Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-25-2022, 06:09 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
2,212 posts, read 1,448,802 times
Reputation: 3027

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boston Shudra View Post
I don’t think Boston’s budget is actually that big compared to similarly sized cities. It’s tricky since universities and hospitals can’t be taxed and together, those things take up a lot of land and jobs in the city.



Mass and Cass themselves don’t have many people in them right now. Not sure about the nearby streets to the south. There’s still a decent amount of litter but fewer junkies I think.
Boston's city budget is going to be about $4 billion for a city of less than 700K residents and 90 sq miles, whereas Philly has under $6 billion for ~1.6 mil residents and ~140 sq miles. The per square mile difference isn't huge, but the per capita disparity is noticeably better for Boston. I am sure a big part of it is "cultural" too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-25-2022, 06:23 PM
 
Location: Baltimore
21,628 posts, read 12,733,519 times
Reputation: 11216
Quote:
Originally Posted by the resident09 View Post
Yeah this is about right. Both places seem very clean to me overall, although DC does have a good amount of rats you'll see, but the streets in both Boston and Washington are among the most well kept I've seen in major cities. By comparison LA is a dump in a lot of places, the freeways look dirty to me. SF already has a rep for dirty streets much like Manhattan.
Boston has real rat issue but you’re simply not gonna see a lotta rats or anything negative in Bostons core outside of DTX, Chinatown and the common to a lesser extent.

I also don’t find Manhattan all that dirty apart from the trash pick up practices. Bronx is a different story.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2022, 06:24 PM
 
Location: Baltimore
21,628 posts, read 12,733,519 times
Reputation: 11216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muinteoir View Post
Boston's city budget is going to be about $4 billion for a city of less than 700K residents and 90 sq miles, whereas Philly has under $6 billion for ~1.6 mil residents and ~140 sq miles. The per square mile difference isn't huge, but the per capita disparity is noticeably better for Boston. I am sure a big part of it is "cultural" too.
Baltimore has a 4.11 billion dollar budget.

San Francisco’s is 14 billion.

New York City is 100 billion.

Phillys budget is just low. And the culture is more tolerant of blight and trash.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2022, 06:28 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
2,212 posts, read 1,448,802 times
Reputation: 3027
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade View Post
Baltimore has a 4.11 billion dollar budget.

San Francisco’s is 14 billion.

New York City is 100 billion.

Phillys budget is just low. And the culture is more tolerant of blight and trash.
Interesting, but I don't find Baltimore or New York any cleaner than Philadelphia. So I guess the budget theory of cleanliness is flawed, lol.

Edit: I'd be interested to see specifically how much money each city puts toward cleaning and beautification.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2022, 06:30 PM
 
Location: Baltimore
21,628 posts, read 12,733,519 times
Reputation: 11216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muinteoir View Post
Interesting, but I don't find Baltimore or New York any cleaner than Philadelphia. So I guess the budget theory of cleanliness is flawed, lol.
Difference between mid Atlantic and New England. Albeit Boston was pretty dirty before Mayor Menino, so the old heads told me. And some of the other New England cities that aren’t as prosperous bare pretty dingy/dirty especially in their downtowns. But not to the extent of like… Newark.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2022, 07:34 PM
 
Location: Bergen County, New Jersey
12,159 posts, read 7,989,874 times
Reputation: 10123
wow Nyc has a budget of 100m. damn.

someone oughta look into that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2022, 07:37 PM
 
Location: Florida
2,333 posts, read 2,281,879 times
Reputation: 3592
Boston didn’t strike me as exceptionally clean. It’s fine, but I didn’t think it was above average for a city that size. The cleanest cities I’ve visited in the US were Greenville, SC, Sarasota, FL and Orlando.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2022, 07:40 PM
 
Location: Bergen County, New Jersey
12,159 posts, read 7,989,874 times
Reputation: 10123
Quote:
Originally Posted by FL_Expert View Post
Boston didn’t strike me as exceptionally clean. It’s fine, but I didn’t think it was above average for a city that size. The cleanest cities I’ve visited in the US were Greenville, SC, Sarasota, FL and Orlando.
For a large, legacy city with pre-industrial roots (ie, NYC, Philly, Baltimore, SF, Chicago, etc) is what the comparisons are. Obviously places like Greenville SC and Charleston SC are cleaner... but they aren't on the same level. Suburban cities like Tampa, Houston, Dallas, Phoenix are a lot harder to make accurate comps for, as they are suburban cities/metros.

Although... I don't find Orlando to be clean in the 8 years I lived there. Homeless people everywhere downtown and unmanicured medians.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2022, 10:24 PM
 
1,037 posts, read 680,680 times
Reputation: 1864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muinteoir View Post
Boston's city budget is going to be about $4 billion for a city of less than 700K residents and 90 sq miles, whereas Philly has under $6 billion for ~1.6 mil residents and ~140 sq miles. The per square mile difference isn't huge, but the per capita disparity is noticeably better for Boston. I am sure a big part of it is "cultural" too.
Boston is 48 sq miles. The other 40 miles is ocean.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2022, 04:16 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
2,212 posts, read 1,448,802 times
Reputation: 3027
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDee12345 View Post
Boston is 48 sq miles. The other 40 miles is ocean.
Oh right, I always forget that part. That's a good city budget per square mile then! Lots of $ to clean the nooks and crannies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top