U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York 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)
 
 
Old 11-23-2012, 08:49 PM
 
396 posts, read 1,196,840 times
Reputation: 88

Advertisements

Compared to east New York and bed-study which one would you say was worse? What would you say was the safest part of NYC during that time period?
Thanks
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-23-2012, 09:16 PM
 
Location: Crown Heights
965 posts, read 2,255,185 times
Reputation: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Revis Island View Post
Compared to east New York and bed-study which one would you say was worse? What would you say was the safest part of NYC during that time period?
Thanks
neighborhoods like Brownsville and East New York are special kinds of neighborhoods where throughout probably most of their history they've all ways been kind of bad no matter what the demographics were. In spite of Bed Stuy's infamy in years past, Brownsville was always worse than Bed Stuy, it has a higher concentration of public housing, and in those days it had a lot more burned out buildings and vacant lots festering with trash. Of course I can only speak of the late 80's on into the 90's on account of I was born in '83. However, from history given to me by people who experienced it and also by just reading, Brownsville was always rough and was designed as a low neighborhood from the get go.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2012, 09:23 PM
 
396 posts, read 1,196,840 times
Reputation: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by twist07 View Post
neighborhoods like Brownsville and East New York are special kinds of neighborhoods where throughout probably most of their history they've all ways been kind of bad no matter what the demographics were. In spite of Bed Stuy's infamy in years past, Brownsville was always worse than Bed Stuy, it has a higher concentration of public housing, and in those days it had a lot more burned out buildings and vacant lots festering with trash. Of course I can only speak of the late 80's on into the 90's on account of I was born in '83. However, from history given to me by people who experienced it and also by just reading, Brownsville was always rough and was designed as a low neighborhood from the get go.
Thank you
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2012, 09:40 PM
 
Location: Bronx, NY
5,680 posts, read 18,373,624 times
Reputation: 2264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Revis Island View Post
Compared to east New York and bed-study which one would you say was worse? What would you say was the safest part of NYC during that time period?
Thanks
Brownsville was an early Jewish ghetto. But during the crack era, Brownsville was not one of the very worst. It was horrible, but there were worse neighborhoods. However, it has seen less improvement than other neighborhoods, and that is why it is the worst neighborhood today.

Look:

1.) 48th* (E.Tremont) - 201 per 100,000

2.) 41st (Hunts Point) - 112 per 100,000

3.) 28th+32nd (Central Harlem) - 108 per 100,000

4.) 42nd (Morrisania)- 94 per 100,000

5.) 40th (Mott Haven) - 93 per 100,000

30th precinct (West Harlem) - 88 to 92 per 100,000

6.) 79th+81st (Bed-Stuy) - 87 per 100,000

7.) 83rd (Bushwick) - 75 per 100,000

8.) 44th (Highbridge) - 74 per 100,000

9.)73rd (Brownsville) - 71 per 100,000

10.) 46th (Tremont) - 69 per 100,000

11.) 75th (East NY) - 68 per 100,000

12.) 67th+70th (E.Flatbush/Flatbush) - 61 per 100,000

13.) 23rd+25th (East Harlem) - 60 per 100,000

14.) 34th (Washington Heights) - 52 per 100,000

*Note, the East Tremont rate of 201 was inflated with the Happy Land arson fire. The rate without that was in the 60's.

Thats the 1990 murder rates. Um West Harlem (30th precinct) is in that funny spot because I previously miscalculated its murder rate. I had it around 65 per 100,000 but the problem was that I included the population for both the 26th and 30th precinct with only the 30th precincts stats. So the above is roughly the range the 30th would have been in, given some population numbers I found online.

As you can see, Bushwick and Bed-Stuy had higher murder rates than Brownsville, at least in 1990.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2012, 09:54 PM
 
396 posts, read 1,196,840 times
Reputation: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMario View Post
Brownsville was an early Jewish ghetto. But during the crack era, Brownsville was not one of the very worst. It was horrible, but there were worse neighborhoods. However, it has seen less improvement than other neighborhoods, and that is why it is the worst neighborhood today.

