Lion of the Blogosphere

Everyone wants to live in the Big Apple

The population of New York City is growing. People are moving in, and they are not moving out.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

March 27, 2014 at 9:23 AM

Posted in New York City

136 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Yes…Yes…Yes…America is a crappy place overall. NYT writers have been reading your blog and my posts to make this assertion that everyone wants to live in a vibrant city such as NYC, with all of its immediate amenities, not some podunk suburban wasteland, full of low proles with sprawling shopping malls, or some depressing working class prole city in one of the flyover states.

    I’ve met quite a number of White transplants from places that you wouldn’t expect such as Idaho, Iowa and Utah, and places in the south such as Birmingham, Alabama. But I say a large chunk of our transplants come from NJ, a state with almost non-existent walking cities.

    JS

    March 27, 2014 at 9:53 AM

    • Who wants to walk? I’d rather drive and park right on front of my destination.

      Dave Pinsen

      March 28, 2014 at 5:04 AM

      • Hackensack, NJ seems to be that place!

        JS

        March 29, 2014 at 10:29 AM

  2. Obviously, it is not the case that everyone wants to live in New York. In fact, I doubt that most people want to live in New York. Nevertheless, it is a positive sign for the city that it’s population is growing.

    BTW: “Eight of the 15 fastest-growing large U.S. cities and towns for the year ending July 1, 2012 were in Texas, according to population estimates released today by the U.S. Census Bureau.”

    I don’t think everyone wants to live in Texas.

    ice hole

    March 27, 2014 at 10:00 AM

    • No, but try finding a few NYC transplants in Utah or worse, Nebraska and Idaho. There are more transplants moving to NYC than transplants leaving the Big Apple for some Podunk town.

      JS

      March 27, 2014 at 1:31 PM

      • People are moving because of (perceived) economic necessity, but anyone who wouldn’t rather live in this than this nightmare-scape is sub-human.

        Samson J.

        March 27, 2014 at 9:15 PM

      • Well, shoot – this than this.

        Samson J.

        March 27, 2014 at 9:16 PM

      • So, er, Samson…you don’t believe people can differ on the merits of rural vs urban life?

        SFG

        April 2, 2014 at 10:19 PM

    • Haven’t clicked on this particular article, but in general, it’s important to consider the impact of immigration. Is the population of a US state or city rising because Americans, on net, are moving there? Or are Americans, on net, leaving, but the population is still rising due to immigration?

      There’s a big difference between those two scenarios. If the population of a state or city is rising because of third world immigration, it says little about the relative attractiveness of that place within America, because any part of America is likely attractive relative to the immigrants’ home countries.

      Dave Pinsen

      March 27, 2014 at 1:52 PM

    • I don’t know about Houston, Dallas, or San Antonio, but there are sure a lot of people who want to live in Austin. The cost of living is very low in Texas, which is attracting people from California, New York, and Illinois among other places. There is also no state income tax.

      jonahcheng

      March 27, 2014 at 8:46 PM

  3. if this is supposed to be a comment on deblasio causing people to move out of the city – clearly too short a time frame for anyone to measure.

    the moves on charter schools is going to be unpopular, because its one of the few accessible tactics parents have to avoid the lumpenproletariat in NYC, which is the biggest problem the city has.

    the snow storms were funny – sure, some streets didn’t get plowed, but for a mayor who likes to sleep in, goes late to every meeting he has, it’s a leading indicator of general sloppiness.

    he put bratton in, which in theory, should help keep crime in control. although ending stop and frisk would be far more significant than which guy holds press conferences.

    ultimately, i think the most significant thing to watch for is some major crime event, where deblasio comes down in a way which is seen as lenient or sympathetic to the perpetrators, encouraging more bad behavior. like crown heights or something. so far this hasn’t happened.

    lion of the lionosphere

    March 27, 2014 at 10:02 AM

  4. Read the article again. The growth is driven by natural increase and immigration from other countries. Nyc is still losing people to the rest of the country, though not as quickly as before. Hardly evidence that everyone wants to live in nyc.

    aisaac

    March 27, 2014 at 10:28 AM

    • Because the gentrification of many NAM areas, the incoming population rate probably exceeds the outgoing population rate, and less people want to move out as a result.

      Further, NYC is a college friendly town which attracts students from all over the country and the world. Do you want to be in some college campus area in the middle of nowhere? Only losers want to do this nowadays, with the exception of Ivy League students.

      JS

      March 27, 2014 at 1:39 PM

      • New York City only has one good school — Columbia.

        Renault

        March 27, 2014 at 8:59 PM

      • You are a really terrible person. Please don’t move to Canada.

        Samson J.

        March 27, 2014 at 9:18 PM

      • Renault – And why would you recommend someone attending the University of Buffalo over some school in NYC?

        Besides Columbia, there’s NYU, School of Visual Arts, Parsons School of Design and even FIT. Not Ivy Leagues, but going to these schools provide an urban experience that a liberal artsy college in some bumblef*ck town doesn’t.

        JS

        March 27, 2014 at 11:06 PM

      • NYC isn’t what comes to mind when I think “college town” (or “college-friendly town”). Some real college towns – including places in relatively small cities – are actually pretty cool. I personally went to a big city college, though not in NYC. No regrets, though living in a big city can cut into the “college experience” somewhat. For college-friendliness, Bozeman beats the big city hands down.

        It should also be pointed out NYC versus podunk is a false dichotomy.

        trumwill

        March 28, 2014 at 3:01 AM

      • It should also be pointed out NYC versus podunk is a false dichotomy.

        True, but if you are not heading into Finance/Consulting after college via the Ivy Leagues, then don’t waste your time in some smallville college town, that is if you’re thinking of relocating to a big city after graduation. Your formative years of obtaining connections, internships, experience and friends in the big city gives you an edge over someone starting from scratch.

        Further, being exposed to the big city at that age makes you smarter and more aware, than some naive idiot who’ve just landed right after college.

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 10:17 AM

      • Attending a “bumblefuck” school like Princeton, Dartmouth, or Williams will give you a far more impressive and connected network than any of the New York schools you listed.

        Most good schools are in suburban or rural environments. I cannot think of anything more depressing than attending college in a real city like New York.

        Renault

        March 28, 2014 at 11:26 AM

      • Attending a “bumblefuck” school like Princeton, Dartmouth, or Williams will give you a far more impressive and connected network than any of the New York schools you listed.

        Again, I wasn’t talking about Ivies!

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 11:51 AM

      • So Renault, in your view, NYC is a great place when it comes to afterschool (since you said NYC is where all the smart people congregate after college), but it’s a horrible place to attend school (with the exception of Columbia)? How nice of you to think this way!

