NYC more affordable than elsewhere in the US?

@yentle You were definitely ready for the move! Glad you're enjoying your new suburban life!

Now that I live in Nowhere with a beltway that never has any traffic, EVER (at least in my definition of traffic), I get why people like their cars. Driving here is actually fun. I spent my entire adult life in cities where driving was not only not fun, but definitively stress-inducing between stand-still traffic and understandably aggressive drivers (and pedestrians! and cyclists! and now scooters!!).

Nothing here is more than fifteen minutes away, and I don't blink at going out of my way to pick up my mother in law en route to wherever I am going if she has errands to run.

On the other hand, I always felt energized just by being in any part of NYC, whereas here in Nowhere, the bulk of my surroundings (save our awesome, but SMALL, neighborhood) not only do not energize me, but they make me feel like I am on a sad conveyor belt of some sort. What alarms me even more is that I no longer bat an eye at the yard signs that say "God, guns and Trump will save our country." I am thinking that as easy as life is here, I just can't see it for the long haul. Time will tell.

One of the things that surprised me the most about Manhattan was the high cost of food. Unlike downtown LA or San Francisco where I could always find a big chain grocery store within walking distance (like Safeway in SF or Ralph’s in LA), in NYC, I find the least expensive option is a Whole Foods but the nearest one to us is one mile away and Whole Foods is not cheap. You are lucky if you live near a Trader Joe’s but there are only a handful in NYC. When I will drive to NJ, I would always, always do two things, fill up on gas and stop at an ALDIs to load up on groceries. When I compare the haul of food I could buy at ALDIs or ShopRite for say $50 to what that $50 buys me in Manhattan, it’s pretty shocking. But even before the congestion tax, it’s not financially feasible to drive to Hoboken JUST for gas and groceries. I also looked into delivery, again, with the delivery fees, it’s a wash with shopping at Whole Foods and I’m the type of guy that likes to buy his own food, not have someone pick it for me. Based on the shear number of delivery people on their bikes and escooters, it seems most NYC people don’t care. But it definitely adds up…and if other major cities can have large chain grocery stores in their downtown cores, it’s frustrating nyc can do the same

911, can you get to Big Apple Meat Market behind the Port Authority?
Not cheap for everything but generally the closest you'll have to a Safeway experience in NYC.

Not been to Big Apple Meat Market. There are some less expensive grocery stores in Lower East side near John Lindsay East River Park track that I sometimes run at, for example, some fruit and vegetables and especially coffee is cheaper there than anywhere in Hells Kitchen but again it’s not feasible to buy a bunch of groceries in lower east side then schlep back to my home 4 miles away. My ultimate fantasy is that they open a massive ALDIs or Walmart in Hell’s Kitchen but I know that will never happen!! One can always dream…

Right that's the problem with NYC living.
Things are either more convenient & much more expensive than nowhere, or more inconvenient and probably still more expensive.

If the thing you want isn't convenient walking distance from your apartment, then hauling across town and schlepping it home is often worse than the dreaded suburbs & just driving there.

If your local grocery options are a bombed out Key Foods/Associated/Gristedes, overcrowded Trader Joes/Fairway, upmarket like Citarella/Whole Foods, it's not great. Yeah I can go down to Chinatown for great produce, and across town for good bagels, and the down to Port Authority for meat, and there goes the entirety of my Saturday. Many have commented Manhattan has uniquely bad grocery quality and price for how rich of a city we are.

Just like when I need to do any clothing, electronics, hobbyist or sporting goods shopping - yeah its in Manhattan but the train/walk there & uber/taxi back is time consuming & expensive relative to out in nowhere. And my best option for most stuff is B&H who are closed when I want to shop - Friday night & Saturdays.

Or you use amazon/other online in which case again no better than nowhere. Worse if you have no doorman because everything is getting stolen.

Thinking about the wealth level on this thread, is paying 20% -30% more for groceries really even an issue? Guess we all have our issues that we draw a line in the sand on.

Manhattan is higher retail space cost, delivery cost to store, and labor cost. To top it up, people buy smaller quantities than burbs as the average family size is smaller. It is not possible to delink these from grocery prices regardless of who sells it.

There is a reason Aldi is not here as it will find it hard to survive without charging 30% more vs burbs and Manhattanites will sneeze at the product quality. Only the cost of the produce of the seller is less but $ mark up will be similar to Wholefoods to cover retail cost.

Even Chinatown is not cheap vs say suburban store in NJ. Yes the fish there is cheaper but they don't have the same hygeine standards as Whole foods. Yes, you can get much bigger variety of greens and pork/chicken cheaper there but good beef or lamb is slim picking. High quality Chinese restaurants in Ctown are still very well priced even though Flushing is better.

I totally agree it is somewhat irrational to complain about expensive food prices in Manhattan vs the burbs if you can afford to live in Manhattan in the first place, I’m very fortunate that at my income/asset level, I can afford to shop at Whole Foods every day, as my wise parents remind me. It is just that when I pay $8 for 2 lbs organic yogurt at Whole Foods (or more at a bodega), I can’t help but picture the THREE two pound containers of organic yogurt I could have gotten Aldi for the same price! I forgot to mention that there is a Target near me which has more reasonable prices, however, there food selection especially for produce is really limited and if you go late in the day, they are frequently sold out of many basic food items like milk and eggs

Random answers:
Farmingdale Meat Market will deliver to Manhattan for orders over $200. Recent purchases include 14 American Wagyu ribeye for $516.

I've also cut my own hair since about 2015.

Driving here CAN be fun. Mustang Magic just informed me that the Whipple Gen 6 3.0l Stage 2 Supercharger is in and they're ready to schedule the install along with dual catch cans, resonator delete, intercooler, Steeda hood struts, puddle lights, Escort Maxcam 360c, etc Looking at WHP 750+. I know I'm going to have fun.

Try grocery shopping at Hong Kong Supermarket 157 Hester Street

I thought I'd get on Reddit. One poster said WF is much cheaper now that Amazon bought it but I don't know I can't seem to escape without paying $50 for not very much to show for it.

Lincoln market is pretty good value but there are only two locations in Manhattan so it involves a degree of schlepping

Another poster suggests Brooklyn Fare? Don't know it.

MTH, Here is what my read on Wholefoods pricing strategy in at least Union Square: Non organic staples and Organic Apples are fairly priced for quality. Organic bok choy is more or less the same price as non-organic bok-choy in China Town. For the rest they are frequent sales. Speciality items like Cheese counter is always at a premium vs TJ.

Beef is expensive now at WF but you are buying butcher's counter not pre-packaged. Wegman's has better prices for pre-packaged meat.

I have tried Salmon from Trade Joes and Wholefoods. Trader Joes has a lot of water in it and Whole foods is just way better with one being able to choose the cut. The prepacking concept at TJ means that I don't get to choose what I eat.

