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.
The unsafe, unclean, bad school environments almost killed cities. People moved out of the cities for a better life. If the cities offered everything everyone wanted to raise a family, the burbs would never have flourished over time.
That could be true... cities weren't exactly clean back then, and often had factories and manufacturing plants next to residential buildings, but people who initially moved to the suburbs were given tax breaks and tax incentives, much in the way that people in subsidized and section 8 houses are today. The suburbs weren't built to offer people a better way of life, because honestly, Capitalists don't give a rats ass about the general population, they only care about making profit. The suburbs were built so the government can make money during the depression. No if, ands, or buts about it. That's all it was for.
Cities do offer everything to raise a family and arguably more for more people. You forget that some of the best schools within the metro are actually WITHIN the city limits of Philadelphia. Penn Alexander, Masterman, Meredith, Central, etc. etc. Let's try to look at things from a fair and balanced perspective if we are going to have this conversation Frank.
Now if we look at suburbs from another perspective, their creation is coming back to nip this country in the butt. We are sprawling outward instead of maintaining existing infrastructure. Inner ring suburbs are starting to decline all around the U.S... everything that people tried to escape by moving to the suburbs is now following them to the suburbs.
Not really.. The burbs offer everything city don't have. Thats why we moved.. If the city had what we wanted we would not have moved. Its that simple. Its why everyone I have ever known has too. No one wants to spend more $$ to get to the burbs unless it offers something people want. And it surely does. Thats why the ring keeps moving out away from the cities and the people keep coming out here.. You can try to make it sound like the people who move away from the city are wrong but living in both places i can tell ya they are not
Not really.. The burbs offer everything city don't have. Thats why we moved.. If the city had what we wanted we would not have moved. Its that simple. Its why everyone I have ever known has too. No one wants to spend more $$ to get to the burbs unless it offers something people want. And it surely does. Thats why the ring keeps moving out away from the cities and the people keep coming out here.. You can try to make it sound like the people who move away from the city are wrong but living in both places i can tell ya they are not
Okay. What do suburbs offer that cities don't? Because I can give you a laundry list of things that cities offer that suburbs don't.
Its very simple.. Good schools, clean, safe streets, nice homes, good public service. For anything else the city has like Arts, restaurants, medical expertise etc we can drive to and enjoy like anyone who lives there. Its really the best of both worlds.
That could be true... cities weren't exactly clean back then, and often had factories and manufacturing plants next to residential buildings, but people who initially moved to the suburbs were given tax breaks and tax incentives, much in the way that people in subsidized and section 8 houses are today. The suburbs weren't built to offer people a better way of life, because honestly, Capitalists don't give a rats ass about the general population, they only care about making profit. The suburbs were built so the government can make money during the depression. No if, ands, or buts about it. That's all it was for.
Cities do offer everything to raise a family and arguably more for more people. You forget that some of the best schools within the metro are actually WITHIN the city limits of Philadelphia. Penn Alexander, Masterman, Meredith, Central, etc. etc. Let's try to look at things from a fair and balanced perspective if we are going to have this conversation Frank.
Now if we look at suburbs from another perspective, their creation is coming back to nip this country in the butt. We are sprawling outward instead of maintaining existing infrastructure. Inner ring suburbs are starting to decline all around the U.S... everything that people tried to escape by moving to the suburbs is now following them to the suburbs.
We're definitely seeing a trend toward re-urbanization, and certain aging Levitt-esque sprawlburbs will definitely decline in stature as a result. I highly doubt, however, we will see anywhere near as much total decay in the suburbs as what transpired in most cities proper from 1960-2000. I also think that besides perennial favorites like the Main Line, Lower Old York Road, Collingswood/The Haddons, etc. etc., similarly charming, walkable inner ring suburbs like Lansdowne will soon be seeing an uptick in popularity. Talk is cheap and far-flung predictions are free, but I personally believe we're far more likely to settle at an equilibrium between urban/suburban quality of life than a complete flip to a nation marked by urban paradise and suburban blight.
