4 ms·

All of those are about young people who mostly haven't started families, or are only starting to in very few cases (couple and a newborn baby). I don't know ab

All of those are about young people who mostly haven't started families, or are only starting to in very few cases (couple and a newborn baby). I don't know about "The Jeffersons" myself, but I struggle to remember a movie with a well-off family living in an apartment, even in areas like NYC or SF. So obviously, you are both right: a family in an apartment is usually a poor one, yet apartments are desireable for young folk.

eesmith 4y ago
Don't change the goalposts. The thesis was "Apartments are associated with low-income ghettos." None of those shows fit that "low-income ghetto" description. Further, 4 of the 12 do not fit your description at all. In "The Jeffersons", they have an adult child, Lionel Jefferson. They moved to the deluxe apartment from a house in working-class Queens after George Jefferson became wealthy from his dry cleaning chain. In "Diff'rent Strokes", the father's daughter is around 14 when the show started (it started November 3, 1978, the actress was born November 7, 1964). His housekeeper died and he decided to take in her two sons. In "The Bob Newhart Show" show, the actor was born September 5, 1929 and the show started September 16, 1972 making him 43 years old. They have no kids. In "Frasier", Frasier is divorced, and his ex-wife has custody of their son. Frasier's father has moved in with him due to mobility issues. Kelsey Grammer (who portrayed Frasier) was born February 21, 1955 and show started September 16, 1993 making him 38 years old. In-universe we know the marriage and child occurred when he lived in Boston, because that was in Cheers.
- senttoschool 4y ago
  https://www.google.com/search?q=USA+public+housing&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjTxuecref9AhU71jgGHT6VAAAQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=USA+public+housing&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzIFCAAQgAQyCQgAEIAEEAoQGDoGCAAQCBAeOgYIABAHEB46CAgAEAgQBxAeUJUPWNITYPEUaABwAHgAgAGTAYgByAWSAQM1LjKYAQCgAQGqAQtnd3Mtd2l6LWltZ8ABAQ&sclient=img&ei=AaoWZJPCMLus4-EPvqoC&bih=883&biw=1680&rlz=1C5CHFA_enVN933VN933 https://www.google.com/search?q=USA+public+housing&tbm=isch&... What do you see?
  - eesmith 4y ago
    I see someone who needs a refresher on Bayesian logic. Apartments are associated with many things, only one of which is public housing. An image search of public housing, which brings up many apartment buildings, doesn't mean that apartment buildings are only associated with public housing. Or, to structure it as you did. https://www.google.com/search?q=apartment+house https://www.google.com/search?q=apartment+house What do you see?
    - senttoschool 4y ago
      But using TV shows as evidence is better?
      - eesmith 4y ago
        What evidence do you have to support your comment? If "Apartments are associated with low-income ghettos" is meaningful, then how come there are many more TV shows taking place in middle- and high-income apartments than in "low-income ghettos"? If we do a GIS search for "apartment building", why are so few of them "low-income ghettos"? If we look at the population of people living in apartments, why are relatively few of them actually living in "low-income ghettos"? (Or does the US really have that many low-income regions?) If we strip away the term "ghetto", with its racist and pejorative history, and its built-in bias for urban living, and instead look at "low-income households", we can easily see there are many poor people who live in houses, including houses with a lawn and back yard. Rural