Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which middle Midwest metro is best: Kansas City, Saint Louis, Omaha, Indianapolis
Kansas City MO 59 29.80%
Saint Louis MO 90 45.45%
Omaha NE 19 9.60%
Indianapolis IN 30 15.15%
Voters: 198. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-25-2012, 02:26 PM
 
Location: The State Of California
10,400 posts, read 15,586,421 times
Reputation: 4283

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by wh15395 View Post
I respectfully disagree. Here's the tiers in no particular order within each tier:

1st Tier:
Chicago

2nd Tier:
St. Louis
Minneapolis
Detroit

3rd Tier:
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Kansas City
Indianapolis
Columbus
Milwaukee

4th Tier:
Louisville
Des Moines
Omaha

I'm not entirely sure if Cleveland should be in 2nd or 3rd, though. Louisville could be arguably bumped up to 3rd. I'm sick of people trying to argue that Des Moines and Omaha are on the same level as Cincinnati, Indianapolis, or Columbus. It is really just a baseless argument.
I can live with that...it's a pretty good ranking
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-25-2012, 02:31 PM
 
Location: The State Of California
10,400 posts, read 15,586,421 times
Reputation: 4283
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanologist View Post
Just as much as Philly being in the same tier with NYC.
Chicago is a Alpha World Class City Ranked with NYC , LA , Tokyo , Paris and London ... I was misunderstood " just listing the top two cities for the region that's all " ...well on the eastern sea board
Philly just might come in second to NYC while not being in it's same tier.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2012, 02:41 PM
 
Location: The State Of California
10,400 posts, read 15,586,421 times
Reputation: 4283
Quote:
Originally Posted by wh15395 View Post
I respectfully disagree. Here's the tiers in no particular order within each tier:

1st Tier:
Chicago

2nd Tier:
St. Louis
Minneapolis
Detroit

3rd Tier:
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Kansas City
Indianapolis
Columbus
Milwaukee

4th Tier:
Louisville
Des Moines
Omaha

I'm not entirely sure if Cleveland should be in 2nd or 3rd, though. Louisville could be arguably bumped up to 3rd. I'm sick of people trying to argue that Des Moines and Omaha are on the same level as Cincinnati, Indianapolis, or Columbus. It is really just a baseless argument.
My wife side of the family are located in Milwaukee Wisconsin , and her " folks really have a chip on theirs shoulders " always talking about how people disrespect and over look Milwaukee " well here I go again I totally forgot about Milwaukee Wisconsin..I thought that the In-Law Side were just being drama queen and kings...but I guess they were right....

P.S.
I would bump Milwaukee up one or two spots........
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2012, 03:21 PM
 
1,185 posts, read 2,221,625 times
Reputation: 1009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Howest2008 View Post
My wife side of the family are located in Milwaukee Wisconsin , and her " folks really have a chip on theirs shoulders " always talking about how people disrespect and over look Milwaukee " well here I go again I totally forgot about Milwaukee Wisconsin..I thought that the In-Law Side were just being drama queen and kings...but I guess they were right....

P.S.
I would bump Milwaukee up one or two spots........
Milwaukee has a metro of 1.7 million which is fall smaller compared to cincy, cleveland, columbus, detroit, st.louis, minneapolis, Kansas city and just about the same size as Indianapolis. Its a major city notheless but it is not in the same tier as the cities larger than it
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2012, 03:41 PM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
11,108 posts, read 23,892,595 times
Reputation: 6438
StL people.

It's 2012 not 1920.

KC is much closer to Stl than you seem to think just as Indy has closed the gap on KC.

I actually prefer StL to KC, but the only real modern difference between them is that metro StL has more people in a larger suburban area. Everything else about the cities is pretty similar, but metro StL feels considerably larger (or at least more built up) than Metro KC.

Same with KC vs Indy. Metro KC and especially the urban core of KCMO feels considerably larger (more built up) than metro Indy, but when you drill down, they are more similar than they are different. I think KC is a little larger, more urban and has a few more regional type attractions (because KC is a regional destination), but Indy it not that far behind. People don't realize that KC is a 2.5 metro pop city. When you include Lawrence, St Joe etc, which are a part of the kc region, there is a lot of people in the area and KC is also a major destination for much of MO, KS, IA, NE, OK etc. If you live in Omaha or Wichita or Des Moines, KC is often a close by vacation city. If you live a few hours outside of Indy, Columbus etc, you have far more choices so a smaller city like Indy won’t have all the attractions that KC has.

St Louis punches a bit below its weight (as does Detroit), KC punches a bit above its weight while Indy, Cincy, Milwaukee and Columbus area about right. Minneapolis/St Paul is really the one metro that is kind of in its own league even though they are not all that much different in size from StL and Detroit.

At the end of the day, they are all pretty much peers though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2012, 03:46 PM
 
Location: Earth
2,549 posts, read 3,981,704 times
Reputation: 1218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Howest2008 View Post
Chicago is a Alpha World Class City Ranked with NYC , LA , Tokyo , Paris and London ... I was misunderstood " just listing the top two cities for the region that's all " ...well on the eastern sea board
Philly just might come in second to NYC while not being in it's same tier.....

