U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Massachusetts
 [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)
 
 
Old 03-21-2017, 03:17 AM
 
Location: Behind You!
1,954 posts, read 3,863,875 times
Reputation: 2731

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdovell View Post
Uh...yeah weak argument. Anyone can take a photo and try to make a caption or a meme. The one of springfield might actually by the trailer park by the walmart.

What is not shown is Mattoon st which looks like the back bay of Boston. It's not showing McKnight which has many Victorian homes as well as Forest Park.

If the objective was that somehow Massachusetts either has no rough looking areas or somehow doesn't think that's possible then that's a really weak mentality.

Boston in at itself is not exactly affluent. Nearly half of residents make $35,000 or less a year
https://www.boston.com/news/local-ne...n-35000-a-year
Boston public school district graduation rate is 72%. What's wrong with that? It's an all time high.
www.bostonpublicschools.org/site/default.aspx?PageType=3&DomainID=4&ModuleInstanceI D=14&ViewID=047E6BE3-6D87-4130-8424-D8E4E9ED6C2A&RenderLoc=0&FlexDataID=11833&PageID=1

The general myth is that everyone in boston lives and works in boston and is affluent. That is not true. The growth of the 128 belt and the exodus in the 70's pretty much proved that you don't need to to live in boston to work there.

Gentrification is the name of the game as well. What was once the Combat Zone is now dorms for northeastern.

Funny, you start with "weak argument" then go on to say whats wrong with a 72% grad rate! I don't care how low it WAS 72% still sucks. That's like saying "ONLY 10 people got shot to death in Chicago yesterday", sure FOR THEM that may be an improvement but terrible in the real world.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-21-2017, 08:08 PM
 
5,829 posts, read 5,220,715 times
Reputation: 3029
Ok... you know I was being sarcastic... right? yes 72% is bad but it's much worse because people associate "Boston" with education and to have it not that much higher than Springfield that has much lower property values.

Let's back up on this thread a bit. I don't think that any place is "good" or "bad". Buildings don't give me a hard time (outside of work that is I work in facilities). But the people make the difference. Can people move? Absolutely. Can areas change? Absolutely but to argue it was just people moving in is putting the cart before the horse.

Much of what is in Mass is gateway cities. These cities were largely relant on one industry. Lowell/Lawrence/Lynn were textiles, Fall River and New Bedford whale oil and then fishing (harder regulations started in the late 70s), Springfield the armory (closed late 1960s), Holyoke - paper (email, internet and phone declined use), Pittsfield - GE, Taunton silver, Brockton shoes, northern Plymouth had cortage park, Quincy had the shipyard etc.

When industries declined the jobs declined. When jobs declined property values declined (who wants to live in a place with fewer jobs?). Back then was pre internet so things were more localized. Immigrants generally moved in. Some, I will say again some, just some ended up on the system. Then we have the 2nd and now 3rd generation. Forget about internet skills and coding how about reading, writing, speaking English and graduating high school etc.

And then there's the pushback. Lowell for example has cahnged thanks to UMass Lowell over the past twenty years. Commutter rails have linked some cities to Boston at least for central and eastern Mass. Quincy has developed quite a bit, infact it's the fastest growing area of the state for population. In springfield we have the rail plant (two months ahead of schedule, the new catholic school, the rail station reopening and of course mgm springfield casino. Rents have increased, graduation rates have increased, other businesses are coming in. An eyeglass shop just opened up in the downtown and a korean street food restaurant is opening in a week (Home - sunkimbop) The supply chain is circulating with quite a bit of B2B.

Is everyone awash in cash? No. But the mentality did a 180. Can places redevelop? Sure but it does take time, capital and leadership. The casino could have ended up in Palmer, the rail plant could have ended up in Pittsfield, the new catholic school could have gone to chicopee. You have to have people fighting in the public, private and even non profit sectors for resources.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2017, 06:34 AM
 
Location: Northeast states
11,942 posts, read 9,973,445 times
Reputation: 3504
Waterbury, Bridgeport, Hartford might be more rough that Massachusetts
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 12:51 AM
 
767 posts, read 1,009,776 times
Reputation: 634
Quote:
Originally Posted by BPt111 View Post
Waterbury, Bridgeport, Hartford might be more rough that Massachusetts
Connecticut has its own economic issues. There's an ongoing thread over there discussing it. There's also the overflow from NYC and NY State, especially in Fairfield County.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 07:11 AM
 
Location: stuck in the woods with bears and moose
23,296 posts, read 22,443,975 times
Reputation: 41997
Quote:
Originally Posted by BPt111 View Post
Waterbury, Bridgeport, Hartford might be more rough that Massachusetts
I don't think Hartford is worse than Lawrence. Both are sad cities though. Lawrence, with its once proud factories and extensive canal system, now in a state of decay.
__________________
my posts as moderator will be in red. Moderator: Health&Wellness~Genealogy. The Rules--read here>>> TOS. If someone attacks you, do not reply. Hit REPORT.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 07:22 AM
 
Location: Massachusetts & Hilton Head, SC
8,436 posts, read 12,805,924 times
Reputation: 6802
Hartford is the most dangerous city in New England. The crime rate is worse than either Springfield or Lawrence.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 08:02 AM
 
Location: Baltimore
10,848 posts, read 4,311,099 times
Reputation: 5929
Quote:
Originally Posted by BPt111 View Post
Waterbury, Bridgeport, Hartford might be more rough that Massachusetts

When compared to older secondary Massachusetts cities like Worcester, Springfield, New Bedford, Lynn, Brockton, and Lowell..

