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.
in my opinion, instead of perpetually trying to over gentrified places like harlem or williamsburg, that are no longer the grimy places they used to be in the 80s, they really should try to stop the gang violence in Brownsville (which is one of the very few areas in the city who doesn't show any sign of improvement), knock down some of the projects around rockaway avenue, place more cops on the corners, and I mean "social" cops, not those who stop & frisk people randomly, the city really has to set a dialogue between NYPD, who got a terrible image, and the locals. As long as inner city inhabitants will see the police as the enemy, the situation will never improve, the violence will never stop and the "no snitchin" mentality will continue. Way more public assistance should be allowed and experienced teachers must come in the local public schools, education is the key and in the US, public school is plagued with violence, low test scores, high drop out rates, the wealthy kids go learn their lessons in private schools while the public school system is getting worse and worse, this is how America keeps poor and minorities in ignorance so they won't fight this unfair system that promotes inequality.
The crime rate may be the same, but at least they'll have fresh air and open space.
The point is that they won't have to move to an area that's worse than the area they came from. They'll have to commute, but everything else about their quality of life will remain the same, even if the area becomes as bad as their old neighborhood, which doesn't even necessarily have to happen, since they might spread themselves out. There are a lot more places to move to (land-wise) in the suburbs than in the city, so it's easier to spread out.
It's going to happen.
No use trying to make it seem like their life will be better after gentrification of their old neighborhoods.
Even if they do spread out more murderers and thugs will just continue moving in and ruining the quality of life.
This is off subject but to me Gentrification is pointless.
You are just making another area ghetto.
Did you know that most of the poor Harlem residents being priced out just move to The Bronx and most Brooklyn residents just move to Staten Island.
So, The Bronx just ends up being more ghetto and Staten Island ends up being the GHETTO forgotten borough. Don't forget all of those suburban areas in Queens.
It's going to happen.
No use trying to make it seem like their life will be better after gentrification of their old neighborhoods.
Even if they do spread out more murderers and thugs will just continue moving in and ruining the quality of life.
This is off subject but to me Gentrification is pointless.
You are just making another area ghetto.
Did you know that most of the poor Harlem residents being priced out just move to The Bronx and most Brooklyn residents just move to Staten Island.
So, The Bronx just ends up being more ghetto and Staten Island ends up being the GHETTO forgotten borough. Don't forget all of those suburban areas in Queens.
And your point is what exactly?
Some areas become worse and some become better. It's just the cycle of the city. Back in the early 1900s, the poorest neighborhoods in the city were in Lower Manhattan, and now they are some of the wealthiest. Upper Manhattan used to be the home of the wealthy and The Bronx used to be entirely middle class. Then they declined and are coming back up.
So some areas in Queens, The Bronx, and Staten Island will go from being middle-class to ghetto (though living in Staten Island, I can only think of a handful of "ghettoes" and their crime levels are nowhere near the levels of areas like Brownsville and the South Bronx)
Some areas become worse and some become better. It's just the cycle of the city. Back in the early 1900s, the poorest neighborhoods in the city were in Lower Manhattan, and now they are some of the wealthiest. Upper Manhattan used to be the home of the wealthy and The Bronx used to be entirely middle class. Then they declined and are coming back up.
So some areas in Queens, The Bronx, and Staten Island will go from being middle-class to ghetto (though living in Staten Island, I can only think of a handful of "ghettoes" and their crime levels are nowhere near the levels of areas like Brownsville and the South Bronx)
Do you think Staten Island can afford another Clifton? That place is terrible.
Do you think queens can afford another St. Albans or Jamaica?
What will they do with the new ghettos? Shouldn't they try to stop crime rather than push it somewhere else?
As a Bronx Landlord I can confirm that the ghetto people from Harlem and Washington Height, once priced out of their neighborhood unfortunately move to the Bronx and makes certain areas of the Bronx worse. A Bronx Landlord that is not informed about this ugly trend will become a victim to decay of quality of life in their building and soon the neighborhood. Since I'm hip to whats happening, I make it very difficult for those kind of people to qualify for one of my apartments ie 650 credit score, 40x the rent, must be employed, no criminal background, no previous evictions or landlord/tenant issues, etc, hence I kept the building desirable and ghetto free despite it being in the Bronx and despite the flood of undesirable people from those areas.
