LA was a very homogeneous town in the 1950s and 60s (Los Angeles: apartment, crime rate)

[chit chatter]

Recently I have been watching the TV Show Dragnet filmed from 1968-1970.

The LA they show in that show of course is just a television version of the city but I suspect it did show a glimpse of what life was like in the City of Angels in that era.

Anyone remember LA from the 1950s or 1960s. They said that it had very little diversity at one time and was mostly full of relocated Midwesterners. In the early 1960s LA was one of the most homogeneous cities in America.

Has the changes made it a better or worse city to live in, in your opinion?

[BRinSM]

a lot of the older folk that i have met that lived in LA then still reminisce on those "better days". LA is much more cosmopolitan now and much more diverse as well. traffic is much worse now obviously, but air pollution is much better and crime is the same from what i've heard. i think the real killer though in the then vs. now comparison is the cost of housing. but that's just the way it goes, economics makes desirable places more expensive to live. having never known the LA of yore, i'm okay with LA today, even though it would be nice to have better transit options for getting around town.

[GatsbyGatz]

Ask that question in another decade. While the post-WWII generation loved the automobile and allowed most urban centers to decay, today's generation is flocking back into city downtowns. Urban living is currently trendy and the result is a greater investment into our downtowns, both private and public. DTLA has plenty of plans and projects in the works. Once the downtown is restored and remastered, the only thing stopping DTLA from becoming a glamorous urban experience will be the homeless problem. That of course isn't enough to stop San Francisco from being one of the hottest urban markets in the country.

[bophisto]

I don't have the exact stats, but i'm sure L.A was a lot less diverse back in the day. I don't think that diversity has made it worse..but I think the problem is overcrowding adds to traffic . many people living in a small apartment is not good for mental health well being etc.

It also used to be a lot cheaper back then you could afford a nice area on a factory job. Areas that are now 1million+ on the westside could be bought by returning war veterans or people with regular manufacturing jobs. Of course this has changed in many cities and most places require two incomes to raise a family.

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by BRinSM

a lot of the older folk that i have met that lived in LA then still reminisce on those "better days". LA is much more cosmopolitan now and much more diverse as well. traffic is much worse now obviously, but air pollution is much better and crime is the same from what i've heard. i think the real killer though in the then vs. now comparison is the cost of housing. but that's just the way it goes, economics makes desirable places more expensive to live. having never known the LA of yore, i'm okay with LA today, even though it would be nice to have better transit options for getting around town.

Which of course it has made considerable strides in.

I would venture to guess that crime has become a lot more spread out throughout greater LA. The "basin" (the city) I'm sure has gotten better through gentrification, as well as real reform in the police as a postive outcome of the riots maybe, don't really know exactly, but the inland valleys from San Fernando through the Inland Empire, has gotten worse.

Despite having a "weak" core for a city of its global magnitude, LA is the epitome, just as much as New York is, as a city where because of its high cost of living, a lot of crime problems have been pushed out to the cheaper fringes of the metro area.

[ferretkona]

Originally Posted by chit chatter

Recently I have been watching the TV Show Dragnet filmed from 1968-1970.

The LA they show in that show of course is just a television version of the city but I suspect it did show a glimpse of what life was like in the City of Angels in that era.

California has never been like has been on TV or the movies. If it is on CA TV do not believe it.

[Mr. Opinionated]

Originally Posted by chit chatter

Recently I have been watching the TV Show Dragnet filmed from 1968-1970. The LA they show of course is just a television version. But I it did show a glimpse of what life was like in that era. They said that it had very little diversity at one time and was mostly full of relocated Midwesterners. In the early 1960s LA was one of the most homogeneous cities in America.
Have the changes made it better or worse?

Originally Posted by ferretkona

California has never been like has been on TV or the movies. If it is on CA TV do not believe it.

And neither has L.A. in this case. I was a kid during the the 1960-70's. My experience was that the core was Afro American. The predomainantly latino communities remained east and north of Downtown. According to my late Grandmother, families like mine migrated from the south, into South L.A. during the late 1930's to 1940's, but were not permitted to venture further until white flight began towards the fringe suburbs. Since I never had much reason to go further than say, Hollywood back then, none of that mattered to me. And I thought contrary to a recent poll, that Los Angeles was the cleanest, most fascinating place anyone in their right mind could choose to settle into!

