maybe it meant the level of expense. Maybe it meant racial diversity and immigration. I know you wouldn't tell that half of the story. With all due respect, if she sold her house for 60K than the house probably wasn't all that desirable. Philadelphia has a horrible real estate market. People in New York City who would have that same house would have gotten 600K because of it's geography.

Because she'd old may mean she was in debt. She may have taken an equity line on her house that you haven't discussed. She may have not had the money to fix up problems in the home. Getting out would have been an economic-based decision. She really only had two options. One, sell it at top dollar and rent a nice apartment in a better part of the city or a suburb (or live with a relative). Or two, disregard economics and stay in her neighborhood. Considering that wasn't in her interests, her losses were due to her having bad luck financially. You shouldn't blame that on the entirety of the neighborhood.

You're assuming too much. And the fact that you think you know so much is highly amusing. Yes I will blame it on the entirety of the neighborhood, not b/c of her bad financial luck. Yes you're right, it did get racially "diverse". And by that, I mean certain people moved in. And hey, guess what, soon enough, it was unsafe to walk down the street. And there was trash everywhere (when I say trash I really do mean trash, actual garbage). Hoorayyy for diversity! Tell me how diversification of a previously white neighborhood in Philly decreased crime, please, name me the neighborhoods b/c I'd love to know. I'd say moving might not be a bad idea when your own grandson (ME) can't enter the neighborhood without getting a gun shoved in his face. Diversity can be so fabulous. It used to be a beautiful Italian pocket with nice little rowhomes. Now, it's an absolute disgrace. I'm talking about Overbrook (not Overbrook Farms) by the way. Read up on it if you want to on wikipedia or google, like you seem to be doing for everything else for your "facts". And when you say Philly has a terrible real estate market, do you mean that b/c it's cheap? Not too long ago, my father sold a house in North Philly for $228,000. I'd say that's pretty damn good for Philly, and I wouldn't pay $10 to live in that neighborhood.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

Usually, the attempt is pitiful because the people who tend to take the most interest in there heritage are economically behind. They use it as a compensation for something they don't have. If educated individuals chose to do this it would be nice, but they usually take much less interest in this kind of stuff.

Many Italians I know take interest in this stuff, most of them are educated. I consider myself educated.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

As I said before, if you can't take good out of your ethnicity, why believe it exists? The best thing that has come of Italian heritage in this country is the Italian food. That is a societal aspect though. From time to time, it could be individual. It's a culinary skill.

Good and bad, the Italian-American culture exists

Originally Posted by nyc0127

Truthfully, if people of Latin American background weren't immigrants, they wouldn't be economically behind. That is why the term Hispanic was created by the government in 1970. No one ever teaches you about that though.

No professor, I did know that the Census Bureau coined the term.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

They created that term so they could invisibly fund programs like ''Financial Aid'', scholarships, work-visa programs or anything that is favorable to immigrants. This speeds up the process of immigrants children success. This is why it's common to see the children of Mexican immigrants in California own 750 thousand dollar southern California homes.

For once I agree with you. But I still think it's pretty damn unfair that they're really the only immigrant group afforded that luxury. Every other immigrant group can come here and eventually flourish. Why do hispanics need it, no other foreign ethnicity needed it. Poverty and Crime don't have to go hand in hand. Italians came here poor but still had nice neighborhoods. Can't say the same about many hispanic neighborhoods. My girl (who is 1st generation Colombian/Mexican and whose mother illegally emigrated here) got to go to great school and has a great job. I'm not saying her success wouldn't be as great if it this was a world free of affirmative action. But I'll admit, that kind of stuff puts a chip on my shoulder because my family had to be here for almost 100 years before the first person (me) went to college. They worked hard and kept their nose clean and eventually came out on top. Why did she (the daughter of an illegal immigrant) deserve all of this over me? Just because her parents decided to leave their country and come here. Why do they deserve it? Oh, right, it's b/c they're discriminated against...how can you discriminate against someone who isn't even here yet. I feel like if you're Hispanic or black and have some intelligence and motivation, you've just got it made.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

I doubt most college students leave the campus (especially at night). If they do, they're probably in a car going somewhere no where near those horrible neighborhoods.

