NYC more affordable than elsewhere in the US?

We went from 'should be easier to fire complacent/imcompetent/burnt out teachers' to 'villainizing all teachers.

If you feel you're getting decent value in NYC education for your tax dollars and that more spending equals better outcomes, you're in good company - the NYC teachers union concurs.

@mth - you strike me as someone who may have actually served in the public sector. If that is the case, what was your personal experience regarding the tradeoffs between efficiency and abandoning the mission? I saw tremendous waste and inefficiency in the areas in which I served, but that inefficiency was inherent in the political process and I choose the inefficiency inherent in the government's provision of certain services (and regulation) over the absence of those services and regulation. I know many who are constantly battling the inefficiency from the trenches. I am actually focused on bilingual education and the politics surrounding that these days, so I admit I am touchy on this subject. I like mercer's idea of more G&T programs in the regular schools, among other ideas that are currently winning the vote these days.

*currently not winning the vote these days

One of the big problems with NYC public schools is they can't expel students. So the biggest problem students get shunted off to Special Ed, which hogs resources. And then the Special Ed classes become ungovernable. Charter Schools are successful because they get to "counsel out" these problem students which end up getting dumped back into the public system. While this probably wouldn't beefal I think a probable fix would be to set up "beyond hope" schools to dump both students and teachers who were otherwise a drain on the system

>>>Even NestM is 141 if you were to believe these rankings. And spending overall per student in the NYC is highest in the nation.

Sure, but also cost of living is one of the highest, and teachers live here too

Also, how much of rankings is based on absolute values of outputs vs outputs given inputs?

Charter and private schools being selective and not taking special needs kids leaves DOE with expensive to educate students; given large immigrant population that does not speak English at home, and given how many private schools are there in NYC I would not be surprised if DOE had to educate a higher proportion of special needs students than the rest of the country

>>>I am actually focused on bilingual education and the politics surrounding that these days

@MCR curious about your thoughts: I saw that DOE has a number of bilingual elementary school programs, some of which were added by the prior mayor administration. Would love your opinion on these (if you have one) as I am wondering whether this is something that could work for my household. I don't have one near me, so it's not a no brainer...

>>>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.

It is popular to complain about schooling in America, but I feel overall schools in the US are pretty good in many ways.
Do agree that education could be even better if the govt prioritized it a little more (and prioritized endless wars a little less).

>>>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/

This is such a weird complaint given these rankings. I just briefly looked at the list, and three of top 15 in the country are in NYC (in three different boroughs!). Seems like a very, very good outcome for NYC DOE.

Krolik, You are too smart not to know the difference between average performace and top few percent of performance of DOE high schools. Also you can adjust for Cola for NYC. I gave you Greenwich CT example and Stuy vs East New York spending for a reason. But if you believe that DOE NYC on an average is great, I wish you continued happines.

>>>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.

But I will note Greenwich high school is only number 321 on Niche ranking list, despite being in a wealthy area where motivated parents probably hire lots of tutors etc.

Krolik, Greenwich is a zoned school meaning that any one in Greenwich including poor performing kid can go there. Where as NYC schools ranked higher are selective schools with strict admisson criteria. So Greenwich should be compared more to NYC average when it comes to spending - it is more expensive that NYC on an average. But NYC does a great job of collecting the needy.

You can reach you conclusions from the comparison and spend your real estate tax dollars accordingly. If you believe, you kid will get into Stuy or other 3-4 top ranked schools in NYC, why care about the averages. I am still in NYC not Greenwich but I don't fool myself about how effectively tax dollars are spent in NYC.

https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/new-york/districts/new-york-city-public-schools-100001
https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/connecticut/districts/greenwich-school-district-107056

@krolik - I suspect one thing on which everyone on this forum will agree is that your child is going to excel and/or be well positioned regardless of where s/he goes to school by virtue of the fact that s/he has you as a parent. With that said, I am a proponent of bilingual education and believe the teachers who choose those programs are a particularly talented/motivated/dedicated bunch. It all depends on whatever other opportunities are available to you, and I believe you will weigh the priorities and tradeoffs to the best advantage of your offspring. I wish I could be of more help but again, I think your kid is going to be better than fine wherever they go to school. I think of where Mr. MCR came from and the utter shock I have had in attending his high school reunions over the years. ("Oh, look at the baby in the bar where indoor smoking is practiced by all, laws in the more urban parts of the country be damned. And wow -that baby's mother is adept at smoking, drinking and holding the baby at the same time!). I actually thought he might have been a diversity admittee (he is from Appalachia) to Harvard, but watching him excel at every new level of competition is a sheer joy. It was in huge part due to his parents, which is why I feel really good about coming to Ohio to pay back what they gave me in the form of Mr. MCR. Thank goodness we got them to move to the big city of Columbus, because the healthcare in Appalachia is lacking to be sure.