Of course many things have cooled but never soured my affection for this world class jewel of a city. Like how it has become Mex-centric, seeminly at the dispense of everything else. Take that as racist instead of racial and you'd be wrong. There is a difference. But more importantly, I do respect that the population has has become predominantly Latino and the culture has morphed accordingly. But diversity is ineffective without interaction beyond vocational. And that is one area that I think Los Angles has always fallen behind.

Is Los Angeles now completely crime free? Have the gangs and drugs vanished? Somewhat, as they have retreated north and eastward. But then, these things also have existed in other sizeable cities. But in L.A. per capita, the crime rate has decreased substantially over the last decade, despite bashing from Northern California and out of state. Is there still mad traffic and crowding? Sure there is. And probably the one thing that discorages me from moving back home. But again, This is a BIG city. approximately 460 square miles of it, excluding the perimeter towns and 'burbs. So I guess in cosmopolitan terms. L.A. has great strides toward becoming even more like the World City it is portrayed as in movies.

[chit chatter]

You said: "So I guess in cosmopolitan terms. L.A. has great strides toward becoming even more like the World City" Interesting logic. Now that LA is almost completely dominated by Mexican Americans who have recently come from south of the border, it is now a world city? I just see it becoming just as homogeneous as before, but instead mostly Hispanic instead of White.

Originally Posted by Mr. Opinionated

And neither has L.A. in this case. I was a kid during the the 1960-70's. My experience was that the core was Afro American. The predomainantly latino communities remained east and north of Downtown. According to my late Grandmother, families like mine migrated from the south, into South L.A. during the late 1930's to 1940's, but were not permitted to venture further until white flight began towards the fringe suburbs. Since I never had much reason to go further than say, Hollywood back then, none of that mattered to me. And I thought contrary to a recent poll, that Los Angeles was the cleanest, most fascinating place anyone in their right mind could choose to settle into!

Of course many things have cooled but never soured my affection for this world class jewel of a city. Like how it has become Mex-centric, seeminly at the dispense of everything else. Take that as racist instead of racial and you'd be wrong. There is a difference. But more importantly, I do respect that the population has has become predominantly Latino and the culture has morphed accordingly. But diversity is ineffective without interaction beyond vocational. And that is one area that I think Los Angles has always fallen behind.

Is Los Angeles now completely crime free? Have the gangs and drugs vanished? Somewhat, as they have retreated north and eastward. But then, these things also have existed in other sizeable cities. But in L.A. per capita, the crime rate has decreased substantially over the last decade, despite bashing from Northern California and out of state. Is there still mad traffic and crowding? Sure there is. And probably the one thing that discorages me from moving back home. But again, This is a BIG city. approximately 460 square miles of it, excluding the perimeter towns and 'burbs. So I guess in cosmopolitan terms. L.A. has great strides toward becoming even more like the World City it is portrayed as in movies.

[New Horizons]

I can't imagine LA as ever being a middle America type of city, and not the major destination that it has been throughout my life. At the 1930 census, LA was already the fifth largest city at at 1.24 million people. The only cities in my lifetime whose growth might resemble LA's growth might be Phoenix and Las Vegas. But even then, I just don't think the vibe was the same as LA. Those people that bought homes in say in Van Nuys and North Hollywood in the 40's must have known they were in a very special place, and not have identified as "Middle Americans". I mean they had the movie industry right next door to them, that alone separated them from the rest of the country. You look at those vintage movie clips promoting Los Angeles and it sounds like utopia.

[UB50]

Originally Posted by chit chatter

You said: "So I guess in cosmopolitan terms. L.A. has great strides toward becoming even more like the World City" Interesting logic. Now that LA is almost completely dominated by Mexican Americans who have recently come from south of the border, it is now a world city? I just see it becoming just as homogeneous as before, but instead mostly Hispanic instead of White.

I don't see LA as homogeneous at all. If I sit down and watch 10 people walk by me on a main street, probably three will be Hispanic, three white, one black, two Asian and one "other." When they interview crowds on TV news, there is usually a mix of people. It doesn't matter what the event is.