Visit to a lower class neighborhood

Today I visited a lower class neighborhood. South Washington Heights to be more specific (the 160s and 170s). Here are my observations:

(1) Children everywhere. Hundreds of them, maybe even thousands. There are almost as many kids around as there are adults. In Hell’s Kitchen, you can look up and down Ninth Avenue and not see a single kid at all. Lower class people sure know how to reproduce.

(2) People sitting around doing nothing. The streets are busy in Hell’s Kitchen, but everyone is walking somewhere or doing something. In the lower class neighborhood, you see people sitting around on their stoops doing nothing.

(3) Signs in Spanish. Maybe there were even more signs in Spanish than there were in English?

(4) People have darker skin. There’s no place in New York City where everyone is white, but where I live whites are the majority. In Washington Heights, I was the minority.

(5) No doormen. There were some residential buildings big enough to have doormen, but the familiar doormen were not present. However I suspect that many doormen live in this neighborhood when they’re not working. How do people buy stuff from Amazon.com if there’s no doorman to receive their package?

Comments

[David Alexander]

Children everywhere. Hundreds of them, maybe even thousands.

I'll make up a hypothesis and says that despite the higher birth rates of poorer people, especially Hispanics, the reason you see so many kids is because they don't have backyards and large homes for over-protective middle class parents to hide their children.

In Hell’s Kitchen, you can look up and down Ninth Avenue and not see a single kid at all.

Hell's Kitchen tends to attract the childless/childfree folk with income in the first place.

People sitting around doing nothing.

I'd gather that unemployment and low wages means you don't have the money and sometimes "need" to go around and do stuff. Plus, for some reason, it's how "they" connect to other people.

I live in a lower middle class neighbourhood in Queens near Nassau County, and "standing around" is common, but it's usually the young men with nothing better to do, or the old washed up men who have nothing better to do. So, it's not just an urban phenomenon, but it can be prevelent in the suburban milleu as well.

Also, in your travels, did you notice that most of the people sitting around doing nothing were male?

(3) Signs in Spanish. Maybe there were even more signs in Spanish than there were in English?

(4) People have darker skin. There’s no place in New York City where everyone is white, but where I live whites are the majority.

Washington Heights has a reputation of being a Dominican neighbourhood, so there's a high expectation of dark-sinned Spanish people and Spanish signs. Just like how Chinatown is filled with Chinese people and signs in Chinese.

As for an area of New York City where everybody's white, try the south shore of Staten Island.

How do people buy stuff from Amazon.com if there’s no doorman to receive their package?

Well, you're making a presumption that they recieve things from Amazon. In most cases, UPS & FedEx try and leave the packages in the lobby, in front of the recipient's door, with a neighbour, or in really bad cases, they take it back to the local distribution centre and hold it for the recipient to come pick it up (or what I've been told from working in an retailer that uses UPS & FedEx). Remember, most people live in apartments sans doormen, and in most safe neighbourhoods, it's not a problem.

[Mr. Mercy Vetsel]

I'll make up a hypothesis and says that despite the higher birth rates of poorer people, especially Hispanics, the reason you see so many kids is because they don't have backyards and large homes for over-protective middle class parents to hide their children.

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

David,

Interesting hypothesis, but easy to check and in fact wrong:

http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html

Hell's Kitchen (10019)
Under 5 -> 2.8% Under 18 -> 7.9%

Washington Heights around 160th (10032)
Under 5 -> 6.7% Under 18 -> 25.5%

Chatham (07928)
Under 5 -> 6.7% Under 18 -> 24.8%

So Half Sigma's anecdotal observation clearly agrees with the Census Bureau data showing at least three times as many children per capita in the Washington Heights zip code.

I added the data from my own middle class town to support MY hypothesis. When people living in Hell's Kitchen decide to have kids they move out to the suburbs where there are plenty of backyards, no housing projects and where the men are at work during the day while their wives are pushing strollers through the Short Hills mall.

-Mercy

[trumwill]

It's interesting how sometimes regional differences smack you in the face. The only place I have ever seen a doorman was in the movies. I honestly thought it was either an entertainment media creation (like chalk lines where murder victims fell) or something that used to be but isn't any longer like gas station attendants (though they still exist in Oregon...).

As far as how one gets packages delivered in an apartment complex, it's a real pain in the posterior. I've usually had them sent to someone that I know and trust that lives in a house and get it picked up there as most apartment complex's I've lived in were gated.

Back when I was living in a southern metropolis, I had a person from the daily newspaper call me and sell me a subscription. I bought it, not realizing that they did not deliver in gated communities (even if they could get in side). I never did get my money back on that. I actually found the inability to get a daily paper more aggrivating than than an inability to get packages.

[Peter]

While neither South Washington Heights nor Hell's Kitchen are typical American neighborhoods, it sounds as if Hell's Kitchen is more atypical.

[David Alexander]

Monsieur Vetsel, thank you for schooling me in terms of the population of the under 5s and 18s. I agree with you that the percentage of children in Hell's Kitchen would be lower, and I said it my original reply (Hell's Kitchen tends to attract the childless/childfree folk with income in the first place.).

