Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Perhaps you should clarify for us how the Texas cities continue to change. Do you mean change or reinvent? Are you speaking about Dallas and Houston, because those cities boomed before Phoenix did. What do you know about Phoenix?
I mean reinvent, and I am talking about all cities east of the Texas Panhandle.
Average crime index 319.2 ( a higher crime index means more crime)
Minneapolis crime index
1999: 756.6
2007: 733.1
2008: 624.2
Gary Indiana crime index
1999: 685.1
2007: 633.9
2008: 608.3
Denver
2008: 338.6
Phoenix
2009: 396
Seattle
2008: 418.8
Compton California
2007: 689.9
New York New York
2009: 234.2
Why don't you post numbers people actually want to look at? If one thinks Minneapolis is crime ridden, she / he is smoking crack. The city has pockets of crime, but overall, it's very safe.
Why don't you post numbers people actually want to look at? If one thinks Minneapolis is crime ridden, she / he is smoking crack. The city has pockets of crime, but overall, it's very safe.
The person who claimed that Minneapolis has a "horrible economy" is just ignorant. Minneapolis-St. Paul has one of the lowest unemployment rates of any metro area of its size in the country. It also has about 20 Fortune 500 companies and the largest privately held company in the country, Cargill. Minneapolis was named this year by Forbes as the best city in America in which to get a job.
I wasn't offended. I asked why you doubted the poster after she/he stated an opinion.
BTW, it's individual.
You have to start something with someone at some point or another, and this comment really didnt involve you. Don't be a hypocrite. I see you make comments towards peoples opinions on other subjects as well.
BTW, i dont need your correction,because i didn't ask you for one.
You have to start something with someone at some point or another, and this comment really didnt involve you. Don't be a hypocrite. I see you make comments towards peoples opinions on other subjects as well.
BTW, i dont need your correction,because i didn't ask you for one.
Why don't you post numbers people actually want to look at? If one thinks Minneapolis is crime ridden, she / he is smoking crack. The city has pockets of crime, but overall, it's very safe.
Do not look at the numbers provided by Unity77 to compare the crime of each cities. That is why I posted the crime index which is conducted by city-data and can be found at city-data.com. A perfect example is that the list place New York as having most murders both in 2009 and 2010 but for a population of over 8 million and a metro near 22 million those numbers are well below average. As oppose to Minneapolis where the city limit is at 300k, the number of crimes there are too high for its population and therefore it will have a higher crime index. You almost can look at crime index as being likelyhood. Again, city limits of New York has a population near 8 million, the state of Minnesota and Iowa combined also has a population near 8 million. New York metro ( and Los Angeles) has a population over 18 million, the states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota combined has a population around 18 million.
I like how the op suggested this thread might not devolve into a bash-fest, since these cities are all pretty evenly matched. Apparently, being evenly matched is not what matters in preventing bash-fests. What does matter is having all of the posters be equally informed about all of the cities in question. A few of you are grossly misinformed about some of these places, and it's showing.
I myself have only ever been to Minneapolis (lived here, actually). Therefore, I'm not comfortable making definitive statements like "city x is crime-ridden and has a terrible economy." I can say that my *impression* of city x is that, but again-- it's a limited impression. I can use facts to back it up, but if I'm going to make such an outrageous blanket statement, they better be pretty good facts.
Which brings me to my primary point:
Quote:
Originally Posted by timeofseasons
Do not look at the numbers provided by Unity77 to compare the crime of each cities. That is why I posted the crime index which is conducted by city-data and can be found at city-data.com. A perfect example is that the list place New York as having most murders both in 2009 and 2010 but for a population of over 8 million and a metro near 22 million those numbers are well below average. As oppose to Minneapolis where the city limit is at 300k, the number of crimes there are too high for its population and therefore it will have a higher crime index. You almost can look at crime index as being likelyhood. Again, city limits of New York has a population near 8 million, the state of Minnesota and Iowa combined also has a population near 8 million. New York metro ( and Los Angeles) has a population over 18 million, the states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota combined has a population around 18 million.
Why would you criticize somebody for using bad stats and then go on to use a LOT of them in your own post?
1.) What was city-data's methodology? Here's a real list:
Minneapolis's violent crime rate is higher than average, but it's hardly "crime-ridden", and when averaged with St. Paul-- which we really should be doing-- it's pretty average. The homicide rate (per 1,000 residents) is lower than every other city in this poll except for Seattle. The total property crime rate is lower in Minneapolis than it is in any other city in this poll except for Denver. The forcible rape rate brings up Minneapolis's violent crime rate. That's not a good thing, but most rapists know their victims and the same can not necessarily-- depending on the circumstances-- be said for homicides.
Plus, you said that Minneapolis was a "mirror-image" of Detroit in this regard. Even a periphery analysis of the data reveals that it is not. Detroit's violent crime rate is almost twice that of Minneapolis, and it's property crime rate is significantly higher, as well.
2.) There are 382,578 people in Minneapolis, according to the 2010 census. That could very, very well be an undercount since the city has a high number of foreign born residents and non-native English speakers. If it is a correct count, that means that Minneapolis lost 40 people between 2000 and 2010. Not 40k, not 4k...but 40. I haven't looked that up, but that almost certainly makes it the most stable population of any large city (that is, neither growing too rapidly or shrinking) in the country between the 2000 and 2010 censuses.
3.) The state of Minnesota and Iowa combined has a population over 8 million, and you're undercounting the combined population of MN, WI, and MI by about 3 million.
Not that the last two points are really important, but if you can't be bothered to consult wiki or the census website before you post things like this, why should anybody read you seriously?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
LOL 
SMH. 
