Suburbs cost more than city UNTIL....

Yes, the timeless debate - if only it was as easy as an objective calculation. We lived in 'burbs (and i commuted) and then moved to the city when kids where ready to go to school (did it backward), so have done both. The intangibles are impossible to quantify;

-You can hit the jackpot and be surrounded by great neighbors with similar-aged non-psychotic kids, or you can be stuck in a wasteland of inwardly-focused suburbanites.....for 8 months of the year everyone's inside anyway.

-Its nice to have a deck to sit on, but now i get to see my kids all the time, take them to school etc.

-Schoolwise, give me one of the good NYC public schools over some homogenous suburban institution anyday. ......

-in the 'burbs something always needs to be fixed, replaced, painted, mowed, trimmed, have its oil changed, etc.....you can do it yourself, or keep an army of tradesmen employed. It wasn't the cost that got to me but the fact that it never ended! - once everything has been dealt with its time to start again.

I grew up in the suburbs and couldn't wait to move to the city. To me, they're really just different lifestyles. I enjoy visiting friends or family in the suburbs to sit out on the deck and relax. But the suburbs are very quiet if you don't have children at home. And very little restaurant options after 9pm. And the costs of taking care of a house as compared to a condo or coop is substantial-something always needs fixing.

people think you get more space in the burbs - what's typical in tri-state? 2000 sq ft at best? one can say i have a 5 bedroom 2 car garage, etc

of the 5 bedrooms how many are used and the 2 car garage implies you have 2+ highly depreciating gas-guzzling "assets" - and each of the 3/5 bedrooms are smaller than a typical manhattan apartment bedroom

the commute is also a "welcome" for the burbanites, i.e. i can read, sleep (you'd rather do that on a bus than your home?)

debate will never end

just pay the sq ft premium of living in a city apartment, get the jibes that come along with it from the burbanites who need to constantly justify their choices, and everyone will be happier

gottabrain - of the 5 bedroom house, with a family of four, we used about 1200 SF (about the size of a 2bed apt). the remaining space gests filled with junk, is never used, but still has to be heated/cooled/maintained. good point on commute - but its still time i would rather spend with my kids.

"good point on commute - but its still time i would rather spend with my kids"

irony with that statement is that suburbanites often justify the house because of the kids

i think house living is overrated - or is it just the 'burbs? certainly wouldn't want an apartment outside of the city - damn

"irony with that statement is that suburbanites often justify the house because of the kids"

very true- most americans are of the opinion that children will surely wilt and die if they don't have their own 300 SF bedroom with its own TV, separate playroom and basement entertainment area, eat in kitchen, big unused backyard, a minivan, and school with people just like themselves.

I've found that kids (small ones anyway) actually like to be with their parents, and they like stimulting urban environments. Can anyone chime in who has teenagers in the city?

"I've found that kids (small ones anyway) actually like to be with their parents"

to that point, even teenagers like their parents

wonder why kids can get easily messed up and entrenched in crap - because their parents are wasting their time on the commute to the suburbs/back from the city (don't undervalue the importance of those 1.5+ hours roundtrip)

With all due respect, I'm looking for a three bedroom. Are you guys saying you can match what it would cost to live in these houses with NYC apartments? Because even adding in the expense of the upkeep on the house, the two cars, the train tickets, etc, I feel like Montclair is more affordable and a better commute ( about a half hour to Penn Station ). My friends in Park Slope and Forest Hills say they are commuting about an hour and fifteen minutes to midtown. A Park Slope three bedroom seems to be about $750. Granted, Forest Hills has a wider range. I mean, I'm curious as to what your NYC alternatives would be because I'd much rather stay in the city.
http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/Montclair-Twp_NJ_07042_1115548257
http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/Montclair-Twp_NJ_07042_1117860632
http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/Montclair-Twp_NJ_07042_1118470624

i love the city and prefer to raise my child here, but i grew up in the suburbs and our big house and big yard were completely used and not filled with junk. we had a neighborhood full of kids that we played with every waking hour and unless it was pouring we were outside - cold snowy winters included - that meant snow forts and snowball fights - we were never inside 8 months of the year - that's nuts. and I grew up in a cold cold state.

i'm writing this only because i think some of things said above are nonsense.

Premise of the comparison is rediculous.

The family that takes the 4 bedroom house in the burbs is the one that would otherwise be cramped in a 2 bedroom, 1 bath in park slope (which you move to for the room int he first place)?

Thats the mistake that blows the whole thing.

Of course, if Park slope is that close to the burbs, goes to show that Manahttan is ways more expensive than the burbs even without private school.

"-Schoolwise, give me one of the good NYC public schools over some homogenous suburban institution anyday. ......"

Of course, the odds of being in a good school in NYC vs. a good school in one of the suburbs we're talking about...

considerably lower.

I was going to joke about winning the lottery, but then I realize thats actually part of the equation. ;-)

I was very happy with Stuy, but if I wasn't going there, I would have been praying for the burbs.

"gottabrain - of the 5 bedroom house, with a family of four, we used about 1200 SF (about the size of a 2bed apt). the remaining space gests filled with junk,"

Then buy the 2 bedroom house in the burbs and make it even cheaper than the city. Or, hell, get the 2 bedroom apartment in the burbs and save tons and tons.

