Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've always thought income inequality in Boston had a lot to do with the large student population mixed with the high concentration of finance, health care and the various innovative industries that demand high salaries.
I also checked and it appears the black poverty rate of Boston is lower than the poverty rate of the entire city of Philadelphia.
Nice slap in the face to poor blacks everywhere.
Poor is poor you ****. Boston has higher average wages than Philadelphia does.
Boston has a ton going on for it and shares a unique characteristic with Philly. While other cities around the country are largely a boom or bust , these two largely exist outside of that market.
I really do not understand this statement. You aren't aware of why poverty exists?
I interpreted it as him saying he always thought Boston's income inequality gap was attributed to its high student population, not that he doesn't understand why poverty exists.
Your other arguments are foolish, but this is probably the funniest. Boston sports events are very well attended...in general, they're better attended than Philadelphia sports events, but both are quite respectable.
If Boston attends it's sporting events better than Philadelphia does, then why didn't the Celtics or Bruins sell out before they won their championships?
Where would the Patriots be on the Boston sports hierarchy without four Super Bowls in the last 16 years? All of which subject of controversy and cheating scandals?
The truth is, the only sports team in Boston that has been followed passionately and loyally is the Red Sox. Hands down, not even close. They sell out win or lose. The Celtics attendance was in the bottom half of the league before 2008, and so was the Bruins before 2011.
Some diehard sports town, huh?
Answer that for me. Please. This is why Boston is so overrated. They cherry-pick on winning teams and then turn around and say "we're the best sports town!" when they didn't even sell out!
Do you really think the Patriots would be top dog on local sports radio over the Red Sox without the greatest QB/Coach duo in NFL history the last 16 years? The Celtics and Bruins were flavors of the week when they won.
This is why I hate being fed all this BS about Boston being the best sports town. My friends that live in Boston (and are Boston fans mind you) admit themselves that there is a lot of bandwagoning that goes on because of the success.
If you want a real litmus test to a city's sports scene, check the attendance and support when they're losing.
There's a reason why Eagles fans have a documentary about them, or why Flyers fans are always voted most intimidating fans and Philadelphia most intimidating arena (along with Montreal). Nobody ever questions an Eagles or Flyers fan.
Give Boston the Sixers' futility and see how long their fans last. My guess is not long judging by the Celtics and Bruins.
The Phillies led the league in attendance for most of the 2000's. It's dipped in the last few years, but every city's has.
Philadelphia fans may be rowdy and violent at times, but the point is nobody questions their support or passion.
Boston is extremely fickle about the sports teams as PROVEN when they aren't spoiled with winning championships.
The Flyers haven't won in over 40 years. They finished 30th in 2007. Doesn't matter. 100% attendance every year for literally decades.
The Eagles haven't won anything. Ever. 100% attendance every year.
Now, can you imagine the city of Philadelphia if suddenly they were awarded 9 titles in 16 years?
It would be a warzone and equally unbearable as Boston, but what separates the two cities and the thing I can at least respect about Philadelphia is that they showed up the entire time before that, Boston didn't.
I will say that NCAA basketball is a much bigger draw and more followed than the Sixers, especially when they're historically bad.
Boston has a ton going on for it and shares a unique characteristic with Philly. While other cities around the country are largely a boom or bust , these two largely exist outside of that market.
The US Commerical Real Estate Market is starting to tank. It isn't going to hit the cities to bad.
Solid point.
I'm interested to see how the next market downturn affects Boston differently in this cycle. Boston is a huge biotech hub, and the industry has really started to explode the past few years...to the point where it may eventually become the city's banner industry. Until very recently, biotech has been almost purely speculative R&D, but that's changed as the large biotech companies have started rolling drugs into the market and big pharma has expanded more & more into the industry. Both high tech & biotech are very VC dependent, and cities like San Francisco rocket to insane levels when the economy is good, but suffer more than others on the downturn. Because of this, I wonder how Boston's growing reliance on biotechnology will affect its stability in future.
the sports attendance stuff? Idk Philly's team are historically bad so attendance is pretty bad. Boston has had unprecedented success in football and done pretty damn well in the other sports too for the last decade. I don't know if I know enough of the topic to be a judge.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