Do you expect these kids to stay locked up inside their campus? No, they don't. And many upperclassmen live off campus.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

I believe your ideology on every white person having Italian or Irish in Philadelphia is either bias or senseless. I do agree that the majority are catholic (by title at least). However, the 1.2 percent it is represents something. Philadelphia may not represent the ethnic or cultural diversity New York does, but it is equally black and white. Philadelphia is 6% Jewish. Philadelphia has some Muslims. It is about 1/10 Latin American (about 6% Puerto Rican).

Thanks for spitting some more facts about Philadelphia that you READ about.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

If you're a white bigot, you may get a block or two, but never a neighborhood.

Oh yeah? Go to Packer Park or Marconi Plaza or Girard Estates (all in South Philly). Go to Manayunk and Roxborough. And the Northeast, when it was nicer, used to be predominantly white. Go to the far northeast, you'll find many white neighborhoods.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

Why do you think South Philly is not black? I swear to god, nothing is more irritating. It's like people think there is an Italian ring off ''South Philly.''

Please point out where I said South Philly isn't black. I didn't say it was predominantly Italian. But when you think of Italians in Philadelphia, you think South Philly, and the South Philly Italian neighborhoods are the last Italian strongholds in the city.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

They must be muttering the ''N'' word a lot, considering 1/3 of 10 percent of their city is African-American. 2.7% of south Philadelphia is also multi-racial (which is more than double of the city's normal rate - even though it's less black and has few Asians). It's not like these whites have the money to isolate themselves either, so from the way you make it sound, they really are screwed.

Like I said, go to Packer Park or Girard Estates

Originally Posted by nyc0127

Why when you say ask ''someone'' in the Northeast, you subsequently meant a white person? The Northeast isn't all that white. Most of it isn't all that pretty.

Yeah well it used to be. It used to be like SI, technically part of the city but basically a suburb. Actually, you're wrong in saying most of isn't pretty. The parts getting bad are closer to the heart of the city, the further you get out and closer to the suburbs, the nicer it gets.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

The blue-collared jobs are usually in too high demand for less affluent suburbs (Gloucester, New Castle and Delaware county) to get.

Again, you THINK you know what you are talking about

Originally Posted by nyc0127

My point on bringing up the situation with Geno's wasn't to prove my knowledge of Philadelphia. It was to show you that Geno is a stubborn fool who depends on people to eat from him. Have you seen the location in where it is? It's in one of the most cruddy environments possible. I do agree that many whites eat there, but tourists?

People who are know the area might (which one explain why half of them have clubs on there streering wheels). White tourists would be frightened to walk through such a filthy neighborhood. The last time I was there, all I heard were barking dogs, saw miserable people and cruddy sidewalks. It smelled horrible too (why do those subways that blow up that much steam through those sewers?).

"Geno" doesn't care. He's not losing revenue. His employees and his patrons typically aren't Spanish speaking. And many of the whites around respect him for his sign and respect that he doesn't hire immigrants like they do across the street at Pat's. And yes, I have been to Pat's or Geno's many many many times. There are plenty of tourists and people not from the area that go there. Sadly, the city is most known for Cheesesteaks, and those 2 are the Mecca of Cheesesteaks in Philly (Pat's being the place that started it all). Oh and you had your chance to prove your point about racially diverse areas, b/c that area around there is a melting pot, probably one of few outside Center City where racial harmony can somewhat exist. It's not a bad area. My uncle owns a beautiful house a couple blocks away. Sometimes you can't judge these South Philly rowhomes from the outside, and they are much bigger than they appear. And whatever smell you smell I don't think is from the subway. Geno's is probably about a mile away from the subway.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

If you love the non-ghetto parts of Philly, you must be in a desert seeing mirages.

No, actually I'm not, they do exist, and they don't have to be wealthy and low-populated.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

For the ones who cowardly left Philadelphia, they go unnoticed. Their voices is little. There racism wouldn't be tolerated in the suburbs. They may be able to afford Delaware county, but look at it. It may as well be a garbage dumb. The only nice places in Delaware and Chester cost a decent amount of money.