And let's be real about Penn Alexander, et al. In addition to being located in generally expensive areas, there is no guarantee that a kid in a good neighborhood elementary school will be able to move on to a Central, Masterman, or CAPA when he/she gets older, even if they are theoretically qualified. Banking on magnet acceptance, which has as much to do with luck and connections as it does academic merit, is going to end up being a losing proposition for many people, myself included. Private school is extremely expensive, and unless I somehow started earning consistently in the seven-figures by my mid-thirties, I would be very hesitant to raise my children in a place where the neighborhood schools are garbage. Don't get me wrong, I personally would prefer to live in an inner ring suburb or residential city neighborhood myself (and if the Philadelphia city schools sufficiently improve by the time I'm ready to start a family, which they very may will, I'd strongly consider the latter). But you can't fault people for wanting to keep their kids away from lackluster classrooms poorly equipped to serve the best and brightest. I'm not suggesting people should split hairs between school rankings (I think a child can be just as well-served by a top-ranked district as a "middle-of-the-road" contender) but there's also a "necessary minimum" that the overwhelming majority of Philadelphia City schools fall pitifully short of meeting.
It's also extremely misleading (not to mention downright condescending) to suggest that people only moved to the suburbs because they were either "tricked" by tax subsidies or blinded by their own prejudices. Obviously, nation-wide city planning (and the not-so-lovely phenomenon known as white flight) played a significant part. But completely legitimate preferences like fresh air, open space, good schools, low crime, and peace and quiet cannot be glossed over either. I agree that besides being a general eyesore, our prevailing sprawling style of middle/outer-ring suburban development is unsustainable in the long term. But that doesn't mean that suburbs are an inherent drain on our nation. There is a happy medium out there and I believe we will discover the "sweet spot" in the not-too-distant future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343
Okay. What do suburbs offer that cities don't? Because I can give you a laundry list of things that cities offer that suburbs don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankgn87
Its very simple.. Good schools, clean, safe streets, nice homes, good public service. For anything else the city has like Arts, restaurants, medical expertise etc we can drive to and enjoy like anyone who lives there. Its really the best of both worlds.
Cities can offer all those things too, but the key difference is that the suburbs can do so at a relatively affordable price. It's silly to view one as being inherently superior to the other. Both settings have their pros and cons. The closest you can get to a "best of two worlds" is a charming inner ring suburb including (but certainly not limited to) Lower Merion or Haddonfield. But these themselves are not exactly cheap, and even if you can afford them, you're still not going to be able to cram every single positive suburban and urban attribute into one place.
Last edited by ElijahAstin; 01-20-2013 at 08:08 PM..
Its very simple.. Good schools, clean, safe streets, nice homes, good public service. For anything else the city has like Arts, restaurants, medical expertise etc we can drive to and enjoy like anyone who lives there. Its really the best of both worlds.
1. There are good schools in the city. Some of the best public schools in the metro are in Philadelphia. Also, cities all around the country tend to be for the childless young professionals, that is nothing unique to Philadelphia.
2. Just because there are unclean areas, doesn't mean there are no clean areas within city limits. There are plenty of clean areas in Center City, South Philadelphia, West Philadelphia, Lower North, Northwest and Northeast Philadelphia.
3. There are plenty of nice homes and they tend to be a better quality build, better architecture and more interestingly designed in the city. Sure rowhomes are smaller, but there are plenty of large victorian twins in UCity, there are plenty of larger houses being built down in South Philadelphia by the sports complex. Chestnut Hill has some of the largest houses in the metro. And the Northeast and Northwest offer some large houses. There is also some massive rowhomes in the Rittenhouse area... so if you desire size, it's not undoable.
4. Sure there are unsafe parts of the city, but there are perfectly safe parts of the city too in every section of the city. There are unsafe suburbs too.
5. Good public service. What do you mean? In all of my life living in the suburbs I did not see one "public service" by the township. Never saw a street cleaner. Nothing. Totally irrelevant.