But I have to save I've never been in a house of 2400 square feet where half was unused and/or filled with junk. Must take special people to do that.

Filled with junk -- you can see those people on that "Hoarders" T.V. show. Also that Neicey Nash :"Clean House", and a couple of other shows on T.V.

With no kids, and no need to commute to the city, and the fact that I enjoy the sound of silence and thinking my thoughts -- I would like a nice house in the burbs. No more b.s. with condo/coop boards. But, I don't drive.

Extra bedrooms, nicely furnished. Able to open the windows and get fresh air. It looks better to me, in some ways than worries of the city life.

Maybe one day.

"and each of the 3/5 bedrooms are smaller than a typical manhattan apartment bedroom"

Yes, but have you seen the sizes of master bedrooms in suburban McMansions? They are truly massive... easily the size of a studio apt. in Manhattan. Some master bedrooms even have 2 attached bathrooms (his and hers) and 2 walk in closets, also his and hers. Then some have sitting rooms, which is another bedroom right there.

"My friends in Park Slope and Forest Hills say they are commuting about an hour and fifteen minutes to midtown."

Do your friends have to take a bus to the subway? Because I have rode the E and F from 71st Continental Ave. plenty of times to Midtown and it takes no more than 30 minutes.

I punched the commutes into Google Maps for an arrival at 9am in Midtown near Grand Central. It says the Park Slope commute is 35 minutes door to door while the Montclair commute is 1:14 including a 48 minute train ride on NJ transit. Both asume ~5 minute walk to the train/subway from home.

An hour and 15 into midtown from Park Slope and Forest Hills?!

They must be stopping along the way for a bagel and coffee.

The best comment from the NYTimes article:
"Its never about the math. Those crazies who commute 2hrs by car or train are just as nutty as those stuffed into a refrigerator sized apartment. Its all about what you want (need) for yourself or where the best location for your job/family/inlaws, you name it are."

ChasingWamus: Good point. Very true.

Re: commute times... I think it is that they cannot get seats on the express from 71st St so they take the local? Does that sound right? Which is around forty mins ... And then it's a bit of a walk to the office on the far west side... so this accounts for their math ... They really seem to have the same commute as the guys from Jersey .... I hear Forest Hills is good for kids though...

Of course nobody ever considers the time waiting on the platform or getting to the subway station.

The article brings up a couple of other issues such as not having to deal with annoying household repairs. Additionally the city , at least the west side offers easy access to two great parks, the river, and Riverside Drive which connects up to 9W a great treasure for cycling fans. Lastly dog owners will attest that their pets are better socialized in a city setting than a suburb setting.

And for the environmentalists. City dwellers cause less pollution.

As everyone one knows I grew up in the city about as much of a gutter rat as one can be and have about as much use for all things suburban (okay I would like a car, a patio, a grill and maybe a hot tub) as I do for the North Korean system of government BUT.....
"Schoolwise, give me one of the good NYC public schools over some homogeneous suburban institution anyday. ......" Does it matter that many of the "good" NYC public schools are hardly models of racial or economic diversity? And while many suburban school districts are still "homogeneous" myoany have increasing numbers of African American and Hispanic students as the suburbs themselves diversify.

Also, doesn't it crack you up that a significant percentage of those "die hard raise my kids in the city types", have country or beach weekend homes? I recently passed a public school (not 41, 6, 234 or 199 btw) that had a sign asking for donations of "a week or weekend at your country house" to be auctioned off for the PTA. Clearly a second home is not a rarity amongst this student body.
This is not the "growing up in the city" I remember, nor it it the urban youth experience of the vast majority of kids in NYC today whose parents do not have the luxury of agonizing over a city/suburban "choice".

Also, doesn't it crack you up that a significant percentage of those "die hard raise my kids in the city types", have country or beach weekend homes?

Unless you are advocating redistribution of wealth that will not change. But that someone advocates raising kids in the city while at the same time maintaining a weekend getaway might appear a contradiction, they approach it with sincerity.

"about 8 hours ago i love the city and prefer to raise my child here, but i grew up in the suburbs and our big house and big yard were completely used and not filled with junk. we had a neighborhood full of kids that we played with every waking hour and unless it was pouring we were outside - cold snowy winters included - that meant snow forts and snowball fights - we were never inside 8 months of the year - that's nuts. and I grew up in a cold cold state"

Actually, in retrospect, i retract my comment about the 8 months - I found most people stayed inside 12 months of the year. It ain't Leave it To Beaver out there anymore wisco - folks like their AC/heat, and 500 TV channels.

Riversider, "crack you up" is a phrase that might tend to make people think you're Psychocrackerboy. Just write "cup of tea" to confirm.

The only way to do a fair comparison in cost of living between two places is by consulting the Big Mac Index. Everything else is lifestyle differences. And please don't start telling me that anybody's lifestyle doesn't involve the Big Mac.

Two single cheeseburgers have always been my drug of choice. Extra pickles, onions and ketchup. Honestly, you dont even need fries.

"Does it matter that many of the "good" NYC public schools are hardly models of racial or economic diversity?"

does this come from first hand experience? or if you have a data source i would genuinely be interested in seeing it (not said in a shitty way). From what i can tell, the local elementary students come from about as broad a range of backgrounds as you could imagine - a huge number come from outside 10014 as well

speaking of cheeseburgers, when mcd can no longer sell a dollar meal, we are fked. BTW, the fish filet is made from a odd looking creature in the deep waters off australia. Kinda old school like swimming with t Rex kinda old school looking fellas.