So overall WF not that expensive for staples after Amazon takeover vs other choices available in Manhattan after adjusting for service and quality.

So yes, Manhattan prices are way higher than what you can get in burbs but so is everything else due to cost of doing business in Manhattan.

One good thing about Manhattan: the ubiquitous fruit stands that are found on many street corners. Although the selection is much more limited than WF, if you’re not too fussy, prices can be great. I can often find berries, oranges and apples for $1 or less per pound depending on the season. Vegetables like peppers, garlic, green onions, cucumber are also very competitively priced often cheaper than either WF or TJ. My favorite is the one on 8th street and W26th Avenue in Chelsea. Plus the guys there are very friendly and many even accept Zelle now so you don’t need to carry cash. Definitely miss those when I’m in San Francisco or LA

>> Thinking about the wealth level on this thread, is paying 20% -30% more for groceries really even an issue? Guess we all have our issues that we draw a line in the sand on.

Spurred by this discussion, and this Reddit thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/fatFIRE/comments/1i906mf/food_spending_and_lifestyle/

I decided to look up how much we spent on groceries last year. We are generally price insensitive, with a strong preference for freshness and quality wherever it may be. Sometimes that means the high-end butcher shop, sometimes mid-end farmers market, sometimes Trader Joes since they run a tight ship with limited SKUs and high turnover. I like the crowded Trader Joes, it keeps everything fresh, but to each their own.

In any case, the bill came in at $17 per person per day, $500 per month, $6000 per year. That covers ~75% of a person's eating in my household (with the balance eaten out, at work, etc.). If we were cost-sensitive, I'm guessing it could be done at $4000 per year. And maybe in the suburbs, $2500 per year. So a $1500 per year savings.

OK, if that's the straw that breaks the camel's back on Manhattan living where a basic studio runs $36K/yr or whatever, to each their own. People do like to draw the line in the sand on food prices. I had a fun discussion w/ family over the holidays saying how inflation is much higher than CPI states. Always interesting to hear strong claims from people lacking relevant knowledge. E.g., how the basket of goods in CPI works, the relevance of short-term volatility in food & energy prices, etc. They were using egg prices as their line in the sand, totally unaware of how long-term prices have tracked CPI, and the existence or effect of the avian flu. I didn't try to convince them of anything, just explained how it works.

@nada - I love that you are now quoting reddit fatFire :-D
Re: food budgets
I think my per-person grocery spend is similar to yours, but covers a lower % of total eating. Breakfast cost is minimal. The problem is always the dining out budget. My weekly grocery budget equals ~1 Manhattan dinner now... If you work from an office, and dine out even 2x/week, then the % of total lunch&dinner meals eaten out hits 50% pretty easily.

Re: CPI, I'm not a big inflation truther, I think individuals experiences of inflation depends on their income/spending/savings levels, age & marital/family status, lifestyle and region.
It's just how the CPI basket of goods works - its just some straw man average consumer - a% on transport, b% on energy, c% on leisure, x% rental housing, y% particular basket of groceries, z% quick service dining, etc.

I'd guess NYC inflation was a bit higher than national average, but then if you were in say Miami where people flocked over COVID it was much much higher as the influx pushed up housing significantly in a short time.

I don't think my parents in unfashionable nowhere experienced that much inflation compared to national average. My youngest brother who lives in an expensive blue state and didn't have enough cash when rates were sub-3% feels pretty locked out of the housing market.

A renter who is younger and putting a larger amount of their paycheck into rent is going to have a higher personal inflation than someone socking away 40% into the stock market while living in a $10k rental comfortably. If your biggest outlay is rent, and it goes up 5-10% multiple years in a row, you are treading water or falling below. If your biggest outlay is investment and your investments keep going up, it's awesome. This is ignoring the inflation driven wage increase effect, though that only lasted about 1-2 comp cycles for most people..

Organic Baby Bok Choy

Whole Foods Union Square $2..79/lb

6 kinds of Baby Bok Choi
Hong Kong Market $1.39/lb to $1.79/lb

https://www.saveur.com/chinatown-produce-prices

I cook >95% of my own meals.

I guess I have a hard time squaring all the (stereotyping here) NY-or-nowhere hardos pumping the unique culture of NYC that can't be lived anywhere else.. with the self-reported eating primarily at home, home-cooked meals (or the occasional diner and pizza)? lol.

I'm the one whinging about NYC cost/benefit, but recognize it has a fantastic vast range of food across cuisines, diets and price ranges. While I can get Thai, Indian and Vietnamese in "nowhere" now just the same as you could get Chinese & pizza 50 years ago or Sushi 30 years ago.. its not like theres 50 places to choose from.

When I'm paying to live in the most expensive city in the world, I'm not going to live a monklike existence. Plenty of opportunity to do that in nowhere.

So if people aren't spending their money on dining and enjoying unique NYC culture, what are you doing instead? Weekly opera/broadway/concert? Museums every week? Genuinely curious and not trolling.

Steve, One of the biggest reasons market rent payers are in NYC is for job/business and mating opportunities. Every thing else is bonus and choice depending on personal preferences.

I spend alot of money on running, running shoes are $100-250 per pair and with my high mileage, I need to replace them every 3-4 weeks. Running coach, $75 per month. Im sure I eat more with all my running but that’s probably negligible. The biggest expense is race entry fees. I run 2-3 races per month, an average race fee is $30-50. If in New Jersey, there are tolls plus gas. Every year, 4-6 “big” races when I have to stay in a hotel and/or fly. So it definitely adds up. My partner likes to eat out, and my counter argument is one evening out dining for me is one less race to run and that’s not a trade off I like. Now, if I didn’t run races for competition, and just ran for physical well being, it would cut down on the cost significantly. But that’s no fun, I feel if I can’t be a competitive runner, there is almost no point doing it. And of course running can be done anywhere, NYC or the Midwest, makes no difference. Plus California has much better running weather year round. Hence my pondering leaving NYC permanently one day and griping about the costs to live here. But you know what? I hate to admit this, but having been in my second home in San Francisco for the past two months, I do miss NYC (a little). I still really believe living in the Big Apple is ridiculously expensive and a little overrated, but it is also true that there is no city like it in North America and has few rivals in the entire world. I guess you gotta pay to play here…

I’ll add a side note about dining for those of us who, unfortunately, have developed medical dietary restrictions. When I moved to NYC in 2015, my husband and I could still eat anything and NYC cheap eats and street food was a joy. Then came medical diagnoses for both of us where we could no longer eat gluten. Add that wrinkle to the grocery discussions here and we had an expensive added shopping nightmare - way upped our need to rely on on-line orders. And the restaurants in NYC are insanely backward relative to many other cities when it comes to clearly identifying allergens and offering choices. Yes there are about ten well known restaurants for gluten free dining spread around the City, a few of which are truly excellent, but on a percentage basis? And you spend lots of time on the clean safe charming subway to get to them……. The irony is that, since we moved out to LI and can use a car easily to get around, there are actually more choices of really good gluten free dining - especially for Italian food. Every time I visit family in LA I am blown away by how far behind NYC is for dietary restrictions/needs.