When people living in Hell's Kitchen decide to have kids they move out to the suburbs

That's true for nearly everybody. Most people don't want to take their chances with the New York City schools system. Those with lots of money can go to the suburban school system of their choice and buy a nice home, and those that are stuck behind can attempt to place their children in a Catholic School and possibly flee to one of the outer boros.

where the men are at work during the day while their wives are pushing strollers through the Short Hills mall

That thought alone makes me want to cringe about the state of your town. Also, since when was Chatham, New Jersey considered a middle class town?

Just as a side point, in my lower middle class Queens neighbourhood, 5.6% of the population is under 5 and 23.6% is under 18.

[Spungen]

"Children everywhere. Hundreds of them, maybe even thousands."

I picture Half Sigma warily cringing through the neighborhood like Rod Taylor in "The Birds."

"In the lower class neighborhood, you see people sitting around on their stoops doing nothing."

Remember, that is because having children severely drains your power crystals.

Re David Alexander's post, I read it to offer an additional reason for seeing more kids (smaller dwelling quarters, so they're forced outside), not to deny that lower-income neighborhoods have more kids. Based upon what I've seen, he's right. Where I live in SoCal, most houses are pretty big. Even lower-class people often rent fairly large houses, even with Section 8. It has to be a really, really bad neighborhood with old, tiny houses or apartments before one sees lots of adults or kids hanging out front. Also, even the working class tend to put their classes in after-hours activities like sports and dance lessons nowadays. The dividing line seems to be being so poor you don't have a car.

[SFG]

You've never been up there before? I wound up in Harlem once when I took the 2 instead of the 1 at the 96th street station (and any New Yorkers here are going to start laughing). I was pretty scared, actually, and it was the middle of the day.

[ChrisV82]

I used to get annoyed by people sitting on their stoops or standing outside of stores in the middle of the day. Don't these people have jobs? Then it occurred to me that I was looking at it from my own perspective. I work during the day. Maybe a lot of them have night jobs. It would be pretty stupid for someone to look at me hanging around at night and wonder why I don't get a job, right?

There are tons of people and children hanging around outside their apartments and houses in poor areas of cities. If people want to socialize that way, if that's how they create strong bonds in the neighborhood, I'm all for it.

Besides, it's not that long ago that Hell's Kitchen was a festering shithole before the yuppies took over.

[rose]

I think some ethnic groups are just stoop sitters and spend a lot of time outside, not only to socialize (unlike us isolated-in-our-cars-and-homes yuppies), but because they live in smaller places, have no air conditining, and just like to be with each other connecting in a sort of clan mentality (humans are supposed to be herd animals, remember?).

I don't see anything wrong with that, while I see a whole lot wrong with the way most of the rest of us lead lives in isolation instead of involvement with each other (TV and the internet don't count!), and if we don't produce more children, we will be overrun just like Europe is being overrun, let alone have fewer people to contribute to taxes and social security.

In fact, I think this sort of "snobbery" about all the children is exactly what will cause us a whole lot of trouble in another decade or two even though we thought we were so smart and efficient to limit the number of children we have. Hey, I bought it hook line and sinker, and now looking back I wish I'd been smarter and had at least six kids and a smaller house, less material goodies, and took time to sit on a stoop and just chit-chat and connect with other human beings.

There are pluses and minuses to each lifestyle, and I suppose the way to go would be the happy medium----isolate sometimes and stoop-sit sometimes just to see how the other half lives.

[IC]

Naturally confident people are likely to relax in face of tough live and future. They relax and worry about nothing. They become poor often.

Insecure people tend to worry a lot. They keep themself busy due to insecurity. They end up rich but still work hard because of natual insecurity.

Secure people often end up with low IQ. But they are confident. Confident guys attract women easily. What mess!

[rose]

I don't think confidence has anything at all to do with being rich or poor. Confidence has to do with knowing your place in the world, finding your niche, and then living it fully.

And you're right, confident guys are more attractive to women even if they are poor and even if they are less than handsome. It's because a woman instinctively knows that a guy who has a lot of confidence will be able to confidently handle anything that comes up when times get tough. Those who worry a lot but get rich tend to fall apart when the riches go by the wayside.

Confidence is security and power. Money comes and goes.

[rose]

Secure people often end up with a low IQ??????????

That comment is downright low IQ because it's so absurd. Prove it!

[IC]

Secure people often end up with a low IQ??????????

That comment is downright low IQ because it's so absurd. Prove it!

Well, let me give you a clue. Just do some googling on IQ, personality, self-esteem, ect. Only read those published in peer-reviewed journal. You will find out who is down right low IQ. You gonna really regret making your comment with such low IQ.

People feel good about themself usually low IQ type.

[rose]

Sorry, I don't buy it. Sounds to me like a lot of peers with a high insecurity level justifying their insecurity by spouting pseudo-scientific nonsense.

You can buy into it if you want to, but no way I will buy it, simply because I've got a lot of life observations that have proven to me that secure people have just as good an IQ as insecure people.

Add to that the different types of knowledge that an IQ doesn't even touch on----such as knowing what to do if you're out in the sticks and your car goes out on you, or a mountain lion attacks, or you need water and all that's around is a polluted stream, etc., etc.

Ya know, there are other sorts of knowledge besides those that IQ measures. As for me, I'd rather have a secure person around who can handle new situations in a confident way than some sort of high-IQ mental giant whose knowledge is primarily theoretical from books and who has hardly any knowledge of practical living.