PDA

View Full Version : Would you say NYC has fell off?



washingtondc1
May 9th, 2006, 06:17 AM
i constantly hear people say,"New York is so five years ago". Personally, i feel that New York has lost it's appeal for some reason. maybe it's oversaturation, but i know it's been the 'it' place before i became interested in it. nowadays it seems chicago, miami, the south, and even phili has taken it's place. what are your thoughts?

ZippyTheChimp
May 9th, 2006, 06:36 AM
Record year for tourism in 2005

Another record projected for 2006

washingtondc1
May 9th, 2006, 06:47 AM
Record year for tourism in 2005

Another record projected for 2006 thanks, but i even see a shift from cost of living to people migrating in large numbers to other areas. of course, at the moment it will have record tourism, but it's future is the question. how do you think nyc residents and future potential residents will react to the cost of living, because i've heard swaying opinions mainly due to that issue? after graduation, nyc is on my list but i'm unsure now...i'm considering chicago, nyc, phili, or miami. what's it's future like, and how will the cost of living play into it?

ZippyTheChimp
May 9th, 2006, 07:11 AM
Your first post suggested a cultural falling off.

Recently, i constantly hear people say,"New York is so five years ago".Now it's cost of living.

New York was expensive 5 years ago. It was expensive 25 years ago. Demographic shifts have been a constant throughout its history.

You will find several threads on NY population, cost-of-living, etc in "NYC Guide for New Yorkers."

BrooklynRider
May 9th, 2006, 07:27 AM
What is also happening in New York City is a reawakening and rediscovery of the Boroughs. Manhattan still is centerstage, but the arts and music scenes have moved to Brooklyn. The Bronx seems the next outpost. The Brooklyn and Queens waterfront are being transformed. A new cruise shipo terminal has opened in Brooklyn. The Fulton fishmarket moved to the Bronx. It has been a reshuffling of the city in many ways - all for the better. The city is undergoing its largest residential construction boom in decades. We have two huge new transportation terminal in Manhattan under construction. Two new modern facilities were just completed in Brooklyn and an intermodal hub completed in Queens. We have two state-of-the-art ferry terminals. Our unemployment figures are lower than the national average. Our salaries are higher than the national average. New York is probably so five minutes ago for people who want to live here and can't do it for financial reasons or who just lack the guts.

washingtondc1
May 9th, 2006, 07:46 AM
Your first post suggested a cultural falling off.
Now it's cost of living.

New York was expensive 5 years ago. It was expensive 25 years ago. Demographic shifts have been a constant throughout its history.

You will find several threads on NY population, cost-of-living, etc in "NYC Guide for New Yorkers." i have a lot of questions about nyc. i'm not trying to debate you and i'm not critizing nyc. just asking questions, and the cost of living was one of the problems people seem to have with nyc. obviously not just out of towners because new yorkers are relocating. thanks for the responses.

washingtondc1
May 9th, 2006, 07:55 AM
also, i'm new to this forum. is there a way i can see who's viewing a thread?

Fabrizio
May 9th, 2006, 08:15 AM
Whose?

Luca
May 9th, 2006, 08:16 AM
I found the “so 5 years ago” comment interesting. I’ve had the opportunity to visit several cities/districts both at the time that the self-appointed style gurus were saying “go. There. NOW” and the proverbial five years alter. In most cases, what I found was that, for a casual visitor, like myself. They were actually much more interesting ‘5 years alter’ once they filled out with more bars/restaurants/shops, etc. They usually spruced up, too. In their original “unspoilt” or “on the cusp” state, they were largely derelict and not that much fun. I suppose if you were a real “insider” to the local subculture they might be interesting, but as an outside visitor... often disappointing.