You keep saying it's cowardly. When all the elements you knew and loved about your neighborhood are fading, why stay? There's nothing cowardly about, they wanted to leave (b/c they didn't like it anymore, b/c they wanted a suburb, b/c the neighborhood changed, etc.), so they left. Nothing wrong with that. Do you expect them to keep their pride and stay while their neighborhood crumbles, then finally selling the house for peanuts and trading it for a big mortgage? You didn't like the place you grew up in and left. Are you a coward too? No, there's nothing wrong with what you did. By the way, Delaware County (and moreso Chester County) have plenty of nice places to live.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

As you described in your last paragraph, if it's this ''racism'' that keeps these neighborhoods from being a crime-riddled ghetto, than is it really worth living in?

Hey, you can't blame these people for not being able to let go and having a strong fear of their neighborhood facing the the same demise as the neighborhood next to it that was nice a mere 10 years before it (especially when there's no housing price barrier - ex. the nice white neighborhood I grew up in where you can get a home for $140K, and it seems like it's the next neighborhood to go to crap). Hell, they even hate the yuppies moving in there too. They're just trying to protect their neighborhood and maintain their culture. Again yes, there is a culture there.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

Bensonhurst may not be all dangerous, but it's not as ''Italian'' as you think.

I never said it is all Italian. But like So. Phila., Italians defined the area and gave it its character. Bensonhurst is still "white" though (Asians might as well be white, and the Russians are certainly white)

Originally Posted by nyc0127

Lastly, you completely contradicted yourself. South Philadelphia is a dangerous place where people commonly get shot dead. I wouldn't be surprised if the the crime-index of whites in south Philadelphia is more than blacks nationwide.

Like I said, the white parts of South Philly (especially the Italian ones) are not dangerous. And I would certainly be surprised if the crime rate of whites in South Philly are higher than blacks nationwide. Find me 10 of the city's 400+ murders done in South Philly by a white man. Actually, I'd be surprised if you could find 5.


You really think you know too much. Seeing that you lived most of his/her life in SI and now lives in So. Jersey, I don't know where you get your "facts". Keep reading wikipedia, the Inquirer, and googling I guess. I don't even know what we're arguing about anymore. I think I was trying to explain how whites in Philly (compared to their NYC counterparts) aren't any more accepting of non-whites, and why certain people in certain neighborhoods are racist and not open to other groups moving in. My only problem with certain groups is how they many times ruin places when their population gets too large. I don't care if they act the way they do b/c of poverty, discrimination, etc. - ya know what, it's not my fault and I don't feel like having my quality of life, in turn, suffer b/c of them.

Originally Posted by nyc0127

maybe you're the one using the south shore kid's doobie.

No thanks, I don't do drugs.

[Jrock247]

Wow.....what a load of gibberish. Staten Island is what is. Obviously you hated growing up there. Anyway, drugs and being a teenager together like PBJ. I grew up in a middle class town on LI and have friends from Staten Island, and things aren't much different between the two places.
No ones claiming that Staten Island is a paradise, but if your middle class its one of the safest areas in NYC to live.
As for bad mouthing civil service....... your in a community college, you haven't exactly arrived at being comfortably middle class. Don't jinx yourself.

[MattSiggs]

Once again, you have only proven your ignorance.

Firstly, the College of Staten Island is both a four year CUNY and a separate community college. I don't attend a community college. It's comments like these that weaken your other statements, because I'm going to assume you don't know what you're talking about if you keep getting things about SI wrong.

Secondly, you claim your facts are true when you have not provided one statistic to back up your claims. I ask you again, where are your statistics? You claim the educated move to Monmouth and that it's "undeniable" that it's below average when compared to other suburbs. Where are the articles that you claim prove these points?

Thirdly, Great Kills is located on the south shore. You spent this whole time yapping about the plight of the south shore; do you even know what neighborhoods comprise it? I live in Great Kills and spent my teenage days around New Dorp(mid-island).

The reason SI is compared to urban locations is because it is a borough in New York City. People come on here all the time asking for the best place to live in NYC, and Staten Island gets added to the mix.

JRock brings up exactly what I'm trying to tell you. No one's saying it's paradise. I'm contending that it's an average and decent place to live, like you mentioned in your first post.