6 ms·

I've been living in Brooklyn for just shy of 20 years and I'm very comfortable in dense cities. After spending about a month in India, primarily in Delhi and a

I've been living in Brooklyn for just shy of 20 years and I'm very comfortable in dense cities. After spending about a month in India, primarily in Delhi and a bit in Jaipur, I remember getting back to Manhattan and thinking "wow, look at all this space, there's no people here! What a peaceful, relaxed city".

lelandfe 11mo ago
Something that surprises often is that NYC used to be far, far denser. See the second image: https://urbanomnibus.net/2014/10/the-rise-and-fall-of-manhattans-density/ https://urbanomnibus.net/2014/10/the-rise-and-fall-of-manhat... I recommend to people the Tenement Museum for their second trip to NYC - it was eye opening (but pretty grim)
- shermantanktop 11mo ago
  What amazes me is that people did not flee. I assume the hand-to-mouth existence they had in these slums was apparently a little better than their prospects elsewhere. Or perhaps they were moving out but immigration and reproduction was more than making up for it…
  - crazygringo 11mo ago
    To where? You have no money, very little skills, you don't speak English. Even if you cobbled together money to take the train to some small town in Ohio or Iowa or something, what are you going to do as a complete social outsider who doesn't speak the language? The idea was to stick around in the LES where you had an actual community. Try to make some money, learn English, develop some skills, and then move out. Which is exactly what people did. And the new immigrants took their places. Also -- they had already fled. This was the fleeing. From Ireland, from Italy, from Poland, etc.
    - kridsdale1 11mo ago
      Their kids were the ones who were better educated and could move on. It’s still happening today.
      - kulahan 11mo ago
        This is the entire reason why people emigrate.
    - shermantanktop 11mo ago
      Sure, my point is that - no matter how bad this looks, it was approximately better than their alternatives. So it's a testament to human resilience. That aside, that there was literally no going back, given the travel to get to NY. I had an ancestor come to NYC in the 19th c. and return back to Sweden, but he was not in the desperate straits that many were. I'm sure some would have returned, given the opportunity.
      - bombcar 11mo ago
        There is a real human tendency to stay in a known but bad situation instead of making the risky leap into the likely better but unknown. You see it time and time again.
  - kridsdale1 11mo ago
    A lot of these people were in immigrant enclaves. Their neighborhoods may have been the only place in the country people spoke their language or shared their religion, so serving that community was their best bet for employment.
rayiner 11mo ago
Who does the best job managing density? Tokyo is lovely and orderly, but it’s not that dense—similar to San Francisco. Maybe Seoul?
- ghaff 11mo ago
  Depends where in San Francisco. A lot of business travelers in particular perceptions of SF are probably colored by the areas near the Moscone (and Fishermans Wharf). Though most of SF is relatively sane in general--certainly not like the Times Square area in NYC.
  - rayiner 11mo ago
    San Francisco doesn’t feel dense to me at all.
    - dragonwriter 11mo ago
      San Francisco is the 5th densest county in the USA, the top four are also the four densest burroughs of New York City. There is a good argument that San Francisco could and should be denser than it is, but its ludicrous to call it not dense at all.
    - 0_____0 11mo ago
      I live in a US city with a higher population density than SF that has barely any structures taller than 3-4 storeys. Most of SF is low density for a city of global importance. The Richmond, Sunset have essentially not changed since the early post-war era.
      - ghaff 11mo ago
        You can argue the global importance of Silicon Valley or even California generally. I'm not sure I get the "global importance" of the city of San Francisco specifically, which besides an attractive location and relatively easy access to Silicon Valley isn't especially unique among medium to large US cities.
  - 11mo ago

lelandfe 11mo ago

Something that surprises often is that NYC used to be far, far denser. See the second image: https://urbanomnibus.net/2014/10/the-rise-and-fall-of-manhattans-density/ https://urbanomnibus.net/2014/10/the-rise-and-fall-of-manhat... I recommend to people the Tenement Museum for their second trip to NYC - it was eye opening (but pretty grim)

shermantanktop 11mo ago
What amazes me is that people did not flee. I assume the hand-to-mouth existence they had in these slums was apparently a little better than their prospects elsewhere. Or perhaps they were moving out but immigration and reproduction was more than making up for it…
- crazygringo 11mo ago
  To where? You have no money, very little skills, you don't speak English. Even if you cobbled together money to take the train to some small town in Ohio or Iowa or something, what are you going to do as a complete social outsider who doesn't speak the language? The idea was to stick around in the LES where you had an actual community. Try to make some money, learn English, develop some skills, and then move out. Which is exactly what people did. And the new immigrants took their places. Also -- they had already fled. This was the fleeing. From Ireland, from Italy, from Poland, etc.
  - kridsdale1 11mo ago
    Their kids were the ones who were better educated and could move on. It’s still happening today.
    - kulahan 11mo ago
      This is the entire reason why people emigrate.
  - shermantanktop 11mo ago
    Sure, my point is that - no matter how bad this looks, it was approximately better than their alternatives. So it's a testament to human resilience. That aside, that there was literally no going back, given the travel to get to NY. I had an ancestor come to NYC in the 19th c. and return back to Sweden, but he was not in the desperate straits that many were. I'm sure some would have returned, given the opportunity.
    - bombcar 11mo ago
      There is a real human tendency to stay in a known but bad situation instead of making the risky leap into the likely better but unknown. You see it time and time again.
- kridsdale1 11mo ago
  A lot of these people were in immigrant enclaves. Their neighborhoods may have been the only place in the country people spoke their language or shared their religion, so serving that community was their best bet for employment.

rayiner 11mo ago

Who does the best job managing density? Tokyo is lovely and orderly, but it’s not that dense—similar to San Francisco. Maybe Seoul?

ghaff 11mo ago
Depends where in San Francisco. A lot of business travelers in particular perceptions of SF are probably colored by the areas near the Moscone (and Fishermans Wharf). Though most of SF is relatively sane in general--certainly not like the Times Square area in NYC.
- rayiner 11mo ago
  San Francisco doesn’t feel dense to me at all.
  - dragonwriter 11mo ago
    San Francisco is the 5th densest county in the USA, the top four are also the four densest burroughs of New York City. There is a good argument that San Francisco could and should be denser than it is, but its ludicrous to call it not dense at all.
  - 0_____0 11mo ago
    I live in a US city with a higher population density than SF that has barely any structures taller than 3-4 storeys. Most of SF is low density for a city of global importance. The Richmond, Sunset have essentially not changed since the early post-war era.
    - ghaff 11mo ago
      You can argue the global importance of Silicon Valley or even California generally. I'm not sure I get the "global importance" of the city of San Francisco specifically, which besides an attractive location and relatively easy access to Silicon Valley isn't especially unique among medium to large US cities.
- 11mo ago