Obviously NYC was never “out”, but just looking at, say, Tribeca now, it’s not exactly heaving with tourists, is it? There are still dozens of buildings that could sue some work. I can only imagine it 10 years ago. It must have been nearly deserted…

My point is: what suits the avant-garde 0.1% is not what suits the “advanced” 2.9% and definitely not the “aspirational” 7%...then you have the remaining 90%....

washingtondc1
May 9th, 2006, 08:33 AM
thanks luca..what do you think the exorbitant cost of living in nyc will entail for the city's future seeing as nyers and future nyers are already becoming sour? from my personal experience i hear from nyers, "don't move to ny, ny will make you or break you with the cost of living and the transportation" etc. i take what you'll are saying into consideration, but i just want all sides. some people seem to want to defend nyc instead of having a colloquial discussion.

ZippyTheChimp
May 9th, 2006, 08:53 AM
Thank you for that insulting remark.

I was not debating you. In fact, I anticipated that you had "a lot of questions about nyc", and directed you to the proper forum, where maybe you would have used the Search function, and did a little research before asking questions.

If you are trying to bait me into an argument, you're not going to be around here very long.

Fabrizio
May 9th, 2006, 09:01 AM
Washington: you have to consider your own personal situation. Will NYC offer possibilities for employment that you won´t get elsewhere? Do you have a job waiting for you? Are you alone? Do you have children? How´s your bank account? Can you buy...will you rent?

It´s not that hard to put 2 and 2 together.

If you´re worried that NYC is "so 5 years ago".... you might want to try Butte Montana.... and be an urban pioneer.

washingtondc1
May 9th, 2006, 09:12 AM
Thank you for that insulting remark.

I was not debating you. In fact, I anticipated that you had "a lot of questions about nyc", and directed you to the proper forum, where maybe you would have used the Search function, and did a little research before asking questions.

If you are trying to bait me into an argument, you're not going to be around here very long. i think we can say we got off on a bad foot. i apologize for what could be in any way perceived as an insult, but my intentions weren't to insult you. rather that remark was directed at fabrazio because he corrected me on a small typo. i have nothing against anyone, i just thought people were getting defensive. now since that is clear, the other question was will high cost incite a migration from nyc but fabrizio covered it. i don't think nyc is a place for people fresh out of college unless you have a job. me becoming an investment banker or something in that field, i don't want to waste my money on unnecessary things so chicago or phili are reasonable locations.

Fabrizio
May 9th, 2006, 09:28 AM
Washington: the correction had nothing to do with me be "defensive".... we all make typos and have problems with spelling and word usage... but do you really think a first time poster will get much respect with such in-your-face sloppy grammar and spelling?

"Would you think NYC has fell off"....and down hill from there.....

Merry
May 14th, 2006, 03:45 AM
Whose?
Wrong, Fabrizio. washingtondc1 was correct with "who's", i.e. "who is". "Whose" is possessive. Now waiting to be flamed...

ZippyTheChimp
May 14th, 2006, 01:37 PM
Note the edit time.

pianoman11686
May 14th, 2006, 03:37 PM
London, Tokyo, and Moscow are all much more expensive than New York City, and they're experiencing booms in their own right. Especially London. With all the great things that a city like New York has to offer, it can't not be expensive.

Merry
May 15th, 2006, 06:52 AM
Note the edit time.
Was that you flaming me, Zippy? Fair point. I just added the bit about "whose" being possessive. I expect alcohol had something to do with my not thinking of it originally and I was very seriously UTI when I did the edit so it was a miracle I was able to type anything. Why the hell it popped into my head then is a blur.

Fabrizio
May 15th, 2006, 07:21 AM
Merry: you´re my kinda gal.

ZippyTheChimp
May 15th, 2006, 07:38 AM
Was that you flaming me, Zippy? Fair point. I just added the bit about "whose" being possessive. The Good Sisters pounded me with grammar lessons, but ironically, it's hard to type with gnarled hands.

Its?

Merry
May 15th, 2006, 10:59 AM
Merry: you´re my kinda gal.
What? You find grammar pedants attractive?
Noooooooo (hiccup)....cheers, Fab....(slurred speech)....just one more glass...