"Unless you are advocating redistribution of wealth that will not change."

We already have wealth redistribution. Wealth goes from the bottom to the top in the form of tax cuts and bailouts. How many vacation homes would be in foreclure if it were not for these 2 factors?

Some suburban kids go to private schools; the local public might not be right for every kid. Then families have the taxes and the tuition both.

No Big Macs for me, ever.

greenecounty: What county are you from/living in?, if you don't mind me asking.
Because you must be the wittiest person out there. Funny comment.

I am not sure I have ever read a more ridiculous discussion on SE.

Most of contributors are people who have already chosen a life in the city talking about how that is the best choice. This is like sitting in a room full of Republicans discussing the pros and cons of Democrat policies AND VICE VERSA.

First of all, many, if not most, of the people who live in the suburbs do not work in the city. I know that for those of us who do that doesn't seem possibly, but it is. There are many corporate, legal, accounting and finance jobs outside of Manhattan.

Also, when people make an argument it is important not to be careful not to select only the facts that support your part of the argument. Taxes + CC in the city today run $1.5 to $2.00 and could be headed up. So $20-24,000/month which is still much more than the average suburbanite for the same size. In the suburbs the increases in taxes MIGHT not go up so much simply because people can no longer afford it and they vote on it themselves whereas in NY it will be renters voting to increase the property taxes on owners and landlords.

Renovation costs: If you want to make major changes in your house in the 'burbs you can do it pretty easily and cheaply, especially if you are handy and can do some of the tasks yourself. A renovation in Manhattan on 1500 sq ft. will cost up to or north of a quarter million and you will have to get permission of the board to do it. In the suburbs that would be a fraction of the cost.

Cars are also way cheaper. True in the suburbs you probably need 2, but you don't have to pay to park them and the insurance is about half the price. After all, for all that people talk of zip car and not needing a car in the city, how many do you know that still have one, whether they park in a lot or even keep it outside the city with a friend or relative?

Dogs: Socialized? seriously? The simple truth is good dog owners have good dogs and vice versa. I don't see any statistics that show that someone in the city is more or less likely to be a good owner.

Schools: Very complicated and probably one of the most important factor why some people choose to move. The fact is that most suburban schools are better than most NYC schools. The very best suburban schools are probably not as good as the very best in the city, but at least someone gets to choose which school they are in. You want to send your kids to Scarsdale? You don't have to buy a $2 million dollar house, just a smaller one in the "catholic" section of town, or a condo. There are no such guarantees in the city, and many people are willing to pay for certainty (as much as there is any) when it comes to their kids.

Environmentalism: If you have a 2nd home don't even try to make this argument. If you take yearly trips overseas you also not living your life by environmental standards.

They might also value that there are more tennis courts, baseball fields, golf courses, etc per capita out in the burbs.

Perhaps the easiest way to figure out that it is cheaper to live in the suburbs is that the people who do make less money than most of the people living in the city! (Occam's razor)

Fact is people make different choices based on the information at hand. And each person has their own values, opinions and options. There is no good or bad. Someone might choose to raise a family in the city and someone might choose to raise them in the suburbs, but the choice is still theirs and neither is more right or wrong.

By the way, I am not even comparing non-NYC suburbs. There you can have the 5 BR house, the good school district and the two cars for the price of a studio condo in Manhattan.

Truth, your earlier comment about living in a house in the suburbs (enjoying silence and the fresh air) is definitely true. You have alot more peace and quiet in the suburbs. Having grown up there maybe I don't appreciate that quality enough. But you have to drive everywhere and very few neighborhoods having shopping within a few block walk from your house. I know quite a few couples who are raising kids in the suburbs and are so busy with driving the kids to their various activities. But without kids (as I am), its really quiet and I prefer to walk outside my apartment building and feel the city life. For me, I think of having a house on the beach for peace and quiet rather than a house in the suburbs. Enjoy your holiday weekend.

AvUWS - i fundamentally disagree - i've seen much more ridiculous discussions on SE.

lol. Ok, that point I will concede.

Just wait until both JimHones and CC join in.

AvUWS: "This is like sitting in a room full of Republicans discussing the pros and cons of Democrat policies AND VICE VERSA."

That's exactly what they really should be doing!

Yeah - be good to hear from our own honorable Knight of the Profession. One fact i didn't disclose before, but one that has made my decision to live in the city more complicated, is my PATHOLOGICAL aversion to paying a broker fees. But there are plenty of threads for that....

A few other things I have noticed about city/suburban life:
(these are things I have noticed because I am a city person, also having been raised here. But I have a lot of family in the suburbs and spend some time out there now that I never did before.)

Gyms: Much cheaper in the suburbs for better quality. NY Sports will allow you to use the gym in Livingston for the same $90 odd/month as one on the UWS. But since that is cheap(er) in the city, it will be below Equinox in quality and you might have to wait for machines at prime time. in NJ it looks like an Equinox in terms of equipment/service and has a pool in addition, and there will be more space. Other differences are cultural. People actually talk to each other in suburban gyms while in the city it is more akin to using a men's urinal. You don't look in their direction and you might go years working out near the same people and not talking to them.