Look:

1.) 48th* (E.Tremont) - 201 per 100,000

2.) 41st (Hunts Point) - 112 per 100,000

3.) 28th+32nd (Central Harlem) - 108 per 100,000

4.) 42nd (Morrisania)- 94 per 100,000

5.) 40th (Mott Haven) - 93 per 100,000

30th precinct (West Harlem) - 88 to 92 per 100,000

6.) 79th+81st (Bed-Stuy) - 87 per 100,000

7.) 83rd (Bushwick) - 75 per 100,000

8.) 44th (Highbridge) - 74 per 100,000

9.)73rd (Brownsville) - 71 per 100,000

10.) 46th (Tremont) - 69 per 100,000

11.) 75th (East NY) - 68 per 100,000

12.) 67th+70th (E.Flatbush/Flatbush) - 61 per 100,000

13.) 23rd+25th (East Harlem) - 60 per 100,000

14.) 34th (Washington Heights) - 52 per 100,000

*Note, the East Tremont rate of 201 was inflated with the Happy Land arson fire. The rate without that was in the 60's.

Thats the 1990 murder rates. Um West Harlem (30th precinct) is in that funny spot because I previously miscalculated its murder rate. I had it around 65 per 100,000 but the problem was that I included the population for both the 26th and 30th precinct with only the 30th precincts stats. So the above is roughly the range the 30th would have been in, given some population numbers I found online.

As you can see, Bushwick and Bed-Stuy had higher murder rates than Brownsville, at least in 1990.
That's a lot of dead people. Great answer
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2012, 10:36 PM
 
Location: Glendale NY
4,841 posts, read 8,721,195 times
Reputation: 3560
Brownsville was always a bad area, it was obviously worse in the 80s, 90s etc. then today. However, back then there was many neighborhoods just as bad and even worse. Brownsville, compared to many other hoods, hasn't improved much over the years, and its probable the closest to old school NYC ghetto today.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2012, 01:48 AM
 
Location: NY,NY
2,896 posts, read 8,958,739 times
Reputation: 2048
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMario View Post
Brownsville was an early Jewish ghetto. But during the crack era, Brownsville was not one of the very worst. It was horrible, but there were worse neighborhoods. However, it has seen less improvement than other neighborhoods, and that is why it is the worst neighborhood today.

Look:

1.) 48th* (E.Tremont) - 201 per 100,000

2.) 41st (Hunts Point) - 112 per 100,000

3.) 28th+32nd (Central Harlem) - 108 per 100,000

4.) 42nd (Morrisania)- 94 per 100,000

5.) 40th (Mott Haven) - 93 per 100,000

30th precinct (West Harlem) - 88 to 92 per 100,000

6.) 79th+81st (Bed-Stuy) - 87 per 100,000

7.) 83rd (Bushwick) - 75 per 100,000

8.) 44th (Highbridge) - 74 per 100,000

9.)73rd (Brownsville) - 71 per 100,000

10.) 46th (Tremont) - 69 per 100,000

11.) 75th (East NY) - 68 per 100,000

12.) 67th+70th (E.Flatbush/Flatbush) - 61 per 100,000

13.) 23rd+25th (East Harlem) - 60 per 100,000

14.) 34th (Washington Heights) - 52 per 100,000

*Note, the East Tremont rate of 201 was inflated with the Happy Land arson fire. The rate without that was in the 60's.

Thats the 1990 murder rates. Um West Harlem (30th precinct) is in that funny spot because I previously miscalculated its murder rate. I had it around 65 per 100,000 but the problem was that I included the population for both the 26th and 30th precinct with only the 30th precincts stats. So the above is roughly the range the 30th would have been in, given some population numbers I found online.

As you can see, Bushwick and Bed-Stuy had higher murder rates than Brownsville, at least in 1990.
The above is the perfect example of the STUPIDITY of those who rely on Statistics. Statistics can be erroneous, MISINTERPRETED, as this poster is doing.