        Further, I’ve come across a lot non-Ivy transplants to NYC. They don’t strike me as overly impressive in anything, but maybe less clever and more naive.

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 12:06 PM

      • Basically, yes.

        New York is a great city to live in in your 20s, but it’s a very shitty place in which to attend college. Even Columbia.

        Renault

        March 28, 2014 at 12:46 PM

      • I want to move to Canada mainly because the school is cheaper up there. I don’t want to shelve out ~ 80K-100K for a non-business or law post bac degree here in the states. The Canucks charge significantly less for a prestigious school such as U of Montreal or U of Toronto.

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 1:03 PM

      • And also McGill in Montreal!

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 1:04 PM

      • JS — do you mean for your children? Or are you bored and looking to go back to school?

        Renault

        March 28, 2014 at 3:49 PM

      • New York is a great city to live in in your 20s, but it’s a very shitty place in which to attend college. Even Columbia.

        But why? Many Columbia students remain in NYC after they graduate, especially the Finance types.

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 6:52 PM

      • I want to have 2 careers, as an accountant and a liberal arts college professor. I earn most of my six figure salary in the 1st half of the year. Canadian schools charge less for a fluff subject.

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 6:56 PM

      • JS, do you think that Texas A&M grads stay in College Station? That if you go to Texas A&M your social/professional network will be limited to there? I did pretty much exactly as you suggest, though not for NYC obviously, but there is more than one way of going about it. The most important thing is to be able to forge those contacts and go to an institution that has them. The University of Georgia almost certainly has a better network in Atlanta than does Georgia State University.

        trumwill

        March 29, 2014 at 10:12 AM

      • Further, NYC is a college friendly town which attracts students from all over the country and the world. Do you want to be in some college campus area in the middle of nowhere? Only losers want to do this nowadays, with the exception of Ivy League students.

        Given the fact that NYC is the Finance, Fashion, Media and Law capital of the world, if not, America, many employers in these respective fields hire students from the local colleges/universities with priority.

        I can’t imagine any idiot wanting to attend some art design – bumblef*ck school in some remote suburb and then try to impress a prestigious media company on Madison Avenue for a job when they graduate, since many of these employers look for local candidates in the Parson School of Design or the Pratt Institute, both very good art schools with graduates who work for magazine and publishing companies in NYC, and have been doing internships with them throughout their college years.

        JS

        March 29, 2014 at 10:48 AM

      • Trumwill – Going to a prestigious university in a major metropolis is the best way to forge connections with your peers, and especially with prospective employers because that’s where the jobs are. Of course the city experience usually takes away the traditional campus life when it comes to socializing, but those students who go to an urban setting for college have their 1st priority to explore the city and its cultural offerings, and to do internships with future employers while they’re at it.

        Enclosed college playpens in the boring suburbs are generally for softies who want to play varsity sports and engage in other useless drivel.

        Columbia University in the past few years has seen an immense surge of applicants, where each subsequent year, it has received more applicants than the previous because of its presence in NYC – a place that has become very desirable to live and work, for those who have the means and credentials to do so. Other Ivies have relatively stayed the same, when it comes to comparing the number of past and present applicants. If de Blasio miraculously doesn’t falter and NYC remains the epicenter of Finance, Fashion, Media, Law and the Arts, we could expect Columbia to be on par with HYP in a decade or so; now that it’s in the process of upgrading its infrastructure and building a new business school, thanks to a few billionaires. Of course, detractors would believe otherwise.

        JS

        March 30, 2014 at 9:56 AM

      • CBS’ new campus has absolutely nothing to do with the undergrad school. The new business school won’t even raise CBS’ position within the M7, much less increase the prestige of the undergrad school to HYP levels.

        Also, there’s no reason for anyone at elite schools to work internships during the year if they’re looking to go into finance/consulting/whatever. That shit is for strivers at places like Stern and Baruch.

        Renault

        March 30, 2014 at 2:09 PM

      • Also, there’s no reason for anyone at elite schools to work internships during the year if they’re looking to go into finance/consulting/whatever. That shit is for strivers at places like Stern and Baruch.

        Geesh, you going overdrive again with your responses because you want to put Ivies into the context of the discussion. I already said the Ivies have a de facto prestige and it doesn’t matter where they’re located.

        Why would any striver want to attend a non-elite bumblef*ck suburban school over an urban one? You can’t seem to answer this question. Also, an urban elite school is better than a suburban one of the same status. Of course, your Harvard education blinds you from thinking about someone who is below you.

        Sidenote: I know you studied engineering during your undergrad years. So you’re not a NYC – SWPL!

        Yes, CBS isn’t for undergrads, but it will be in the new Manhattanville campus, along with other schools, one or two of which are for undergrads. And they’re expanding their business school to include other programs that are not currently available in the present school. So who knows as of yet?

        JS

        March 30, 2014 at 7:12 PM

  5. It’s because that’s where the money is. DC too.

    North Dakota is the fastest growing state, three times the national average. That’s because there is a lot of money to be made there. It’s not because North Dakota has lots of broadway shows.

    There are whole swathes of the country that are really nice to live in. Unspoiled land, low crime, homogenous populations. But there is no way for most people to make any money there.

    Bulk Van Der Huge

    March 27, 2014 at 10:41 AM

    • This. I would love to move full time to Jackson Hole – however, I am not independently wealthy

      uatu

      March 27, 2014 at 1:24 PM

    • Right. Americans follow the money fairly well. In Europe this is not as much the case, where hometowns actually mean something.

      Dan

      March 27, 2014 at 1:55 PM

      • A shame. It would be great to live in a country where your hometown actually meant something.

        MaryK

        March 28, 2014 at 5:58 PM

      • I’m not so sure Americans really do. By now it should be pretty much common knowledge that there are high-paying jobs for everyone in North Dakota. Yet despite high unemployment in many places there hasn’t been any huge influx of job seekers in the Peace Garden State. While North Dakota’s population is growing rapidly in percentage terms, that’s from a very low base and it remains a small state.

        Peter

        ironrailsironweights

        March 29, 2014 at 1:30 AM

      • Europe has population density. The USA does not. Many people would love to earn a great living in their hometown, near family. However, we are often forced to follow the economy.

        Rod

        April 16, 2014 at 2:06 AM

  6. Would have been nice to see a breakout of the “influx of foreigners.”

    Curle

    March 27, 2014 at 10:56 AM

  7. “These population increases underscore the need to spur creation of housing for all New Yorkers, something which we are focusing on as part of the mayor’s mandate to provide 200,000 affordable apartments over the next 10 years,” said Carl Weisbrod, the planning commission chairman.”