My personal take, NYC was a great, interesting city to live in, currently holds little appeal to me. If I had to be there for work, didn't want to deal with commuting then I certainly get it. And of course not to hate on NYC, it's certainly a fine place. But the majority of the current inhabitants are no different than many of the affluent suburbs, very few of the current New Yorkers were born in the city and raised there. It's really just a city of transplants. Two of my children were born there, one of them still lives there. What's my gripe? New York has become too homogeneous, in the '90s we called it disneyfied, now it's that on steroids. For many people that's a good thing, so I guess whatever floats your boat.

I would say New York City is unique in its own way, especially with its towering architecture, etc. but I don't think it holds up to cities like Paris, Rome, Lisbon, Barcelona, London, Zurich. But that's just my two cents.

As far as food prices in grocery stores, I stopped worrying about that quite a while ago, that's certainly a privileged to attitude I know. And of course it wasn't always the case. But food prices aren't what strains my budget. Although I do remember my grandfather, let's call on a millionaire next door type, never bought junk, would do without if he couldn't afford a quality item. But I remember well when suddenly butter and orange juice disappeared from his house. Basically at some point in the '70s prices went up quite a bit on these items, and he decided to do without, guess that was the depression era PTSD? Eventually his taste buds and desires for these products won out, and they found their way back into his refrigerator : )

>> @nada - I love that you are now quoting reddit fatFire :-D
Yeah... once again, damn you for introducing me to it!

Our dining spending is certainly higher than grocery spending too, perhaps 2-3x from eating out 2-3x times per week. So yeah, average weekly meal out equals average weekly grocery spend.

>> So if people aren't spending their money on dining and enjoying unique NYC culture, what are you doing instead?
I think there is a broad range of preferences for different people. For me, eating out 2-3x is enough. I just have no desire to do any more than that: I like cooking, I often prefer simpler preparations, and I frankly think "What's the point of having a nice home if I don't spend time in it enjoying it?" Most of my spending is on rent; everything else is a rounding error. The main thing I like about NYC is its density: the fact that there are people out on the streets, the fact that I can be in any of 3 dozen bustling restaurants within a 5 minute walk, the fact that run along a river bustling with people at a moment's notice without getting in a car, etc.

@Yentle "And the restaurants in NYC are insanely backward relative to many other cities when it comes to clearly identifying allergens and offering choices. "

I wouldn't have believed this, but having a recent restriction.. have to say it's WAY harder than I would have guessed. Mine is more dairy related, not gonna kill me or anything, but some restaurants have little on the menu, refuse to modify anything, don't even know what's in their food, or a mix of all 3. I've had meals where they basically said I could have the grilled chicken breast & some lettuce, lol. Maybe this is just a "Brooklyn service" issue, but there's times the waitress was barely able to hold back an eye roll while discussing. Oh and don't forget to tip 22%+ at the end of the meal for that!

Meanwhile out in nowhere, the last two places I went were very chill, had lots of choices, and offered modifications to fix others.

@Keith - yes the city is full of transplants.. I may or may not count in that group after 20 years, with the asterisk that my mother and grandmother were born here.. All the retail is largely turning over to national and global chains you can get elsewhere. Even some of the non-national, local restaurant & retail groups now are like NYC/Westchester/Greenwich/Nassau/Hamptons..

@911 - For me, spending +50% of time outside city (and venting on this board?) is a relief valve that allows me to tolerate (and in some ways enjoy) my time in the city. Maybe same for you.

This is not a good space to come to as a first time homebuyer :D I no doubt count as one of the barbarian normies - I don't have a creative bone in my body

It's true it's hard to see current NYC giving birth to a George Balanchine or a Sonic Youth. They could be just over the horizon, though. Maybe it has to do with the internet and the flattening of everything.

London and NYC are truly cosmopolitan cities, imo. Other European capitals are attracting metropolitans - ie people from former colonies. So Paris is increasingly West and North African with much smaller smatterings of other communities mixed in. Spanish cities get immigrants from South America. Lisbon has immigrants from Brazil, Angola, Mozambique. South Asian communities in all of the above but in much smaller numbers. Of course European cities are a delight to the eye. They have more history in the tips of their pinkies than NY and it's effortless. But they're overrun with tourists (I never feel that in NYC unless I find myself on the Circle Ferry or some such). And after NY and London they don't quite feel like truly international cities (except in the tourists they attract).

What I like about NYC is the energy and the entire tableau. Just walking in the city is a cultural experience that energizes me even if I don't make it to a show or a haute cuisine venue. Just having an omelette in the neighborhood diner and watching everything around me gives me a feeling that I experience nowhere else in the United States. And if Manhattan ever becomes as homogenous as Keith feels it is (not at all the case in midtown fare east), I will move over to Queens.

+1 to below.
-----
The main thing I like about NYC is its density: the fact that there are people out on the streets, the fact that I can be in any of 3 dozen bustling restaurants within a 5 minute walk, the fact that run along a river bustling with people at a moment's notice without getting in a car, etc.

@MCR - Queens may be my next stop. Cost/commute/dining and even ease of excursions out of city perspective. City retail no longer is much of a draw, and restaurants are fleeing higher rent areas, leaving Queens to pick up the slack.

@300 - My gripe is related to N BK hood going upscale at hyper speed.. it is quickly getting SoHo/Meatpacking treatment. I now have Paul Smith, Hermes, Chanel, Gucci, Le Labo, Byredo, and not 1 but 2 Equinoxes & a Barrys in walking distance. Plus every "midtown lunch" quick service place and mall store under the sun. Maybe the bubble collapses on itself when parents stop sending their Peter Pan 20-somethings checks. My go-to restaurants are all long gone, in just a few short years.

@911 - another BK issue is the waterfront is not developing the way Manhattans has. It's a lot more sporadic, disconnected pocket parks you can traverse in 5 minutes. LIC of all places has a longer contiguous waterfront green space than N BK.

@MTH - I think Europe is falling into a trap of being a Disney vacationland for Americans and the rich world. Crazy looking at the stats re: demographics/youth unemployment/firm formation/job growth/etc. NYC even in the most touristed places never feels like it has the density of tourists that you encounter in Paris, Rome, Florence, etc.

If you hang around the right parts of New York City, it certainly feels inundated by tourists just look at the numbers. However, most New Yorkers are not in these neighborhoods for any extended period of time during the day . Another thing , Europeans blend in a bit more than let's say Americans in Paris , for the most part .The same goes for Paris and Rome. not so much for Zurich, Barcelona and even Lisbon which has been inundated by nomadic workers. There are plenty of non-touristic areas in these cities. And I was just talking about the general vibe of actually living in these cities, not visiting the most touristic spots.

