NYC in the 70s: How Bad Could it Get?

New York in the 1970s was the gritty New York that city has been stereotyped as since. Crime was high, and Central Park was avoided at night for fear of murders and rapes, and the Subways and Streets were avoided because of muggings (and the subways frequently broke down due to neglect anyway). The Son of Sam killer was at large. Sex shops, peep shows and pimps, prostitutes, and drug dealers were in Time Square and throughout the city, and the drug dealers, prostitutes and pimps were doing their illegal activities right in front of the police. The police force was corrupt, which was revealed by Frank Serpico. The city was also hit hard by the economic downturn of the 1970s, and nearly went bankrupt. Because of the deterioration of the city, masses of the population were also leaving. It would take years for the city to recover, and almost twenty years for the city to recover its lost population.

For as bad as things were in the OTL, just how bad could it plausibly get?
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
Is it weird that I wish Times Square was a still a little more like this than the bland Disneyworld that the petty bourgeois tyranny of Mayor Bloomberg has turned it into?
 
If you could ensure the financial industry starts moving out of the city, it'd have a pretty damning impact on New York's economic prospects. Institutional inertia aside though, there'd have to be a place for at least segments of the industry to go. Any possible candidates in the '70s and '80s?

Is it weird that I wish Times Square was a still a little more like this than the bland Disneyworld that the petty bourgeois tyranny of Mayor Bloomberg has turned it into?

A bit, but perhaps an understandable weirdness. It's like an old restaurant, bar, or cafe one has come to treasure suddenly seeing an influx of new patrons. Your favorite seats get taken, and the place is crowded at times and in ways unusual to you. Worse, you can't walk in and instantly recognize the faces of everyone inside. That extra income means the place is able to spruce things up and do some renovations. You probably still enjoy going, but it's a different experience, and even if its a better one, one can still get nostalgic for how it used to be. In essence: It's a way of liking something before it was popular without being a hipster.

Now, if you are not in fact of the age to remember New York as it used to be, I'd chalk up the impulse to a rather misguided sense of romanticism. :p

That said, pettiness seems to be an indelible mark of Bloomberg policy in general. You could probably have a safe and clean New York without the same overbearing, petty sense you expressed.
 
ever see escape from new york?:D

But really it could have got worse. If financial/adverstising/fashion businesses started fleeing and white flight was even greater, NY could be like Detroit.
 
Is it weird that I wish Times Square was a still a little more like this than the bland Disneyworld that the petty bourgeois tyranny of Mayor Bloomberg has turned it into?

I remember reading something pointing out how weird it was for the people who are nostalgic for the "bite" 70s/80s New York and hate the new New York, because they're nostalgic for an age where crime was rampant, murders and muggings and rapes were everywhere, drugs and junkies were everywhere, the streets weren't safe, it wasn't safe to go out at night, and everything was in decay. Basically, the city was shit and you were constantly in danger, so that's not something to miss and complain about Bloomberg and Giuliani over.
 
I remember reading something pointing out how weird it was for the people who are nostalgic for the "bite" 70s/80s New York and hate the new New York, because they're nostalgic for an age where crime was rampant, murders and muggings and rapes were everywhere, drugs and junkies were everywhere, the streets weren't safe, it wasn't safe to go out at night, and everything was in decay. Basically, the city was shit and you were constantly in danger, so that's not something to miss and complain about Bloomberg and Giuliani over.

I think its more a case of not liking Bloomberg and Giuliani more than any nostalgia for the way the place once was. Some people like places having a bit of an edge, I guess.
 
While this is perhaps low on the scale of plausibility, but there's always a slight chance that the bailout of 1975 doesn't happen, and New York City goes bankrupt. Not sure what the consequence of that for the city would actually be, but I can hardly imagine that they'd be good.
 
While this is perhaps low on the scale of plausibility, but there's always a slight chance that the bailout of 1975 doesn't happen, and New York City goes bankrupt. Not sure what the consequence of that for the city would actually be, but I can hardly imagine that they'd be good.

But wouldn't Albany step in?
 
how bad could it have got ?

pick two groups of NYC residents with a difference, and transplant the difficulties in Northern Ireland to NYC with one group playing the Provos and the other the UDA/UVF (for extra points make one of the groups come from the same background as the majority of NYPD officers)

Have regular and NG troops routinely on the streets supporting the NYPD who have to drive around in armoured vehicles due to the risk of IEDs and snipers

Have one of the opposing factions significant feast day 'require' them to march straight through the other factions home turf and the ensuing at least 2 weeks if not amonth of increased tension andfrequent public order incidents require thousands of extra hours from reserve Police officers and the drafting in of additional regular troops

Make it rountine for NYPD officers and troops (nation wide and US forces in Europe) to be targets of IEDs and snipers, make it routine for one or both of the groups to assassinate people believed to be players for the other side,operate extrajudicial 'local community enforcement'

throw in some IEDs in times Square, Central Park and on the route of Macy's
thanksgiving parade during the parade ...
 
how bad could it have got ?

pick two groups of NYC residents with a difference, and transplant the difficulties in Northern Ireland to NYC with one group playing the Provos and the other the UDA/UVF (for extra points make one of the groups come from the same background as the majority of NYPD officers)

Have regular and NG troops routinely on the streets supporting the NYPD who have to drive around in armoured vehicles due to the risk of IEDs and snipers

Have one of the opposing factions significant feast day 'require' them to march straight through the other factions home turf and the ensuing at least 2 weeks if not amonth of increased tension andfrequent public order incidents require thousands of extra hours from reserve Police officers and the drafting in of additional regular troops

Make it rountine for NYPD officers and troops (nation wide and US forces in Europe) to be targets of IEDs and snipers, make it routine for one or both of the groups to assassinate people believed to be players for the other side,operate extrajudicial 'local community enforcement'

throw in some IEDs in times Square, Central Park and on the route of Macy's
thanksgiving parade during the parade ...