    Ya’ll are about to get s-c-r-e-w-e-d.

    destructure

    March 27, 2014 at 10:57 AM

  8. Why? Philadelphia seems so much nicer. And it still has houses that are affordable. Even Brooklyn is now becoming unaffordable. It’s prole neighborhoods are being ruined (in my view) by hipster/bobo types. It would be one thing if people like the commenters on LOTB were moving in. But these invaders are liberal types and wealthy foreigners. Those of us who have families that bought houses here 30-50 years ago will have to settle for buying a small 3 room apartment for 220K and then paying a maintenance fee that is equal to what our rents were 12 years ago. Paying a fortune to live in a box and make someone else wealthy is now a New York City condition, not just a Manhattan one. So I’m out of here. Life sucks. I so regret being born a New Yorker. I don’t know a soul in Philadelphia, but at least it’s urban. I so hate having to structure life around the automobile. With my luck Philly won’t work out and I’ll be stuck in Staten Island with all those guidos…..;)

    MaryK

    March 27, 2014 at 11:01 AM

    • I keep trying to make the “smiley face” by typing a colon and a right bracket, but I must be doing it wrong!

      MaryK

      March 27, 2014 at 11:03 AM

      • Philadelphia is nicer than NYC? That would be a comment coming from a parochial prole.

        I think almost all American cities suck @ss. NYC would be one of the least sucky. I’ll take a cold Canadian city over most of them. Would you rather be in Chic Montreal or some low brow – major metropolis, such as Houston or Miami?

        JS

        March 27, 2014 at 1:52 PM

      • “Philadelphia is nicer than NYC? That would be a comment coming from a parochial prole.”

        I’m the parochial prole par excellence, as you must know at this point. I’m planning to go to a real estate agency in Philly and say something to the effect of “Let me be blunt. I want to live in a white working class-middle class neighborhood with one family homes. A place that gets made fun of for being unsophisticated and provincial. I would prefer the area to have a lot of Italians, but that isn’t absolutely necessary. I’m talking about the kind of place where you see couples with children, people go bowling on Friday night, and go to church on Sunday (at least SOME of them.) Is there a community in Philadelhia that fits this bill?”

        MaryK

        March 27, 2014 at 7:44 PM

      • Canada has a lot of Italians. They are probably of a higher status than those here in the Northeast, just by judging on their attitudes. I can’t imagine them being more obnoxious than the JS guidos or the Tony Sopranos.

        JS

        March 27, 2014 at 8:45 PM

      • People who are always saying NYC was better during pre-Guiliani years have sour grapes. Just reading some of the comments from that NYT article, some of the commentators yearn for the Dinkins and Koch days, when NYC was dirt cheap and no one really wanted to be here if they had a choice.

        JS

        March 27, 2014 at 8:51 PM

      • A little money in Houston takes you a pretty long way. Not sure about Miami, but Tampa is my kind of place.

        trumwill

        March 28, 2014 at 3:02 AM

    • If you’re white you really don’t want to move to Philadelphia.

      peterike

      March 27, 2014 at 12:47 PM

      • I could see how you might get that impression, but it simply isn’t true. There are solidly SWPL areas in Philly where it’s perfectly nice to live, and even walk home alone at night with little fear of being robbed and/or murdered.

        Someone once told me that the primary job of any police department is to keep the trash in the trash can. Philly is pretty good at this.

        Robert

        March 27, 2014 at 7:19 PM

      • What about Roxborough and the area referred to as “Graduate Hospital?” They both seem good. There’s also a neighborhood called Manayunk that seems ideal for me. Ironically, some of the people there are already complaining about a hipster/bobo invasion! But the houses there are perfect – they’re just like the ones in Brooklyn. Most of Philly has very narrow houses that look like apartments masquerading as houses. Roxborough and Manayunk look different. I decided to rule out South Philly (the “Rocky” neighborhood) because it is just TOO prole based on how it looks. It is reminiscent of Red Hood – prole on steroids.

        MaryK

        March 27, 2014 at 7:58 PM

      • MaryK, G-Ho (yes, people really call it that) isn’t a white working class neighborhood. It’s getting nicer as a result of gentrification, but it was formerly a black ghetto neighborhood and a lot of ghetto blacks still live there.

        If you’re looking for a white working class neighborhood, you might want to reconsider south Philly, something near East Passyunk Square. It’s getting nicer and nicer and the guidos that still live there are a lot more friendly than the Irish and Polish proles in other parts of the city.

        Roxborough and Manayunk are technically in Philadelphia, but they’re basically the suburbs. They’re outside of the main parts of the city, anyway. I’m not sure about Roxborough, but a friend of mine moved to Manayunk about six months ago and is very happy there. It’s very green compared to the rest of the city: parks, trees, etc. and from what I’ve heard, restaurants that aren’t terrible are becoming more common.

        Robert

        March 28, 2014 at 5:08 PM

      • “Roxborough and Manayunk are technically in Philadelphia, but they’re basically the suburbs. They’re outside of the main parts of the city, anyway”

        I saw some Youtube clips about both communities. You may be right about Roxborough, but Manayunk looks urban enough for me. Being near the center of the city isn’t very important to me. Manayunk can’t be further from downtown Philly than my neighborhood in Brooklyn is from Manhattan. And I would be perfectly content with living and working in one neighborhood in Philly and only going into the more commercial areas about twice a month – maybe even less.. The important question I have about Manayunk is : can I walk around there? Or will I need a bus or a car to even go grocery shopping?

        I could give South Philly another look. But I hear its turning NAM. I don’t want to buy a house there and then have to sell it in 7 years because the area is unlivable.

        MaryK

        March 28, 2014 at 8:04 PM

      • You absolutely do not. Philadelphia is soul killing for white people.

        Rod

        April 16, 2014 at 2:17 AM

      • Roxborough is well advanced toward eventually becoming too NAM infested to live. Graduate Hospital is in the bubble but on the edge. Roxborough is in the bubble but is a drinking destination and a frat crowd draw. South Philly is way too prole and you have to be very careful about where you choose to live. It changes from block to block and is extremely ghetto in parts.

        Robert said:

        “If you’re looking to buy, I’d take a look at Fishtown, something close to Frankford on the east side”

        He also made comments endorsing Northern Liberties. Robert has the mind of a Philadelphian and so his perspective is relative to the QOL offered by the city, but in general his recommendations are not nice neighborhoods except in comparison to other parts of gentrifying Philly. There areas that he recommends are too vulnerable to random violent crime vents.