What the city offers that the suburbs DON'T is certainly plenty. You proved my point, you have to DRIVE to do anything of interest. All the action is in the city. I can walk to anything you have to drive to. I can walk to the bar or a restaurant or for shopping. I have access to world class public transit, my job, world class shopping, museums, restaurants, bars, parks, sporting events, and grocery stores all within walking distance. Anywhere too far to walk I can take public transit to. I am in the middle of a large metropolitan city surrounded by hundreds of thousands of people within a couple mile radius. I can even just walk with nothing to do and have interesting architecture and an interesting street scape all around me, with thousands of other people out and about, not a monotonous walk through the suburbs with the same house over and over again where your lucky to see even one person. Also, in the city, people converse and are friendly. In the suburbs, someone will call the cops on you if you get to close to their house. In the city, there is a sense of community like no suburb you can find. People converse, when you walk down the street people will say hi, or good morning. In the suburbs you will get a rude glance and no response if you say hi to anyone you don't know. There is no sense of community. Everyone lives in the same house with the same yard with the same two cars and two kids, everyone drives to work from 9-5 to drive back home again and do the same thing over again the next day. Any action besides the shopping mall or the nearest Friday's (or other chain restaurant) is within the city where you HAVE TO DRIVE TO... then have to drive back home at night, so you can't have any fun. There are some few good exceptions of suburbs IMO like New Hope, Collingswood, Media, etc... but they are still inferior to the vibe of the city.
1. There are good schools in the city. Some of the best public schools in the metro are in Philadelphia. Also, cities all around the country tend to be for the childless young professionals, that is nothing unique to Philadelphia.
2. Just because there are unclean areas, doesn't mean there are no clean areas within city limits. There are plenty of clean areas in Center City, South Philadelphia, West Philadelphia, Lower North, Northwest and Northeast Philadelphia.
3. There are plenty of nice homes and they tend to be a better quality build, better architecture and more interestingly designed in the city. Sure rowhomes are smaller, but there are plenty of large victorian twins in UCity, there are plenty of larger houses being built down in South Philadelphia by the sports complex. Chestnut Hill has some of the largest houses in the metro. And the Northeast and Northwest offer some large houses. There is also some massive rowhomes in the Rittenhouse area... so if you desire size, it's not undoable.
4. Sure there are unsafe parts of the city, but there are perfectly safe parts of the city too in every section of the city. There are unsafe suburbs too.
5. Good public service. What do you mean? In all of my life living in the suburbs I did not see one "public service" by the township. Never saw a street cleaner. Nothing. Totally irrelevant.
What the city offers that the suburbs DON'T is certainly plenty. You proved my point, you have to DRIVE to do anything of interest. All the action is in the city. I can walk to anything you have to drive to. I can walk to the bar or a restaurant or for shopping. I have access to world class public transit, my job, world class shopping, museums, restaurants, bars, parks, sporting events, and grocery stores all within walking distance. Anywhere too far to walk I can take public transit to. I am in the middle of a large metropolitan city surrounded by hundreds of thousands of people within a couple mile radius. I can even just walk with nothing to do and have interesting architecture and an interesting street scape all around me, with thousands of other people out and about, not a monotonous walk through the suburbs with the same house over and over again where your lucky to see even one person. Also, in the city, people converse and are friendly. In the suburbs, someone will call the cops on you if you get to close to their house. In the city, there is a sense of community like no suburb you can find. People converse, when you walk down the street people will say hi, or good morning. In the suburbs you will get a rude glance and no response if you say hi to anyone you don't know. There is no sense of community. Everyone lives in the same house with the same yard with the same two cars and two kids, everyone drives to work from 9-5 to drive back home again and do the same thing over again the next day. Any action besides the shopping mall or the nearest Friday's (or other chain restaurant) is within the city where you HAVE TO DRIVE TO... then have to drive back home at night, so you can't have any fun. There are some few good exceptions of suburbs IMO like New Hope, Collingswood, Media, etc... but they are still inferior to the vibe of the city.
We all have choices to make summers, and while my lifestyle preferences are probably closer to yours than Frank's, that doesn't give you the right to make the same hackneyed generalizations about the suburbs that he sometimes makes with regard to the city. The urban experience you seem to desire (and all the bells and whistles that come along with it) is going to cost quite a pretty penny. Though I certainly hope you're able to afford your hopes and dreams, keep in mind that many people lack the sufficient money required to reap the pros of raising a family in the city while being able to insulate themselves from most of the cons.
We all have choices to make summers, and while my lifestyle preferences are probably closer to yours than Frank's, that doesn't give you the right to make the same hackneyed generalizations about the suburbs that he sometimes makes with regard to the city. The urban experience you seem to desire (and all the bells and whistles that come along with it) is going to cost quite a pretty penny. Though I certainly hope you're able to afford your hopes and dreams, keep in mind that many people lack the sufficient money required to reap the pros of raising a family in the city while being able to insulate themselves from most of the cons.