Food: grocery stores are MUCH cheaper in the 'burbs. Even fairway seems expensive to someone who shops in Shoprite or Pathmark. (You think 3 pints for $5 of blueberry's is cheap in season? try 2 pints for $1.19 in Pathmark). average to Good restaurants are more expensive though you will have more elbow room. And there is no delivery of every type of food. A suburbanite is more likely to cook more at home. And though some might choose TV dinners, something similar could be said of a NY'r who orders in Chinese, etc. multiple days/week.

Pool/BBQ/gardening/vegetable garden: Choices again, but if you want these it is not possible or prohibitively expensive for someone in the city. Perhaps these very factors (and being able to cook in big kitchen and host larger dinner parties) are why people have a 2nd home outside of the city?

Culture: Much more of this in the city, but remember that a lot of what we take for granted is also available to someone from outside. My in-laws have regularly taken in the philharmonic, ballet and opera, which can't always be said about NY'rs. Also, a lot of what was cute and good about NY culture is vanishing. Street fairs? Once something more rare and which I loved, where the nature of each was flavored by the neighborhood, now they are pretty homogenized sources of crepes, smoothies, mozzarepas and brickabrack. I still love their street food and I haven't paid retail for socks in a decade.

Again, the reason people live in both places is because there are lots of choices and we are all different. That the city is cheaper is pretty much blown away by the fact that people who move out do it because they can't afford it and people who move back do it because they can. Any other justification is being rationalized.

AvUWS - agree, you definitely get it in the neck grocery-wise in the city - we do FreshDirect. Great service but they have have cranked their prices as well. Like you say, meals are more likely to be eaten out. But what commuter uses the suburban gym? Jeez, they wouldn't get home until after midnight?!?

But its all part of the balancing act - the city move was about simplifying/decluttering our lives.....now, off to brunch, and then take kids to a water park or something. It was interesting, I called my buddy on Long Island yesterday to see if he wanted to meet me at the beach and he told me his wife had him doing "yard work" all day!! like it was a farm or something........

as to using the gym... again, not all suburbanites are commuters. And some might have easier commutes than some city residents.

Maintenance fees used in this example for the co-op is incredibly low at $600 - not a fair representation of true maintenance fees in Park Slope. If you run a search including this level for maintenance fees only one list comes up.

Interesting discussion. Let me add my 2 cents in since I have lived in both the burbs and the city.

First off, most people who live in the burbs DO NOT commute to Manhattan. In northern NJ, only 25% of workers commute to the city everyday. Many companies have offices or their U.S. headquarters in northern NJ. If your in Battery Park City and look across the Hudson, you will see a lrge boxy building (the tallest one in NJ). That building is owned by Goldman Sachs.

Second off, someone incorrectly impled that city people make more than those in the burbs. I find that hard to beleive. WHile Manhattan workers likely make more, I doubt people i the outer boroughs make more.

Also, living in the burbs is definitely cheaper. Food is cheaper. Gas is cheaper. You don't have to pay for private schools or parking. I remeber when gas hit $4 a gallon in most fo the country during the summer of 2008. When plenty of NYC stations were charing over $4, not a single one in NJ ever hit the $4 mark.

One disadvantage of livining in the burbs is that NOBODY will ever visit you. Your friends and relatives will tell you that they will visit you, but they will only come once to see your house. After that, you will never see them again.

pres: "One disadvantage of living in the burbs is that NOBODY will ever visit you."

Unless you can convince them to move near you too... I think many people have success with that.

Also, some people might consider that as an "advantage."

Alpo - I think you have it backwards.

You missed that the suburbanites won't visit you in the city either. Yes, they may come into the city and you will get a chance to go out to eat with them or to the museum with them, but they won't come in to visit you since you don't have space to handle the whole family at once and no one wants to pay $40 to park or an hour to find parking.

My friends, all ex-manhattanites, have had many more get togethers at various suburban homes to which all the current manhattan residents ventured, than vice versa. After all, it is easier to get a zip car than to find parking in the city.

That's true if you have friends or relatives in the burbs. But I did not. Most of my realtives and friends are in Manhattan and Long Island.

Thanks, Lobster. I'm at the beach house now. It belongs to my boyfriend. I can't afford to own my condo in Manhattan,and a house out here. I do love the beach, not so much the country. But, that's on the Hamptons - thread.

Have a great weekend with your hubby. Hit up Costco and Home Depot --GO WILD AND CRAZY!!!

"Does it matter that many of the "good" NYC public schools are hardly models of racial or economic diversity?" Per InsideSchools.org

Ethnicity %: PS 41
73 W; 5 B; 11 H; 9 A

Ethnicity %: PS6
75 W; 5 B; 9 H; 8 A

Ethnicity %: PS234
70 W; 6 B; 7 H; 16 A

Ethnicity %: PS199
66 W; 8 B; 11 H; 15 A

An average of about 70% white doesn' sound very much like NYC, although it may well represent those neighborhoods, and I suspect the numbers are about equal to those of the schools in many suburbs. I realize that this is not a complete list of "good" New York public schools and that some others (in Brooklyn?) may in fact be more diverse.

I'm not saying there aren't some excellent arguments for staying in town, the commuting time thing is huge, but I'm not sure diversity is one, if you are going to then live in areas and send your kids to schools that are no more diverse than a suburban area.