        Mary, Philly is way to degenerated and NAM infested to constitute a desirable place to live. You’re cashing out with a couple of million and starting a Real Estate company?

        Seattle, all day. Also: Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Boston, Portland, or anywhere in NorCal. Try Napa or somewhere nearby. If you are hellbent on Philly, try across the bridge in Haddonfield N.J.

        Absolutely use the NYT census map to plan your move. It’s a critical resource.

        Rod

        April 16, 2014 at 2:33 AM

    • Philly is a dirty, insular, and angry city. I would’ve never guessed you are in Philly. What area do you live in? Rittenhouse?

      uatu

      March 27, 2014 at 1:27 PM

      • Was your comment addressed to me? I currently live in Brooklyn, where I was born and have lived all my life. I’ve never wanted to live anywhere else. But I’m certain I’ll have to leave Brooklyn within the next few years when my family home is sold. It will probably sell for close to 2 million and I’ll get about a third of that. But I won’t waste the money paying rent for another 20 years to the kind of people I detest. I could take my share of the money and buy a house outright in Bensonhurst or Dyker Heights. But it would take all my money – and increasingly I don’t like the kind of people who make up even the white population in Brooklyn.

        I visited Philly once because my cousin and her husband lived there briefly. However I only saw the downtown tourist area. I know the Rittenhouse area. It is lovely aesthetically, but the very last place I’d want to live. For the same reason I wouldn’t want to live in Park Slope. I’m not a good fit culturally for that type of community.

        MaryK

        March 27, 2014 at 7:37 PM

      • I haven’t experienced life in Philadelphia, but I’d say that NYC is pretty dirty and gets angrier by the year. Insular is relative. Most people tend to think New Yorkers are insular and imagine that life hardly exists outside of NYC. I’m insular in that I love NYC. It will break my heart to leave. But it’s really only Brooklyn I’m loyal to – not Manhattan. And I love it more for what it once was than for what it currently is.

        MaryK

        March 27, 2014 at 7:49 PM

      • I would say the same of Baaston.

        JS

        March 27, 2014 at 8:48 PM

      • Mary, get on a plane and relocate to the West Coast. There’s plenty of great cities there. The worst thing you will encounter is annoying hipsters and condescending libs.

        Curle

        March 28, 2014 at 2:04 AM

      • @MaryK: good points. Have you looked into towns in the Mountain West? If you aren’t stuck in an elite value-transference job there are lots of great towns in Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, Oregon, Washington that I think man LotB posters would love to raise a family in.

        uatu

        March 28, 2014 at 2:51 AM

      • Yes, West Coast is better for Mary.

        Yes and yes again, because only losers gripe about how unaffordable and unliveable is NYC. Anything to a New Yorker, especially any place west of the Hudson is 2nd tier.

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 10:25 AM

      • “Yes and yes again, because only losers gripe about how unaffordable and unliveable is NYC”

        Is it necessary for you to keep insulting me, JS? Didn’t I apologize to you (twice) when I thought I’d been hurtful? . And also, I hear that SWPL people think rudeness is a guido trait. You wouldn’t want someone to think you’re from Staten Island now, would you…..:)

        Play nice, now. Or I’ll get some Italian grandma to hit you with her wooden spoon. And I can tell you from experience – those f__ckers HURT!

        MaryK

        March 28, 2014 at 7:52 PM

      • People who complain about NYC being expensive either have sour grapes and/or have been displaced.

        White ethnic proles with the exception of Jews have been pretty much pushed off from the island of Manhattan. The reason could be that Jews have been welfare recipients with subsidized housing at greater frequencies than the Italians or the Irish. But before the Anti-Semites chime in, no one knew that New York would be this desirable oasis in the backdrop of greater – boring America. And most White ethnics wanted to flee the city away from NAMs in the 70s and 80s, and head out to the burbs because NY was so crime ridden. Jews for some reason remained in large numbers, usually in middle income housing, and were surrounded by blacks and Hispanics. Further, Jews were more politically vocal and demanded that affordable housing be built for working class and middle income Whites, along with NAMs.

        JS

        March 29, 2014 at 12:53 AM

    • Philadelphia is pretty dangerous.

      Dave Pinsen

      March 27, 2014 at 1:54 PM

    • Public transportation in Philly has a bad reputation, but it’s not all that terrible. The el/subway lines run like they’re supposed to most of the time. Buses are more hit or miss and whenever we have an inch of snow, you shouldn’t expect any bus to be on time. A lot of neighborhoods don’t get plowed when we get a lot of snow, and you can actually get stuck in a neighborhood for a day or two if we get a foot or more unless you’re willing to walk a mile. It’s usually pretty easy to get where you’re going, but make sure to leave early if it’s important to be on time.

      If you’re looking to buy, I’d take a look at Fishtown, something close to Frankford on the east side. Most nice houses in Philly are all the same: rehabbed row houses with hardwood floors and new kitchens and bathrooms. They’re usually between 1200 and 2000 square feet. If your house has something extra, it’s usually a nice backyard or a roof deck. If that’s the kind of place you’re looking for, Fishtown is one of the safest and cheapest places to buy. It borders a completely SWPL/hipsterfied area called Northern Liberties and it looks more and more like it every six months.

      If you have kids, I wouldn’t recommend moving here unless you can afford to send them to private school. I don’t know anyone who sends their kids to private school. Everyone moves to the suburbs once their kids reach school age, which is what my wife and I are planning to do once our kid gets older.

      Robert

      March 27, 2014 at 6:03 PM

    • Chicago is better for than Philadelphia in this regards. The prices in the nice neighborhoods in Chicago are about on par with Philadelphia. Also the North side of Chicago is much cleaner, safer and basically better segregated than basically any part of Philadelphia. Chicago has much better restaurants, entertainment and culture than Philadelphia. And there’s a lot more jobs in Chicago proper, whereas most companies have moved to the Philly suburbs because of the city’s business tax lunacy. This makes it much easier to get buy without a car, by having a job in the city proper. Culturally Chicagoans are much friendlier and higher class, whereas Philadelphians are by and large angry and prole-ish. Of course the biggest downside is the weather’s worse.

      Doug

      March 27, 2014 at 7:36 PM

      • Chicago has much better restaurants, entertainment and culture than Philadelphia.

        Ah, the restaurants. And beautiful Chicago blondes hailing from Upper Midwestern states. Attractive and worthy of LTRs.

        But, what do you say the odds are of Chicago turning into Detroit-South?

        The Undiscovered Jew

        March 27, 2014 at 8:28 PM

      • Well the possibility can’t be discounted entirely. Unlike NYC and LA which have been exporting their ghetto out of the city, Chicago’s just been bottling it up on the South Side. So there’s always the chance that it might explode both across the rest of the city and politically into the mayor’s office. Plus the State of Illinois is in such bad economic straits that it might just drag everything down into Greek-style bankruptcy.

