Good place to start a family in NYC?

[Entangled]

Originally Posted by Alkonost

I have a friend raising a family out in Kew Gardens (queens). He loves it there. Outside of that, maybe Staten Island, but for either I'm not 100% sure about the schools. You'd be better off making sure an accident doesn't happen until you can afford a better school district, or who knows maybe relocating is something to think about.

Really? What exactly does your friend think of KG? It's definitely green and the rents are lower, but it's rather dead and has a large population of Central Asian Jews who are very ethnocentric and keep to themselves. I think that Astoria is great for families, but it's definitely more expensive and the apartments are a lot smaller than KG.

[Alkonost]

Originally Posted by Entangled

Out of curiosity, which cities did you find more appealing than NYC with regard to raising a family?

Boston, Chicago, Denver, Dallas, SLC, & Nashville (Franklin specifically, which is a suburb). In the end I picked Dallas. School quality is more dependent on the wealth of a neighborhood than the geographical location, and all of those cities had a surprising amount of ethnic diversity to varying degrees- even Nashville. NYC doesn't have a monopoly on the immigrant populations, even though it's one of the biggest melting pots.

Originally Posted by Entangled

I traveled to other cities around the country and found that while many of them are quiet and less expensive there are significant disadvantages. For one, the cultural diversity is at a minimum.

I'd wonder what your definition of "minimum" is. Just about every place has ethnic diversity if you look for it, in but places with smaller populations it might not be immediately apparent. I've found there's a huge blind eye turned to ethnicity when you don't see an equal mix of minorities and whites. Whites are actually VERY culturally diverse but they just get lumped in as "white", as opposed to Irish, Slavic, Spanish, Italian, etc. It's a shame that the ethnic diversity of whites doesn't seem to count.

Originally Posted by Entangled

Kids grow up in a more sheltered and homogeneous environment, often overly dependent on their parents for support.

Parents should never rely on the environment to raise their kids in the first place, whether it's a vanilla neighborhood in the Midwest or Mott Haven. Parents are supposed to teach and support their kids so they grow up to be racially, religiously, and politically tolerant adults no matter where they live. I've actually run into more racists in NYC than in the boonies upstate, go figure!

Originally Posted by Entangled

In other rural/suburban areas, there is a huge emphasis on religious centrality, uniformity is paramount and immediate marriage and a nuclear family are expected either straight out of high school or after college.

That sounds more small-town rural to me than suburban.

Originally Posted by Entangled

I would want my children to grow up in an urban environment, just as I had, to be exposed to different cultures and the arts, to be able to visit parks, try different cuisines, take buses and trains to school and have the convenience of just walking up the block to buy tomatoes as opposed to driving miles to hit a mega supermarket. These are just basic preferences I suppose.

Yeah I had thought that too, for a while. Then I realized you don't need to live in NYC to have most -and in some cases, all- of the things on that wish list.

Originally Posted by Entangled

I actually think it's great for kids to grow up in cosmopolitan areas. Perspectives and character develop differently in metropolises than in rural, suburban and west american cities (excluding LA, SF and Chicago).

While I liked growing up in NYC, I consider it neutral when it comes to whether or not it's good for the kids or not. Growing up in a city can be either a positive or negative experience.

Originally Posted by Entangled

Cleveland as an example, has a one of the best and lowest real estate markets. The pace of life is slower, but the cultural elements are limited. There is still somewhat of a divide between blacks and whites, there aren't as many ethnic groups as there are here.

I'm not sure where you're getting your info on Cleveland. They have a very diverse population: Slavs, Germans, Irish, Italians, Chinese (they actually have a Chinatown and a little Italy), Koreans, Puerto Ricans , and Hungarians- there's probably more on the list, too. So it's a much more diverse place than you're giving it credit for. Just because a place doesn't have "as much diversity as NYC" doesn't mean it's not diverse or is sorely lacking in it.

Originally Posted by Entangled

The winters are brutal, everything is a strip mall and museums are lackluster.

I love brutal winters, but I'm in the minority. As for museums, that will almost always depend on the wealth and size of a city, not the ethnic makeup. Museums are VERY expensive to build, maintain, and acquire items for. Without a large enough tax base to fund the construction and high-volume tourism to pay admission fees you're just not going to be able to sustain museums like that you expect to find in NYC. Racial makeup of the city has little to do with it.

Originally Posted by Entangled

That's why many of these towns rely on play dates and such, and go crazy with children's activities. Children grow up inundated with all kinds of projects, but forget to be creative and are a little out of touch with the regular environment.

Sorry I disagree VERY strongly on that. Placing emphasis on facilitating family actives are a GREAT thing and we have that in NYC too, you know. You're blaming the environment for extremely bad parenting where kids don't learn to be creative. If anything is going to make a kid creative, it's the proper guidance and teaching from the parents with the help of project and activities that are fun and challenging. If a parent doesn't engage their children and instead drops them on the front doorstep or in front of the TV, it doesn't matter where they grow up it's going to be a BAD situation.