@Keith You're right it's only the most highly touristed areas. But when tourism accounts for x% of your local economy it denatures a place. You have all the tourists all year long and then everyone from the less expensive areas (who can no longer afford city center locales) ends up working in tourism or in a tourism adjacent business. In capital cities (Paris, Madrid, Rome etc) you've also got administrative state employees, but that's also kind of - not sure how to put it - 'inorganic' ie not self sustaining (or only through taxation). In NYC (like London) there's a financial hub that spawns other businesses - an economic engine - that has nothing to do with tourism or, in the cases of capitals, the state.

You can spot the visitors, lollygagging along the narrow cobblestone streets. They may be Dutch, French, Eastern European/Russian, German or Italian but they generally read 'Hi, I'm on vacation' :)

Some EU cities are looking at ways to regulate the numbers but it's difficult to turn down the $ it generates when there isn't that much growth in other areas.

Again, not knocking Europe. I have friends who have settled there very happily. It's dripping with charm. And I will say that Europeans with education and comfortable jobs have a 'know how to live' code. They may work hard...but not too hard. Which goes back to the job growth/firm foundation thing. Tough if you're from there and young. Or even not so young but with a limited education. Not as tough as America materially (there's a real social safety net in the EU), but tough in terms of quality of life and opportunity, serving people all day who you'll never see again in your life with limited prospects to move up or out. If you have a job, you hang onto it for dear life.

Anyway, that's just me. If that's where you end up I wish you a happy retirement! Many have taken that road and never looked back. They've cracked the code (or theirs) and more power to'em!

Mth, I'm just not sure I agree with your analysis of Western Europe from a economic perspective. I feel like I see what you're talking about more when I travel through Central America or the Caribbean or places like Hawaii. Unfortunately here in the US a place that I've traveled through extensively as a musician, there's quite a bit of poverty, and for lack of a better word, a sort of ugliness as far as living conditions go. And unfortunately there are no tourists to prop those areas up after their manufacturing job bases have been shipped overseas or otherwise lost to something else. That's a big part of America. I currently live in the south, and there's quite a bit of poverty down here, I've driven through parts of Louisiana, Alabama etc. Where you would literally think you were on the wrong side of the tracks in essential American country, communities living in uninsulated metal roofed houses etc.

I think the opioid crisis and the methamphetamine crisis in this country is the end result of the significant underlying issues we have as a nation.

For all the people complaining about NYC being very expensive, how much more did you complain when the home prices in the rest of the country were 30% cheaper vs NYC? $100 house went to $150 on a national basis and NYC apartments are flattish.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CSUSHPINSA

There is definitely more poverty in the US than either Western Europe and Canada. Like Keith said, I’ve driven through the South, I drove from Miami to Toronto. And some of the towns and places I drove through were pretty depressing, in particular in South Carolina . As I drove farther north, things improved. It was a part of America I had never seen before and it was eye opening. But in exchange for the “social safety net” that you have in Europe and Canada you have higher taxes. At their peak earning years, my parents back home in Canada was forking over nearly 50% of their income to the federal government in taxes. And there is less opportunity to advance. If you are smart and hard working, there is no better place to be than in the US, I firmly believe no other country will give you the opportunity to succeed. But if you fail, there will not be much help. I like to think of myself as pretty intelligent, hard working and I had a good deal of luck in my life and I was able to realize a dream of retiring at 44, more than 20 years younger than my parents. I truly believe I could have never succeeded that way I did had I stayed in my home country of Canada, just too much regulation and road barriers to my path. Anyway, this is way off topic, but being as pro-American as I am doesn’t mean I don’t realize that the US has its flaws

At 911 I totally agree with you, I don't think there's a better country than America to try to make your bones in. The woman that cleans our house, she's 67, made her money here and just realized her dream of buying a house in her home country of Guatemala where she will spend most of her retirement. And I think that's the story of a lot of immigrants that come here, and that's why everybody wants to get in here! And as you point out, there's no safety net for the middle class, but if you hit the absolute bottom of the barrel and you've been conditioned to stay there, they'll give you enough shekels to survive and provide some level of free healthcare. One thing I observed when I first started traveling through Europe as a poor musician, my poor musician, European brethren all lived significantly better than I did, with very little stress in their life. Europeans are also greatly handcuffed by social status dictated by birth. You don't have too many people in say Germany or France that were poor punk rockers, and then went on to start a a disruptive real estate business selling a couple of $100 million worth of property every year.

I remember my British friend telling me many many years ago in New York, he had moved here and was a high-end furniture maker. He said the British mindset was you were born to shoemakers. You'll be a shoemaker, sure, maybe that's an exaggeration but you get the gist of it.

@Keith - I still hear the same re: class in the UK from my friends there. It's not gone away even with the younger generations. Agreed the US is the place to be if you re smart and ambitious.

I am left of center, but seeing how the tax, regulate and large social safety net model has worked out for Western Europe does give me pause. Does the US have room to go on progressive taxation & more social programs - yes, should we go as far as France, UK or Spain.. no way. There just seem to be no incentives or ambitions to strike out on your own, raise capital, start a company, hire people and build things.

Another aspect of US that I think gives us great benefit is that we have multiple metropolitan centers for different specialities. NYC for finance/law, SF for tech, LA for entertainment, Boston for education/medtech, Chicago for more ag/manufacturing business, DC for politics, Miami is sort of a LatAm entrepot, Dallas for energy, etc.

In UK you have London as the center for everything that matters, and the rest of the country suffers for it.

Steve, we live a (somewhat) monklike existence in this expensive city, and what do we get out of it?
-easy access to family (mr. front porch is a native New Yorker)
-access to incredible education (most of the middle schools that I'm familiar with here are of comparable quality to the high school I went to in Nowhere)
-a strong transportation network (I get how questionable the subway is, I'm on it constantly, but it's also nice that it gets you everywhere, plus the bonus that teenage kids can transport themselves places rather than having to be driven everywhere by mom)
-a nice (by our standards) apartment (this was our big post-Pandemic shift, since we were spending more time inside)
-great street life/casual social energy -- this is sort of to mcr's point - if I strike up a conversation with someone in my neighborhood, at a local coffeehouse or whatever, chances are high that they're going to be someone who fascinates me, and I'll be energized by the interaction. There is also still an artistic life in this city, though you do have to burrow deeper to find it. Plus, it's such an international city that if I want to switch languages I can easily do that.
-fantastic healthcare when we need it -- I broke my toe, went to an urgent care, and then for a follow-up was sent to a thirty-years-of-experience world-class foot guy. Only in New York, kids.

Amen on the healthcare. It's keeping me here. Also new building at 26th/8th will have a Lidl. For those with cars, Costco in Rego Park is a wet dream. Tons of parking. The only limitation is how much space you have to store groceries.