poverty is a serious issue - rural poverty rates in the US are higher and more persistent than in urban areas - and those people are not living in apartments. https://www.nmhc.org/research-insight/quick-facts-figures/quick-facts-resident-demographics/household-incomes/ https://www.nmhc.org/research-insight/quick-facts-figures/qu... shows that households who rent a house (or building with 4 or fewer units) and households in apartments have almost the same income; only slightly less for households in apartments. While those who own a house are significantly richer. Which means there are more likely to be able to buy a house. This would seem to reduce your original comment to saying there's a strong association of having a large house with middle to high income families, and of low-income people living in smaller residences. Which I have no serious disagreement with.
- necovek 4y ago
  You exactly chose the ones that I am unfamiliar with. As I am not much of a TV fan, that's probably because some are more famous than the others. OTOH, none of the stories you described portray a "common" family (a couple with school-age children, mostly because kids are school-age for most of their "kids-ness" :)). Btw, there is no need to turn confrontational: I've even said that both you and the parent poster are right, and added distinctive qualifiers which make that true. I am basically not working with OPs "thesis" as a statement to be (dis)proven, but clarifying why they might feel that way, going with "assume the best reading" when we chat here.
  - eesmith 4y ago
    Instead of writing "All of those are about ... I don't know about "The Jeffersons .." you might say "Of the $N I know about ...". That might be less confrontational by better expressing the limits of your knowledge. Why do you say the parent poster is right? I disagree with validity of your distinctive qualifiers. In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35212323 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35212323 I listed four other shows, all with families with teenaged children, and all taking place in apartment buildings. Including one in public housing. But the number of other shows I listed strongly suggest that apartments are NOT associated with low-income ghettos, at least in TV depictions. Also, "The Odd Couple", two divorced men share an apartment. In the show they were adults in the 1930s, so matching the actors' ages of around 50. They have an 11-year-old neighbor, Philip.
    - necovek 4y ago
      Let's put it this way: I am not out to prove you wrong, and I am not out to prove my point either. Perhaps I'd get support for my point by looking at the popularity of the shows in question, seeing how many viewers tuned in into each of those. But it doesn't matter much (and I would be "moving the goalposts"), since the discussion was what is a preferential middle/higher income family dwelling type. My general point is that the OP had a different viewpoint in which it's not unusual to consider TV shows as preferring one lifestyle for middle class families (a house with a backyard), while your point that apartment-dwelling does not indicate poor tenants in TV shows is similarly true. Nobody is saying 100%, even if we are talking without qualifiers like "most", "majority", "most influential" and such. As a human talking to another human, if I say "ice cream is great", I hope I don't have to say how "I personally love most ice cream flavours I've tried even if I hate or dislike some of them, and there are many I haven't tried either" instead, so we wouldn't get into an argument how I wasn't really precise. And it's ok to disagree too, which is where we are at it seems.