Bushwick and Bed Stuy had higher rates than Brownsville. Ok, does that mean Brownsville was a SAFER neighborhood? A better place to live than Bushwick and BedStuy? Does it mean that nowhere in the whole of those neighborhoods was "nice", or relatively "safe"?

The reality is that Brownsville was a far worse, and more dangerous place to live than Bed Stuy or Bushwick!

Murders per 100k does NOT tell the story of reality.

[Made up stats just to prove a point, though the relationship is real.]

For example, Brownsville's population totaled 100,000.
Bed Stuy totaled 500,000:

Now, lets say that the geographic size of each neighborhood is equal. Lets also say that 50% of Brownsville is comprised of abandoned, vacant, burnt out housing with BLOCKS of leveled empty lots.

Bed Stuy, on the other hand, while sufferring some similar ills, mostly on the commercial strips, 90% of the housing is in tact, and there are few, if any leveled BLOCKS!

Ok, considering ALL that, along with the poster's murder rate stats, WHICH is the worst neighborhood? Which is the most dangerous? Which is the most unliveable? Which neighborhood are you most unlikely to obtain a mortgage on a building? Of the two area, which will have the more *stable* residents? Which area might even have some residents of middle classs income?

I hope you can see that statistics are for the Stupid! They can be interpreted any number of ways, with any intended meaning. They are most often used by those who wish to make a prejudiced case of one sort or another, and have little to do with the reality of anything.

Stats are simply a SINGLE fact among many facts, and cannot solely be used to determine anything.

Another example, anyone who thinks that Flatbush or East Flatbush are even remotely suffering from the ills of poverty like that found in the South Bronx and/or Harlem, again, is stupid!

There is little, if any, of that kind of poverty, then or now, within those neighborhoods. There is NOT even a housing project in the whole of Flatbush! East Flatbush?? Are there burnt out buildings? Abandoned buildings? Leveled blocks? Absolutely NOT!!

So, let's cut the crap!

****

Brownsville was NOT "always" a "bad area"! It was a working class/lower middle neighborhood. Much of it a Jewish ghetto. That is "ghetto" in the original sense, which does not mean slum nor bad area. It simply means where Jews were forced and/or compelled to be.

It may seem always bad, only if the action of sperm and egg which met to form you occurred in 1983. Though sperm and eggs were meeting for generations prior!!

*****

Please stop gawking!!
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2012, 08:15 AM
 
Location: Confines of the 101 Precinct
23,681 posts, read 37,912,963 times
Reputation: 10319
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMario View Post
Brownsville was an early Jewish ghetto. But during the crack era, Brownsville was not one of the very worst. It was horrible, but there were worse neighborhoods. However, it has seen less improvement than other neighborhoods, and that is why it is the worst neighborhood today.

Look:

1.) 48th* (E.Tremont) - 201 per 100,000

2.) 41st (Hunts Point) - 112 per 100,000

3.) 28th+32nd (Central Harlem) - 108 per 100,000

4.) 42nd (Morrisania)- 94 per 100,000

5.) 40th (Mott Haven) - 93 per 100,000

30th precinct (West Harlem) - 88 to 92 per 100,000

6.) 79th+81st (Bed-Stuy) - 87 per 100,000

7.) 83rd (Bushwick) - 75 per 100,000

8.) 44th (Highbridge) - 74 per 100,000

9.)73rd (Brownsville) - 71 per 100,000

10.) 46th (Tremont) - 69 per 100,000

11.) 75th (East NY) - 68 per 100,000

12.) 67th+70th (E.Flatbush/Flatbush) - 61 per 100,000

13.) 23rd+25th (East Harlem) - 60 per 100,000

14.) 34th (Washington Heights) - 52 per 100,000

*Note, the East Tremont rate of 201 was inflated with the Happy Land arson fire. The rate without that was in the 60's.

Thats the 1990 murder rates. Um West Harlem (30th precinct) is in that funny spot because I previously miscalculated its murder rate. I had it around 65 per 100,000 but the problem was that I included the population for both the 26th and 30th precinct with only the 30th precincts stats. So the above is roughly the range the 30th would have been in, given some population numbers I found online.