+1 on the historic social mobility in the United States. I think many of us on here are well off in ways that we might not be had we been trapped in systems where there was much more limited social mobility (i.e., anywhere else on the planet). What we are experiencing politically right now will determine the future of social mobility in the United States. We have the tech libertarians who are 100% about social mobility and unfettered competition from immigrants vs the rust belt et al who want to protect Americans from the extreme consequences of capitalism. I understand and empathize with both perspectives. Obviously I don't know how it is going to shake out, but I will never forget that I am the beneficiary of unfettered capitalism to the extent it enabled my great grandparents, grandparents and parents to set me up in the new system, and I am also the beneficiary of protectionism to the extent that I feel certain I have benefitted from preferences along the way because I am a "type." What dismays me about human nature is that history suggests that those who throw off their oppressors prove not to really be upset about oppression per se; they just want to be the ones who are doing the oppressing. It makes my head explode to hear any of the Trump children or Jared Kushner talk about meritocracy as if any of them could have attended the universities they did without buying their way in.

Also, to tie the above to what draws people to New York, the highly skilled highly paid immigrants that live in New York and San Francisco just do not have the same ability to live in nowhere with any quality of life. Our god daughter is a junior at Harvard now, and my favorite thing to talk to her first gen friends about is how they are amazed and delighted they were to get to Harvard and find so many people with whom they can identify culturally after being raised in nowhere by immigrant science professor parents who taught biology, chemistry, match, etc at universities in nowhere as their path to U.S. citizenship for themselves and for their children. These kids are never going back to Nebraska, Alabama, Mississippi or Louisiana. My hope is that the rich tableau of New York spreads across the country at some point, but given what surrounds me at the moment, we are a long ways off from that. Even Dave Chappelle is thinking about leaving Ohio because he finds himself scared here in a way that he had not been previously.

In other words, Nowhere is a great option if you can blend in, but not so much if you can't.

>>>So overall WF not that expensive for staples after Amazon takeover vs other choices available in Manhattan after adjusting for service and quality.
So yes, Manhattan prices are way higher than what you can get in burbs but so is everything else due to cost of doing business in Manhattan.

I started this thread on suspicion that Manhattan is not that expensive compared to some of the nicer suburbs, especially when taking into account lower property taxes and higher level of services (and of course the time and cost of commute).

And I don't really get the food cost discussion. Like for some other posters, this is not a major expense. The number one expense for us right now is... nannies! After that, real estate. An Aldi would be great, but between the local supermarket, the TJ walking distance, WF/Amazon/Costco that deliver, some BK "ethnic" supermarkets that also deliver, some Korean and Japanese supermarkets within walking distance, I just think there are a lot of varied options here also, before I need to get on a bus or a subway.

Here is what we do for food, family of 3:
1) Weekly delivery order from Whole Foods. I bought a delivery subscription, so for each order I just pay the $5-7 tip. This weekly order is about $100 tip included. It is much cheaper than the neighborhood supermarket. The convenience of delivery is amazing.
2) Once a month walk to Trader Joes. 20 minute walk, spend about $100.
3) Various prepackaged foods/purees for the toddler from Amazon Prime. Gerber brand and similar.
4) Toddler prepared meal subscription "Little Spoon" and "Nurture Life". Like $60 per week. Paying for convenience of not having to figure out how to cut and prepare food so the toddler could eat it.
4) Certain staple items like coffee from Costco and Amazon, all delivered.
If I urgently need some bread I can walk to the neighborhood Gristedes in 5 minutes.

On Saturdays, we do Chinese takeout, $30-$40. On Sundays, a date night (with baby) at a steakhouse 2 blocks from my house, $120. M-F dinner is the food from WF (nanny cooks). And breakfast and lunch at the office (not cheap, $20-25 per day at Aramark cafeteria).

If we were in the burbs, maybe we could shave off $200/month tops if we ate at home more and shopped at Aldi. But the real expense is still the nanny/housekeeper who cooks the food + various baby-specific stuff (which is temporary).

Another +1 to below. I guess I am not a good candidate for suburbs...

+1 to below.
-----
The main thing I like about NYC is its density: the fact that there are people out on the streets, the fact that I can be in any of 3 dozen bustling restaurants within a 5 minute walk, the fact that run along a river bustling with people at a moment's notice without getting in a car, etc.

To first order, I think that at a certain degree of wealth, you can identify those living in NYC who actually like NYC living vs suburban living by whether or not they have a second home in the Hamptons or upstate or whatever. A less accurate predictor for those not at that degree of wealth is whether they fantasize about it, as there is many a slip between the cup and the lip of fantasizing and actually doing it if/when the capacity arises.

Krolik, how is WF delivery in terms of online selection and quality of fresh products delivered compared to what you’d pick yourself? I generally pick fruits, vegetables, meats based on what looks good. I’ve also noticed the following at meat counters. Customer looks at list and orders X without inspecting meats. Butcher picks up the absolutely worst-looking specimen of X, with customer not paying attention or even caring to express an opinion. It baffled me for a while, until I realized the customer was fulfilling an Instacart order. Hence, I became suspicious of online ordering of groceries. Wondering what your take on this is, now that you get weekly deliveries.

there is a huge difference in suburban home prices based on commuting time to the City. Everyone who buys in the suburbs makes a decision trading lower or higher price versus shorter or longer travel time. Also, it has not been mentioned but most families in the suburbs with kids have two cars. Only about 10 percent of the families Manhattan even have a car.

>>>Krolik, how is WF delivery in terms of online selection and quality of fresh products delivered compared to what you’d pick yourself? I generally pick fruits, vegetables, meats based on what looks good.

Not great. There are unwanted surprises, like very tiny zucchinis (I would have bought twice as many if I knew they were this tiny, or just something else) or smoked salmon as a substitute for fresh salmon more than a few times (my fault, you can disable substitutions). But it saves so much time. Here is my order from today (and basically every week):

Protein: eggs, ground turkey, fresh tilapia or salmon
Veggies/fiber: zucchini, bell pepper, green beans in a microwaveable bag, mushrooms, cauliflower
Dairy: greek yogurts, milk, cream cheese, shredded cheese
Fruits (for baby mostly): strawberries, blackberries, tangerines
Tomato sauce and bread

I think this particular order is hard to screw up. Nanny will cook grilled fish and veggies and meatballs. If going in person, you can pick something exciting like in-season fruits, but I just don't have time. Maybe I'll stop by a TJ next weekend and get something different, otherwise its kind of the same safe order on repeat.

Inonada, I thought you had a housekeeper, but you go shopping for groceries yourself?

@Keith - I get you. I was thinking of cities. In the US, where is the action? In the knowledge economy. Where are the jobs in the knowledge economy? Cities. But cities are surrounded by a gigantic moat called rent.