eesmith 4y ago

Don't change the goalposts. The thesis was "Apartments are associated with low-income ghettos." None of those shows fit that "low-income ghetto" description. Further, 4 of the 12 do not fit your description at all. In "The Jeffersons", they have an adult child, Lionel Jefferson. They moved to the deluxe apartment from a house in working-class Queens after George Jefferson became wealthy from his dry cleaning chain. In "Diff'rent Strokes", the father's daughter is around 14 when the show started (it started November 3, 1978, the actress was born November 7, 1964). His housekeeper died and he decided to take in her two sons. In "The Bob Newhart Show" show, the actor was born September 5, 1929 and the show started September 16, 1972 making him 43 years old. They have no kids. In "Frasier", Frasier is divorced, and his ex-wife has custody of their son. Frasier's father has moved in with him due to mobility issues. Kelsey Grammer (who portrayed Frasier) was born February 21, 1955 and show started September 16, 1993 making him 38 years old. In-universe we know the marriage and child occurred when he lived in Boston, because that was in Cheers.

senttoschool 4y ago
https://www.google.com/search?q=USA+public+housing&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjTxuecref9AhU71jgGHT6VAAAQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=USA+public+housing&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzIFCAAQgAQyCQgAEIAEEAoQGDoGCAAQCBAeOgYIABAHEB46CAgAEAgQBxAeUJUPWNITYPEUaABwAHgAgAGTAYgByAWSAQM1LjKYAQCgAQGqAQtnd3Mtd2l6LWltZ8ABAQ&sclient=img&ei=AaoWZJPCMLus4-EPvqoC&bih=883&biw=1680&rlz=1C5CHFA_enVN933VN933 https://www.google.com/search?q=USA+public+housing&tbm=isch&... What do you see?
- eesmith 4y ago
  I see someone who needs a refresher on Bayesian logic. Apartments are associated with many things, only one of which is public housing. An image search of public housing, which brings up many apartment buildings, doesn't mean that apartment buildings are only associated with public housing. Or, to structure it as you did. https://www.google.com/search?q=apartment+house https://www.google.com/search?q=apartment+house What do you see?
  - senttoschool 4y ago
    But using TV shows as evidence is better?
    - eesmith 4y ago
      What evidence do you have to support your comment? If "Apartments are associated with low-income ghettos" is meaningful, then how come there are many more TV shows taking place in middle- and high-income apartments than in "low-income ghettos"? If we do a GIS search for "apartment building", why are so few of them "low-income ghettos"? If we look at the population of people living in apartments, why are relatively few of them actually living in "low-income ghettos"? (Or does the US really have that many low-income regions?) If we strip away the term "ghetto", with its racist and pejorative history, and its built-in bias for urban living, and instead look at "low-income households", we can easily see there are many poor people who live in houses, including houses with a lawn and back yard. Rural poverty is a serious issue - rural poverty rates in the US are higher and more persistent than in urban areas - and those people are not living in apartments. https://www.nmhc.org/research-insight/quick-facts-figures/quick-facts-resident-demographics/household-incomes/ https://www.nmhc.org/research-insight/quick-facts-figures/qu... shows that households who rent a house (or building with 4 or fewer units) and households in apartments have almost the same income; only slightly less for households in apartments. While those who own a house are significantly richer. Which means there are more likely to be able to buy a house. This would seem to reduce your original comment to saying there's a strong association of having a large house with middle to high income families, and of low-income people living in smaller residences. Which I have no serious disagreement with.
necovek 4y ago
You exactly chose the ones that I am unfamiliar with. As I am not much of a TV fan, that's probably because some are more famous than the others. OTOH, none of the stories you described portray a "common" family (a couple with school-age children, mostly because kids are school-age for most of their "kids-ness" :)). Btw, there is no need to turn confrontational: I've even said that both you and the parent poster are right, and added distinctive qualifiers which make that true. I am basically not working with OPs "thesis" as a statement to be (dis)proven, but clarifying why they might feel that way, going with "assume the best reading" when we chat here.
- eesmith 4y ago
  Instead of writing "All of those are about ... I don't know about "The Jeffersons .." you might say "Of the $N I know about ...". That might be less confrontational by better expressing the limits of your knowledge. Why do you say the parent poster is right? I disagree with validity of your distinctive qualifiers. In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35212323 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35212323 I listed four other shows, all with families with teenaged children, and all taking place in apartment buildings. Including one in public housing. But the number of other shows I listed strongly suggest that apartments are NOT associated with low-income ghettos, at least in TV depictions. Also, "The Odd Couple", two divorced men share an apartment. In the show they were adults in the 1930s, so matching the actors' ages of around 50. They have an 11-year-old neighbor, Philip.
  - necovek 4y ago
    Let's put it this way: I am not out to prove you wrong, and I am not out to prove my point either. Perhaps I'd get support for my point by looking at the popularity of the shows in question, seeing how many viewers tuned in into each of those. But it doesn't matter much (and I would be "moving the goalposts"), since the discussion was what is a preferential middle/higher income family dwelling type. My general point is that the OP had a different viewpoint in which it's not unusual to consider TV shows as preferring one lifestyle for middle class families (a house with a backyard), while your point that apartment-dwelling does not indicate poor tenants in TV shows is similarly true. Nobody is saying 100%, even if we are talking without qualifiers like "most", "majority", "most influential" and such. As a human talking to another human, if I say "ice cream is great", I hope I don't have to say how "I personally love most ice cream flavours I've tried even if I hate or dislike some of them, and there are many I haven't tried either" instead, so we wouldn't get into an argument how I wasn't really precise. And it's ok to disagree too, which is where we are at it seems.