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.
This is the first time in a while Ohio248 hasn't mentioned Chicago's poor economy as the reason why it has the worst ghettos.
Chicago's ghettos were bad long before its economy stumbled.
Even when Chicago was doing very well, the South and West Side ghettos were extremely rough. It probably has to do with the segregation in the area, and the super-tough Chicago projects, which are basically war zones.
When they demolished some of the projects, the thugs moved to the Dirty 100's and South Shore, and ruined those areas.
That's because those homes are summer beach bungalows.
Far Rockaway was built as a summer colony. In the 70's and 80's, the city bought the remaining bungalows to build high-rise apartments. Unfortunately, the city had huge financial problems, so they only built like half the apartments.
The remaining vacant bungalows have been sitting there and rotting. They're slowly being replaced by new condos, but with the recession, the work has slowed down or sometimes stopped.
It will probably be another 10-15 years before all the bungalows are cleared.
No wonder. I guess summer beach getaways don't work up there.
The list is worthless because the "neighborhoods" are very random, and they are tied to population.
The "neighborhoods" in Chicago are things like a small industrial area, and a plot of vacant land with 3 houses on the southern boundry.
Yeah there is a little industrial over there. Might have had stuff stolen. That is certainly not even CLOSE to the worst neighborhood. Just a mostly industrial section. That is close to some united center parking lots during concerts/games so that is probably why it is high. The worst ones I have seen first hand are probably New Orleans, Montgomery, and Cleveland in the 90s.
Also another important thing to mention is that the worst looking ghettos usually aren't the most dangerous or with the most crime, maybe they are per-capita (for a reason). People commit crimes, so when you have terrible looking areas in Detroit that are 3/4 abandoned homes or vacant lots they aren't quite as bad crime-wise as some of the more intact and occupied areas of Detroit where there's still a lot of people there. An interesting thing to look at would be the worst looking ghettos that are mostly occupied, like you would see in a 3rd world country where slums are quite different than here in the US. I'm talking about bad areas with the worst looking residences that are still occupied, people living in substandard housing.
I found that the most dangerous areas now are usually around 10%-25% abandoned homes/vacant lots as opposed to much more.
To some people, the projects and black people walking around is 'the ghetto', when it's really not. 'Ghetto' isn't a racial thing, it's a mindset.
Okay so I know this is an old post and all but I was just browsing the net and was inspired to register after I saw the comments on the DC hoods posted...
First off... I know the post is about the worst "looking" ghettos... or whatever... (worst looking is probably largely a function of the status of construction/demolition etc) that being said those aren't the "worst" (looking) parts of DC posted
But.... to say... Barry Farms... or Lincoln Heights... or Clay Terrace... aren't really the ghetto lmao... those are some of the more dangerous places in America (probably top 1% of the top 1% overall)... The "worst" neighborhood in DC is too subjective... a lot of people might go with Condon Terrace right now over those...
I don't understand what how bad a place "looks" has to do with... really... most realities of how dangerous a place is or quality of life is lol... Most of the "worst" looking places in DC are private owned... because those private parties don't take care of the property the way the government does (while the gov't owned housing might be "worse" to live in)
It's the nation's capital... it's cleaner than most places... It has more funding per capita than most places for the upkeep of buildings than most places... but also... more murder per capita than most places
Also another important thing to mention is that the worst looking ghettos usually aren't the most dangerous or with the most crime, maybe they are per-capita (for a reason). People commit crimes, so when you have terrible looking areas in Detroit that are 3/4 abandoned homes or vacant lots they aren't quite as bad crime-wise as some of the more intact and occupied areas of Detroit where there's still a lot of people there. An interesting thing to look at would be the worst looking ghettos that are mostly occupied, like you would see in a 3rd world country where slums are quite different than here in the US. I'm talking about bad areas with the worst looking residences that are still occupied, people living in substandard housing.
I found that the most dangerous areas now are usually around 10%-25% abandoned homes/vacant lots as opposed to much more.
Good point.
People always talk about Detroits abondoned areas as being crime infested, WRONG.
Most of the D's worst neighborhoods look like suburbs, really. Neighborhoods off Dexter Ave, and 7 Mile are considered the worst, but look pretty nice.
It's about crime not looks, but some places have the worst of both worlds. I really do thank god that I was not born in a place like Camden,NJ.
Location: Detroit's eastside, downtown Detroit in near future!
2,053 posts, read 4,393,656 times
Reputation: 699
Quote:
Originally Posted by Observation
Good point. People always talk about Detroits abondoned areas as being crime infested, WRONG.
Most of the D's worst neighborhoods look like suburbs, really. Neighborhoods off Dexter Ave, and 7 Mile are considered the worst, but look pretty nice.
It's about crime not looks, but some places have the worst of both worlds. I really do thank god that I was not born in a place like Camden,NJ.
Thank you, most of Detroit (esp to someone from the eastcoast looks suburban than "urban") anyway. People say things like that because they are going on what the media is telling them. I'd feel way safer walking through Poletown (the area that is constantly smh shown on youtube, cnn etc) than walking through Brightmoor
Of what I've seen, Pittsburgh and St Louis had the worst looking. Lots of boarded up houses, vacant lots, and general decay and abandonment.
edit: and Philly
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwkimbro
The people left behind usually fit in one of a few categories...people that can't let go of a neighborhood that once was...people who moved in because it has high access to the city, but is extremely cheap... people who are homeless/vagrants and find easy squatting... and people who are poorly educated and never traveled much and don't know any better.
uh...what about people who are dirt poor?
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.
