08-07-2010, 09:34 PM
Hi,
Perhaps. I think it has more to do with "you can take the boy out of the slums, but you can't take the slums out of the boy." The same architectural styles on the Upper West Side are some of the safest and most expensive residences in NYC. Single family residence neighborhoods range from crime infested slums to family friendly areas even though the economic conditions are often the same in each. But the amount of crime seems to be inversely related to the number of neighborhood watch signs (and people).
Maybe, maybe not. But projects have been around since the late nineteenth century. They've mostly failed, and in the same way. I'm speaking of the 1950s. Half a century should have been more than enough to learn. Most politicians have never heard of Santayana, much less understand him.
--Pete
(08-07-2010, 08:39 PM)Jester Wrote: Architectural choices appear . . .
Perhaps. I think it has more to do with "you can take the boy out of the slums, but you can't take the slums out of the boy." The same architectural styles on the Upper West Side are some of the safest and most expensive residences in NYC. Single family residence neighborhoods range from crime infested slums to family friendly areas even though the economic conditions are often the same in each. But the amount of crime seems to be inversely related to the number of neighborhood watch signs (and people).
Quote:If the projects had been built differently, they might not have ended up so badly. I don't think they really understood that at the time. In retrospect, however, the pattern seems clear.
Maybe, maybe not. But projects have been around since the late nineteenth century. They've mostly failed, and in the same way. I'm speaking of the 1950s. Half a century should have been more than enough to learn. Most politicians have never heard of Santayana, much less understand him.
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?