Indianapolis vs. Louisville

[Shakeesha]

I like Louisville better. It is friendlier and has more culture.

[Toxic Toast]

Want to Try the Most Exciting Food in America? Leave New York City.
Smaller cities like Philadelphia, Indianapolis, and Asheville are where the culinary heat is right now.

[shrinkdavid1982]

Originally Posted by Shakeesha

I like Louisville better. It is friendlier and has more culture.

Friendliness and culture are largely subjective concepts. What you consider to be culturally significant someone else may dismiss. That is what is great about American cities. They are diverse and people gravitate to the city that hopefully aligns with their ideals and desires and provides them with the quality of life they are seeking. This is the main reason city compassions are largely irrelevant. What one perceives as a pro someone else may perceive as a con. That is life. I don't see it as one has to be better than the other. They are different and offer different experiences.

[Serious Conversation]

Originally Posted by shrinkdavid1982

But fishers is BORING. It is typical suburbia. In my opinion, Carmel/Fishers is way over rated. Just because you get a lot of development doesn't make it interesting. Sure, you have all the chain restaurants and an Ikea but at the end of the day, nothing really sets it apart from any other growing suburb. Every housing addition is a replica of every other housing addition in middle America. If that is your jam, go for it. I think Louisville offers a bit more in this area.

I used to live in Carmel. While I'm not a big fan of Fishers, saying that it isn't growing or doing better than most suburbs is ridiculous. The south side suburbs never get the amenities as quickly as Carmel and Fishers do, if they get them at all. Carmel is very exclusive. There's nothing similar to it in the entire state of Kentucky.

[Shakeesha]

Originally Posted by shrinkdavid1982

Friendliness and culture are largely subjective concepts. What you consider to be culturally significant someone else may dismiss. That is what is great about American cities. They are diverse and people gravitate to the city that hopefully aligns with their ideals and desires and provides them with the quality of life they are seeking. This is the main reason city compassions are largely irrelevant. What one perceives as a pro someone else may perceive as a con. That is life. I don't see it as one has to be better than the other. They are different and offer different experiences.

I am not changing my answer because you don't like it. If comparisons were "largely irrelevant" as you stated, then city-data would have no reason to exist. I chose Louisville and that's that.

[Peter1948]

Originally Posted by Serious Conversation

I used to live in Carmel. While I'm not a big fan of Fishers, saying that it isn't growing or doing better than most suburbs is ridiculous. The south side suburbs never get the amenities as quickly as Carmel and Fishers do, if they get them at all. Carmel is very exclusive. There's nothing similar to it in the entire state of Kentucky.

Disagree.


Prospect/Norton Commons/Goshen/Crestwood are very similar. That sliver of NE Louisville suburbs feels like Carmel with less office park sprawl and IMO that is a good thing. Reminds me of Carmel in 1990s before it really blew up. Norton Commons is very similar to what they are doing in the core of Carmel. I have lived in both areas and am in Indy almost monthly.

If you mean KY has no Hamilton Co, IN, I agree there. Louisville's closest suburb, Oldham County, has barely 25% the population (Hamilton is also geographically much bigger).

[shrinkdavid1982]

Originally Posted by Shakeesha

I am not changing my answer because you don't like it. If comparisons were "largely irrelevant" as you stated, then city-data would have no reason to exist. I chose Louisville and that's that.

No one asked you to change your opinion.