Btw, in the city/burb argument, I'd give a shout out to areas such as Ditmas Park in Brooklyn that let you have yards, parking and large homes but put Manhattan within a subway ride.

Lizyank - c'mon, there are many more meaningful dimensions to "diversity" than race. While i don't have kids at any of the famous NYC schools you mention, i could bet that if you diced the student body by nationality, or what parents do for a living etc., it would be more interesting reading than the same analysis from an average suburban school.

As an aside to prove that i am not solely a cheerleader for city living - we went to a city pool for a swim today and we all had to stand in line to get our bags checked "for weapons" before we entered. Probably more of a legacy from times past but hell, bet that doesn't happen at the GlenClairWoodChester pool!

I love it when peopel bring up school diversity. It's hilarious. The same people who scream that schools should be diverse send their kids to all white schools.

People are full of well-meaning theories until the day they have to decide where they are going to send their baby to school. No-one wants their kids to be different - and it totally does lead to hypocrisy. I read an interestuing book where the author observed that most racially diverse schools/neighborhoods are those that are changing (going one way or the other) - i.e.: racially, economically, culturally diverse environments may not reflect equilibrium.

The Carmine Street pool? That was our "weekend house" when I was a kid. It used to get SO crowded on days like today (90 degree +), that they would stop letting people in. Even more fun, when I was a teenager, we used to sneak in over the fence and go swimming at night...until the cops came and chased us out. This happened at least once a week. I suppose it really wasn't safe with no lifeguard (not to mention beer, pot etc) but it made growing up in the city a lot more fun!

Ha, awesome Lizyank - thats some serious NYC heritage! - the city must have been much rawer in those days - I 'spose it has now become a little .....suburban (but still with weapon pat-downs)

FYI: nothing is crowded this weekend as most people are at their weekend houses. I was having a smoke on the roof last night and reckoned only about 10% of apt lights were on in adjacent buildings.

When I lived in 10014 people in the hood didn't have weekend houses, except for the Carmine Street pool and the always popular tar beach.

if you commute via train, miss one train and there's a longer wait than if you commuted via subway

good point - If you commute, your life becomes ruled by the LIRR/NJ TRansit/Metro North schedules, including the safety factor you have to build in to get to Penn/GCS on subway. When i used to do it, would find myself farting around on internet waiting for the next "window" to catch train. ...... then i would fall asleep and end up at the end of the line all the time.........

....and once there was a bear in our yard (or it may have been a big possum) - i swear i was taking my life in my own hands every time i ventured through a tunnel from the safety of Manhattan.

NYC10014: Oh, dear -- da bears, da bears! They are upstate in Willow. They haven't been in Woodstock, as far as I know from my friends who live there. I would not want bears around.

Let the bears have some land. All those people who claim to love the great outdoors don't give a dam that they are destroying the very thing they seek.

Getting back to the article itself, Park Slope is not 'the city'. Park Slope is a sort of suburban/city mix. I'm not knocking it - I understand why people love it there, but this wasn't an accurate comparison of 'the city' vs. 'the suburbs'. Not to mention that this supposed family apparently never goes anywhere you can't get to via a Metrocard. And no one would say 'oh, a 2/1 walkup in Park Slope w/no car is cheaper than a 4/2.5 in South Orange, let's move there to save money'. They say 'we can afford either a 2/1 walkup in Park Slope or a 4/2.5 in South Orange - which one makes the most sense for us?'

If you want less than an hour "easy" commute of Manhattan + good schools + pleasant environment, it's gonna cost you. Whether you want to move to Park Slope or Montclair, both aren't perfect and aren't cheap. There have been so many theories as to why the 2-child family has gotten so darned $$$ to raise, even with 2 working parents. Much of it is the educational arms race. In the 70s, my parents were unusual in their focus on our education in my nabe. I am reminded of something I read on a forum on Japanese-style bushibans and cramming. The more parents try to help their kids, the more you're moving the median and the more our average Sophie/Max has to try to get there (not that all this pushing means a more educated child).

You really want to beat the education arms race??

Send your kids to a mediocre HS in the city but have them outperform everyone else. Kids still get into top universities from regular NY HS's, just not very many of them. It might be easier for your child to excel in JF Kennedy than be in the top quartile of Bronx Science.

Either way, a child who really concentrates on learning in a state university or even CUNY will get more out of their education than someone who gets into an Ivy (or Ivy-like) college and then does not apply themselves. And they will graduate with a lot less debt as well.

(Either way, I believe the amount of debt one can accumulate today can be a huge impediment to success regardless of where you went to school. I think less debt, and the freedom to take chances that comes with that, is a better track to success. And this from someone with an Ivy MBA.)

Let's not talk about the top students. And who knows if a "middle-class" child can outperform a hungry immigrant kid who missed the SSHATs. No guarantee. You want your kid to be part of the lumpy middle at JFK or the lumpy middle at Bx Sci?

Ditto CUNY/SUNY. A top students will be fine anywhere. A mediocre student in the middle of the pack at an Ivy will do better than a middle of the pack kid at CUNY-SUNY.

NYC - Much much easier to be ahead of the middle in a not so good institution. Middle of the road in a mediocre institution actually takes some work on behalf of someone with half a brain.

