Money Magazine: Best Places to Live in USA. 2009/2010/2011 (Denver, Lakewood: best cities, hotels)

[Josseppie]

Colorado did well in these lists too! In fact Pueblo, Fort Collins, Colorado Springs and Denver made it.

http://nextgenerationconsulting.com/...09-2010_US.pdf

[livecontent]

It is that time again, for the List of the Best Places to Live from Money Magazine:
Best Places to Live 2010 - from Money Magazine

Colorado has these cities on the list of 100 cities:

No 6. --Fort Collins
No. 12--Highlands Ranch
No. 18--Broomfield
No. 33--Loveland
No. 58--Arvada

Cities that are considered from 50,000 to 235,000, per this methodology:
Best places to live 2010 - FAQ and Sources - from MONEY Magazine

Shhh...I wanted to keep the pleasures of Arvada--Quiet.

HighLands Ranch--Interesting!

Broomfield--a hidden gem.

I just noticed---Boulder is not on the list. Ha, Ha, Ha...


Livecontent

[goyanks57]

Originally Posted by livecontent

I just noticed---Boulder is not on the list. Ha, Ha, Ha...

I just noticed---Pueblo is not on the list. Ha, Ha, Ha...

[BarryK123]

All these top xxx city surveys are such a joke (ha ha ha) made to sell magazines.

[EscapeCalifornia]

Three of those are Denver suburbs and one isn't even a city. I wonder why they couldn't have just said "Denver metro". What makes Arvada better then Lakewood or Westminster. What makes Highland Ranch better than Parker or Littleton? It all seems rather arbitrary.

[vegaspilgrim]

Originally Posted by EscapeCalifornia

Three of those are Denver suburbs and one isn't even a city. I wonder why they couldn't have just said "Denver metro". What makes Arvada better then Lakewood or Westminster. What makes Highland Ranch better than Parker or Littleton? It all seems rather arbitrary.

I've always wondered that too. Especially when the places chosen are just generic (though well planned and maintained) suburbia with nothing uniquely distinctive, as far as I can tell. I'm convinced all these "lists" are nothing more than toilet literature.

[jazzlover]

I consider Money's ratings on almost anything a total crock. One can usually tell with any of their "where-to-live" ratings that they have not ever even visited the places they write about. Most of it is little more than teen-age slop journalism. The only place Money magazine is very useful is in the outhouse, and that slick paper doesn't even work worth a damn for that.

[PokerMunkee]

Once I saw a town in Minnesota was #1, I quit reading it.

[livecontent]

I agree all those list are just garbage journalism. However, people read it; believe it and take it seriously. So what happens people start considering that as a place to move. Real Estate Prices go up. Cities use these list to try to attract businesses and sometimes it works in the city's favor and businesses do relocate. It is especially true of businesses that rely on a population which has a disposal income, as indicative of many people who move and retire to these cities, based on the listings.

So, yes you can dismiss these list but in these days of rapid media attention and peoples desires to be a part of the crowd--the best list essentially become a truism. It can help a city and it can harm an area with people moving quickly and overwhelming city services.

I was the Executive Chef at the Hilton Harvest House in Boulder in the 1980s. There was an article in one of the big magazine, Either Newsweek or Time--I can't remember. It highlighted Boulder Harvest House, where the Hip Go, Cocaine flows and there are beautiful woman in damskin tops at the garden bar behind the hotel on the weekends. Well, the following weekend the Boulder Airport was overwhelmed with private jets; there were traffic jams; the hotel was booked solid and there were so many wealthy people who came from all the country. It was a nightmare with extreme demand for food and drinks. We had to get extra police protection. It was terrible but profitable.

So, be aware that good publicity or bad publicity, either true or not, can affect a city's prosperity. Fort Collins has been on the this list, many times on the top; it certainly changed that city.

Livecontent

[wanneroo]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

I consider Money's ratings on almost anything a total crock. One can usually tell with any of their "where-to-live" ratings that they have not ever even visited the places they write about. Most of it is little more than teen-age slop journalism. The only place Money magazine is very useful is in the outhouse, and that slick paper doesn't even work worth a damn for that.

Basically it's a bunch of number crunching done by interns and slopped together by a lazy "journalist" or two.