And once you get to the city the knowledge economy is composed of professional silos each with its own credential requirements. You need a certificate to change a coffee filter. H.L. Menken, Jack London, Earnets Hemingway did all right as reporters. Today you need to spend something astronomical to get a degree in journalism or communications. The same is true for other professions that are really crafts or trades where you learn by doing. Along with the course credits and student debt you get lots (and lots) of training in how to think of the issues of the day and advocacy.

One of the first things Josh Shapiro did when elected was eliminate 4-year college degree requirements for most state jobs.

https://www.pa.gov/governor/newsroom/press-releases/governor-shapiro-leads-the-nation-on-eliminating-college-degree-.html

Anyway, yes, there's great misery in the US but most of that is outside of the major metropolitan areas. And where are the angry anti-elitist voters? Same.

One thing they do have in Europe is fantastic job security. Their labor markets have no give compared to the US. So why rock the boat when there aren't many alternative jobs and your boss can't fire you? That level of security means young people have no incentive to take career risks. Stick to your boring job with great bennies and enjoy everything but work (where you spend 8 hours/day).

>>>A less accurate predictor for those not at that degree of wealth is whether they fantasize about it, as there is many a slip between the cup and the lip of fantasizing and actually doing it if/when the capacity arises.

By this measure, I am a candidate for the suburbs as I do like to fantasize about a weekend house in the woods...

@front_porch @mcr - thanks for enumerating the pluses of NYC - refreshing to be reminded of what NYC does offer in contrast to the suburbs.

@Krolik wouldn't you be spending just as much on nannies in the burbs? Honest question - maybe it would be cheaper there but I would think it would be close if not the same.

I think it just comes down to a matter of preference at the end of the day. I lived in New York City for approximately 35 years, over various manifestations. I do have a bias for what I call Old New York based on my life cycle. I currently live in a Beach Town, I enjoy getting up in the morning. Swimming in the ocean, taking long walks on the beach, watching amazing sunrises, and 12 years later it hasn't gotten old. Would I have wanted this lifestyle in my twenties or thirties or even 40's, absolutely not. I would have said you're crazy!

I don't necessarily think one is better than the other, it's which one fits your personal preferences. I have plenty of friends that would never think of leaving NYC. I also have plenty of friends that the idea of living in New York City is pure hell. And of course I realize I was lucky that I was able to put together a business that affords me to live this lifestyle.

Keith Burkhardt

I forgot to mention, Amazon will occasionally run sales. I just got $30 worth of groceries for $20 plus $3.00 video credit. Sometimes the sales run for cleaning products.

>>>@Krolik wouldn't you be spending just as much on nannies in the burbs? Honest question - maybe it would be cheaper there but I would think it would be close if not the same.

I think live out nannies are more expensive in the burbs because there are fewer immigrants looking for jobs, and they have more expenses such as a car. Live-in nanny require extra space and is cheaper than live out, but the extra space is not that much cheaper in the high end burbs, and there are all sorts of other expenses that make burbs expensive, like a car.

@Keith - Makes sense. Life cycle has a lot to do with it. And yeah the loss of manufacturing in NYC has definitely drained it of some contrast and color.

@Krolik - It makes sense - more choice in NYC can bring down the cost. Plus you want to be picky in selecting the right personality - easier in a big market.

I can't believe street easy censored my post

30, I thought they quit moderating some time ago?

Me too

Housekeeper used to do the “regulars” portion of it, but then we moved to a bigger place where she wouldn’t have enough time. Now, my wife does most of that, with me usually accompanying if on weekends. Weekend dinners have always been shopped for by us. I mostly enjoy the grocery shopping experience, with my rituals — selecting the cut at the butcher, looking through date stamps on every beer in stock to pick the freshest one, stockpiling favorite snacks from TJ in a Iquarterly run.

>> By this measure, I am a candidate for the suburbs as I do like to fantasize about a weekend house in the woods...

Go rent a house in a vacation spot that’s a 2-3 hour house for ~3 months in the off season. I’m guessing it’ll be the best $10K you will have ever spent, because it’ll knock the reality of those extra 5 travelling hours you can’t spare into you. Not to mention the time & effort of maintaining a second home.

You people are weird

@30 - yes.
Do you mean - Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic ?

What you think "adversity" is.
What you think "fair" is.
What you think "normal" is.
How you think the "average" New Yorker lives (or average US)
What you think "not enough," "too much," exorbitant," etc are.
What you think minorities (as opposed to majorities, not racial) are entitled to.
How you think energy, pollution, natural resources, etc work.
And by "you" I'm not talking to steve123 but the collective
What you think "opulent ," "rich," etc are.

Ask 10 different people, get 10 different answers. Most Americans (not sure about New Yorkers) are most concerned with creating opportunity. It sounds very rah-rah but I think that's where they are.

There's this idea on the left that 'if only people knew how good they had it in Norway' but it's pretty clear they don't want social democracy. Or at least voters don't.

In NYC you could argue there is a soft form of social democracy but, for all the great services it provides, it's riddled with self-dealing, patronage and lack of accountability - more cautionary tale than recipe for other cities to emulate.

Interesting article in the WSJ on Americans who actually moved to Canada after Trump won in 2016 in search of a “better” life. At least one moved back to the US. Both countries have their pros and cons, as with comparing the US to any European country but the truth is, the grass is always greener on the other side

https://www.wsj.com/world/democrats-joke-about-moving-to-canada-post-trump-these-people-actually-did-it-d0061499?st=paM8WL&reflink=article_copyURL_share

Sorry meant obviously to say the grass ISN’T always greener on the other side (haven’t figured out to edit my posts on SE!)!

>>>What you think "adversity" is.
What you think "fair" is.
What you think "normal" is.

@30 oh, really?

One reason my partner and I are here and not somewhere else is because we realize just how unfair the world is and are benefitting greatly from all the unfairness by living in NYC.

Maybe some of my waspy male colleagues at my big company workplace take NYC and its opportunities for granted. I do not. I also don't take for granted no bombs being dropped on my home, steady economic growth, advantageous passport with visa-free travel, etc. And unlike you, I did not get here by the lottery of birth.

Do I have it the easiest? In the grand scheme of things, yes. But on the margin, I could nitpick some specifics:
- No grad school scholarship despite test scores way higher than admitted student average. Scholarships went to... legacies. I had to pay off six figure loans.
- Overpriced real estate and other assets, mostly owned by boomers or older generations. But can't even buy some of those - get turned down by the board for who knows what reason.
- Paying highest taxes in the US and no deductions, literally, I am doing just a standard deduction, and yet we have scary subways with people burned to death.
- This year at work.. I had to be ranked/evaluated by comparing less than 10 month financial results vs 12 months for others, with no adjustment or even acknowledgement that I was on maternity leave for part of the year.
- While the white house is fighting DEI. Women have it too easy apparently.
- Working like a maniac with nannies watching my kid 7 days a week, but bonuses sucked; at least half of my after tax pay goes to pay for the nannies just so I can go to work... and I have to do all sorts of schedule gymnastics around business travel.

