Good idea to move from Northern NJ to Philly?

[BPP1999]

Originally Posted by frankgn87

using that analogy, remove the worst part of NYC and then what happens. That makes no sense..

What exactly is your point of this? To try and get the guy to move to South Jersey instead of Philadelphia? Do you really think he will be unsafe in Philadelphia?

[FromGA]

I think of NYC/DC/LA/SF metros as a different breed.

After that, I think Philadelphia is a sort of first among equals, depending on what you are looking for. Philadelphia, being sandwiched between NYC and DC, might be considered inferior to those two cities/metros in some/several aspects. But the correct comparison, for this poster (and for many others) is to compare to Atlanta / New Orleans etc. to Philadelphia. Philadelphia will look much more decent in this comparison.

[frankgn87]

Originally Posted by BPP1999

What exactly is your point of this? To try and get the guy to move to South Jersey instead of Philadelphia? Do you really think he will be unsafe in Philadelphia?

The simple point is that when someone claims that Philly and NYC are the same 'safeness' the website (City-Data) has real data and wanted to point out the *FACTS* . Thats all.. I don't care where people move..

Whats your point? To create false statements to get the guy to move to Philly? (see how silly that sounds?)

[UDResident]

Originally Posted by frankgn87

Nyc crime vs Philly crime a'la city data. Not even close. Philly is over two times as unsafe as NYC..

In 2010 the crime index number for NYC is 243 and Philly is 567. Just the facts..

//www.city-data.com/city/Philad...nsylvania.html

//www.city-data.com/city/New-York-New-York.html

Originally Posted by frankgn87

using that analogy, remove the worst part of NYC and then what happens. That makes no sense..

Or you could act like the worst parts of NYC don't even exist the way you're doing. New York has over 8 million people. It also has over 500 murders a year and at its worst had over 1,000 murders a year. Think about that for a second, frank. True, New York is a lot more built up and is mostly apartment buildings and multifamily so bad areas are maybe a bit more isolated but that doesn't mean people can't just take the subway and commit crimes. More of New York has probably been dealing with crime longer than parts of Philly have. People still get mugged in Brookyln and even in Manhattan. If you live in a ritzy part of it then sure, New York is safer than Philadelphia just because of the sheer wealth and other assets in sections of Manhattan but otherwise you have just as much of a chance to get murdered in Times Square as you do in Logan Square. In other words, neither city is all that unsafe outside of certain neighborhoods but both cities have city crime in their cores and always will.

New York already went through what it went through. It's been on an upswing since probably the 80s. No city has ever been anywhere near as bad as New York at its worst and it seems pretty insulting to the people who grow up in the still rough neighborhoods to act like New York is this crime-free place and Philly is so much rougher.

Originally Posted by FromGA

I think of NYC/DC/LA/SF metros as a different breed.

After that, I think Philadelphia is a sort of first among equals, depending on what you are looking for. Philadelphia, being sandwiched between NYC and DC, might be considered inferior to those two cities/metros in some/several aspects. But the correct comparison, for this poster (and for many others) is to compare to Atlanta / New Orleans etc. to Philadelphia. Philadelphia will look much more decent in this comparison.

The only one out of that list that's on another level than Philadelphia is New York, and that's only because of the city itself. The two metros are very comparable. DC wouldn't even exist as a city if yellow fever hadn't hit Philadelphia. LA would be nothing but a place full of immigrants if it weren't for things like Hollywood and "the American Dream", and they needed to be 200 square miles larger than New York just to get 3 million or so people. SF is sprawl outside of the city and even inside the city, the numbers are mostly boosted by apartment buildings given how suburban some of their streets are. SF is really the only city out there that's even remotely on the level of the East Coast and it still falls short. Philadelphia is an old city, like London, like Boston. The difference is that Philadelphia and its metro are a lot more urban and dense than Boston and especially its metro. You're right that New Orleans and Philadelphia are very similar but that's only because both have produced more real culture and have more real and unique identity than "cities" like LA, SF, and DC could ever hope to.

[frankgn87]

Originally Posted by UDResident

Or you could act like the worst parts of NYC don't even exist the way you're doing. New York has over 8 million people. It also has over 500 murders a year and at its worst had over 1,000 murders a year. Think about that for a second, frank. True, New York is a lot more built up and is mostly apartment buildings and multifamily so bad areas are maybe a bit more isolated but that doesn't mean people can't just take the subway and commit crimes. More of New York has probably been dealing with crime longer than parts of Philly have. People still get mugged in Brookyln and even in Manhattan. If you live in a ritzy part of it then sure, New York is safer than Philadelphia just because of the sheer wealth and other assets in sections of Manhattan but otherwise you have just as much of a chance to get murdered in Times Square as you do in Logan Square. In other words, neither city is all that unsafe outside of certain neighborhoods but both cities have city crime in their cores and always will.

I hear ya.. All I wanted to do is to use city- data's 'data' to clear up any misconceptions.. I would live in Philly over NYC any day tho..
If you remember NYC's mayor called out Philly last year on crime and bragged how they have less in NY due to their stop and search rules up there.

[UDResident]

Originally Posted by frankgn87

I hear ya.. All I wanted to do is to use city- data's 'data' to clear up any misconceptions.. I would live in Philly over NYC any day tho..
If you remember NYC's mayor called out Philly last year on crime and bragged how they have less in NY due to their stop and search rules up there.

They don't. They have a lower murder rate because they have more people.

You're creating and furthering misconceptions, frank.

[frankgn87]

Originally Posted by UDResident

They don't. They have a lower murder rate because they have more people.

You're creating and furthering misconceptions, frank.

Then you better talk to city data cause that's their data.. And amount of people are taken into consideration too. Read the links..


Don't shoot me I am only showing facts..