It was easier (much) for me to outperform in NYU than in my Jewish private HS. And friends who went to Queens College got into NYU law while some who went to an Ivy went to Brooklyn Law (also good, but I expect they would have preferred NYU). The Queens-to-NYU was also not top in the Jewish private school.

If you push a kid through HS, elementary, Kindergarten, etc. all to get them into an Ivy, you are more likely to burn them out. Let them mature and grow. It is better to outperform at the end of the race than at the beginning, it is also the time where time spent learning will teach you valuable things.

I should have said "Middle of the road in a mediocre institution actually takes some [real negative effort] on behalf of someone with half a brain."

Great WSJ article I found. It calls BS on all of the talk that people in the burbs are going to be moving back to the city (which is exactly what I have been saying for months):

The Myth of the Back-to-the-City Migration
The condo bust should lay to rest the notion that the American love affair with suburbia is over.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704103904575337100515285886.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Great points overall.

> An average of about 70% white doesn' sound very much like NYC

Yes, NYC public school system is 80% non-white. The few public schools (and even fewer junion and high schools) can't really do much diversity bragging over the burbs (except for maybe Asians).

And, yes, Park Slope isn't "the city", bad comparison. It is already a part suburban compromise.

And my folks live in the burbs and work full time, I guarantee they go to more broadway shows than 99% of the folks on this board.

> A few other things I have noticed about city/suburban life:

Great list. I'd add:

Car insurance... if you do have the car, insurance is MUCH cheaper in the burbs. My folks took their same cars across the city line, and their rates were cut in half. I assume other types of insurance are affected as well.

Drugstore stuff... INCREDIBLE the difference in the suburbs. Yes, groceries are cheaper, but the difference in duane reade items often blows me away. Can pay 50% or LESS for the same items in the burbs. Incredible how much we get ripped off on qtips and shampoo and deodorant in Manhattan.

Overall, cheaper means "same costs less" or "get more for same dollars". The comparison they're making it just a poor one (in the article).

"NYC - Much much easier to be ahead of the middle in a not so good institution. Middle of the road in a mediocre institution actually takes some work on behalf of someone with half a brain."

True, but that doesn't mean you'll end up in a better place.

Folks 100th in the class at Stuy sometimes made Harvard. 200th (a third of the way down) or sometimes even middle of the pack went cornell or other ivies.

There are tons of others schools where the 1 doesn't even make an ivy. Hell, I've seen years where Midwood, supposedly one of the top non-specializied, gets noone into Harvard-Yale-Princeton.

> It was easier (much) for me to outperform in NYU than in my Jewish private HS.

I'm sure it is, and I'm sure its tougher to outperform at Harvard, too. That being said, you have a TON of options being in the top half of the class at Harvard that noone gets out of NYU.... and tons more as you move to other schools.

> And friends who went to Queens College got into NYU law while some who went to an Ivy went to
> Brooklyn Law (also good, but I expect they would have preferred NYU).

If you're going to grad school, thats a separate point. I think it can be a waste to pay for the undergrad. But, in my class, the folks at the lower end of the range all went to pretty good law schools, even if they slacked off.

But if you're talking about getting into the real world, a higher ranking at an inferior school may not necessarily be the ticket.

My recipe would be... the best school you can be top 25% at...

> If you push a kid through HS, elementary, Kindergarten, etc. all to get them into an Ivy, you are
> more likely to burn them out. Let them mature and grow. It is better to outperform at the end of the
> race than at the beginning, it is also the time where time spent learning will teach you valuable
> things.

I agree with that.

Don't get me started on diversity - wait, don't I always say this before launching off?

There is never going to be true diversity in any kind of institution that sorts by ability. Ability to pay, academic ability, ability to apply and hustle. Whatever.

Unlike most UWSers, I don't cringe at the fact that the "street" diversity you get in our nabe consists mainly of dark people serving lighter people. You're not going to fix that by flooding the G&T programs or Dalton with the right-complected folks. Obama can't fix it.

And Liz, might I remind you (humbly as a non-native) that the much vaunted diversity of your youth was just as segregated.

Agreed.... but it was brought up to counter the bs in the anti-suburbs argument.

btw, want another advantage to the suburbs, not having to play this nutty nutty game of school zones and applications and siblings and lotteries and all that. How many uws parents are fuming mad now?

Its not perfect in the 'burbs, but you don't have that craziness. Thats worth something.

somewhereelse: Drug-store stuff: check out Bed Bath& Beyond. Huge selection, great prices. Forget about Duane Reade.

I do that occasionally.... better than duane reade, but still not nearly as cheap as the suburbs. And some of the suburban drugstores dwarf the BBB section. I've been in a target where the drugstore type stuff areas were nearly as big as the entire BBB.

somewhereelse: Haven't been in a Target. Would like it.

"A mediocre student in the middle of the pack at an Ivy will do better than a middle of the pack kid at CUNY-SUNY" - what does this mean? they do better professionally?

right now, i'm missing the outdoor space that my suburban counterparts are probably taking for granted. yeah, i have lots of parks to go to, but geez, it sure would be nice to get some fresh air w/o schlepping the kids around.

i also miss having a car. as soon as we can afford to have one in the city, i'm gettin' one. a big one! a big 'ole suburban minivan and i'm gonna park it in a lot and waste money on it and love it and i won't care!

