Does NYC have a hell-hole stereotype? Other cities do, and 80's NYC does, and some people throw that shade at all metros, but I wasn't aware of NYC being specifically mis-characterized as being worse than average.
Regardless, this usage of statistics is an excellent example of one of the disconnects between Americans (and I assume other groups of people).
NYC is wonderful, and very safe as far as major cities go. Driving is much less safe, but is safe-ish. We live in a safe world, statistically speaking.
But it's critical to accept that people don't only care about statistics. Humans have emotions. If in town A your chance of being beaten in the street is higher than your chance of being injured in a car accident, and in town B the odds are equal and reversed, people are going to be more angry and critical of town A, especially if the car accidents are not perceived as being of unusually negligent origin (i.e. it's not because everybody there is drunk all the time).
Now if you slide the statistics to counteract the perceived negativity of the two things, at some point they equal out, theoretically, but in practice, it's apples and oranges. In other words, behavior and intention matter. Dignity and civilization matter - a lot. Autonomy and responsibility matter. Crime and deliberate carelessness are not the same as, e.g., a pure accident.
It's the same reason people are more outraged about being hurt by a robot than by a human-driven vehicle.
We have to accept that this side of human nature is intrinsic, and not by itself irrational, even though it is sometimes the source of irrational decision making, when people get too swept up in it.
Regardless, this usage of statistics is an excellent example of one of the disconnects between Americans (and I assume other groups of people).
NYC is wonderful, and very safe as far as major cities go. Driving is much less safe, but is safe-ish. We live in a safe world, statistically speaking.
But it's critical to accept that people don't only care about statistics. Humans have emotions. If in town A your chance of being beaten in the street is higher than your chance of being injured in a car accident, and in town B the odds are equal and reversed, people are going to be more angry and critical of town A, especially if the car accidents are not perceived as being of unusually negligent origin (i.e. it's not because everybody there is drunk all the time).
Now if you slide the statistics to counteract the perceived negativity of the two things, at some point they equal out, theoretically, but in practice, it's apples and oranges. In other words, behavior and intention matter. Dignity and civilization matter - a lot. Autonomy and responsibility matter. Crime and deliberate carelessness are not the same as, e.g., a pure accident.
It's the same reason people are more outraged about being hurt by a robot than by a human-driven vehicle.
We have to accept that this side of human nature is intrinsic, and not by itself irrational, even though it is sometimes the source of irrational decision making, when people get too swept up in it.