        On the other hand, while the likes of the Daleys and Rahm Emanuel leave much to be desired, they are a far cry from the sheer incompetency of Kwame Kilpatrich. Chicagoans seem to have a pretty decent track record of avoiding the most dreadful political mismanagement that’s required to truly run a great city into the ground.

        Doug

        March 28, 2014 at 3:57 AM

      • Better segregated, but the density of the NAM buildup in the surrounding city is downright frightening and off-putting. Are you saying that it’s effectively not a factor if you reside in the North Side?

        I’d be interested in a comparison between the white sliver of L.A. and the white sliver of Chicago.

        Rod

        April 16, 2014 at 2:38 AM

    • :”Would you rather be in Chic Montreal or some low brow – major metropolis, such as Houston or Miami?”

      That depends on whether you value being chic, or more specifically having people believe you are chic. To me things like space, safety, and the kind of neighbors you have (I refer to their values, not even primarily ethnicity, race, or religion.) are more important than trendy boutiques and art gallieries. A neighborhood of Mormons would be preferable to a neighborhood of chic people. Maybe I should move to Salt Lake City!

      MaryK

      March 28, 2014 at 6:03 PM

    • MaryK, Philly is not nice. Most of it is a NAM dominated no-go zone, with the exceptions being the mostly boring suburbs or center city. Violent crime often penetrates center city but you can live with blinders on in a bubble if you have the money to do so. It can be charming within limits.

      I recommend Seattle. It isn’t as urban, but the overall area is probably the best QOL in the country for a person who has to have a middle class career. If you don’t need to work in a large economy, or if money isn’t an object, then my recommendation might change.

      Your best place will have a lot to do with your race. This is one of the few places where we can be honest about that reality.

      Rod

      April 16, 2014 at 2:14 AM

  9. I believe it. Though, I recently left NYC for fly over country and I’m a million times happier. I retain “New Yorker” status (having l lived there 11+ years), but enjoy the benefits of a better quality of life. Also, I get to visit the city in the best way – as a former New Yorker.

    I think NYC is probably one of the best places to be if you’re young, ambitious, and single. But as one’s mid-30’s wind on, settling down (wife, house, family) becomes a tall order in that area. The funny part is that almost anywhere you move to, there will be a small community of SWPL’s from NYC/S.F. who’ve made the same decision as you.

    SWPL2

    March 27, 2014 at 11:04 AM

    • I see many SWPL women with baby carriages in Manhattan.

      JS

      March 27, 2014 at 1:27 PM

      • Most, though, will move to the suburbs when the children reach school.age, at least if theycannot afford sky high private school tuition.

        Peter

        ironrailsironweights

        March 27, 2014 at 10:12 PM

      • It’s what you call cognitive dissonance coming from SWPLs. They move their children out of the city, and deny them of all the things they’ve enjoyed in it when they were single w/o kids, just because they can’t afford private school.

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 10:29 AM

      • Here’s an article describing such cognitive dissonance. Transplants who can’t hack it in the Big Apple, move back to square one where they started, justifying where they grew up is better than the place they always wanted to be.

        http://www.theatlanticcities.com/arts-and-lifestyle/2014/02/why-i-miss-suburbs/8489/

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 10:37 AM

    • To be a New Yorker you have to live there 10+ years, right? I always thought that was the “official” requirement.

      ASF

      March 27, 2014 at 5:12 PM

    • “he funny part is that almost anywhere you move to, there will be a small community of SWPL’s from NYC/S.F. who’ve made the same decision as you.”

      I think this is a big trend. I live in a mid-size city in Florida traditionally known as being a retirement destination, and there’s been an explosion of SWPLs and hipsters in the past five years. The traditional SWPL areas seem to be driving them out with a combination of high prices, low job growth, and general business unfriendliness (a lot arriving seem to be entrepreneurs of various sorts).

      Doug

      March 27, 2014 at 7:41 PM

    • It used to be a turn off if you told people from elsewhere that you’re from NYC. People saw you as a d-bag.

      I remember going to San Francisco as a very young guy in the late 90s, and the San Franciscans I’ve met weren’t impressed. Or maybe San Franciscans don’t like New Yorkers because there is some kind of mini-rivalry between the SWPL towns.

      JS

      March 27, 2014 at 8:55 PM

  10. What do you think the chance of a loose nuke going off in Manhattan in the next 25 years? I think it is above 5%, which rules it out for me.

    lodola

    March 27, 2014 at 12:30 PM

    • Don’t nukes radiate even when idle? Doesn’t that make them easy to detect with a geiger counter if they are inbound on a bridge to Manhattan?

      Dan

      March 27, 2014 at 2:00 PM

      • The emissions from a nuclear weapon are low energy and there is a large amount of shielding. Physicis is against trying to detect a nuclear bomb given natural background radiation.

        superdestroyer

        March 27, 2014 at 7:33 PM

    • Not an unreasonable concern, although I’d hate to see what would happen to the country that tried it–that means the USA now has free reign to unload their colossal arsenal on you.

      SFG

      April 2, 2014 at 10:25 PM

  11. “an influx of foreigners combined with a continuing decline in the loss of migrants to other states increased the population. . .”

    In the words of Andy Dufresne, are you trying to be deliberately obtuse?

    fakeemail

    March 27, 2014 at 12:31 PM

  12. “In the city, 73,000 newcomers arrived from abroad in the year ending July 1”

    My guess is it’s at least double that, maybe triple. There are swarms of illegal Asians and Africans in New York who don’t make the count.

    Anecdotal but interesting. Last week I was driving on BQE in the middle of the day, around noon. Traffic slow bec of pothole repair. I suddenly noticed that nearly every car around me was driven by a Chinese (or Korean or whatever). So I started really looking, and I swear it was probably 8 out of 10 cars driven by Chinese. It also occurred to me that in New York, having a non-elite car is really a prole sign. If you’re mid-tier you live in a neighborhood close enough to the subway that you don’t need a car, or you take cabs. Or you’re rich and you have a $600 a month parking spot in your building for your Mercedes. It’s the Chinese strivers in the outlying Queens and Brooklyn neighborhoods that have cars, not the white people.