> "A mediocre student in the middle of the pack at an Ivy will do better than a middle of the pack kid > at CUNY-SUNY" - what does this mean? they do better professionally?

Assume so, and its very much true. I have a lot of classmates that were bottom half of the class. But, after a few years out, you don't have the GPA on anyway, and many get afforded opportunities they don't necessarily deserve but get because of the ivy league degree. Not saying they get all of them, but there are definitely some doors opened.

I think of it as an "insurance policy". If you're good, you don't need it anyway. You'll make your own opportunity. But if you're going for the minimum effort, that credential is going to get you something decent options. I know a good amount of folks who just stink at what they do, but the degree carries them.

"Either way, a child who really concentrates on learning in a state university or even CUNY will get more out of their education than someone who gets into an Ivy (or Ivy-like) college and then does not apply themselves. And they will graduate with a lot less debt as well."

Totally true. But if the kid is going to put in effort either way, I think you come out much further ahead education-wise at the more challenging school. Challenge promotes growth.

And I found you can learn as much (if not more) from your classmates as you are from the teachers. its not like they are holding back info from you in state schools.

But, to me, its the intelligent dialogue and the debate, and the challenging each other that makes for better educated people. If the class is operating at a lower level, its not good for the smartest ones there.

sw's point is clear when you look at Bush. less then mediocre student became a babling president. would he get there with a degree from Hunter??????? not

"Assume so, and its very much true."

tell that to the 7th year Harvard grad who was just asked to leave his firm by the partner who went to Brooklyn Law. But anyway, yeah I do agree with most of your points. If you're a natural dud, best to come from money so mom and dad can by you a nice education and send your lame ass swinging through one of those doors that your're just gonna get tossed out of. at least you had a shot.

or maybe you become president. you just never know.

> tell that to the 7th year Harvard grad who was just asked to leave his firm by the partner who went
> to Brooklyn Law.

Know many Brooklyn law partners at Cravath?

There will always be idiots and exceptions, of course, but if that Harvard dude was that bad... you think he would have even gotten the job coming from Brooklyn law?

No, the school doesn't define if you're good or not. But it gives you some extra points and does create a "minimum" of sorts. I know tons of poor, poor employees that will always have a job because of an ivy league degree.

"If you're a natural dud, best to come from money so mom and dad can by you a nice education and send your lame ass swinging through one of those doors that your're just gonna get tossed out of. at least you had a shot."

True. But money alone won't get you HYP anymore, unless its obscene money and comes with at last some grades.

Tons of families have money, just a few thousand kids go top tier.

And, the idea that folks get tossed out... some places, yes. But there are far, FAR too many places where just hanging around and not making waves keeps you around for a long time. Banks can be one place outside of a crisis...

"sw's point is clear when you look at Bush. less then mediocre student became a babling president. would he get there with a degree from Hunter??????? not"

The sad part is as mediocre as he was, Harvard accepted him after THAT....

Of course, the standards for the ivies are far different from what they were in that era. Now they're dominated by public school kids.

Know many Brooklyn law partners at Cravath?

not many, but they do exist. i agree with you though. too bad kids don't come with a "i should be ___ when i grow up" label. would make things so much easier.

> not many, but they do exist.

You sure about that?

ok, so not only do i not know ANY partners at cravath, i also don't know how to read. i'm a dud!

10023, yes the city of my youth was pretty segregated. It was also MUCH less diverse. Ethnicity usually meant were you Irish, Italian or Jewish (African Americans being self identifying). The very few Asians who lived here were virtually all Chinese and lived in Chinatown. (I didn't meet any Asian kids until I worked with a couple in D'Agostino's), South Asians were an oddity. Russians? If you met you would run for your life. Hispanic meant Puerto Rican period. Yes, there were pockets of "assorted other white people" i.e. Ukrainians in the East Village, Germans in Yorkville, European Spanish in my neighborhood.

I was myself a total minority as a Jewish kid in a heavily Catholic neighborhood. Being the only kid without a Christmas tree sucked. But I guess its a good thing my friends' Catholic schooling coincided with Vatican II because at least I was spared the whole "Christ Killing" thing.

Some institution segregated themselves along ethnic or religious lines. Our Lady of Pompeii and St Joseph's are a few blocks from each other but served totally different congregations; Italian and Irish respectively. But everyone in the 'hood was born in St Vincent's (RIP), except me of course...I was born in Beth Israel. Even NYCHA properties were segregated: among the "Chelsea projects" the newer Fulton Homes were always predominantly Hispanic while the Elliott Houses remained solidly white for decades. (I kind of remember an African American kid in my pre school class but he could have been, like me from outside the projects)

My elementary school was majority white but I would guess perhaps less so than it is today. Students were tracked and in the "Intellectually Gifted Children" program I was in (don't laugh, this was before alcohol and drugs and besides since when does the NYC BOE always make smart decisions)I honestly don't recall more than four or five students "of color" (all African American). However, in my junior high and high school, white kids were a distinct minority.

In terms of economic diversity, which is probably a more critical goal, you are right--there really wasn't any. I know my parents friends' who lived in the 'burbs were richer but, maybe its just that kids don't give a shit about money; I just assumed everyone was like us; struggling lower middle class. Some lived in walk ups, some (like us) had an elevator, but then some kids families' had cars and we didn't. No one starved and no one wintered in the Swiss Alps or summered in Newport. We all got after school jobs as soon as we could--no one ever thought not to.