As a Bronx Landlord I can confirm that the ghetto people from Harlem and Washington Height, once priced out of their neighborhood unfortunately move to the Bronx and makes certain areas of the Bronx worse. A Bronx Landlord that is not informed about this ugly trend will become a victim to decay of quality of life in their building and soon the neighborhood. Since I'm hip to whats happening, I make it very difficult for those kind of people to qualify for one of my apartments ie 650 credit score, 40x the rent, must be employed, no criminal background, no previous evictions or landlord/tenant issues, etc, hence I kept the building desirable and ghetto free despite it being in the Bronx and despite the flood of undesirable people from those areas.
Can I ask you a few questions.
Doesn't that also make it hard for you to find tenants? Once the neighborhood goes down the drains nobody will want to move in.
What do you plan on doing then?
These questions aare not meant to offend you. I'm just a curious person
I knew a couple of landlords who get stuck between a rock and a hard place because of that.
Do you think Staten Island can afford another Clifton? That place is terrible.
Do you think queens can afford another St. Albans or Jamaica?
What will they do with the new ghettos? Shouldn't they try to stop crime rather than push it somewhere else?
you are right on the last part but even with the liberian gangs problem in the area I don't think that Clifton can be considered a worst of the worst places in NYC (damn I don't even hear about Park Hill anymore).
As a Bronx Landlord I can confirm that the ghetto people from Harlem and Washington Height, once priced out of their neighborhood unfortunately move to the Bronx and makes certain areas of the Bronx worse. A Bronx Landlord that is not informed about this ugly trend will become a victim to decay of quality of life in their building and soon the neighborhood. Since I'm hip to whats happening, I make it very difficult for those kind of people to qualify for one of my apartments ie 650 credit score, 40x the rent, must be employed, no criminal background, no previous evictions or landlord/tenant issues, etc, hence I kept the building desirable and ghetto free despite it being in the Bronx and despite the flood of undesirable people from those areas.
Hilltopjay, You're my goddamn hero! There should be more landlords like you. I live in Washington Heights and when i save up i am moving to the Hoboken area. Fack the heights and harlem!!!
Do you think Staten Island can afford another Clifton? That place is terrible.
Do you think queens can afford another St. Albans or Jamaica?
What will they do with the new ghettos? Shouldn't they try to stop crime rather than push it somewhere else?
Hold on. You live in Newark and you think Clifton is bad? I don't even think St. Albans is bad either. Unless you live in one of the better parts of Newark (the North or East Wards).
Clifton doesn't even come to mind when I think of a "ghetto" on Staten Island. The areas I were thinking of were Stapleton, Arlington, and the northern sections of New Brighton, West Brighton, and Port Richmond.
And crime is generally worst when you have a bunch of low-income people together in the same neighborhood. When you spread them out, the crime rate generally isn't too bad. Look at all of the housing projects south of the SIE. All of them and the surrounding neighborhoods are generally considered safe. Say the tipping point for when a neighborhood starts to become really dangerous is when the poverty rate goes over 30%. Very few SI neighborhoods are like that.
There's nothing saying they will necessarily keep on moving into the same areas of SI and bring those areas over 30%. They could spread themselves out over several areas and you don't have concentrated poverty, and therefore the crime rate isn't that bad.
Hold on. You live in Newark and you think Clifton is bad? I don't even think St. Albans is bad either. Unless you live in one of the better parts of Newark (the North or East Wards).
Clifton doesn't even come to mind when I think of a "ghetto" on Staten Island. The areas I were thinking of were Stapleton, Arlington, and the northern sections of New Brighton, West Brighton, and Port Richmond.
And crime is generally worst when you have a bunch of low-income people together in the same neighborhood. When you spread them out, the crime rate generally isn't too bad. Look at all of the housing projects south of the SIE. All of them and the surrounding neighborhoods are generally considered safe. Say the tipping point for when a neighborhood starts to become really dangerous is when the poverty rate goes over 30%. Very few SI neighborhoods are like that.
There's nothing saying they will necessarily keep on moving into the same areas of SI and bring those areas over 30%. They could spread themselves out over several areas and you don't have concentrated poverty, and therefore the crime rate isn't that bad.
Actually, I live on one of the few quiet streets in the West Ward.
And I agree they could space out but states have a bad habit of building projects in suburban areas once the poor move in.
They have to put them somewhere don't they?
This raises the poverty rate and the number of poor people packed together.
Oh, and don't forget all the housing vouchers being given to people to put them in suburban apartments.
Last edited by Ilovethecommunity; 01-08-2012 at 01:47 PM..
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.