Originally Posted by Entangled

As nice as the city as is, and as big as your house and a plot of land may be, it's still a little too provincial for my liking. As a note, this obviously a very subjective reasoning.

If your definition of "provincial" is west of the Hudson, then yes. If you look hard enough in the middle of nowhere you're bound to find scary examples of intellectual wastelands, but NYC doesn't have a monopoly on sophistication and diversity- you can find that in a lot of places.

Originally Posted by Entangled

As for the overall environment I've been fantasizing about moving to Paris to start a family. The parental leave is definitely more generous, the work environment more human and social/family life is more essential. In addition to great respect for culture and arts, there's less of a focus on consumerism and affluence (while I'm not saying that it's absolute, it's at a lower scale). The only problem is that it's harder to find work, obtain a citizenship status and it's more expensive than NYC.

Hey go for it! I haven't been to Paris yet, but I hear it's beautiful. And if the European economics are a better fit for you then you should be where you're going to be happy.

[Alkonost]

Originally Posted by Entangled

Really? What exactly does your friend think of KG? It's definitely green and the rents are lower, but it's rather dead and has a large population of Central Asian Jews who are very ethnocentric and keep to themselves. I think that Astoria is great for families, but it's definitely more expensive and the apartments are a lot smaller than KG.

My friend really loves KG! He's Cuban ethnically, and he's never expressed any problems or being excluded/shunned by anyone in the neighborhood from other ethnic backgrounds. From the sound of it he gets along really well with everyone and the kids are happy living there.

[Forest_Hills_Daddy]

No issues with Kew Gardens as long as you have a small family and can make do with an apartment. The nice places to live there are near the LIRR station or the stretch of Metropolitan Ave. from Park Lane South to Lefferts, as well as 118th St. towards Metropolitan. The good restaurants are on the Forest Hills side of Metropolitan which you can reach by walking or taking a short bus ride on the Q54. There is also a good bagel store and organic goods store (Thyme) near the LIRR.

Just make sure your house is zoned for PS99 as some areas are zoned for Richmond Hill. If you prefer private schools, you can choose Our Lady of Mercy and Our Lady Queen of Martyrs in Forest Hills or Holy Child Jesus in Richmond Hill. The expensive Kew Forest School is also located nearby.

There are orthodox Jews living there but they tend to keep to their own and don't really bother anyone else, as do most residents in KG.

[Entangled]

Originally Posted by Alkonost

Boston, Chicago, Denver, Dallas, SLC, & Nashville (Franklin specifically, which is a suburb). In the end I picked Dallas. School quality is more dependent on the wealth of a neighborhood than the geographical location, and all of those cities had a surprising amount of ethnic diversity to varying degrees- even Nashville. NYC doesn't have a monopoly on the immigrant populations, even though it's one of the biggest melting pots.

Agree with Boston and Chicago (this one is too windy and the winters are too cold). Not fond of the rest. I can't deal with the southern drawl, the lifestyle, the culture, etc. I just don't like the South, except for South Beach (although I would never want to live there). North Carolina experience was disappointing, on many levels. I'm not a fan of TX, and Mormonism in SLC makes me uneasy.

Originally Posted by Alkonost

I'd wonder what your definition of "minimum" is. Just about every place has ethnic diversity if you look for it, in but places with smaller populations it might not be immediately apparent. I've found there's a huge blind eye turned to ethnicity when you don't see an equal mix of minorities and whites. Whites are actually VERY culturally diverse but they just get lumped in as "white", as opposed to Irish, Slavic, Spanish, Italian, etc. It's a shame that the ethnic diversity of whites doesn't seem to count.

It's true, but Irish, Spanish, Italians are still several generations old, and have fully grown into the American milieu, and rarely retain the authentic flavor. Slavic immigration is on the rise, but it's just not enough of a variation. I do think it's important to have multiplicity and great variation But you're right, it's important to recognize the variety withing one "race." For example, I know people who live in cities with described population, but they will not feel comfortable visiting Greek, Lebanese or Argentine restaurants. Italian, Irish and Polish communities tend to intertwine, thus there really isn't much of a distinction.

Originally Posted by Alkonost

Parents should never rely on the environment to raise their kids in the first place, whether it's a vanilla neighborhood in the Midwest or Mott Haven. Parents are supposed to teach and support their kids so they grow up to be racially, religiously, and politically tolerant adults no matter where they live. I've actually run into more racists in NYC than in the boonies upstate, go figure!

Very true. However, the experience is just as essential, and is often lacking. Children are still detached when they move to mixed communities. They want to identify, but have a difficult time connecting. Their social groups tend to reflect their background and upbringing, regardless of their egalitarian education.

Originally Posted by Alkonost

That sounds more small-town rural to me than suburban.

Yes, but we didn't specify only cosmopolitan cities as an alternative to NYC. Many people claim that NYC is not the best place to live, and prefer sprawling real estate to the urban lifestyle.

Yeah I had thought that too, for a while. Then I realized you don't need to live in NYC to have most -and in some cases, all- of the things on that wish list.

I'm not saying that there aren't many places that fit that category. In fact, in this large state there are only a handful... 2,3?

