Springfield to Boston rail (Brockton, Newton: tech jobs, neighborhood, schools)

[btownboss4]

Originally Posted by mdovell

Consider the following:

https://www.citylab.com/equity/2017/...crisis/521709/

"The current opioid epidemic has deep roots in the suburbs. Furthermore, the violent crime rate—which has been declining across the United States—fell three times faster in America’s primary cities than it did in their suburbs between 1990 and 2008. Murders actually rose by 16.9 percent in the suburbs between 2001 and 2010, while falling by 16.7 percent in cities. Many, if not most, of America’s mass shootings occur in suburbs, from Columbine to Sandy Hook."

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...outputType=amp

There are huge amounts of the South and North shore that are not diversifying.

So the pure and simple view of this is white flight didn't end

I would like to point out a 16.7% increase in murders in the suburbs is like .1/100,000 to .12/100,000 murders. While a decrease in the cities of nearly the same magnitude would be like 20/100,000 to 18.4/100,000. Basically the numbers are so tiny in the suburbs that a “16.9% increase!” Is basically like 3 actual murders in the whole metro

[mdovell]

Originally Posted by btownboss4

I would like to point out a 16.7% increase in murders in the suburbs is like .1/100,000 to .12/100,000 murders. While a decrease in the cities of nearly the same magnitude would be like 20/100,000 to 18.4/100,000. Basically the numbers are so tiny in the suburbs that a “16.9% increase!” Is basically like 3 actual murders in the whole metro

Again not making sense. Criminals don't care where you live and suburban and rural areas are sift targets. I've heard recently in CT that some get dropped off from NYC and do robberies and then get picked up. It doesn't take much for a car, a gun and a smartphone with GPS. Suburbs invested in schools and you guys make strong arguments for that but they didn't invest in police. Mutual aid of six or seven towns can happen with just one incident. It's not that there are bad or lazy police but they just aren't staffed. Cities have shotspotter and cameras everywhere etc.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by mdovell

Uh Weymouth for starters. Hardly any growth in the past thirty years for population. You have to have population growth according to your argument. OK fine. Halifax Gary anything in 20 years. Hingham is up but only 10%.... in the past 40 years. That's really not a whole lot of growth.

Furthermore demographics do matter as it dictates the markets for everything. Immigration helps with ethnic restaurants, birth rates lead to education etc. The largest growing industry on the cape is life insurance.

You also have to see what groups are staying, coming in and moving out. I saw huge growth in Weymouth in the 80s and 90s but then stall out. The base has not been redeveloped fully. I saw the Irish of South Boston go to Weymouth and people of color go to Rockland and Brockton.

Uh, Weymouth population grew by 7.4% from 2010 to 2018. THAT IS NOT A DYING TOWN, by any definition. It's not 1985 anymore, today Weymouth is over 5% Asian. Many Brazilians there. The base got off to a slow start, but it will get there.




Try again.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by GeoffD

And yeah, as an undesirable town, Weymouth is an outlier in suburban Massachusetts. Nobody is going to pick it to relocate there and anyone who graduated in the top-10% of their High School graduating class fled so it's seen little or no population growth. It's the way of things. At my last High School reunion, nobody in the top-10% of my class had stuck around. They sprayed to the high cost of living places around the country where there was better opportunity. The few that stuck around either had family businesses they are now running or they went doctor/lawyer track where you don't have to move since those jobs exist everywhere.

First time (save for a few notoriously uppity Hinghamites), I've heard Weymouth called "undesirable". It's honestly very average, and would guess the median income to be at or slightly above the state overall. It's not a "great town". Schools aren't the best (although many do just fine there). Drugs are pretty bad, like many places. Crime is overall low. Aspects of it are "city" even though it's technically a suburb. As I said in my previous post, population is growing at a significant pace and will likely keep increasing as base development picks up. Sorry your experience in Weymouth was bad, but it sounds like you are quite "successful" despite that.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by mdovell

Seekonk is practically Providence not Boston..

It's a suburb.

Originally Posted by mdovell

You have to look at longer population growth beyond 20 years, see who iso ING in, moving out and staying. Kids grow up go to higher Ed (maybe the military) and move. Do they move back? Not really are homes behind bought by single people or just couples. How long does that last? What's the divorce rate and how do they split that?

This demographical shift is affecting everywhere. City, suburb, rural alike.

Originally Posted by mdovell

You have to undead happening in the Berkshires and cape is eventually going to creep in other parts of the state. It isn't a rural, suburban or urban issue.

NO.

[mdovell]

Uh yeah about that. Look at the school enrollment and cross check that with the immigration article and get back to me. Yes it is growing.

I grew up in Weymouth and yes it is dying. The drug problem is one of the worst in the state, I personally know former members of the Mayors staff and still know plenty of people there. It used to be a town to be proud of. The base closed, old chains left and gradually became a homogeneous tasteless suburb. The Fairgrounds are long gone, the mall is gone, vacant fronts at Columbia square, under maintained parks, blocking off trails that kids walked for generations etc. It used to be nice.

