3 ms·
Poorer folks in New York City have drastically less space available for...pretty much everything. Even in relatively spaced-out areas, this is true. If you go
by timr 6y ago
Poorer folks in New York City have drastically less space available for...pretty much everything.
Even in relatively spaced-out areas, this is true. If you go to Central Park, you'll find that the density of people on an average day is far higher at (say) Harlem Meer than it is further south. There are simply more people who are sharing the same recreation space that is within X miles of the place they are living.
Central Park is actually a silly example, because it's far better than most other parts of New York. Go to Fort Washington Park on an average sunny weekend, and the density of people is dramatically higher than Riverside Park, further south. And that's just recreation...poorer people have less time for that than rich people do. Go to Flushing, and people are cheek-to-jowl at pretty much all times, even though there's a big empty park right next door.
- dcolkitt 6y ago> And that's just recreation...poorer people have less time for that than rich people do. At least in the US, the poor have significantly more leisure time than the rich. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/09/the-free-time-paradox-in-america/499826/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/09/the-fre...
- Someone 6y agoI couldn’t get the information out of the article, but I would think conflating the working poor with the non-working poor makes that statistic unfair towards the working poor (and, because there are relatively more non-working poor, more unfair than conflating the working rich with the non-working rich) Even if the working rich work more hours than the working poor, the situation might be reversed when one includes commute time from and to, and between jobs.