    Also on the same trip, there’s this mini-van with I’m guessing Russians in at. Some sort of Eastern Euro/Russian types anyway. Man and woman, kid in the back in a car seat. The window next to the kid rolls down and the kid tosses a bunch of trash right onto the highway, wrappers of some kind. I turn to the driver and hold up my hands in a kind of “what the f?” way. He looks at me totally baffled. What was I even talking about? Of course you just throw your trash on the highway! Then I wondered if he was going to shoot at me because he had a head like a rugby ball and was all blinged up (typical trashy Russian slob). Maybe we need to start running that Crying Indian anti-litter campaign again, because the vibrant new arrivals neither know nor care about any of that.

    New York really is turning into Bladerunner.

    peterike

    March 27, 2014 at 12:45 PM

    • Have you been to flushing?

      Dave Pinsen

      March 27, 2014 at 10:03 PM

    • Peter – America is a crappy place, ok? It’s mostly proleland with a sprinkle of superficial SWPL cities.

      JS

      March 27, 2014 at 11:31 PM

  13. As others noted, mass 3rd world immigration totally obscures the statistics. If 50,000 professionals and artsy people leave and Dominicans and Pakistanis sponsor 75,000 of their relatives to arrive on family reunification visas, that is pretty damaging to the city’s prospects, even if you have strongly positive net population growth.

    Mismanagement of schools and infrastructure will drive out professionals and useful workers first, and poor migrants will still keep coming, because even a badly run NYC is orders of magnitude better run than Tegucigalpa or Karachi, and family reunification visas bring them to where their relatives are, not where the ideal places to live are.

    el supremo

    March 27, 2014 at 1:59 PM

  14. NYC would be even more desirable, if NAMs got their act together! LOL…

    Seriously, Hispanics seem to show some potential. Blacks are on the way out. I expect East New York to be bobofied within the next ten years.

    http://gothamist.com/2014/01/09/developers_trying_to_gentrify_east.php

    JS

    March 27, 2014 at 2:01 PM

    • Hispanics may be on the way out. The blue collar work of the future will be high(er) skill blue labor. Robot maintenance and repair, advanced welding, working with advanced ceramics. In other words jobs best suited for prole white men with 85-110 IQs.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      March 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM

      • Proles are still overrepresented in blue collar work in the South and Flyover, no? SWPL towns have no place or respect for proles.

        JS

        March 27, 2014 at 11:39 PM

      • People don’t disappear when their jobs disappear.

        Dave Pinsen

        March 29, 2014 at 2:09 AM

      • Yes, they do.

        You only get what is funded.

        Rod

        April 16, 2014 at 3:01 AM

    • Now consider this possibility – if guidos got their act together, even the dreaded Staten Island would be desirable! Might it be that the Italians in NYC also show some potential? I really shouldn’t ask you this, JS! But I’m just a glutton for punishment! LOL

      MaryK

      March 27, 2014 at 8:09 PM

      • The only way for guidos to get their act together is to embrace higher education, college learning where they broaden their horizons. That Jersey Shore thing is what the ghetto is for NAMs.

        JS

        March 27, 2014 at 11:12 PM

  15. Lion – Whatever happened to the discussion that de Blasio will turn NYC into a garbage dump again? This article proves otherwise. I think he will falter on his affordable housing plan, unless he wants to provide affordable housing for middle income – college educated folks with middle class values, and not for Jamal, Tyrone and Sheniqua, who have been displaced from the ghettos.

    JS

    March 27, 2014 at 2:09 PM

  16. So, New Yorks’ domestic migration is still negative, an outflow, although it used to be twice as big.

    And, the population growth is coming from Immigration.

    How is this great for New York and New Yorkers?

    Rotten

    March 27, 2014 at 2:16 PM

    • Apparently many SWPLs prefer to live amongst 3rd world immigrants over their fellow proles.

      JS

      March 27, 2014 at 9:00 PM

  17. New York City after four years of DeBlasio’s not so crypto-communist rule.

    http://www.theonion.com/articles/84-million-new-yorkers-suddenly-realize-new-york-c,18003/

    “8.4 Million New Yorkers Suddenly Realize New York City A Horrible Place To Live”

    Oswald Spengler

    March 27, 2014 at 4:05 PM

  18. The fact that rents are higher in close-in areas of cities like NYC, Boston, Chicago, Portland, Seattle, San Francisco, etc., indicates that the current demand is not being satisfied by supply, and a lot more people would prefer to live close-in than currently do. Some people do genuinely prefer a suburban lifestyle, but some people live in the suburbs primarily because it’s cheaper (which includes public schools, which are cheaper than the private schools that they might feel the need to send their kinds to if they lived close to the center city). Anecdotally, I know lots of people who live in in the suburbs Beaverton and Gresham not because they like them. On the contrary, they think these places suck. They live there because Portland is now too expensive for them.

    The solution to this problem is to build a LOT more market-rate apartments and condominiums closer in, so as to increase supply. As of now, this is done in a rather piecemeal fashion, as redevelopment is more expensive than building McMansions in the exurbs, in part due to local political opposition from established residents who wish to preserve the perceived quaint elements of their city, so that they can imagine that they’re living in an 18th century fishing village rather than a modern city.

    anon666

    March 27, 2014 at 4:40 PM

    • Living in a condo in the inner city means no children, a greater chance of no spouse, and a limit on your hobbies. Living in the close-in areas means making a huge number of concessions. Many do not want to have to fight for parking spaces or listen to my neighbors and that requires living in the suburbs. Some people did not really like college and do not want to keep living the college lifestyle into middle life.

      superdestroyer

      March 27, 2014 at 7:30 PM

      • Some people simply can’t fathom that many don’t want to live in the city. I grew up in the country and the thought of being stuffed into a condo makes me ill. I like my freedom and privacy too much. Heck, I don’t even want to live in the burbs. I think superdestroyer is right. Some people never got past college. As much as I like Leon — he seems like a nice, level headed fellow — I find it unfortunate he’s not married with a family. Then again, maybe he values his freedom and privacy too much? If you find the right person you really don’t lose your freedom and privacy. You find someone to share it with.

        destructure

        March 27, 2014 at 10:00 PM

      • I did like college and graduate school and am living the “college lifestyle” (as you characterize it) 5 blocks from Willis (née Sears) Tower in my later middle age. Rupert Murdoch (older and many orders of magnitude richer than I am) just bought a $57 million condo in Manhattan. Some of us will take ballet over a back yard any day. I don’t hear my neighbors and don’t fight for parking and I’m certain Mr. Murdoch doesn’t either, nor do the other denizens of the better parts of this country’s premier cities. Many of us actually live on a salary rather than off of capital.

        Anthony

        March 28, 2014 at 12:42 AM

      • I didn’t say that nobody genuinely preferred the suburbs. I said that the high rents near the city center and in urban neighborhoods suggest that the demand for housing there currently outstrips supply, Many potential residents want to live near the city center but currently cannot due to limited supply, and thus *settle* for the suburbs. Of course, some suburbanites genuinely prefer the burbs.