I'm not sure where you're getting your info on Cleveland. They have a very diverse population: Slavs, Germans, Irish, Italians, Chinese (they actually have a Chinatown and a little Italy), Koreans, Puerto Ricans , and Hungarians- there's probably more on the list, too. So it's a much more diverse place than you're giving it credit for. Just because a place doesn't have "as much diversity as NYC" doesn't mean it's not diverse or is sorely lacking in it.

My in-laws live there, and I have visited many many times. The divide between blacks and whites is very pronounced. There isn't that much in the arts, architecture, restaurants and nightlife department. Frankly, I find it slightly depressing.

I love brutal winters, but I'm in the minority. As for museums, that will almost always depend on the wealth and size of a city, not the ethnic makeup. Museums are VERY expensive to build, maintain, and acquire items for. Without a large enough tax base to fund the construction and high-volume tourism to pay admission fees you're just not going to be able to sustain museums like that you expect to find in NYC. Racial makeup of the city has little to do with it.

Museums and arts aren't for everyone, even though I think they are essential for personal and spiritual growth, and frankly to humanity overall. Everyone should have at least one form of art they enjoy. TV and mainstream cinema doesn't count. I actually think that CULTURAL makeup has to do a lot with the volume and the quality of museums.

Sorry I disagree VERY strongly on that. Placing emphasis on facilitating family actives are a GREAT thing and we have that in NYC too, you know. You're blaming the environment for extremely bad parenting where kids don't learn to be creative. If anything is going to make a kid creative, it's the proper guidance and teaching from the parents with the help of project and activities that are fun and challenging. If a parent doesn't engage their children and instead drops them on the front doorstep or in front of the TV, it doesn't matter where they grow up it's going to be a BAD situation.

Creating their own activities, without constant facilitation initiated by parents is an integral part of a healthy childhood. Something that seems to be missing in today's parenting style.

If your definition of "provincial" is west of the Hudson, then yes. If you look hard enough in the middle of nowhere you're bound to find scary examples of intellectual wastelands, but NYC doesn't have a monopoly on sophistication and diversity- you can find that in a lot of places.

True, on a smaller scale. Hey, I'm not saying that NYC is the be all, end all. It's just that I haven't found better. Don't get me wrong, I am definitely miffed about some things in NYC. Like the work culture, I hate this workaholic attitude that permeates our city. I hate that people take pride in working crazy hours, and working in big firms with big reputation, yet most of them are burnt out, bored and unhappy. I don't like that there is that chase for affluence, or financial status, the "It" factor has extrapolated among younger generations. NYC artists aren't what they used to be anymore, many of them more concerned with the image while lacking talent or depth. Everything is a fad. The neighborhoods are becoming diluted, overly gentrified and unreasonably expensive. This city is turning into a haven for posers, glamour chasers, trust fund babies, workaholics and struggling and tired residents. I don't like the dichotomy. I don't believe that one must live to work, and I don't believe that quality, interpersonal communication and moral values must take a backseat to mediocrity, consumerism, affluenza and status quo. Finally I hate Bleecker street in Greenwich Village where it's Mardi Gras 24/7, filled with frat boys, posers, dimwits and bad food (with some exceptions).

Hey go for it! I haven't been to Paris yet, but I hear it's beautiful. And if the European economics are a better fit for you then you should be where you're going to be happy.

If it were only that easy.

[Entangled]

Originally Posted by Forest_Hills_Daddy

No issues with Kew Gardens as long as you have a small family and can make do with an apartment. The nice places to live there are near the LIRR station or the stretch of Metropolitan Ave. from Park Lane South to Lefferts, as well as 118th St. towards Metropolitan. The good restaurants are on the Forest Hills side of Metropolitan which you can reach by walking or taking a short bus ride on the Q54. There is also a good bagel store and organic goods store (Thyme) near the LIRR.

Just make sure your house is zoned for PS99 as some areas are zoned for Richmond Hill. If you prefer private schools, you can choose Our Lady of Mercy and Our Lady Queen of Martyrs in Forest Hills or Holy Child Jesus in Richmond Hill. The expensive Kew Forest School is also located nearby.

There are orthodox Jews living there but they tend to keep to their own and don't really bother anyone else, as do most residents in KG.

Yep, this is all true. I live in KG, but often dream of Astoria. I just don't care for the Central Asian Jewish population. They are crass swindlers who monopolize the hood and prevent other businesses from opening there, and they build gaudy houses. I'm not making assumptions by the way, I know this. The best places in KG are the wonderful cinema, the fish market, architecture, the park, Homstead, and pooosibly Tu Casa. Everything else, in addition to the trashy Austin Ale house blows. We also recently lost the only decent restaurant that couldn't get their service together.

And you're right, Danny Brown is the jewel of Queens.

[BridgetLelay]

There are many family-friendly neighborhoods within New York City. Battery Park, Manhattan is one. There are loads of great job opportunities and great neighborhoods like Park Slope in Brooklyn, and Corona, Ridgewood, and Forest Hills in Queens, to name a few.