The problem is that NYC has never been a city of two clearly defined ethno-religious groups the way Belfast is. If, say, Italians and Irish hate each other it still doesn't explain how Jews, Puerto Ricans, African Americans, Dominicans, and established Anglo-Dutch New Yorkers fit into the dichotomy.

By the 70s, New York was way too diverse. In the 1850s, you had the Proddy/Catholic divide, but by the 20th century there were too many different groups.
 
I remember reading something pointing out how weird it was for the people who are nostalgic for the "bite" 70s/80s New York and hate the new New York, because they're nostalgic for an age where crime was rampant, murders and muggings and rapes were everywhere, drugs and junkies were everywhere, the streets weren't safe, it wasn't safe to go out at night, and everything was in decay. Basically, the city was shit and you were constantly in danger, so that's not something to miss and complain about Bloomberg and Giuliani over.

#1 here perhaps?
 
The problem is that NYC has never been a city of two clearly defined ethno-religious groups the way Belfast is. If, say, Italians and Irish hate each other it still doesn't explain how Jews, Puerto Ricans, African Americans, Dominicans, and established Anglo-Dutch New Yorkers fit into the dichotomy.

By the 70s, New York was way too diverse. In the 1850s, you had the Proddy/Catholic divide, but by the 20th century there were too many different groups.

it doesn;t necessarily need to be ethno-religious-the Irish troubles while superficially ethno-religious have some interesting ideological factors such as the number of reds in the IRA who wanted a 32county socialist republic...

two big organised crime gangs going full blown at it and the NYPD losing the streets

or 'traditional' 'old skool' mobsters (who didn't hurt kids, avoided the heroin business and looked after their dear ol'mum Kray style) vs. drug pushers trying to get more and more skag on the streets ... with the police alleged
to be colluding with the old skool gangsters at some level
 
ever see escape from new york?:D

But really it could have got worse. If financial/adverstising/fashion businesses started fleeing and white flight was even greater, NY could be like Detroit.

But isn't that a bit catch-22 situation? NY was financial centre because a lot of businesses were there and a lot of businesses were there because it was a financial centre. So anybody deciding to operate outside of it would work in worse environment. It would require a lot of businesses to relocate together which would be unlikely since they would all go to worse place. Or move to existing but smaller centre and expand it.
 

Thande

Donor
I remember reading something pointing out how weird it was for the people who are nostalgic for the "bite" 70s/80s New York and hate the new New York, because they're nostalgic for an age where crime was rampant, murders and muggings and rapes were everywhere, drugs and junkies were everywhere, the streets weren't safe, it wasn't safe to go out at night, and everything was in decay. Basically, the city was shit and you were constantly in danger, so that's not something to miss and complain about Bloomberg and Giuliani over.

Nostalgia isn't rational though; there are older people here who are nostalgic about being bombed in WW2.
 
But wouldn't Albany step in?

Well, I am of the age that I remember Albany DID step in and got caught by the undertow. And since then I have found out that President Ford was warned that if NYC were to go under, there would be a run on US Treasuries and the US$.

Now suppose Jerry called their bluff? Not just NYC would be like Detroit, but the whole country. And the Soviets would still be around. :D
 
If you could ensure the financial industry starts moving out of the city, it'd have a pretty damning impact on New York's economic prospects. Institutional inertia aside though, there'd have to be a place for at least segments of the industry to go. Any possible candidates in the '70s and '80s?

Well, in the 1970s and 80s, the Charlotte financial boom was underway.
 
it doesn;t necessarily need to be ethno-religious-the Irish troubles while superficially ethno-religious have some interesting ideological factors such as the number of reds in the IRA who wanted a 32county socialist republic...

two big organised crime gangs going full blown at it and the NYPD losing the streets

or 'traditional' 'old skool' mobsters (who didn't hurt kids, avoided the heroin business and looked after their dear ol'mum Kray style) vs. drug pushers trying to get more and more skag on the streets ... with the police alleged
to be colluding with the old skool gangsters at some level

Okay, I think I get what your going for now. Don't get me wrong, I liked the idea from the start (not that I wish it happened, just that it's a cool idea).

I had a similar idea for a story taking place in Boston. I wanted to have poorer city without the urban revival shit (which would be the one plus side). I envision the immigrants (particularly the Irish) embracing more radical socialist ideas, and the Yankees embracing traditional capitalism or even fascist ideas. I figured this would need to be in a world without WWII and maybe without WWI either. Keep Europe old-fashioned aristocratic for as long as possible so that all the radicals bring their beliefs across the Atlantic.

Basically keep the social and political climate of the early 20th century going for longer, and make it more polarized.
 
Nostalgia isn't rational though; there are older people here who are nostalgic about being bombed in WW2.
I'm not sure whether you can say it's not rational. Couldn't you use that augment to say it's not rational for Soldiers to miss active service? Or in general for when people miss times that, despite being dangerous, they enjoyed for other reasons?
 
Top