As schools are mentioned keep inind general government has little else.

https://www.masslive.com/news/2019/1...ort-finds.html

Again police need the tools to do their job. Schools rely on police for long term security anyway. The days of shooing away police from schools are long over.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by mdovell

Uh yeah about that. Look at the school enrollment and cross check that with the immigration article and get back to me. Yes it is growing.

Yes NEWS FLASH, birth rates are declining in the western world. Nothing specific to Weymouth or suburban towns. A town cannot be dying if it is growing, that is just silly.

Originally Posted by mdovell

I grew up in Weymouth and yes it is dying. The drug problem is one of the worst in the state, I personally know former members of the Mayors staff and still know plenty of people there. It used to be a town to be proud of. The base closed, old chains left and gradually became a homogeneous tasteless suburb. The Fairgrounds are long gone, the mall is gone, vacant fronts at Columbia square, under maintained parks, blocking off trails that kids walked for generations etc. It used to be nice.

Times change my friend. The area I grew up in kind of "lost its soul" in the same manner. Retail has changed entirely on a nationwide level, locally much has shifted to "leafier" Hingham (there goes your whole notion there) ie. Derby St., the shipyard...you talk about Columbian Square but what about the Landing? That seems to be doing better. N. Weymouth used to be the pits, but has been on an upswing for some time now (particularly those streets with views of Boston Harbor). Either way, the suburbs are alive and well. You have yet to show anything convincing otherwise.

Originally Posted by mdovell

https://www.masslive.com/news/2019/1...ort-finds.html

Again police need the tools to do their job. Schools rely on police for long term security anyway. The days of shooing away police from schools are long over.

What in the world does this have to do with Weymouth??? The article mentioned Hatfield, a small rural town in Western Mass. The problem seems to be more prevalent in smaller departments like that.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by massnative71

First time (save for a few notoriously uppity Hinghamites), I've heard Weymouth called "undesirable".

Originally Posted by mdovell

I grew up in Weymouth and yes it is dying. The drug problem is one of the worst in the state, I personally know former members of the Mayors staff and still know plenty of people there. It used to be a town to be proud of. The base closed, old chains left and gradually became a homogeneous tasteless suburb. The Fairgrounds are long gone, the mall is gone, vacant fronts at Columbia square, under maintained parks, blocking off trails that kids walked for generations etc. It used to be nice.

Between the school ratings and this kind of narrative, I think "undesirable" is appropriate. Any time Weymouth comes up in a "where should I buy a house" thread here, it's typically in the context of being priced out of anything better.


I think it's tied to the location of the metro Boston suburban office parks and transportation infrastructure. The suburban jobs tend to be north or west of Boston. The Southeast Expressway is 1950 highway infrastructure. If you don't work near South Station where commuter rail is convenient, it's tough to get to the office.

[Dm84]

Originally Posted by GeoffD

Between the school ratings and this kind of narrative, I think "undesirable" is appropriate. Any time Weymouth comes up in a "where should I buy a house" thread here, it's typically in the context of being priced out of anything better.

And yet, outside the echo chamber of the 1% on this forum, people are buying houses in places like Weymouth every day, and the house prices keep rising. It's especially ironic to see someone who's boosting Springfield every day take a cheap shot at Weymouth.

I think it's tied to the location of the metro Boston suburban office parks and transportation infrastructure. The suburban jobs tend to be north or west of Boston. The Southeast Expressway is 1950 highway infrastructure. If you don't work near South Station where commuter rail is convenient, it's tough to get to the office.

128 and the Pike are no picnic either.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by GeoffD

Between the school ratings and this kind of narrative, I think "undesirable" is appropriate. Any time Weymouth comes up in a "where should I buy a house" thread here, it's typically in the context of being priced out of anything better.

Originally Posted by Dm84

And yet, outside the echo chamber of the 1% on this forum, people are buying houses in places like Weymouth every day, and the house prices keep rising. It's especially ironic to see someone who's boosting Springfield every day take a cheap shot at Weymouth.

Sure there is almost always somewhere "better". "Scituate is for people priced out of Cohasset". "Medfield is for people priced out of Dover". "Needham is for people priced out of Newton", and so on...however nobody would classify any of those towns as "undesirable". C-D does not reflect the real world, the top 1% are WAY overrepresented here. Even a "middling" town like Weymouth requires a good chunk of change to live in now. And even with a school rating of 4, it sure as heck beats Boston, Chelsea, Revere, Lynn, etc. never mind SPRINGFIELD.

Originally Posted by GeoffD

I think it's tied to the location of the metro Boston suburban office parks and transportation infrastructure. The suburban jobs tend to be north or west of Boston. The Southeast Expressway is 1950 highway infrastructure. If you don't work near South Station where commuter rail is convenient, it's tough to get to the office.

True the South Shore does not have quite the price tag of Metro-West for the comparable, for that reason. More people there work finance/insurance jobs in the Financial District, Seaport, etc. The commute sucks, but it sure doesn't stop people from living there.