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.
Restaurant-wise most places that cater to really low income people are either fast-foods chains or bad sports bar. A place with really good tapas isn't going to target low income people because they know they can ask for more money. They are going to target people around the middle.
Restaurants are a weird hill to die on for the "wealthier people don't use low-income businesses" argument. Neither a fast food chain nor a crappy sports bar is limited to low-income clientele. And the latter is not a restaurant category that I would say makes up a majority of restaurants serving lower income clientele. Lower income clientele also frequent pizza joints, Chinese restaurants, ethnic places, specialty spots (i.e. Coney Island hot dog shop), bakeries, etc. All of those places have a diverse clientele in terms of income. In my neighborhood I actually get $1 pupusas and $2 empinadas at cheap local spots more often than I'm having oysters or a premium single malt at one of the other local places. I'd wager most middle and upper income families to Chinese takeout or pizza more often than sit down meals at top tier restaurants.
That said, I don't actually disagree with the notion that many other businesses that cater to lower-income clients don't also cater to higher income clients. We have check cashing shops, foreign currency transfer shops, and several other businesses that I'll have no use for largely because of our income. There are many others where I'm not the target demographic (nail salons, hair salons, women's clothing stores), or differences in interests will keep me out (smoke shop), but several it's largely about the income.
Another advantage of living in a place that costs LESS than you can actually afford is that you save money for other things - a second home, vacations, retirement, private school for kids, etc.
I realize no one in greater Boston or on this forum NEEDS to do any of that because they have it all...but just sayin'
Restaurants are a weird hill to die on for the "wealthier people don't use low-income businesses" argument. Neither a fast food chain nor a crappy sports bar is limited to low-income clientele. And the latter is not a restaurant category that I would say makes up a majority of restaurants serving lower income clientele. Lower income clientele also frequent pizza joints, Chinese restaurants, ethnic places, specialty spots (i.e. Coney Island hot dog shop), bakeries, etc. All of those places have a diverse clientele in terms of income. In my neighborhood I actually get $1 pupusas and $2 empinadas at cheap local spots more often than I'm having oysters or a premium single malt at one of the other local places. I'd wager most middle and upper income families to Chinese takeout or pizza more often than sit down meals at top tier restaurants.
That said, I don't actually disagree with the notion that many other businesses that cater to lower-income clients don't also cater to higher income clients. We have check cashing shops, foreign currency transfer shops, and several other businesses that I'll have no use for largely because of our income. There are many others where I'm not the target demographic (nail salons, hair salons, women's clothing stores), or differences in interests will keep me out (smoke shop), but several it's largely about the income.
Another advantage of living in a place that costs LESS than you can actually afford is that you save money for other things - a second home, vacations, retirement, private school for kids, etc.
I realize no one in greater Boston or on this forum NEEDS to do any of that because they have it all...but just sayin'
As someone for whom budget *is* always a concern, I can understand where you are coming from there.
Another advantage of living in a place that costs LESS than you can actually afford is that you save money for other things - a second home, vacations, retirement, private school for kids, etc.
I realize no one in greater Boston or on this forum NEEDS to do any of that because they have it all...but just sayin'
I don't think we are talking bout the same thing. I am not talking about people that make 10-20k less than me. I am talking about people that make so much less than me that their life-style is different from mine because of money.
I don't think Boston would be a better place if a favela grew somewhere in the city but it would increase economic diversity.
What is the advantage of living in a place with big income diversity?
I don't particularly seek restaurants that cater to people with an income much lower than mine (the quality is too low) or much higher than mine (can't afford).
If a city is 1/3 like me, 1/3 much poorer and 1/3 much richer there are going to be plenty of amenities that are not targeted to me so, what is the advantage for me to be in such a place compared to a place that is 80-90% like me?
I generally prefer places with some economic diversity, if it is well balanced. As a few others touched on, I make good use of some amenities that may not necessarily be targeted at me (and yes some of which is food, although there are other things). Some of which may be "higher" or "lower" income stuff.
But I think an even bigger aspect is how that shapes people in different demographics, greater income diversity generally makes better rounded individuals from top to bottom. I prefer to be around "people in the middle like me" in a varied community, vs. "people in the middle like me" in a segregated community where perspective can be lacking.
FCMA has some LEGENDARY posts about the food scene in Fitchburg and Leominster. I hope they chime in. You raise great points.
Forgetting what I said, but I’d imagine it has to do with how tacky chain steakhouses cost about as much real restaurants that are good, yet seem by far to be the most popular thing in the Leominster parts. There’s a little bit of $$ on the fringes around there but it sure ain’t buying taste or creating any downtown vitality. I’d rather head to dumpy Fitchburg to try the new brewery (Thirsty Robot) or new Jamaican or Mexican places, though mostly I’ll try and stay away until about 2045 at which point maybe Fitchburg won’t be utterly depressing and I’ll be 60-something but still 20 years from retirement (which will certainly be rather bleak).
A dense place with natural edges that might get cooked in to the next Maynard or Hudson before 2045 is Clinton. Same bones as the former two, just slightly further west in to the non-ironic mustache belt. Easy access to Worcester, not at all to Boston.
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.