Merry
May 15th, 2006, 11:04 AM
The Good Sisters pounded me with grammar lessons, but ironically, it's hard to type with gnarled hands.

Its?
I haven't had enough (none tonight, sad) to drink to respond to that sensibly.

MrSpice
May 15th, 2006, 03:38 PM
thanks, but i even see a shift from cost of living to people migrating in large numbers to other areas. of course, at the moment it will have record tourism, but it's future is the question. how do you think nyc residents and future potential residents will react to the cost of living, because i've heard swaying opinions mainly due to that issue? after graduation, nyc is on my list but i'm unsure now...i'm considering chicago, nyc, phili, or miami. what's it's future like, and how will the cost of living play into it?

This problem is not unique to New York in any way. Los Angeles, San Francisco and many other coastal areas have exprience significant apprciation in housing prices as well as the cost of living. As other people said on this forum, other areas of New York City have experienced exponential growth. You can still find affordable apartments in the outer boroughs (Queens, Bronx, Staten Island, Brooklyn).

ryan
May 15th, 2006, 04:12 PM
i don't think nyc is a place for people fresh out of college unless you have a job.

Well, pretty much anyone needs a job no matter where they live (and if they don't need a job, the certainly don't care about the cost of living in NYC).

I can't think of a better place for people fresh out of college to live. Unrivaled career opportunities (unless the industry doesn't have much of a presence here), social opportunities and more nightlife options than any twenty-something could exhaust. So it's more difficult to buy real estate. There's more to life than buying stuff.

BkBound718
October 29th, 2006, 02:54 PM
if u can make it here u can make it any where

Front_Porch
October 29th, 2006, 05:21 PM
When I moved to New York City 20 years ago, I waited until I got a job on Wall Street because the city was "so expensive."

Now, it's exponentially worse in terms of cost. Housing is the most obvious: when I wanted a "starter apartment" in Manhattan, my downpayment was $13,000, and I freelanced it. Now the downpayment on that apartment (which I no longer own, example only) is pushing six-figures. No thirty-year-old is going to just freelance it. When I show apartments like that, they're to buyers who can get a hefty gift from their parents, or a very limited professional class (I remember a software engineer vested in her Google stock).

Sure, there's the argument that you could find a cheaper starter apartment, but it would be an hour away from work, and that's really a different, and less fun, experience than the New York I got to live in.

Does that mean New York's no longer a fun place if you're middle-class? It depends on your outlook. Some people like being near the Met more than others. Some people hate a two-hour-a-day commute more than others.

I'd say one easy test is this: does the idea of spending 30% of your gross income on housing and a fair chunk more on overpriced food seem inane? Or tantalizing?

ali r.

lofter1
October 29th, 2006, 07:58 PM
It's inane and insane -- but I'm not leaving (yet)

antinimby
October 30th, 2006, 02:23 AM
Don't leave lofter . . . but if you do, where will you go?

Gregory Tenenbaum
October 30th, 2006, 03:10 AM
Well this is a good point.

It is expensive.

But would you live in London, which is about equally expensive, with less of the things that you may like?

Some would because they want something different - nothing wrong with that.

First you should decide where you want to live

Then decide how you are going to pay for it.

Too many people do it the other way around.

lofter1
October 30th, 2006, 07:40 AM
where will you go?

That's the problem, eh?

Iceland seems enticing ...

But, then again, maybe not -- at least based on this 2006 SURVEY (http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10004716.shtml) from the EIU (http://store.eiu.com/index.asp?layout=product_home_page&product_id=1990000199):

2006 ranking City/Country (Last year)

(3) Oslo/Norway
(1) Tokyo/Japan
(8) Reykjavik/Iceland
(2) Osaka/Japan
(4) Paris/France
(5) Copenhagen/Denmark
(7) London/Britain
(6) Zurich/Switzerland
(8) Geneva/Switzerland
(10) Helsinki/Finland NYC looks like a deal in comparison ...