>>>So Greenwich should be compared more to NYC average when it comes to spending

No, I don't think it should, because demographics of Greenwich and NYC are very different and NYC students are just more expensive to educate. So, it seems to me that DOE is spending what it must.

@krolik - I love your posts, and, as I have noted previously, I hope you keep posting on SE and that SE Forum continues for the next many years. I have been at this since 2009 and have evolved; I have met a number of the still-regular posters on here IRL, and they all have enriched my life, even if we have some fundamental differences in opinion. Who knows when I will next be in NY, but I am determined to get that poker game together, and I will task Inonada with trying to recruit you, Steve123,Turbo911, MTH and stache into the mix (Inonada, Keith, Ali, 30yrs and 300 Mercer all pre-date me and are "the mix."), but I am certainly not the boss of Inonada, so it will be up the the Dean as to whether he obliges, and frankly, if he obliges and excludes me, more power to all of you.

Oh - and @Yentle should also be included, even if I am not. :)

@mcr I certainly don't advocate throwing in the towel generally. But maybe 30years' idea of throwing in the towel on select students based on a track record of ill behavior/non-compliance isn't as crazy as it sounds. It's way outside the Overton Window I realize. As good liberals we like to look at potential but at a certain point certain kids do not belong in the classroom with those who may not come from stable households but are willing to try.

More and better commercial and vocational tracks based on student interest wouldn't have to cost more and might be more effective.

30 years is also right about difficult kids getting warehoused in Special Ed, doing great disservice to kids who really need special ed.

Putting the hardest cases in detention wouldn't do much to alleviate budget pressure but it would empower teachers who are hamstrung.

And where teachers are the problem - it happens, they stay in the system too long, burn out or become cynical - a streamlined process for dismissing them would empower principals.

MTH, Some of the worst performing and higher spending DOE schools have a big special ED (or eqt) population. Not a whole lot teachers can do in these schools and many do give up trying. That is why Charter schools in poor areas give an opportunity for the kids in these problem schools to get out of that environment rather than being dragged down by problem kids and associated culture.

@MCR sounds fun and I would love to join if I am able

>>>I am a proponent of bilingual education and believe the teachers who choose those programs are a particularly talented/motivated/dedicated bunch.

I guess I am wondering if these programs are a way for ESL students to learn English, or also a way for English-speaking students to learn a language. And whether students in these programs perform well in math and other subjects.

Always happy to host, MCR. You just need to tell us when you’ll be in NYC next, and we can use that as the excuse.

I'm a lousy poker player, but I'm in! I'll bake something.

FWIW my kid in NYC public schools isn't getting the education that some of your kids are getting in private schools, but we're still overall happy with them, and certainly don't think the delta is worth ... where are we now? $65,000 a year?

Ali,
$65k is right ballpark plus $3-4k average parent donation. In school, after school activities a few days a week another $6-10k per year and most kids are doing it in addition to outside the school activies which public school kids do as well. In general, less focus on rot learning and more focus on in depth learning/concepts and EQ. Very little indoctrination so far in my experience of 5 years. If the kid is not keeping up, they do try to manage out. So the results do have a selection bias. Clearly not worth the spread over a good free zoned public school from my point of view like PS41, PS6 or PS234. But me and wife are also big believers that parents have as big a part in kids education as school till 5th grade.

High school may be a different calculus depending on what the parents and kids value in education and how smart the kid is and of course how much money you have.

I will add that a good $10k in my estimate is going to fancy free lunch/snacks and top notch somewhat luxurious building conditions which don't necessarily contribute to education. Then the senior administrative staff gives certain demanding parents a lot of attention which is not necessarily adding value to the kids education but just catering to parents' emotions. There is a cost to that. How much I don't know. Low student to teacher ratio is the main extra expense over good public schools. As you get to higher grades, the choice in courses is amazing. Not saying that it is needed but it is a luxury.

