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.
Obviously we have different definitions of "nice".
No, it does not look older than other materials. You think a one hundred year-old brick house will look worse than a one hundred-year old wooden house?
My point is that neighborhoods in the northeast don't look worse because the buildings are made of brick. They look worse because of abandonment, poor design, overcrowding, and litter.
Yes, we certainly have different defintions of "nice." From the photos, the neighborhoods do look nice. Whether they are actually nice is a different question. But the OP asked about the most visually ghetto cities, and the pictures you posted do not strike fear in the heart of the average human being.
Take almost any Mid-Atlantic older town in a major metro, usually located on a historically industrial river.
Whereas I'm sure Compton, and Watts, and Oakland are bad, those are 3 ghetto areas within 800 miles.
I would dare to say that the Mid-Atlantic has the most "ghetto" in one area... most of these areas are within 1-1/5 hours of each other.
North, West, SW, South Philadelphia
Camden
Chester
Wilmington
Trenton
Reading
York
Harrisburg
Lancaster
Atlantic City
Baltimore
Washington
Anacostia
Patterson
Irvington
Newark
Bronx
Brooklyn
Not saying that other regions aren't beaten up, and falling down (ie: Midwest,) but I think the sheer amount of old industrial towns in the Mid-Atlantic would cause it to take the cake.
I had to laugh one time. I was in Venice, CA, and somebody actually had the balls to call it "the ghetto."
Take almost any Mid-Atlantic older town in a major metro, usually located on a historically industrial river.
Whereas I'm sure Compton, and Watts, and Oakland are bad, those are 3 ghetto areas within 800 miles.
I would dare to say that the Mid-Atlantic has the most "ghetto" in one area... most of these areas are within 1-1/5 hours of each other.
North, West, SW, South Philadelphia
Camden
Chester
Wilmington
Trenton
Reading
York
Harrisburg
Lancaster
Atlantic City
Baltimore
Washington
Anacostia
Patterson
Irvington
Newark
Bronx
Brooklyn
Not saying that other regions aren't beaten up, and falling down (ie: Midwest,) but I think the sheer amount of old industrial towns in the Mid-Atlantic would cause it to take the cake.
I had to laugh one time. I was in Venice, CA, and somebody actually had the balls to call it "the ghetto."
Uh...
a) Oakland and LA are 300 miles from each other. The whole state of California is 600 miles. Where did you get the 800 miles from?
b) I Disagree completely. Ever heard of...
Marin City
Richmond
East Palo Alto
East Menlo Park
Hunters Point/Tenderloin/Sunnydale/Mission/Fillmore SF
North & South Vallejo
East Pittsburg
North Antioch
Stockton
South Sacramento
Cherryland (Hayward)
Ashland (San Leandro)
Roseland (Santa Rosa)
East San Jose
South Berkeley
South Modesto
Take almost any Mid-Atlantic older town in a major metro, usually located on a historically industrial river.
Whereas I'm sure Compton, and Watts, and Oakland are bad, those are 3 ghetto areas within 800 miles.
I would dare to say that the Mid-Atlantic has the most "ghetto" in one area... most of these areas are within 1-1/5 hours of each other.
North, West, SW, South Philadelphia
Camden
Chester
Wilmington
Trenton
Reading
York
Harrisburg
Lancaster
Atlantic City
Baltimore
Washington
Anacostia
Patterson
Irvington
Newark
Bronx
Brooklyn
Not saying that other regions aren't beaten up, and falling down (ie: Midwest,) but I think the sheer amount of old industrial towns in the Mid-Atlantic would cause it to take the cake.
I had to laugh one time. I was in Venice, CA, and somebody actually had the balls to call it "the ghetto."
Have to agree with this statement; the Mid-Atlantic ( Philly, Trenton, Camden, Baltimore) has some pretty poor areas, visually-speaking..
I could have expanded that list 3 times with small, vague areas like the ones you listed. Most are just parts of a bigger city. Also, warmer climates have higher crime numbers because they don't have 10 degree weather where not even a crack dealer would stand outside.
I'd rather stay anywhere on the east then where I bn in out here
**** any place beats being **** at taking out the trash
Try Camden
By df369 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/39454056@N00/ - broken link) By neurothustra (http://www.flickr.com/photos/51821663@N00/ - broken link) By df369 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/39454056@N00/ - broken link) By Gare and Kitty (http://www.flickr.com/photos/gareandkitty/ - broken link)
http://www.cityinvincible.com/images/graffiticamden_zn3h_by1p.jpg (broken link)
~~~
Camden is all around ghetto. Visually and statistically. It's a sad, decrepit city.
a) Oakland and LA are 300 miles from each other. The whole state of California is 600 miles. Where did you get the 800 miles from?
b) I Disagree completely. Ever heard of...
Marin City
Richmond
East Palo Alto
East Menlo Park
Hunters Point/Tenderloin/Sunnydale/Mission/Fillmore SF
North & South Vallejo
East Pittsburg
North Antioch
Stockton
South Sacramento
Cherryland (Hayward)
Ashland (San Leandro)
Roseland (Santa Rosa)
East San Jose
South Berkeley
South Modesto
^That's just in Northern California.
Aren't those very small/neighborhoods. But they named large general areas not neighborhoods.
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.
