3 ms·
Comparing NYC to Beverly Hills is apples and oranges. The only likeness they share is, perhaps, that they are both independent municipalities. Exhibit A, NYC:
by rbranson 16y ago
Comparing NYC to Beverly Hills is apples and oranges. The only likeness they share is, perhaps, that they are both independent municipalities.
Exhibit A, NYC: The most populous city in the US with the highest density and having the highest economic output. It is considered the world capital for finance and is a world cultural center for fashion, media, art, theater, food, and music. More people live in the city limits of NYC than 40 of the 52 states.
Exhibit B, Beverly Hills: An affluent bedroom community with around 30,000 residents and a suburb of Los Angeles.
- hugh3 16y agoOf course, they're very unlike each other. I'm just not convinced by the idea that a city needs poor (both in income and in quality) people in order to function. The low-paid jobs which do need to be done in Manhattan can easily be done by people commuting in from New Jersey. I'm actually not sure about the outer boroughs, I've never actually been there (that sounds snobbier than it is, I've only been to NYC twice). It seems to me that gentrifying the outer boroughs should be one of the great challenges facing New York City.
- rbranson 16y agoLow, middle, and high-income people alike already DO commute from outside the city. The NYC metro area has extensive and expensive transit infrastructure that is constantly expanding. Cost of construction and infrastructure increases with density in a super linear fashion.