Gothamist: Quality of Life Declining in NYC According to Survey

fionafee

Sun, 15 Jun 2008 19:25:19 -0500

Great comments! I work above 155st and it IS a third world country up here! There is no quality of life in NYC when you are constanly running like a maniac. What is that saying?? Europeans work to live, we live to work? We are always go, go, go. I have been to many other countries as well as other cities here. We lack a lot more than the quality of life. I think I am like everyone else who gets "stuck" here.....money and fear of change! I KNOW I could have a much better life elsewhere but you stay with what you know......how about the habla espanol factor as well??? NOT GOOD!

Editrixie

Fri, 13 Jun 2008 01:43:14 -0500

No one can afford Honolulu or San Francisco either.

Anna_Merkin

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:23:22 -0500

I love(d) the community called Fort Greene. People (the ones who have lived there for a few years), know you, speak to you, and wonder how you're doing when they don't see you. The people who work at many of the neighborhood's businesses (again, mostly the older businesses) know what's going on in the neighborhood and also know their patrons. The quality of life degradation is coming in part, from people who have no idea of what community means except for some newly-found suburban isolation in which they can play like they're in the big city but in reality, they live in a bubble.

esquared

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:47:21 -0500

"Does that danish thats been sitting in the hot sun all day long look good? How about some of that "meat" at the counter? Or maybe that $5 box of Cheerios seems like a good deal? Maybe this was ok in the 1970s; but we're in the 21st century. Indeed, we are in the 21st century, where most yunnies would prefer to shop at CS, and all these pharmacies sprouting up in NYC. Please, feel free to shop there. By the way, this just in from Crain's business news: "Expired items were found at 142 CVS and 112 Rite Aid Pharmacies in New York; 60% of CVS stores and 43% of the Rite Aid stores visited by investigators had expired goods.. Welcome to the 21st century NYC.

drewo

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:39:23 -0500

Good to hear Rach. I'll keep a birdseye out for any new trees in my hood.

Rach

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:11:57 -0500

I've noticed a lot of new trees in my neighborhood. Where there was none, now there are six trees across the street outside my window. So perhaps you're just not seeing where they're planting them. And yes, it does make a big difference in QOL, I love those fucking trees.

drewo

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 10:29:32 -0500

Here's a few reasons for NYC's QOL decline for Bloomie and his cronies to chew on: Filth - the city is disgustingly dirty, from sidewalks to streets to subways, it's a filthy mess, in part to our fellow New Yorker's crass behavior. NYC is Third World style in terms of lack of cleanliness. Noise - mostly attributed to vehicles from trucks to buses to cabs to delivery vans, as well as construction noise, nightclub noise and the din of thousands of hi-rise ventilation systems. The biggest complaint from New Yorkers is noise - so much of it you can't hear yourself think. Lack of greenery and public greenspace - yes, the Mayor is correct in that more people are choosing to live in New York. But for every apartment built for these newcomers, exactly zero amount of parkland is added to the city. It's too crowded and there's not enough easily accessible public space. There's also an alarming lack of trees on most city streets - a small addition to our street scape that makes a big difference in QOL. The city has talked a lot recently about planting trees - but most streets remain concrete heat canyons with nary a living plant in sight.

esquared

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 09:33:38 -0500

JenChungsBra

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 09:22:06 -0500

It's a good thing "availability of banking services" was one of the factors in the survey or else NYC would have dropped another 20 or 30 places on the list. Meanwhile to give you an idea of where New York really ranks on the world scale, this survey, done by an international firm that uses a UK phone number on its press release, uses NEW YORK CITY as the baseline for its worldwide quality-of-life survey. Quote: The rankings are based on a point scoring index, which sees Zurich scoring 108, while Baghdad scores 13.5. Cities are compared to New York as the base city, with an index score of 100.