But hey, no bombs falling on my head, and I have a comfortable 2 br apartment, at least twice the size the one that I grew up in. I'll take it!

This is on point.

>>In NYC you could argue there is a soft form of social democracy but, for all the great services it provides, it's riddled with self-dealing, patronage and lack of accountability - more cautionary tale than recipe for other cities to emulate.

>>>stockpiling favorite snacks from TJ in a quarterly run.

I do this too :) Can't beat TJ for snacks.

Krolik/MTH, What is your view on why voters continue to elect such politicians?

And let me add continue to spend money recklessly without result even if they are not benefitting from it personally.

>>In NYC you could argue there is a soft form of social democracy but, for all the great services it provides, it's riddled with self-dealing, patronage and lack of accountability - more cautionary tale than recipe for other cities to emulate.

This isn't the 'Ask not' crowd, evidently - more like the 'what's in it for me?' crowd :D

Because that is the only way to get elected.

Most voters on the bottom of the economic food chain are not in a good position or don't care to try to climb to the middle or the top, don't know / care to know much about the budget and the future of the city. They also kind of want to stick it to the "rich". So they will vote for infinite spending or regulation programs for themselves, especially if these programs sound good like regulated housing (most don't realize they will never get a regulated apartment, only those NYers that were here 20 years ago or more can have them). And because the dependent social class is very large in NYC, you cannot win an election without them. Successful candidates have to find common issues that everyone cares about, like safety and rats, and focus on those. But reigning in spending is hard to run on in a city with so many dependents.

I kind of think that giving parents extra votes is a solid suggestion. Otherwise under 18 population is under represented in political decisions, giving all the power to retirees who end up saddling future generations with too much debt burden.

>>>Krolik/MTH, What is your view on why voters continue to elect such politicians?

And let me add continue to spend money recklessly without result even if they are not benefitting from it personally.

Krolik, That is a good point. Basically very narrow tax base and high number of dependents.

As frustratingly incompetent I find the mayors and their administrations in cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, NYC, San Francisco (and I could go on…), part of the blame is with the voters and those who choose not to vote. All these Democratic mayors were pretty transparent on what they wanted to do and they still got voted in, so you cannot totally blame the administration. The Los Angeles wildfires are a good example. While I have deep sympathy for those directly impacted, on the other hand, both California and Los Angeles governments have ignored basic forest management and wildfire mitigation at the expense of various other priorities like saving tiny fish, allowing teenagers to get sex change operations without parental consent, reparations for descendants of slaves, allowing illegal immigrants to apply for home loans and driver licenses not to mention the billions on the homeless crisis which has actually gotten worse. And the list goes on. People love to vote for progressive democrats because it makes them feel so good that they are helping others. But when their house burns down because of the gross incompetence of their elected officials, maybe they’ll think more carefully who the vote for next time

Turbo, I agree. Voters in LA didn't elect Caruso. Voters as a majority ( all you need is 50.1% to win) are to blame but you do need to keep in mind high number of "dependent voters" (as pointed out by Krolik) can make those 50.1% . Their priorities may be very different from call it from 20-30% of the people who pay majority of the taxes.

Suburbs can control for the tax base being spread more widely as they don't necessarily have public housing, transportation, and other social services and tend to have a minimum entry price in terms of real estate or rent.

But such is our system. There is nothing new.

Krolik is right: they keep voting them in because they keep the goodies coming. Create regulations (some are good, others ridiculous), pay a public servant with complete job security to enforce it with overtime, make sure that job goes to a supporter.

To be fair to Democrats --

NYC may be ungovernable (some of what got Adams elected was the idea that he would wrestle policing into a little more control, because he was a cop and these were his buddies -- but has policing significantly changed under him as mayor? If it has, I missed it);

Republicans aren't always the princes of efficiency (Trump's Covid response during his first term was a mess, for instance); and

Some of those "big Democrat" goodies are indeed good for nearly everyone -- universal 3K is undoubtedly expensive, but it benefits Republican and Democrat alike, Krolik's going to enjoy it, and freeing up women to work more should be a net positive for the economy. De Blasio did a lot wrong (including assuming that his rival Cuomo would back him on the funding of it) but he did tremendous good for the city by getting 3K launched.

So it's a little more nuanced than "Elephant bad, donkey good" IMHO.

To be clear, is not middle-of-the-road or moderate Democrats who I rail against (as my partner is one and I certainly don’t hate her). And I don’t think Adams is one of them (although he has other problems). It’s ultra left wing, progressive, “woke” democrats like AOC, Bernie Sanders and basically every Democrat in California that I have problems with. And I understand why lower income people vote for Democrats because they think they will be getting handouts from the rich through the government . And I suppose the millionaires in UES, Beverly Hills and Pacific Palisades vote Democrat out of some sense of guilt. But Trump made inroads in many, many very traditional Democrat strongholds. That shows you there is a limit what people will take. If Democrats just stayed with taxing the rich and wealth redistribution, handouts for the poor, they’d probably do better than if they also embraced open and chaotic borders, we are all going to die from climate change unless you buy an electric car and boys can compete in girls sports

>>>NYC may be ungovernable

Agree, this is a really tough one

>>>universal 3K is undoubtedly expensive, but it benefits Republican and Democrat alike, Krolik's going to enjoy it

AMAZING program. Its a huge public benefit, not just a narrow benefit for parents who work. Like, how does it not exist in the rest of the US? Don't we want people to have some kids at some rate above zero? It has been shown than preschool attendance improves school performance for kids from poor families, so it is not just childcare for parents that work, but also an investment future workers productivity, public safety etc.

Agreed but Democrats should stick to a few big ideas: universal 3K, Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid. A public option would've been a nice thing but there weren't the votes.

Educated and rich democrats might vote the way they do out of guilt but it's also a status play. Compassion is everything in high-status circles. Loyalty to one's own (policing our borders, policing our cities) is not. Any thing that isn't compassionate is ruled cruel. God forbid your opinions don't tick every box. A lot of people vote R because they know they're seen as peasants by educated people (largely democrats).

>>>Agreed but Democrats should stick to a few big ideas: universal 3K, Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid.

And they do. Medicaid is the largest spending bucket in NY city and state.
https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/fiscal-note-risks-for-medicaid-and-other-ny-state-healthcare-programs/

Half of the city is on Medicaid. Lots of people under report income or have cash income in order to qualify. Lots of fraud from provider side also.

Apparently fraud skyrocketed when they turned it into the cereal aisle by opening it up to Medicare Advantage.

Education is a big one. It always will be and probably should be but there's a different kind of fraud going on there: I'll pretend to teach and you pretend your adolescent is learning. Largely because of the union that sees in every compromise an existential threat.