Hartford and Bridgeport are more blighted and have more gun crime. They are more segregated racially and have deeper generational poverty.

Hartford and Bridgeport are better connected to other part of CT a well as NYC because the Highways o through them. Their are a lot more jobs in those city's themselves heir employment center and more urbane with better nightlife.

Waterbury is like a Massachusetts city, run down for the majority of it and not very centrally located or important to the states economy.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 08:20 AM
 
Location: stuck in the woods with bears and moose
23,296 posts, read 22,443,975 times
Reputation: 41997
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaseyB View Post
Hartford is the most dangerous city in New England. The crime rate is worse than either Springfield or Lawrence.
Interesting. To me, Hartford doesn't look as bad as Lawrence so I am probably going on appearances rather than crime rates. Lawrence appears to have had a golden age in manufacturing but if you go there now, you just see deserted mills, falling apart multi family houses, trash all over the streets, and general urban decay. They have a historic site where the history has been preserved--including their famous Bread and Roses strike back in the days of the Industrial Revolution--but it's kind of sad to see what has become of this city today.

Hartford has had dangerous areas for as long as I can remember but those areas seem to have spread.
__________________
my posts as moderator will be in red. Moderator: Health&Wellness~Genealogy. The Rules--read here>>> TOS. If someone attacks you, do not reply. Hit REPORT.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2017, 06:50 PM
 
5,829 posts, read 5,220,715 times
Reputation: 3029
Well I've been in both places.

Lawrence I think tended to miss the boat. It's only 15 miles away from Lowell and Lowell really turned around due to UMass Lowell.

The other problem is the tax structure vs NH which is right across the border. To be a retailer in Lawrence when sales tax doesn't exist in NH while at the same time have the poverty levels.... It reminds me of bars by the CT boarder fully knowing that happy hour exists.

I find Hartford can look nice but the size of it and the lack of a tax structure pretty much made it nearly impossible to function in the long term. Vs springfield I think they do a better job on their waterfront and use of food trucks. The graffiti in CT is huge..I mean huge. In Springfield there's city employees that all they do is clean it up immediately.

Of course the other aspect in Lawrence is mills. There's so many things that can be done with them but it takes time and planning. Holyoke is doing a good job but the number is so fast it's insane. Gateway City Arts is fantastic and frankly I doubt such a project could be made with public funds at the speed they operated with.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2017, 05:47 PM
 
7,456 posts, read 4,394,624 times
Reputation: 15514
Quote:
Originally Posted by FCMA View Post
Fairly good overview illustrating that there are absolute smoking craters of humanity peppered across the entire state. Not just west, nor middle, nor east. The whole region is covered in these relics of the industrial revolution that couldn't cut it anymore especially after the 1960s. Also it is certainly possible to find ugly areas of "nice" towns and nice areas of "trashy" towns (most all of them do have nice parts) and confuse the matter when all you're basing it on is a selective photo montage.

For selective example, besides that ridiculous trashy strip joint, Whately is a pretty stable old Polish farm town mixed with university-employed intellectual types, with barely any blight to see, full of postcard New England architecture. Wouldn't be a candidate for this list.
Yeah, I remember going into many such old mill towns and seeing rundown stuff back in the late 70s and the 80s. Some of them had periods where they seemed to be getting neater and more prosperous--or less depressed--but they didn't sustain that rise. If anything, the photos only show that those that already have, get more. Those that don't have, fall even lower.

Some places I remember as being a bit rough-looking but still good to visit sometimes. Brockton comes to mind, when they had a good restaurant. Even then, it was a tired-looking place, formerly a shoemaking center, I think?????

Then I think of how rough Waltham, or the central part of it, looked then, and now I hear that gentrication is changing it. The difference, of course, is that Waltham is so close to Cambridge, Newton, Weston, and the beltways to good jobs. Brockton, not so much.

I bicycled through many places on routes that drivers didn't favor. If you really want to see how a city lives, ditch the car and walk, bike, or bus. Cities have always been a weird jumble of poverty in stone's throw of great wealth.

The tiny rural towns in central and western MA were really nice to bike through back then. They didn't seem to be last-resort dumpy housing for people who couldn't afford to live closer to the larger more prosperous cities, but times have changed.

It is sad to see those pretty hill towns being neglected.
Rate this post positively 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.


 
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:

Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > Massachusetts

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, 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