poopmast

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 09:19:17 -0500

I agree Tokyo > NYC except for salaries and untrimmed bush

Gothamist_Cynic

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 08:24:19 -0500

As much as I love NYC. Tokyo > NYC

cucarachita

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 07:59:48 -0500

The only reason I'm here is because of the work. No where else would I have as much work available. On the other hand, no where else would I pay such a ridiculous rent, or put up with such gross subways, or practically pay just to breathe on a park bench. (Which I won't sit on now anyway, because apparently they're getting invaded by bedbugs from the homeless people sleeping on them!) If I could find as much work anywhere else, I'd be there. And yes, I'm from here!

cucarachita

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 07:56:20 -0500

Quality of life declining in NYC? No shit, Sherlock!

angry_pickle

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 01:41:29 -0500

Totally agree with #16 and #17. Plus no city in the world has the intellectual and artistic life here. Oh really? Are most of the best doctors in the country in NYC. No! And even if some are in that class, you're probably paying more for their rent than for their skill. The best hospitals? Nope. The most Nobel prize winners? Nope. The most colleges and universities? Nope. And greatest orchestra? Nope that would be Chicago. The most technologically advanced and innovative companies? Nope. The best public school system? No way. The best advertising firms? Definitely. you are referring to "bodegas", which are wonderful. Does that danish thats been sitting in the hot sun all day long look good? How about some of that "meat" at the counter? Or maybe that $5 box of Cheerios seems like a good deal? Maybe this was ok in the 1970s; but we're in the 21st century.

rcltrh

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 23:26:17 -0500

"The stores close at 7 (except the malls, yech). The bars close at 2." You just described Brooklyn, the Bronx, Staten Island, and most of Queens. Also, you should be aware that even in Manhattan no new 4 am liquor licenses are being given out - all new NYC bar licenses are requiring 2 am closures. NYC, the city where millionaires live in slums, and multi-millionaires live in squalor. It takes a billionaire to actually have a decent place to live here, and even then it is nothing special compared to west coast or other city housing.

cuntry

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 22:33:05 -0500

number 17, you douchebag idiot, go back to ohio. you are referring to "bodegas", which are wonderful. a mom and pop shop is not the same as a bodega, though a bodega can be one. here, this will help you, you scum of the earth. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Mom-and-pop+store

starrygordon

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 22:01:21 -0500

"Quality of life" seems to mean degree to which city is like a mall in a suburb for rich people. Every place in the North America I have been for any length of time has been Mickey Mouse compared to New York City. That includes San Francisco and Boston. But, yeah, I am sure dumb rich people can go shopping in those places and return home gratified with their glitzy junk and their "quality of life" so they must be high on the scale.

Steven

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 21:52:24 -0500

How about the declining of life in New York State? The state and the city both suck the blood out you when it comes to taxes. One sure doesn't move to New York to have a quality of life.

Pharmer

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 21:36:53 -0500

On the bright side, maybe this survay will discourage some people to relocating to NYC?

Snoopy

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 21:26:31 -0500

Take in one of those "sports bars" out there across the river and you will find a total bunch of idiots. They can't go beyond the reality that sports aren't that important. The average conversation is, "Yeh but dem guys are going down because of the team."

west side Michael

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:51:11 -0500

Just go down Broadway from 32nd street to 26th street and see why, Don't vomit. At least this city has a life after 9 p.m.

Think twice

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:21:17 -0500

"This is the greatest place to live." Typical response from an overconfident chauvinist. I hope to god he doesn't have a third term. It's about time we had ourselves a realist. Re: #17 So true.

Anna_Merkin

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 18:37:34 -0500

Boston sux.

slappy

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 17:23:01 -0500

I've lived in a few cities in the States. The stores close at 7 (except the malls, yech). The bars close at 2. What I miss most when I live outside NYC or Europe is the diversity of the people which really gives NY its soul and the swaggering chaos of the streets. Plus no city in the world has the intellectual and artistic life here. Its there if you look for it. I love it here. That said. I think Bloomberg and Giulliani should be arrested for crimes against the people.

sonyactivision

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 17:00:48 -0500

Portland's got good junk but it's overpriced (obviously humped in from Seattle) The dope's better in San Fran and it's clean, like East Coast. Stay away from LA: too much black tar and snobby fucks in the Westside who won't bust up even though they got the mainline.

