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.
Dallas to Shreveport is unattractive? With all of those beautiful trees? How is it that driving through any non-mountainous/hilly portion of New England would be any more special then?
Some parts of that stretch of interstate look a little swampy, but east of Tyler all the way to Marshall is nothing short of elegant, in my opinion.
LOL so to be clear states need to be combined to compete with California and Texas. Save the dumb "size" argument, your history screwed you over states like Delaware shouldnt even be states in the first place.
Dallas to Shreveport is unattractive? With all of those beautiful trees? How is it that driving through any non-mountainous/hilly portion of New England would be any more special then?
Some parts of that stretch of interstate look a little swampy, but east of Tyler all the way to Marshall is nothing short of elegant, in my opinion.
Highway driving, with few exceptions (like 93 and 91 through the mountains), is just as boring in New England as it is anywhere else. 95 through the 300 mile or so stretch of Maine is painful. Flat and all trees with a HANDFUL of spots where you can see buildings/homes from the highway (Kennebunk Rest Area, Biddeford, Portland, Freeport, Auburn/Lewiston, Augusta, Bangor/Old Town and that's about it).
That said, there's a ton of scenic driving in New England that doesn't involve mountains. Like literally thousands of miles of coastline.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrantiX
LOL so to be clear states need to be combined to compete with California and Texas. Save the dumb "size" argument, your history screwed you over states like Delaware shouldnt even be states in the first place.
Pathetic but hilarious.
I think it's more pathetic to be fixated on imaginary lines. It takes 10.5 hours to get from Stamford CT to Fort Kent Maine (about as far as you can possibly drive in New England) and it takes 13 hours to get from El Paso TX to Texarkana TX. Texas has counties that are bigger than states in the Northeast. For me, the state line is irrelevant, it's the distance (how long will it take me to get there?) that's important.
Dallas to Shreveport is unattractive? With all of those beautiful trees? How is it that driving through any non-mountainous/hilly portion of New England would be any more special then?
Some parts of that stretch of interstate look a little swampy, but east of Tyler all the way to Marshall is nothing short of elegant, in my opinion.
That's what I've always thought. I don't get it either. Heavily forested region just like the flatter areas of the NE.
I think it's more pathetic to be fixated on imaginary lines. It takes 10.5 hours to get from Stamford CT to Fort Kent Maine (about as far as you can possibly drive in New England) and it takes 13 hours to get from El Paso TX to Texarkana TX. Texas has counties that are bigger than states in the Northeast. For me, the state line is irrelevant, it's the distance (how long will it take me to get there?) that's important.
I've lived in the northeast. I was born in the northeast and I'm from Albany. First this thread takes into account a lot of speculation that just doesn't exist or didn't when I lived back east. No one from Buffalo is going to claim being apart of the same northeast as NYC, vice versa. I think its ridiculous to treat the upper northeast like a second class place and then make a thread and try to act like all is forgiven to work together on beating down on another place. From El Paso to Beaumont, Lubbock to Harlingen everyone in that state identifies as being a Texan no matter what the differences are. Northeast isnt that same way, you are a divided people New England, Midwest (think Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Rochester), mid Atlantic, etc. You can try to articulate no lines but your regions culture is much to divided to ever feel as unified as big states like Texas or California and that's been our point from the start. Comparing single states no matter what their size to entire regions for us comes off this way. I know you may see things differently living in New England your tiny region is unified beyond state lines but its not unified with other places in the northeast like New Jersey or western Pennsylvania or upstate New York.
Yes sure the northeast has everything Texas does, as a region it should but as a state no Texas and New York stand alone standing beside one another then there's the rest distantly following those two.
That's what I've always thought. I don't get it either. Heavily forested region just like the flatter areas of the NE.
The proportion of the Northeast that's flat is rather small excpeting the coastal Plain (mainly the southern 2/3 of Jersey and much of Long Island) and the area by the Great Lakes.
No personal photos, no. You could "streetview" that area and it might give you an idea, though those images don't exactly do it any justice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrfox
Highway driving, with few exceptions (like 93 and 91 through the mountains), is just as boring in New England as it is anywhere else. 95 through the 300 mile or so stretch of Maine is painful. Flat and all trees with a HANDFUL of spots where you can see buildings/homes from the highway (Kennebunk Rest Area, Biddeford, Portland, Freeport, Auburn/Lewiston, Augusta, Bangor/Old Town and that's about it).
That said, there's a ton of scenic driving in New England that doesn't involve mountains. Like literally thousands of miles of coastline.
I think it's more pathetic to be fixated on imaginary lines. It takes 10.5 hours to get from Stamford CT to Fort Kent Maine (about as far as you can possibly drive in New England) and it takes 13 hours to get from El Paso TX to Texarkana TX. Texas has counties that are bigger than states in the Northeast. For me, the state line is irrelevant, it's the distance (how long will it take me to get there?) that's important.
Even in large states like Texas/AZ/CA their is a great geographical, climatic, and cultural shifts in shorter areas of land. SoCal by it's self has extremes within close proximity. Same with Texas. The areas around the Texas Triangle are different enough from each other and close-by at that. You don't have to drive deep into West Texas to see that much of a topographical and cultural shift. Just drive from Beaumont, to Austin, and from Austin down to Corpus Christi or Laredo.
Forget West Texas, just drive from Lufkin to Laredo. HUGE cultural shift, and pretty big shift in natural scenery. You go from Humid/Sub-tropical climate, White, Southern Culture to a Semi-Arid, Steppe, predominantly Mexican, in a span of only 6hrs. In that span you pass through the Piney Woods of East Texas, the Texas coastal plain, Houston, the Hill Country/San Antonio and eventually a Steppe/Semi-Arid climate. So even the size argument is flawed, because you couldn't get this kind of climatic or cultural shift if you added everything from Maine to Virginia.
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.