        I have no idea what your rant about college has to do with anything. Most urbanites I know work full time jobs, and my city in particular is undergoing a baby boom. Many of the hipsters and yuppies who had kids decided that moving to the suburbs wasn’t necessary, namely because it isn’t. In the 19th century, urban areas actually were incredibly crowded, given that people would raise 5-6 children in two bedroom apartments. Even at full occupancy, urban neighborhoods are considerably less dense today. Many of the newer condos and apartments are considerably roomier, and people have 1-2 children. (And reasonably so – 1-2 children is an appropriate number of children to have in the modern world. We no longer live in an agrarian society where 5-6 children are needed to go milk the cows and tend the sheep.)

        As for the ” concessions” you refer to, that all depends upon what one actually wants. Parking is not an issue for me — I cycle and use the Car2Go carsharing service. Living in the suburbs would force me to make the concession of having to buy a car. If one ones a dedicated parking space, many residential buildings have parking garages below. As for hobbies, I suppose that If I owned a fleet of seven ATVs, thus requiring me to own a personal garage and driveway, then living in a smaller urban space would be a concession, but considering what my interests actually are, the fact is that a garage is just one more room I’d have to clean and maintain – something I regard as a pain in the ass. If I lived in the suburbs, I’d have to drive everywhere. I wouldn’t have a neighborhood full of restaurants, cafes and pubs I could walk to. There also aren’t as many attractive women in the suburbs, nor many opportunities to meet them.

        As far as my purposes are concerned, the suburbs simply suck. That said, I’m not anti-suburb — I recognize that many people prefer that lifestyle and that’s fine. I am, however, in favor of building more high-density residential buildings in the city itself, however, so that people have more choice over where to live. The demand is obviously there.

        anon666

        March 28, 2014 at 1:45 PM

      • As far as my purposes are concerned, the suburbs simply suck. That said, I’m not anti-suburb — I recognize that many people prefer that lifestyle and that’s fine.

        Or you could be one of those delusional SWPLs who move back to the suburbs simply because the city life costs too much without sacrifices either for them or their families. It’s all back to square one, where they endure a long commute because they need to save money and/or send their kids to a better school district that is not easily available in the city.

        I personally would never subject my kids to suburban life. Inner city kids who are intelligent and attend decent schools in the city outshine their suburban peers, simply because they are exposed to more things in an urban setting. Different mix of people, different cultures, different personalities, predictable and unpredictable, both good and bad, that you often don’t find in the non-prole burbs, where everyone seems like a lovey-dovey person whose part of the family. This kind of learning experience is valuable in itself.

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 4:10 PM

      • Anthony,

        How many New Yorkers or Chicago residents have actually been to the ballet in the last year? Last five years? When reading personal accounts it seems that those who want to live the urban-extended college lifestyle, it seems that their life revolve around drinking, getting drunk, and going to bars. Maybe the urban dwellers do not like the suburbs due to the lack of bars more than the lack of ballet.

        superdestroyer

        March 28, 2014 at 8:50 PM

      • “Many of us actually live on a salary rather than off of capital.”

        One step ahead of the reaper.

        Glengarry

        March 31, 2014 at 6:57 AM

    • Its expensive because its a desirable place to live. Buildings lots of condos would probably lead to overdevelopment and overcrowding, making these areas less desirable.

      alex

      March 27, 2014 at 7:51 PM

      • The Pearl District is a neighborhood that is completely built out with condominiums. They probably have about five vacant lots left to build on, and then they are done. The high rents there suggest you are wrong.

        anon666

        March 28, 2014 at 1:06 PM

    • Red cities are cheap because they are less multicultural, thus with less eating options.

      JS

      March 27, 2014 at 8:59 PM

      • True. I guess this is an SWPL need. Most people, especially married people with kids, don’t eat out that often. It gets too expensive. And even a lot of single professional people don’t make enough money that they can afford to eat out all the time – now without putting an undue strain on their budget. Didn’t you write a post recently where you spoke of young woman living in NYC who start taking money out of their retirement fund in order to maintain their daily dining-out habit? To me, all a great selection of restaurants does for a person is tempt him to spend money he should instead save. From what I see in prole neighborhoods, there are a number of people who go out with friends once a week to a local diner or restaurant where you can get a meal for a total of about $23 (tip included.) But I know of almost no one who eats out every day – even at a McDonalds or a diner.

        MaryK

        March 27, 2014 at 11:20 PM

      • Houston may have more French expats than New York.

        Dave Pinsen

        March 28, 2014 at 12:10 AM

      • Do you really think that Houston is less multicultural than Portland? Have you been to both cities?

        superdestroyer

        March 28, 2014 at 4:47 AM

      • “Didn’t you write a post recently where you spoke of young woman living in NYC who start taking money out of their retirement fund in order to maintain their daily dining-out habit?”

        Yes, you have to understand that this woman doesn’t know how to cook. How would she feed herself in a prole neighborhood? Are the neighbors more empathetic where she gets invited for a free meal every night.

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 10:42 AM

      • “How would she feed herself in a prole neighborhood?”

        Talk about learned helplessness! The same way the proles do. She’d buy vegetables and boil them in a pot on the stove. She’d make her own salads instead of buying packaged salad. And she could make eating at home a whole lot easier by buying cooked meat that just needs to be reheated in a microwave (frozen fish cakes, a whole cooked chicken to be eaten over a few days) . She wouldn’t have to spend two hours a night making a meal from scratch. I almost never eat out and I use my stove and microwave, rarely an oven.

        Prole neighbors wouldn’t invite her over every night. But a kind prole woman might offer to teach her how to make at least one kind of meal. She could start with this and then learn more on her own thru DVDs., David James Robinson has a DVD series “Learn how to cook.” 15 hours of content for about $50.

        But the question is: why didn’t this girl’s parents teach her how to cook – at least minimal cooking? I guess SWPLs aren’t “future-oriented” about everything!

        MaryK

        March 28, 2014 at 11:47 AM

      • But the question is: why didn’t this girl’s parents teach her how to cook – at least minimal cooking? I guess SWPLs aren’t “future-oriented” about everything!

        The same type of cognitive dissonance found in SWPLs who enjoy living in NYC with all its amenities, but deny their children of the same, because private school in the Big Apple costs a bundle, where they move to the suburbs, back to where they started.

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 12:55 PM

      • Claiming to be unable to cook is just a way of saying “gaze upon my big long uncut college education and despair, ye prole cockroaches”.