You do realize I only do it because he does the same thing to the city. I understand why people move to the suburbs to raise a family, it is just easier and cheaper... but Frank acts like it is completely undoable in the city.. which is completely untrue, it is definitely doable to raise a kid properly in the city. Some of my friends were raised in the Northeast and went to the same university I did... some others went to Penn State.... so what's the difference again? Also, practically ALL of my friends who grew up in the suburbs with me, now live in the city.. If I had a house in the suburbs I would be worrying about the future. On the other hand, I can't wait to buy a house in the city, because I know it's only going to appreciate in value.
You do realize I only do it because he does the same thing to the city.
That's a silly reason and only makes you look bad. Also, while I'd say you two are generally tit-for-tat as far as unfounded stereotypical statements go, you really made some vitriolic (and quite frankly, downright offensive) statements this run around. I respect the two of you both as forum contributors and on a personal level. Do yourselves a favor and at least try and get along so we can fulfill our missions of helping prospective movers as much as possible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343
I understand why people move to the suburbs to raise a family, it is just easier and cheaper... but Frank acts like it is completely undoable in the city.. which is completely untrue, it is definitely doable to raise a kid properly in the city.
I completely agree with you on this. Nonetheless, in the end, you have to make a choice, and just as moving out to the suburbs will inevitably sacrifice some of the perks of the city, choosing an urban neighborhood also involves trade-offs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343
Some of my friends were raised in the Northeast and went to the same university I did... some others went to Penn State.... so what's the difference again?
This is a meaningless statement out of context. Did they go to public, private, or parochial school? Did they mostly take honors/AP or college prep classes? Were the public schools magnets or open-enrollment? Obviously, I'm not suggesting having a bright future is an impossibility at a city school, and many of the Northeast neighborhood schools, while not all that great, offer stable enough learning environments and do manage to meet the necessary minimum educational threshold. Of course, if you live in the Northeast, which you often disparage as "the worst of both worlds," you get the drawbacks of a "concrete suburban" lifestyle without the benefit of urban vitality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343
Also, practically ALL of my friends who grew up in the suburbs with me, now live in the city..
I live in the city too, and I also happen to enjoy it, as do a lot of young people. Many of them eventually relocate to the suburbs to raise a family. More among our generation will probably remain in the urban core, but if you're hoping for an all-out transformation in familial settlement patterns, you're probably going to end up sorely disappointed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summersm343
If I had a house in the suburbs I would be worrying about the future. On the other hand, I can't wait to buy a house in the city, because I know it's only going to appreciate in value.
Another meaningless statement out of context. Places like Willingboro, Levittown, and Pennsauken, have declined, and will probably continue to do so. Places like Voorhees, Montgomeryville, and Exton almost surely will not in the foreseeable future. On the same token, while a row home in Northern Liberties will very likely significantly appreciate in value, a twin in Bustleton probably will not.
That's a silly reason and only makes you look bad. Also, while I'd say you two are generally tit-for-tat as far as unfounded stereotypical statements go, you really made some vitriolic (and quite frankly, downright offensive) statements this run around. I respect the two of you both as forum contributors and on a personal level. Do yourselves a favor and at least try and get along so we can fulfill our missions of helping prospective movers as much as possible.
Please tell me what I said, that was:
A. Offensive
B. Vitriolic
C. Untrue
Please. I would like to know.
I offered what I think is a fair critique of the majority of the suburbs in the United States.
Also, when do I ever say anything stereotypical? Is it actually stereotypical? Or just painfully true, and you don't like to hear it?
I would like to see a happy medium between urban and suburban as well, but there are some deep dark truths that seep through the veins of EVERY American suburb that needs to be addressed, and IDK why it is taboo to talk about it while on the other hand, no one bats an eye as cities continued to be bashed by those from the suburbs.
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.
Also, practically ALL of my friends who grew up in the suburbs with me, now live in the city.. 
If I had a house in the suburbs I would be worrying about the future. On the other hand, I can't wait to buy a house in the city, because I know it's only going to appreciate in value.