So ignoring the cost, the education and experience is very good for us.

@MTH - I believe the Overton Window is evolving daily before our eyes.
@Krolik - Bilingual education is a politically charged area (and has been for decades), so there is research to support any agenda. For my part, I suspect there is no effect on overall student performance. In other words, if the student is going to get an A in math in an English-only classroom, the student is going to get an A in math in the bilingual classroom. Same for B, C and D students. I am a proponent of bilingual education because speaking multiple languages humanizes everyone who does not speak the language of your parents, and increasing understanding and empathy between cultures only has upside from where I sit.
@Nada and Ali - Seeing you guys (and Nada's current abode!) merits a trip unto itself. Maybe in the summer. I can't believe how long it has been since I have been to New York. Just plain wrong.

If you have to live in the rust belt, Columbus is your best bet. Things could be worse!

Columbus Circle is cool

@stache - I have been truly shocked at how much I like Columbus. And yes, for anyone who is reading this, things could be much worse for all of us. We are in the sweet spot of "life is good."

@Rinette - Why do you have to be that way? I suspect you would like all of us in person. Maybe consider joining the poker game (but that would require you to make nice with @Inonada).

P.S. to @Rinette - I am not sure if you had any way of knowing this, but Aboutready literally died at a relatively young age a few years ago of complications from M.S. Heartbreaking for her husband and daughter.

@mcr - isn't it, though? Here everyone's hair is on fire over USAID and overseas research centers...All I can say is those organizations shouldn't share their projects or their budgets with your average swing voter hhhh. Short term I believe there's going to be disruption. Long term? I'm not sure anything of great consequence will change.

Some ideas to bring down the cost of living in NYC. Some are truly harebrained. Others have merit:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/01/16/nyregion/nyc-affordable-ideas.html?unlocked_article_code=1.uU4.ZN5u.HqyTsXMSWWsZ&smid=url-share

I've never played a game of poker in my life. Did enjoy playing Oh hell and something called Liverpool rummy for a period with a group of friends after dinner over a bottle of wine. Good times...

@Krolik - Seems like you're sticking around for now but thought this was interesting:

https://patch.com/new-york/new-york-city/time-move-out-city-spacious-home-maplewood-nj

So sorry to hear that about, aboutready! We actually had lunch together once and she interviewed me for something.

>@Rinette - Why do you have to be that way?

??

@MTH thank you, that is such a good find!

@Krolik It's cute, walkable, good schools...

Pulling way, way out for a minute there's a good Atlantic article about how progressives are killing the kind of society they claim to want - open, diverse, affordable - through zoning:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2025/03/american-geographic-social-mobility/681439/?utm_medium=cr&utm_source=email&utm_campaign=02_11_2025_cover_story_promo_yoni_appelbaum_march_issue_30_day_engaged_prospects_large_subject_line_10_10_80_b&utm_content=B&utm_term=prospects_30_day_engagement

@MTH, don't forget this weeks NYMag special focus on trust fund brats.

One of several articles - https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/parents-money-family-wealth-stories.html

And the mechanics of how its done - https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/how-is-wealth-transferred-generational-money-kids-children.html

@MTH - That effort is by no means limited to progressives. NIMBY, expressed chiefly in zoning debates, is ubiquitous and non-partisan.

I think Robert Reich was a NIMBY

@MCR - I am left of center myself, and agree both sides are NIMBY.

The problem is NIMBY sort of makes sense & conforms with right wing ideology - conservatism, tradition, not changing, small town living, blah blah blah.

BUT the values a lot of left wing, especially urbanists espouse - change, progressiveness, solving the housing crisis, helping those in need, etc are thrown out the door by people when it comes to development in THEIR town/neighborhood. They throw up all sorts of smokescreen excuses about the style of the building, or the character of the neighborhood, or the traffic, or whatever. All to get to the same NIIMBY view - don't build housing near me. Which is hypocritical.

Robert Reich is a good example. Once you notice it, you see it everywhere. Even my parents are like this.

There was that Harlem city council member fighting a redevelopment because it was only part affordable instead of 100% affordable, so years later it's become a truck depot *. " local councilwoman protested, arguing that the project would bring more gentrification". I guess an empty lot is better than housing?

Two years since the NYT article and the city council turned down the revised development yet again. The harder you make development, the longer the process is, the higher the chance of rejection, the more expensive it gets. This is on top of all the hard expenses of building here.

see: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/18/nyregion/harlem-truck-depot-housing.html

@Steve123 - I see and concede your (and Mth's) point.

