Manhattan secedes from NYC. Then what happens?

[freepcrusher]

In another article, someone was mentioning how New York has Brazilian levels of income inequality. Most of the cool areas (elite, upscale, trendy) are in Manhattan. Why not have Manhattan become its own city.

Would the four boroughs still want to stick together or would they want self determination as well (I can imagine SI still not wanting to be in the same city as the Bronx). I can also imagine a lot of people in Harlem, Washington Heights etc all moving across the Harlem River

[The Free North]

There's a better chance of Canada becoming the 51st state.

[Link]

I can imagine SI still not wanting to be in the same city as the Bronx

I would think Riverdale is nicer than most of SI.

I can also imagine a lot of people in Harlem, Washington Heights etc all moving across the Harlem River

Whoa have you ever stayed in Harlem and gone out in Manhatten?  That cab uptown is going to be way cheaper than a cab to the Bronx.  That little river makes a world of difference.

[ag]

I can also imagine a lot of people in Harlem, Washington Heights etc all moving across the Harlem River

You'd need a pretty efficient ethnic cleansing campaign for them to move. Because few things other than threatening to shoot their kids would make them do it. Have you BEEN there?

BTW, Harlem, Washington Heights, etc. alone are about a third of Manhattan population (over 500 thousand people). 50% Hispanic, 30% black, 15% white. Pretty solid voting block they would be, no matter how you slice.

[Hatman 🍁]

I support de-amalgamation almost everywhere, even if it happened over 100 years ago, as is the case here.

[King]

A borough leaving NYC is as unpatriotic as a state seceding from the union.

[minionofmidas]

All the world laughs.

[traininthedistance]

I support de-amalgamation almost everywhere, even if it happened over 100 years ago, as is the case here.

What really?  That's an obviously awful idea (with the possible exception of Staten Island, which it can be argued ought to be a part of New Jersey instead).  If anything, metropolitan areas should be consolidating much more aggressively than they do, to cut down on redundancy, turf wars, de facto "gated" communities in the suburbs that refuse to pay their fair share to the body politic, planning inconsistencies, hyperlocalized decisions with negative spillovers, negative effects of fleeing tax bases, etc. etc. etc.

[Sol]

I support de-amalgamation almost everywhere, even if it happened over 100 years ago, as is the case here.

What really?  That's an obviously awful idea (with the possible exception of Staten Island, which it can be argued ought to be a part of New Jersey instead).  If anything, metropolitan areas should be consolidating much more aggressively than they do, to cut down on redundancy, turf wars, de facto "gated" communities in the suburbs that refuse to pay their fair share to the body politic, planning inconsistencies, hyperlocalized decisions with negative spillovers, negative effects of fleeing tax bases, etc. etc. etc.

I think Hatman's opinion is strongly influenced by the gerrymandered, failing amalgamation of Toronto, which has prevented a lot of good urbanist practices from being put in  place and has installed nuts like Rob Ford.

My question then is- if amalgamation results in anti-urban policy, is it worth it?

[badgate]

It would be worse than Eagleton seceding from Pawnee

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

A borough leaving NYC is as unpatriotic as a state seceding from the union.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I think Hatman's opinion is strongly influenced by the gerrymandered, failing amalgamation of Toronto, which has prevented a lot of good urbanist practices from being put in  place and has installed nuts like Rob Ford.

The current boundaries - I don't see how they're gerrymandered? They're identical to those of Metro Toronto, the old upper tier of local government in the city - might have elected Rob Ford, but they also elected David Miller twice. And the old City of Toronto was hardly ever run from the Left, even if it was at the time it was amalgamated. The Canadian municipal mergers of that general era were (are) mostly unpopular for the same reason that a similar (if less disjointed) process was in Britain in the 1970s: the fear of a loss of local autonomy. The answer to which, I think, isn't deamalgamation, but greater decentralisation (of the things that can be sanely decentralised. So not planning. Never, ever planning) within the metropolitan behemoth.

[Хahar 🤔]

Before you post something like this, it might be worth taking the time to note which county is New York County. Manhattan is New York.

[Sol]

I think Hatman's opinion is strongly influenced by the gerrymandered, failing amalgamation of Toronto, which has prevented a lot of good urbanist practices from being put in  place and has installed nuts like Rob Ford.

The current boundaries - I don't see how they're gerrymandered? They're identical to those of Metro Toronto, the old upper tier of local government in the city - might have elected Rob Ford, but they also elected David Miller twice. And the old City of Toronto was hardly ever run from the Left, even if it was at the time it was amalgamated. The Canadian municipal mergers of that general era were (are) mostly unpopular for the same reason that a similar (if less disjointed) process was in Britain in the 1970s: the fear of a loss of local autonomy. The answer to which, I think, isn't deamalgamation, but greater decentralisation (of the things that can be sanely decentralised. So not planning. Never, ever planning) within the metropolitan behemoth.

I've heard allegations- although they may be spurious, idk- that the merger of Toronto was designed to elect right-wing mayors. Although I'm in no way familiar with Canadian politics.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I've heard allegations- although they may be spurious, idk- that the merger of Toronto was designed to elect right-wing mayors. Although I'm in no way familiar with Canadian politics.

The - undeniably badly handled - merger of Toronto was designed to save money. It was imposed by one of the most right-wing provincial government's in the recent history of Canada, let alone Ontario, though any political impact would have been an added bonus (and it hasn't really worked out that way anyway). Now, what should have happened in pretty simple: the old municipalities within Metro Toronto should have been folded into it, and maybe have retained some function or other (even if only a basic representation/consultation one), rather than the... er... crude approach that was actually taken.

[Indy Texas 🇺🇦🇵🇸]

I support de-amalgamation almost everywhere, even if it happened over 100 years ago, as is the case here.

What really?  That's an obviously awful idea (with the possible exception of Staten Island, which it can be argued ought to be a part of New Jersey instead).  If anything, metropolitan areas should be consolidating much more aggressively than they do, to cut down on redundancy, turf wars, de facto "gated" communities in the suburbs that refuse to pay their fair share to the body politic, planning inconsistencies, hyperlocalized decisions with negative spillovers, negative effects of fleeing tax bases, etc. etc. etc.

Considering the progressive policies of people like Bill DeBlasio depend on taxing the hell out of the rich (while inexplicably complaining that they make too much money), the dumbest thing they could possibly do is overplay their hand and start annexing suburbs, where less rich but more conservative people will provide the numbers to vote down that entire agenda that a numerically small group of plutocrats can't stop.

The outcome would be even worse in the South. Imagine what would happen if Atlanta gobbled up Cobb County.