So was there a lack of ethnic and economic diversity in 1960s-70s NYC? Yes. And only partially because the city itself wasn't as diverse. Was it as stratified as I see the city being today? I don't think so, but then I'm not a kid and I see stratification where before I didn't.

Exactly, Liz. When did "diversity" become desirable when it has never really existed? And who gets to define, etc.? I hate it when people bring up diversity in arguing for city over burbs or vice-versa (don't see the white folks clamoring to move to Fort Lee or Edison).

For the commuting discussion:
~ 2 hours more commuting into Manhattan a day (1 hr each way)
= 10 hours per week
= 520 hours per year
= 21.6 days per year
= 3 weeks per year of commuting per person

In order to quantify it in dollars, I chose to take income * 0.05 (3/52 weeks) of opportunity cost of my family's time.

Spacey, that 520 hours of work per year is more like 13 40-hour weeks, so your multiple should be .25

> When did "diversity" become desirable when it has never really existed?

When it became the sour grapes rallying cry of folks trying to rationalize squeezing into an apartment not meant for a family. ;-)

Seriously, I think its just an attempt at a putdown of the burbs by folks who aren't so secure. There are a ton of amazing schools in the burbs.

There are tradeoffs, both ways. But pretending there is only one choice for everybody, and the other one sucks, is just a case of sour grapes.

> ~ 2 hours more commuting into Manhattan a day (1 hr each way)

If one has to make strawman arguments, you figure they don't have to make much of a case.

The differential of city vs. suburban commute is NOT 2 hours a day, certainly not park slope vs. the burbs being discussed in the story.

spaceboy....

and then you get a job in midtown west, but live on UES. your commute goes from 15 min to 40 min and now the difference is in 20 minutes per day.

most people in the burbs or outer boroughs commute approx 1 hr. if you're in manhattan, it's usually 1/2 hour.

in current day and age there's telecommuting. if you live far enough, you can get away with doing it more. if you're within 1/2 work, you should be in. take that into consideration for about 15-20 days a year.

Upper West Side similar to what Liz described for Village/Chelsea, but it went like this:
* wide streets and avenues white (or jewish, anyway)
* narrow avenues, in tenements, Puerto Rican (but one street was Cuban)
* narrow streets, in cut-up brownstones (i.e. townhouses), black
* that one building across from the Thalia movie theater, an SRO catering exclusively to black drag queens (possibly for hire, in which case they were part of my hot summer night Baskin-Robbins run hooker count, but I was so naive, even as a child, that I didn't realize it).

That's all.

ab: It was just a rough approximation to give you a sense of just how much time it is. I would easily add 1 hr each way to my commute if I moved out of the city.

swe: If you want to strawman, I would also never move to West Orange over Park Slope. Its not even close.

> It was just a rough approximation to give you a sense of just how much time it is

Thats like saying "yes" is a "rough approximation" of "no".

;-)

> Its not even close.

Yes, WO is much, much cheaper apples to apples.

And certainly not two hours more of a commute!

I have to say, I'm a "city" fan, but the city arguers are making the burbs sound better and better.

I also happen to consider Park Slope the burbs. Spaceboy, the way you look at WO is probably the way I look at PS. They'll have their fans, but neither is "the city" by a mile.

Alan I actually had an Irish girlfriend who lived on West 70th Street. She got "in trouble" senior year of HS and is probably a grandmother now...YIKES. So count there being at least one shiksa on the UWS circa your childhood years (the late 80s of course). I don't suppose there were many but what about the trophy buildings on CPW...Majestic, San Remo, etc. were they Jewish back in the day or just a little bit mixed versus Park and Fifth Avenue where a Jewish person only entered if they had papers for a Client to sign.

Liz, good question -- the trophy buildings were a world apart, but I would guess they were waxing jewish and waning Regular. Park/Fifth has jewish buildings, and Regular buildings, but never the twain.

The mother of an UWS friend grew up on the UWS (1940s-1950s) and during high school would go to Harlem for entertainment til the wee hours ... but she wasn't allowed by her parents to go two blocks away to the Irish area around Columbus and Amsterdam in the W. 70s and W. 80s -- too dangerous.

"Seriously, I think its just an attempt at a putdown of the burbs by folks who aren't so secure. There are a ton of amazing schools in the burbs."

I think it's the other way around where there's more criticism from those in the 'burbs on city living. This begs the question on why 'burbians're browsing a city real estate site...

anyway...

sparing the outright comparisons between 'burbs and city because those just end up in hurt feelings apparently

quality of life is good in the city
schools are good
there IS space to be had (you've just got to pay)
commute (40 minutes TOPS) is better IF you work in the city
there's culture, restaurants

yes, yes, all these hold true for our kin in the country but they wants their cars and their 5+ bedrooms and their walk-in closets the size of montana

I would advise anyone considering a move to the burbs to stay with friends or rent a hotel room and try it out for a week. A train commute is not at all like a subway commute (for better or worse depending on your temperment). Also, multiply any suburban commute quoted by 1.5. They never include driving to the train station, waiting for a late train or the train being delayed in the tunnel coming into the city or taking the subway to the office.