|
|
| Re: Time for the MTA to cash in on the graffiti in the system... (548505) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Time for the MTA to cash in on the graffiti in the system... |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Sun Jan 6 10:16:14 2008, in response to Re: Time for the MTA to cash in on the graffiti in the system..., posted by Christopher Rivera on Sun Jan 6 09:37:54 2008. If that was indeed true then why did the city only experience growth during the 80s, during the 70s the outer boroughs struggled, don't relate growth in manhattan to growth citywide, if the city was in fact growing then the effects would've been felt city wide like the growth occuring now.Its not "if it was true." It was true. You made a statement about the city that was false, and I called you out on it. Now you're changing your definition and you're still wrong. The only way that you can be right is if you drop the use of the word "bankruptcy" and only focus on the most economically disadvantaged parts of the city. If you were in fact right then why was the city cutting back transit service? WHy were they reducing trains? Why were trains breaking down frequently? The city was cutting back on transit service before the 70s. It has nothing to do with that decade. Why was graffiti rampant? That has nothing to do with the state of the local economy. This is now in James Q. Wilson's territory. You can read a quick bit on it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixing_Broken_Windows What you're saying has in fact no proof... What I am saying has nothing but proof. Go to the library and look up the quarterly growth stats for the City in the 70s. It is not opinion, it is fact. look at the 1977 blackout compared to the 2003 black out... That has nothing to do with economic growth. It has a lot more to do with the whole city living through 9-11 together than anything else. Looting and vandalism were widespread, hitting thirty-one neighborhoods, including every poor neighborhood in the city. Among the hardest hit were Crown Heights where seventy-five stores on a five-block stretch were looted, and Bushwick where arson was rampant with some 25 fires still burning the next morning. At one point two blocks of Broadway, which separates Bushwick from Bedford-Stuyvesant in Brooklyn, were on fire. Thirty-five blocks of Broadway were destroyed: 134 stores looted, 45 of them set ablaze. In all, 1,616 stores were damaged in looting and rioting. 1,037 fires were responded to, including 14 multiple-alarm fires. In the largest mass arrest in city history, 3,776 people were arrested. Many had to be stuffed into overcrowded cells, precinct basements and other makeshift holding pens. A Congressional study estimated that the cost of damages amounted to a little over US$300 million. Nothing to do with economic growth in the city. You're citing statistics that have absolutely nothing to with economics. I strongly suggest that take basic economics classes. In 2003 NONE OF THAT HAPPENED. So the time were in fact bad, look at the pictures of the outer boroughs where there were abandoned buildings, crime on nearly every street. Where was that growth... there was none. Come on, if there was growth there wouldn't be that famous line "Ford to City... Drop Dead" I grew up in Brooklyn during the 70s, and there were no such problems. Anyway, you're not providing proof. You're providing anecdotal evidence and avoiding the only real proof that there is because it will prove you wrong. |
|
|
|