As you can see, Bushwick and Bed-Stuy had higher murder rates than Brownsville, at least in 1990.
So that's what determines what makes a neighborhood bad? Murder rates? That's it? Majority of the time it's bad guys killing other bad guys, so these statistics don't affect the average working stiff....what about other stats such as assault/robberies and rapes?
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence

Forum TOS: //www.city-data.com/forumtos.html
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2012, 08:22 AM
 
Location: Bronx, NY
5,680 posts, read 18,373,624 times
Reputation: 2264
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcoltrane View Post
The above is the perfect example of the STUPIDITY of those who rely on Statistics. Statistics can be erroneous, MISINTERPRETED, as this poster is doing.

Bushwick and Bed Stuy had higher rates than Brownsville. Ok, does that mean Brownsville was a SAFER neighborhood? A better place to live than Bushwick and BedStuy? Does it mean that nowhere in the whole of those neighborhoods was "nice", or relatively "safe"?

The reality is that Brownsville was a far worse, and more dangerous place to live than Bed Stuy or Bushwick!

Murders per 100k does NOT tell the story of reality.

[Made up stats just to prove a point, though the relationship is real.]

For example, Brownsville's population totaled 100,000.
Bed Stuy totaled 500,000:

Now, lets say that the geographic size of each neighborhood is equal. Lets also say that 50% of Brownsville is comprised of abandoned, vacant, burnt out housing with BLOCKS of leveled empty lots.

Bed Stuy, on the other hand, while sufferring some similar ills, mostly on the commercial strips, 90% of the housing is in tact, and there are few, if any leveled BLOCKS!

Ok, considering ALL that, along with the poster's murder rate stats, WHICH is the worst neighborhood? Which is the most dangerous? Which is the most unliveable? Which neighborhood are you most unlikely to obtain a mortgage on a building? Of the two area, which will have the more *stable* residents? Which area might even have some residents of middle classs income?

I hope you can see that statistics are for the Stupid! They can be interpreted any number of ways, with any intended meaning. They are most often used by those who wish to make a prejudiced case of one sort or another, and have little to do with the reality of anything.

Stats are simply a SINGLE fact among many facts, and cannot solely be used to determine anything.

Another example, anyone who thinks that Flatbush or East Flatbush are even remotely suffering from the ills of poverty like that found in the South Bronx and/or Harlem, again, is stupid!

There is little, if any, of that kind of poverty, then or now, within those neighborhoods. There is NOT even a housing project in the whole of Flatbush! East Flatbush?? Are there burnt out buildings? Abandoned buildings? Leveled blocks? Absolutely NOT!!

So, let's cut the crap!

****

Brownsville was NOT "always" a "bad area"! It was a working class/lower middle neighborhood. Much of it a Jewish ghetto. That is "ghetto" in the original sense, which does not mean slum nor bad area. It simply means where Jews were forced and/or compelled to be.

It may seem always bad, only if the action of sperm and egg which met to form you occurred in 1983. Though sperm and eggs were meeting for generations prior!!

*****

Please stop gawking!!
Listen idiot, instead of buying your stupid subjective feelings, why don't you take a look at the stats. Your example was crap, like all of your posts. Do you know that a.) Brownsville was not a vacant waste land in the 90's? and b.) Do you know Bushwick was actually the neighborhood in Brooklyn that suffered the most arson and hence had the most empty lots?

Don't get all emotional on me you little girl lol. just cause your poor precious neighborhood was not the worst hood back int he day doesn't mean you gotta cry about it.

But yeah let's listen to this fools opinion, forget the OFFICIAL statistics. Smh.

Idiot.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2012, 08:26 AM
 
82,989 posts, read 80,458,267 times
Reputation: 58960
I lived on church and linden blvd in the 1960's. It was still pretty good but already anything further down linden past rockaway parkway was getting pretty crappy.
i used to walk with my parents down to brothers resturant or the brownsville boys club and we never had issues although the area was in a tailspin at that point already. .

i remember going alone to the ambassador theatre by myself at 9 or 10 years old so how bad could it have been..
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:


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 > New York > New York City
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, 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