You know I've always wondered if the 1950's Detroit (when it was at it's peak) with a population near 2 million would have been in the same tier as Chicago today. I once heard someone mention that if it grew the same rate since then it would have eventually passed Chicago in city population had it not been for the decline.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2012, 03:54 PM
 
Location: The State Of California
10,400 posts, read 15,586,421 times
Reputation: 4283
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanologist View Post
You know I've always wondered if the 1950's Detroit (when it was at it's peak) with a population near 2 million would have been in the same tier as Chicago today. I once heard someone mention that if it grew the same rate since then it would have eventually passed Chicago in city population had it not been for the decline.

I heard the very same thing , but Detroit was always a one dimensional city to began with " Auto Industry coupled with Heavy Industry " if they would have branched off into " White Collar and Financial Sector " they could have over taken Chicago Ill......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2012, 05:11 PM
 
Location: Tampa - St. Louis
1,272 posts, read 2,183,481 times
Reputation: 2140
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo View Post
StL people.

It's 2012 not 1920.

KC is much closer to Stl than you seem to think just as Indy has closed the gap on KC.

I actually prefer StL to KC, but the only real modern difference between them is that metro StL has more people in a larger suburban area. Everything else about the cities is pretty similar, but metro StL feels considerably larger (or at least more built up) than Metro KC.

Same with KC vs Indy. Metro KC and especially the urban core of KCMO feels considerably larger (more built up) than metro Indy, but when you drill down, they are more similar than they are different. I think KC is a little larger, more urban and has a few more regional type attractions (because KC is a regional destination), but Indy it not that far behind. People don't realize that KC is a 2.5 metro pop city. When you include Lawrence, St Joe etc, which are a part of the kc region, there is a lot of people in the area and KC is also a major destination for much of MO, KS, IA, NE, OK etc. If you live in Omaha or Wichita or Des Moines, KC is often a close by vacation city. If you live a few hours outside of Indy, Columbus etc, you have far more choices so a smaller city like Indy won’t have all the attractions that KC has.

St Louis punches a bit below its weight (as does Detroit), KC punches a bit above its weight while Indy, Cincy, Milwaukee and Columbus area about right. Minneapolis/St Paul is really the one metro that is kind of in its own league even though they are not all that much different in size from StL and Detroit.

At the end of the day, they are all pretty much peers though.
St. Louis punches below its weight relative to Kansas City? In what respects?

Nobody is saying it is 1920, but its obvious that Kansas City has an unfounded inferiority complex to St. Louis. All you have to do is look at the Missouri legislature and its quite evident that Kansas City wants nothing to do with St. Louis in regards to advancing urban agendas in the state and would rather work with rural areas to bring down St. Louis at the expense of Missouri's collective urban future.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2012, 05:54 PM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
11,108 posts, read 23,892,595 times
Reputation: 6438
Quote:
Originally Posted by goat314 View Post
St. Louis punches below its weight relative to Kansas City? In what respects?

Nobody is saying it is 1920, but its obvious that Kansas City has an unfounded inferiority complex to St. Louis. All you have to do is look at the Missouri legislature and its quite evident that Kansas City wants nothing to do with St. Louis in regards to advancing urban agendas in the state and would rather work with rural areas to bring down St. Louis at the expense of Missouri's collective urban future.
I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree with that 100%.

First off, I don’t see KC residents as having any sort of complex towards StL. Maybe in 1980 or 1990, but not today. I think most people across the state are pretty knowledgeable about what both metros offer. I have tons of friends and family in both and any more there is pretty much mutual respect. If anything at all, many in StL have a complex because they just can’t fathom the idea of being compared to KC or being a peer of KC. I follow StL news and people there are jealous of the KC P&L District, the performing arts center, even that KC is getting an IKEA before StL. Just like KC people were jealous of the new bush stadium, metrorail etc. It goes back and forth a little bit, but for the most part, I think most people respect both cities.

As far as KC being against urban issues? You have to be kidding me. KCMO has pioneered urban investment and KCMO leaders and StL City leaders work together all the time. Both cities are heavily involved in maintaining historic tax credits, both cities are pushing the state to invest in transit etc.

Now both cities have suburbs that can and will work against urban issues. So maybe there are some morons in the suburban districts around KC giving these issues a difficult time, but that same thing goes on in the StL region.

Remember this is coming from somebody that would choose to live in StL over KC any day of the week. I like StL a lot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2012, 08:50 PM
 
1,160 posts, read 1,658,894 times
Reputation: 1605
I like KC, but it feels much smaller than St. Louis. I know a lot of people who moved to St. Louis from KC, and they say that St. Louis is just much more happening--that there's a lot more going on. The urban core of St. Louis is in a different league than KC. There are so many more dense, urban neighborhoods in St. Louis and inner ring suburbs. Also, KC just doesn't have the old style urban feel that St. Louis has. St. Louis also has a much heavier Jewish and Italian influence.

As for IKEA choosing to locate in KC over St. Louis, oh well. Yeah, it would be great, but I'd take rail transit over IKEA any day. Cities with rail transit are in different league than cities without it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:49 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top