MTH, The cohort of students and their parental backgrounds and responsibility is a big part no one talks about. That is probably half the reason why NYC spends so much per pupil (double the national average instead of say 30-40% to adjust for cost of living) on education without commensurate results and NYC real estate taxes keep going up. It is much easier to educate a kid whose parents are also educated. You provide free services they will come. NYC real estate has been the golden goose which so far keeps on laying the golden eggs for the city govt and even state govt in form of transaction taxes.

@300 It's true. But they sure spend much less on educating the children of less educated parents in other parts of the country.

I had to look it up and you're right - property taxes are about 30 - 45% of NYC's tax revenue depending on the year and about 29% of total revenue followed by city personal income tax (~15% of tax revenue).

Education is one part. I don't have ready data. Look up English as first language. Public housing, section 8 residents etc. So the teachers can only do much - not saying that DOE system can't do much better. Other places don't continue to throw money as they just don't have the money (so they spend half the money for equally bad results) but NYC keeps throwing more money at the issue due to real estate and city income tax dollars.

Food for thought:

Similar spending per student very different results. And Newark is mostly funded by state not local taxes.

https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/new-jersey/districts/newark-public-school-district-105647

https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/new-jersey/districts/montclair-public-school-district-106218#:~:text=Montclair%20Public%20School%20District%20contains,of%20students%20are%20economically%20disadvantaged.

And look at instruction vs support services split in a rich school district which spends less money per student ($29k per year per student) vs NYC (35k per year per student) despite very high cost of living in Greenwich CT.

People can draw many different conclusions but in my opinion keep throwing more real estate tax dollars beyond a certain point can't make up for composition of parents some of who are attracted by social services offered by NYC.

It is the same in Paris. Poorer areas have poorly performing schools despite the same spending.

NYC will be better off setting up more G&T and Charter schools so that poor students with more motivated parents can get better education and those schools don't cost any more than other schools - in fact less as the students have fewer discipline problems due to the selection process. That is much better use of Real Estate tax dollars and will attract more educated parents in the city.

https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/connecticut/districts/greenwich-school-district-107056

Famous Stuy high school costs ($25k) a lot less per student that East New York high school ($35k).

https://www.nycenet.edu/offices/finance_schools/budget/DSBPO/budgetatglance/sy24_25/en/School_Budget_at_a_Glance_2024_2025_K953_English.pdf

https://www.nycenet.edu/offices/finance_schools/budget/DSBPO/budgetatglance/sy24_25/en/School_Budget_at_a_Glance_2024_2025_M475_English.pdf

Wealth of data here for Real Estate and Income Tax dollar spending.
https://www.nycenet.edu/publicapps/Offices/FSF/BudgetAtGlance.aspx

>>>That is probably half the reason why NYC spends so much per pupil (double the national average instead of say 30-40% to adjust for cost of living) on education without commensurate results

How do you define commensurate results? I thought NYC DOE system was very good, is that not the case?

Really!! Only selective schools are good (largely because they get the best students) and zoned wealthy area elementary schools are good.

>> I thought NYC DOE system was very good, is that not the case?

You can look at the college readiness and other scores and compare to other places.
https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/new-york/districts/new-york-city-public-schools-100001

You can look at other ranking website like Niche.

Even NestM is 141 if you were to believe these rankings. And spending overall per student in the NYC is highest in the nation.
https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-public-high-schools/

Most public schools in the United States, including New York City are a disaster and something for the supposedly richest and most advanced country to be ashamed of. And yes, sorry to all the teachers out there, but a huge part of the blame falls on teacher unions. It’s an absolute disgrace. Read the article below. Apparently you can fail basic math, English and science and still graduate high school. Teachers claim the testing is “too stressful “. Wait till these kids entire the real world.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/democratic-politicians-are-in-denial-on-the-education-crisis-ef57095b?st=NcXdAJ&reflink=article_copyURL_share

@300 Very good points on spending. Law of diminishing returns.

Trendiness in curriculum and teaching style redesign are also a considerations. Every few years they issue different guidelines. Without going back to the bad old days, a bit of rote memorization would be a good thing.

@911Turbo - 100% re unions. Paying teachers more would be OK if it were easy to get rid of the underachieving ones and easier to perform pop-in class visits. Class size is also a case of diminishing returns. Unions take the stand that 'smaller is better'. There's zero evidence of that.

@Krolik My understanding is that public education gets progressively dicier the higher you go, grade schools having the best outcomes.

I guess every job ends up being a job, but I am surprised how many teacher I know that genuinely don't like kids anymore..

There is also the question of public school employment being too safe & easy vs charter schools being too tenuous & hard.

I know a number of Millennial teachers who started their careers in charter schools as that was all they could find, but left as soon as possible. Why - longer hours, more schooldays, shorter summer breaks, higher standards, poor benefits, tenuous employment, but yes at least higher pay (at entry level).

Ideally teaching would be something a well meaning person could make a career out of, held to some amount of performance expectations, without being unfireable, competitively paid.

There is also the possibility that charter school work largely because they can be selective of what kids they admit, and give better outcomes for kids in bad homes by keeping them in the classroom longer hours and more days (less time in the home). The former isn't scaleable but the latter is.

Steve, While this is a part of their success, they tend to have more motivated and responsible parents. A lot of behavioral learning is taking place at home before they start school. Bloomberg is right about increasing the number of charter schools. He truly cares about education.

-----------
There is also the possibility that charter school work largely because they can be selective of what kids they admit, and give better outcomes for kids in bad homes by keeping them in the classroom longer hours and more days (less time in the home).

@300 - you are saying the same thing really
Charter schools work because they can be selective in who is admitted, with motivated parents hustling to get their kids in being part of that selection.. and while that works for some subset of the population it is not a scaleable solution for education as a whole.

Steve,

Agree. It is certainly not scalable for all education and you can't ignore and make up for parental part in education. However, as long as Charter schools are oversubscribed and lotteries are needed, there are motivated parents left without Charter school.

I believe a similar effect can be achieved by more G&T by DOE which work well even though that goes against the idea of everyone's education being the same.

That is why I blame DOE teachers less than what many others on this board do - DOE administration and teachers unions has plenty of blame to go around. When the kids don't speak English and are poor, it is an uphill battle if the parents are not motivated and dedicated to educate their kids despite their circumstances. Virtually, all large cities in the US have the same problem.

Question for the board: For any of you who villainize teachers who feel an obligation and moral responsibility to give every child, even those with unmotivated parents and poor modeling at home, a chance at education, what is your feeling towards society's obligation to give such children a chance at education? Is it your view that society should conclude that every child whose parents are 'unmotivated' has no chance of success, so let's not even bother trying? Rhetorical question, because I am intimately familiar with your type and I know how you would like society to look. Anyone in that camp can take comfort that the current administration is hard at work on bringing that vision to fruition.