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.
The 1970s was that era I believe. New York City lost 10.4% of its population from 1970 to 1980 (Bronx lost 20.6%) and then gained from 1980 to 1990.
Oh, 1970s. Damn you, tiny iPhone screen!
I still don't think NYC has changed the most. It was still huge, it was still diverse, and its housing stock was still largely the same in the 70's. Even its famous subway system has changed very little between then and now. Blight hit the city hard, but that could be said for most inner cities of that era and even today, the South Bronx remains one of the roughest areas of the city, though nowhere near as bad as it once was. Other cities have changed more dramatically.
Last edited by RaymondChandlerLives; 11-22-2012 at 05:53 AM..
1970 predates the "Bronx is Burning" era though, the city had yet to hit those delths, when it lost a million people. Also, demographic shifts and periods of blight/gentrification are not unique to NYC (see: DTLA, Hollywood, SoMa, big swaths of DC). NYC was already a melting pot in 1970, its housing stocking wasn't much different, and it wasn't much less populated than it is today, a sign that its urban fabric (our term of the day, lol) was largely in place. There are better options in this category.
Parts of the Bronx were already wastelands by the early 1970's, it peaked somewhere in the late 1970's-early 1980's, but by the early 70's, the south Bronx was already crap. In fact, the first neighborhood in the south Bronx to experience white flight (Mott Haven) did so in the late 1950's early 1960's.
I still don't think NYC has changed the most. It was still huge, it was still diverse, and its housing stock was still largely the same in the 70's. Even its famous subway system has changed very little between then and now. Blight hit the city hard, but that could be said for most inner cities of that era and even today, the South Bronx remains one of the roughest areas of the city, though nowhere near as bad as it once was. Other cities have changed more dramatically.
The city looked like a bomb was dropped on it. Not only the Bronx, but parts of Brooklyn, Uptown Manhattan, and the Lower East Side, also were abandoned and filled with vacant lots. The crime rate was much much higher, probably the biggest change in crime any city has seen from the 70's. Time Square was an ENTIRELY different place. The whole strip was were you went to get laid. You had the drug dealers on 8th ave (or 7th not sure), trains completely covered in graffiti etc. These are things that I can't even imagine in current NYC. You'd have to be here to see the complete change the city made. I can't fathom NYC like that. It's so much change that it feels like two completely different cities.
Doesn't even look like the Bronx with all the ranch style homes.
The murder rate of the South Bronx and Harlem back then was over 100 murder per 100,000. Now Harlem worst section is at 17 per 100 k, while most of it is at 13 per 100 k....south Bronx's worst is 23 per 100 k, while most average 13 as well.
Virtually every metric about Miami has changed radically. Aside from obvious developmental/skyline changes the most dramatic change has been that the fabric and essence of the city has shifted from being an "American" city to an International city(namely Latin American). While the fabric of every other US city remains distinctly American, Miami has become foreign to many Americans, for better or worse. If you revisit any other city in the US after 40 years you'll see the spectacular changes in skylines and demographics, but the "soul" and character of the city is still recognizable. "Miam-uh" was once a southern town full of seniors that had 2 seasons... on and off. It's light years removed from that now. I'm at a loss to cite another city that has changed as much dramatically and intrinsically to its core. Miami now takes it cues from foreign places rather than the USA.
1970 predates the "Bronx is Burning" era though, the city had yet to hit those delths, when it lost a million people. Also, demographic shifts and periods of blight/gentrification are not unique to NYC (see: DTLA, Hollywood, SoMa, big swaths of DC). NYC was already a melting pot in 1970, its housing stocking wasn't much different, and it wasn't much less populated than it is today, a sign that its urban fabric (our term of the day, lol) was largely in place. There are better options in this category.
He said 1970s, not 1970s. I take that as a reference to the era. It's not unique to NYC, just the magnitude is and the ethnic mix is way different than it was back then especially compared to how gentrified and expensive NYC as a whole is now--including parts that used to be considered no man's land. So it's not just that other cities went through the bad times and many cities are now on the up and up, but that the magnitude of change between the two is huge. Like I said, it depends on how you look at it. Also, if you don't think its housing stock isn't much different, then you haven't been around since the 90s. I agree there are a lot of different options, but I don't agree there are really that many better ones. It's a matter of what your rubric is.
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.