Billionaire Wildnerness is a good read and the best example of the hypocrisy you highlight. Lots of high net worth progressives avail themselves of the strategy that is described in that book. It is the ultimate NIMBY strategy that compounds already obscene wealth.

*under the guise of environmental conservation.

Lots of high net worth reactionaries avail themselves of the strategy as well, but they own what they are doing, and what they are doing is consistent with the values they champion.

Everyone is in favor of affordable housing, except if it's anywhere near them.

One potential solution to this:

Allocate city resources to neighborhoods willing to bare burdens, remove city resources from neighborhood which won't. Take 3 homeless shelters? Get 20 more patrol officers in your precinct. Refuse to allow multifamily housing? Lose your library branch. Take a methadone clinic? Your hospital gets a great trauma unit funded.

@30yrs - I like it - repurposing a Trump MO - transactional, carrot/stick policy - for good.

More of on the same topic with more historical context. Apparently a Charles Cheney in Berkely CA shares some of the blame with Jane Jacobs for the development of NIMBYism. Some of the first zoning laws were againts laundries to keep Chinese out or make them move out. Jacobs' intention was inclusive - she wanted to make her neighborhood livable for working class people - Cheney's was deliberately exclusionary.

https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/how-zoning-ruined-the-housing-market-in-blue-state-america-3fa94568?st=GxsYNS&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/how-zoning-ruined-the-housing-market-in-blue-state-america-3fa94568?st=GxsYNS&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

@MTH - agreed, I think a lot of people took the wrong lessons from Jane Jacobs and extrapolated it to blocking all development. She was mostly blocking a highway destroying housing, now people think it means up zoning/density that net INCREASE housing are also bad.

I often marvel at how messed up the zoning is in N BK.
More and more 50 story towers going up all along the water front, a 1/2 mi to 3/4 mile walk uphill from the nearest train station. They are so far from the train they advertise a shuttle bus as part of their amenities.

Meanwhile the train station is surrounded by 3-5 story buildings. All the housing gets built along the water front simply because there's nothing there and no one to complain, yet. Maybe give it 10 years and even that development will get blocked.

steve123,
Historically, "good" neighborhoods (outside of Manhattan) were built far from subways on purpose

@30 - fair point, but I don't think that's held in well.. ~30 years right?

The best part of my old UWS place was living 60 seconds from an express train station. Certainly a premium paid for that now comparing to the peripheral Riverside Blvd UWS condos for example.

One of the things I love about the Beekman Place cul-de-sac is the low-rise zoning that results in a relatively low-density area surrounded by crazy high density. It makes for a unique setting. With that said, I would wholly support rezoning the cul-de-sac, levelling all the current structures and putting up affordable housing in its place. Sure, the special historic character would be gone, but it is an anachronism whose time should have been up awhile ago.

@MCR some historical stuff is worth preserving. If we level everything, how soon will NYC no longer attract tourists and new residents? It's a balancing act.
My neighborhood has quite a few crumbling walkups of no special significance. a few of them got leveled and high rises built on those sites... one of which blocked my view of the Empire State building. Oh well. More housing is good for the city. It doesn't have to be regulated housing to have a positive effect on NYC - all new housing helps.

What saddens me is NYC has lost that old kooky quality that made living here so special. You could run into/know kooky/quirky type people all the time. They have been priced out or died. Now you have upmarket eccentric types which can be interesting but it's not the same. Any new housing going up is for upper middle class (by national standards) calling it 'affordable' (for whom I say?). Times change.

@krolik - I agree that some things are worth preserving for history; however, the Beekman cul-de-sac is not among them. It is not a tourist attraction and not even many New Yorkers are aware of it. The only ones who care about it are the ones who actually live there, and they have historically been a definitively exclusionary bunch that does whatever they can to insulate themselves from people who actually work for a living.

P.S. - But with the above said, I will continue to enjoy that magic cul-de-sac as long as it prevails. I would not do anything to prolong its current existence and would vote against its current existence were such a question presented to me, but while it is there, I do love it.

How low are cap rates in these top suburbs like Summit or Scarsdale? I looked at the rental prices for houses recently and they seemed a lot lower than I expected given selling prices. Or maybe the inventory I am looking at is very different?