Jaze

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:55:23 -0500

Any survey that concludes that ZURICH is the best place on earth in which to live is devastatingly flawed. But I'm all for NYC coming in behind Baghdad if that'll slow down the stream of new arrivals coming into the city.

Shinobi Shaw

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:53:05 -0500

I am talking about Portland Oregon. I also think Vancouver is excellent in QOL (it was I believe 3rd in world ranking in QOL after Vienna and Zurich). Someone mentioned Colorado? That's another excellent QOL in general. You have Boulder, Aspen (posh, but still...mountains!), and of course....Denver. Overall, I have a feeling that in 5-8 years I'll be in one of these locations that I mentioned. I don't think I will stomach living here for another decade. And I am from here!

eyekantspel

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:49:42 -0500

cwbuecheler

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:43:55 -0500

New York's pros outweigh its cons for certain people - myself included, although it's growing pretty tenuous these days - but for the vast majority of people there's no way in hell I'd ever recommend they move to this insanely expensive, overcrowded, too-hot-in-summer, too-cold-in-winter, technologically backward, vermin-infested city. Unless it really matters to you to be surrounded by tons of museums, night life, and other things that many people won't ever take advantage of (and couldn't afford to even if they wanted), there's no good reason to live in New York instead of many of the smaller, more spacious, cleaner, cheaper, more advanced cities scattered around the country.

Snoopy

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:42:12 -0500

San Francisco sucks! It's all pan handlers and aged hippies in a not so good looking, hilly, beat up town.

dimshine

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:33:02 -0500

boulder is pretty good, denver too. yay mountains!

smitty

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:23:12 -0500

San Francisco is pretty awesome.

Blairy Blair

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:20:42 -0500

Portland is horrible! It's all rain, rain, rain, cold, cold, cold. It's like they're under water and depressed all the time. Don't ever move there.

BaHa

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:02:14 -0500

There are two Portlands, you know, and the one on the east coast is quite livable. Which one are you referring to?

TKaisen

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:58:20 -0500

Can't wait for this to continue to decline so that all these Carrie Bradshaw wannabes and hedge fund managers would leave thus, NYC can have its character and soul back. Yup, rich people never lived in Manhattan before the 90s. Greenwich Village, Irving Place/Gramercy, and Central Park West all sprang up since the mid-90s. Nothing says fun like a mugging!!!

esquared

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:57:38 -0500

Better to live in a boring place than pretentious.

jenspellnogood

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:57:37 -0500

Quality is all relative, and NY can offer a great qol for those that want this but...Bloomberg has blood on his hands for fucking this place up.

Shinobi Shaw

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:51:07 -0500

THe city has never been about quality of life, it's always been about adventure, transformation, edge (though that's gone now) and dreams. If I want high quality of life in NA, I move to Portland or Vancouver.

gcouncil

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:49:23 -0500

NYC QOL (Quality of Life) will continue to decline for anyone who makes less that $150K/year. You can't do a lot of the things you can do in other less "great" cities with cost of living as high as it is here. Hmmmm...COL and QOL seem to have an inverse relationship...duh.

Shinobi Shaw

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:49:03 -0500

The city has never been truly about quality of life, it has always been about adventure, transformation, edge (though that's gone now) and following dreams. If I was looking for a high quality of life in North America, I try Portland or Vancouver.

theevilone

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:44:46 -0500

I have a friend who recently relocated to Zurich. Thinks it is the most boring place on earth.

esquared

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:39:31 -0500

According to Bloomberg "This is the greatest place to live. This is why tourism is up 9% here," uhmmm... Mr. Bloomberg, living and visiting aren't the same. NYC is only nice to visit, but not to live, unless you're one of the wealthy 2% living in the UPE.

esquared

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:34:24 -0500

matty

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:31:08 -0500

New York - Great place to visit!