        Wah, but my fingernails are too long to press the start button on the microwave. You just don’t get it. (Breaks down sobbing, hand outstretched to passers-by.)

        (Rising wail.)

        Glengarry

        March 31, 2014 at 7:07 AM

  19. everyone…that is, everyone who doesn’t mind roaches or more human feces on the street than dog feces or the rudest people in the history of the world or …

    larry darrell planned to settle as a cabbie in nyc because it had the best libraries. or so thought maugham, an old fairy.

    jorge videla

    March 27, 2014 at 7:56 PM

  20. Philly has white slums too. Mostly in the southern part of the city. Not as violent as the black ghettos, but still the area looks decrepit, with plenty of crime and social breakdown.

    Charles Murray wrote a lot about “Fishtown” in his last book.

    Jay123

    March 27, 2014 at 11:47 PM

    • murray is himself a prole.

      neither of his parents attended college, but he speaks as if he were giving elocution lessons on a yacht. peggy noonan is the same way. by overcompensating for a formerly prole way of speaking, he sounds even more prole. like someone who owns a standard poodle and gives it a show clip.

      jorge videla

      March 28, 2014 at 8:42 PM

      • james flynn, of the flynn effect, is even worse.

        jorge videla

        March 28, 2014 at 8:44 PM

      • Poor Jorgeous overuses “prole” because of his own class hangups.

        Murray grew up in the Iowa of the mid-fifties. That’s about as classless a society as one can imagine. No proles in Iowa, just Americans.

        Pincher Martin

        March 28, 2014 at 11:42 PM

      • “just american” is as prole as it gets.

        is it the ‘tache? is that the attraction? or is it the power?

        jorge videla

        March 29, 2014 at 2:50 AM

    • Yes, he did. There was a story about some working-class girls from Fishtown who made a pact with each other to each have a baby out of wedlock and raise the children together. I guess by “together” they meant that they’d form an unofficial social circle to provide a support network, not that they’d all share some kind of communal household. But either way it was an interesting story. These girls apparently didn’t believe there would be enough marriageable men to make waiting for marriage an option. Yet by wanting to raise the children “together” they were exhibiting some of the old family and neighborhood cohesiveness that white ethnic proles used to be famous for (and in some areas still maintain.) A poignant attempt to preserve some form of “traditional values” while surrendering to the social/moral decline going on around them.

      MaryK

      March 28, 2014 at 9:48 PM

    • “by overcompensating for a formerly prole way of speaking, he sounds even more prole.”

      Murray tells us that he’s from a working class family in Iowa. So he never hides his background. But it’s funny you should find him pretentious. I always thought he was amazingly NON-pretentious. I find his speech very natural and not affected at all. Peggy Noonan is another story. She really overdoes it. People in the conservative movement who’ve worked with her say she’s a shameless self-promoter. And unlike Murray, she tends to look down on the people she grew up with.

      MaryK

      March 28, 2014 at 9:54 PM

    • He wrote about Fishtown from 5,000 feet. Fishtown is indeed decrepit, but it isn’t because of the SWPLs who are gentrifying it. Fishtown’s look/feel primarily comes from the cramped prole architecture, the fact that it’s still mixed, and the proximity to 100% NAM neighborhoods that puts you on-guard when walking through it. There are no white neighborhoods left in Philly wherein social breakdown is a factor, except maybe in one small section of the upper northeast section of the city that is miles past the neighborhoods to which your refer.

      Most inner city Philly white neighborhoods are relatively clean, low crime and tight knit. However, there are very few true white neighborhoods left in Philly. Where they exist, they exist as a few square blocks at most. I know a neighborhood wherein the residents all come out of their homes and stare at any NAMS who dare take a look at any house on the market in their neighborhood. Their few guarded prole blocks are amongst the nicest in the city. These Italian and Irish proles are inter-generational union members and business owners, though. They’re a different breed and have long ago worked out their piece of the city. There are a few small sections like this in South Philly that remain. Anyone who knows the city is extremely careful around Northern Liberties and Fishtown, despite the hype. People are shot by predatory NAMS in these areas pretty much on an annual basis.

      Rod

      April 16, 2014 at 2:58 AM

  21. How would want to live in an overrated hole like NYC?

    Answer – GAYS, Caribbean hispanics and blacks, Chinese, white trash hipsters from families with money, paranoids who think the rest of America is like the movie “Deliverance”. And yes, the super rich.

    Rifleman

    March 28, 2014 at 11:08 AM

    • New York City is overrated because the rest of America is bland, boring, suburban, many areas are lumpenprole, and most important, lack of vibrancy and industries for youths to thrive on.

      JS

      March 28, 2014 at 12:57 PM

      • There really is nothing like reading and commenting on Lion’s blog from vibrant NYC. Sitting on one of the stools at Caffe Vita on the LES, there’s usually a super model on the next one (or a charming BIGLAW or WALLSTREET guy, if you’re a woman).

        West of the Hudson, you have to get in a car if you want to read this blog.

        Dave Pinsen

        March 28, 2014 at 6:07 PM

      • Poor Dave. He thinks people are impressed by anorexic models with a snoot full of nose candy.

        destructure

        March 29, 2014 at 1:10 AM

      • There aren’t many supermodels there. Dave meant to say some nice SWPL girl might be sipping coffee next to you, while you are blogging on LoftB with your smartphone.

        Do you expect a BIGLAW or Wall St guy to be charming with their all the same cookie cutter personalities?

        Caffe Vita is just another Seattle Starbucks Chain, with a natural feel, fancy coffee equipment and no NAMs working for them. At least, the last time I was there.

        JS

        March 29, 2014 at 10:26 AM

    • How would want to live in an overrated hole like NYC?

      That would be “Who?”

      Rifleman

      March 28, 2014 at 1:14 PM

  22. Lion – Maybe should participate in this forum:

    Who’s happier? Business majors whose worth comes from money or Liberal Arts majors whose worth comes from self actualization.

    http://www.city-data.com/forum/colleges-universities/1749139-who-do-you-think-tend-happier.html

    Most non-Finance bobos I’ve met just aren’t true Liberal Arts in anything. They read a lot low brow works not too different from proles who like sci-fi.

    JS

    March 28, 2014 at 1:15 PM

    • There are some great stereotypes in that discussion.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      March 28, 2014 at 1:29 PM

      • Finance folks have no personality. That’s what they’re saying.

        JS

        March 28, 2014 at 7:17 PM

  23. Just wondering–nobody’s raised the possibility of urban and rural living each having their pluses and minuses and being suited for different people?

    SFG

    April 2, 2014 at 10:29 PM


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: