- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 1930s New York City in color
Posted on 2/4/20 at 12:41 pm to jnethe1
Posted on 2/4/20 at 12:41 pm to jnethe1
quote:
You’re right, I’m certain it’s just a coincidence.
I didn't say it was a coincidence.
The chart you posted and the facts it portrays don't really have enough information to draw an intelligent conclusion on causation. But that certainly didn't stop you from hinting at one that you're too scared to articulate.
1
Posted on 2/4/20 at 12:44 pm to willymeaux
amazes me in any pics of cities in the US prior to 1950 that there is no litter everywhere
Posted on 2/4/20 at 12:47 pm to The Spleen
You said:
Which would mean it’s essentially a coincidence, right?
It displays all the information needed to come to a logical conclusion. I have said time and time again that I will allow the facts to speak for themselves.
quote:
The facts tell me you're dumb enough to believe correlation is causation.
Which would mean it’s essentially a coincidence, right?
quote:
The chart you posted and the facts it portrays don't really have enough information to draw an intelligent conclusion on causation. But that certainly didn't stop you from hinting at one that you're too scared to articulate.
It displays all the information needed to come to a logical conclusion. I have said time and time again that I will allow the facts to speak for themselves.
Posted on 2/4/20 at 12:51 pm to willymeaux
Great video. Thanks for posting.
Posted on 2/4/20 at 1:02 pm to Kentucker
Because they didn't have food
Posted on 2/4/20 at 1:24 pm to jnethe1
quote:I wasn't. What I said had nothing to do with anything you said. I said the thing that I said, and I meant the thing that I said. I didn't mean the thing you said. The thing you said is different.
So why did you act like you were ignorant of its meaning?
Understand?
quote:Knew you weren't man enough. You're scared.
You are without a doubt my favorite lib.
Posted on 2/4/20 at 1:27 pm to VolsOut4Harambe
quote:
quote:
Is that smog in the first shot of the video?
If so, that's a lot of smog.
You gotta take into account that a lot of powered things, such as most trains, heaters, generators, etc were powered by coal/steam back then. Coal-burning = smog galore.
Probably a good number of factories actually still building real shite in the city proper then too.
Posted on 2/4/20 at 1:33 pm to jnethe1
quote:
Actually it’s on par with the crime rate then, but did you take into account that in the 1930’s they were still suffering from the Great Depression?
Also, weird that during the period of “white flight”, crime rates grew exponentially. I wonder why?
You linked annual homicides, not homicide rates, and your data stops in 2013....
You don’t even think about crime here.
510 murders in 1936 compared to 289 in 2018
This post was edited on 2/4/20 at 1:41 pm
Posted on 2/4/20 at 1:35 pm to tide06
quote:
Crime was relatively low in NYC until the current mayor screwed everything up.
Crime has continued to drop under him. I know 2018 was the 3rd year in a row with falling murder rates.
And if you bring just Manhattan into it (which is what most people on here think of NY) crime is incredibly minimal
This post was edited on 2/4/20 at 1:37 pm
Posted on 2/4/20 at 1:38 pm to BreesyInBigEasy
quote:
You linked annual homicides, not homicide rates, and your data stops in 2013....
Check the historical population figures of NYC. It's been remarkably steady since around 1930 or so. Such that the differences between raw numbers and rates would be rather negligible over that time period.
quote:
1930 6,930,446 +23.3%
1940 7,454,995 +7.6%
1950 7,891,957 +5.9%
1960 7,781,984 -1.4%
1970 7,894,862 +1.5%
1980 7,071,639 -10.4%
1990 7,322,564 +3.5%
2000 8,008,278 +9.4%
2010 8,175,133 +2.1%
2018 8,398,748[6] +2.7%
LINK
Posted on 2/4/20 at 1:43 pm to Y.A. Tittle
Check the historical population figures of NYC. It's been remarkably steady since around 1930 or so. Such that the differences between raw numbers and rates would be rather negligible over that time period.
It’s a difference of close to 1.5 million people from 1930 to 2018. Certainly not negligible
And even so, 510 murders in 1936 compared to 289 in 2018
It’s a difference of close to 1.5 million people from 1930 to 2018. Certainly not negligible
And even so, 510 murders in 1936 compared to 289 in 2018
Posted on 2/4/20 at 1:45 pm to BreesyInBigEasy
quote:
It’s a difference of close to 1.5 million people from 1930 to 2018. Certainly not negligible
It sort of is, though, if you're looking at that entire 80+ year or so spectrum and discussing rates versus real numbers is all I'm saying. I have no dog in the fight on the rest of y'all's silly pissing match here.
Posted on 2/4/20 at 1:51 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
sort of is, though, if you're looking at that entire 80+ year or so spectrum and discussing rates versus real numbers is all I'm saying.
It’s ~20% change in population. It definitely isn’t negligible. The murder rate was 3.4 in 2018. 7.4 in in 1936 (based on 1930 population).
And I agree, it’s a dumb way for him to try and make whatever incorrect point he attempted to
This post was edited on 2/4/20 at 1:54 pm
Posted on 2/4/20 at 1:55 pm to willymeaux
Reminds me of China (the smog)
Posted on 2/4/20 at 2:20 pm to xiv
You said:
Do crime rates have anything to do with the overall safety of a place? Because I referenced the crime rate and you said that you didn’t mention crime rate, you said safety. I’ve always thought that the crime rate of a place would be a factor when determining the overall safety. But you think not?
I said that I will allow the facts to speak for themselves. The only thing left is for you to come to a conclusion as to what those facts say to you.
quote:
I didn’t mention crime. I said it is safer now than it was then, which is true.
Do crime rates have anything to do with the overall safety of a place? Because I referenced the crime rate and you said that you didn’t mention crime rate, you said safety. I’ve always thought that the crime rate of a place would be a factor when determining the overall safety. But you think not?
quote:
Knew you weren't man enough. You're scared.
I said that I will allow the facts to speak for themselves. The only thing left is for you to come to a conclusion as to what those facts say to you.
Posted on 2/4/20 at 2:25 pm to jnethe1
quote:
Do crime rates have anything to do with the overall safety of a place? Because I referenced the crime rate and you said that you didn’t mention crime rate, you said safety. I’ve always thought that the crime rate of a place would be a factor when determining the overall safety. But you think not?
Still waiting for you to post the homicide or crime rate since you actually posted neither
quote:
I said that I will allow the facts to speak for themselves.
Well the homicide rate is less than half what it was back then. Annual murders are far below the numbers in the 1930s too. Maybe get data that hang from 2013 next time
Posted on 2/4/20 at 2:31 pm to jnethe1
Didn’t read. Not interested in any of your limp-wristed content.
Posted on 2/4/20 at 2:57 pm to willymeaux
quote:
It honestly feels weird looking at how clean and graffitiless New York once was.
Spray paint in a can wasn't invented until 1949 so...….
Posted on 2/4/20 at 3:02 pm to willymeaux
TLDW
Posted on 2/4/20 at 3:04 pm to willymeaux
The music was much better than what's out today.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News