In North America, Canadian cities are now more expensive than all but the largest cities surveyed in the United States. Of 16 US cities featured in the survey only New York (27th), Chicago (35th), Los Angeles (35th) and San Francisco (40th) are pricier than Montreal and Vancouver (joint 43rd).

If things take a turn for the better here's an option:



With the cost of living set at around a third of that of New York, Tehran remains the cheapest destination in the ranking, a long way down from its position as the world's most expensive destination 14 years ago.


© Copyright 2006 by Finfacts.com

antinimby
October 30th, 2006, 02:49 PM
See, lofter? The grass isn't always greener on the other side of the fence...

Better off staying put and using the moving expenses you would have spent and take a trip to visit Iceland instead. ;)

pianoman11686
October 30th, 2006, 03:03 PM
Those cost of living statistics have come up in other threads before, and the same inconsistency applies: currency rates. The US dollar has been very weak over the past few years, especially in relation to other big currencies (the Euro, the British Pound, the Yen, even the Canadian Dollar). All of those figures need to be readjusted for average cost of living vs. average income, with a standardized currency.

Luca
October 31st, 2006, 03:12 AM
Those cost of living statistics have come up in other threads before, and the same inconsistency applies: currency rates. The US dollar has been very weak over the past few years, especially in relation to other big currencies (the Euro, the British Pound, the Yen, even the Canadian Dollar). All of those figures need to be readjusted for average cost of living vs. average income, with a standardized currency.

It's called pourchasing power parity. If you multiply PPP by average (or emdian) income you get an idea of purchasing power. Note however, that housign (to the extent that it si owner occupied) does nto coutn entirely as an expense, since it has a large capital component. This effect is trated differently in different calculations and for expensive towns like London or NYC it can, of course, make a big difference.

ablarc
October 31st, 2006, 06:46 AM
...purchasing power parity...
Big Mac Index.

pianoman11686
October 31st, 2006, 12:58 PM
^A surprisingly reliable measure of cost of living.

Luca, I'm not sure what you mean about housing. At least in the U.S., people spend somewhere around one-third of their incomes on housing, be it rental or mortgage payments. In New York, this percentage can run as high as 45%. In my mind, it's an important factor in determining cost of living.

I'm also not sure if you agree with me on the currency issue. Purchasing power, as I understand it, is more of a factor in determining cross-country costs, as in for tourists or expats. If you earn a living in the U.S., and the British pound is appreciating relative to it, while the Canadian dollar is depreciating, your US dollars will have more purchasing power in Canada, relative to Britain. What I'm saying is that these differences shouldn't be taken into consideration at all when compiling those types of surveys. Currency rates are just too volatile and subject to outside factors like speculation and geopolitical events to really factor into people's decisions about where to live. All I'm saying is, the scale that we use to measure cost of living must be standardized, to avoid the kind of fluctuations that can drop a city from #10 on the world's most expensive places to live, to #30 in a single year.

Ninjahedge
October 31st, 2006, 01:35 PM
Piano... There is one other thing that they really do not take into account in these suveys.

Tha actual STANDARD of living that each area has. You can put one particular standard of living on to compare everyone across the board, but the expenses incurred and the things participated in in the city are different than in the country, or in other countries.

The same person may want to live the same way (certain apartment/home space, car, entertainment, food) in different areas, but some people know that when they move to Manhattan they ditch the car and some of their expenses drop.

How to compare these differences is difficult, unless you define each "average" persons idea of living in each district and then tell what the costs for each of those would be in each of the areas.

You would have to take the "average" living routine in LA and compare the costs of that IN LA and in NYC, as well as the "average" NYC lifestyle. Certain things would need to be itemized so that you get an idea of what your life would be in one sense without having to keep some of the thnigs you would no longer need (such as a car in NYC proper). But the idea would be the same.

You would find out how much it would cost you to live somewhere in some way and compare that to how much you would be earning.... Not an easy apples and oranges comparison.