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.
I definitely need to check out Raleigh next time on out that way.
For some reason I didn't really care for Charlotte much. are both cites are similar?
Charlotte was way to flat for my taste.
Raliegh feels smaller than Charlotte, but is closer to universities and the East Coast so it feels a bit more "connected" to the NE in some ways. Charlotte is all about big business.
People are voting with their feet on this one. Santa Barbara's population shrank by 4.4% in the 2000s...Raleigh's grew by 47%. If SB were such an amazing place to live that it warranted such a high COL with a very disproportionately low avg income...wouldn't its population still be growing? And on the flip side; if Raleigh was only affordable because it was such an undesirable place to live...wouldn't its population be decreasing?
A lot of people can't afford to live in Nice either, but it doesn't make it less desirable than Dallas. The two are not comparable in any way. Raliegh's fine, but if I was in the pharma industry I'd live in San Diego.
I definitely need to check out Raleigh next time on out that way.
For some reason I didn't really care for Charlotte much. are both cites are similar?
Charlotte was way to flat for my taste.
Obviously not. This is the case in most Southeastern cities.
For some of West Coasters the inability to see mountains or hills (although they would likely be classified as mountains) or the ocean in the distance makes a lot of the South feel very confining. I know a lot of people that prefer the lushness of the South and the trees. The lack of vistas drives me nuts, however.
Santa Barbara is a mid sized city. Yes, it is expensive-so are most desirable areas. Irvine is mid sized and is one of the lowest crime cities in the nation- much much lower than the alternatives. Neither of these is ideal for "blue collar" workers because of the cost of living. I'd rather go to jail than live in Fresno, so I'm not sure why it's being touted here. Colorado Springs seems fairly dull. I guess if you don't have any money Raliegh would be the choice. But if you have SOME money, a mid sized California city like Santa Barbara would seem far preferable.
It doesn't seem like there are that many jobs in Santa Barbara. I've always assumed that many of the people that live there already have money.
For some of West Coasters the inability to see mountains or hills (although they would likely be classified as mountains) or the ocean in the distance makes a lot of the South feel very confining. I know a lot of people that prefer the lushness of the South and the trees. The lack of vistas drives me nuts, however.
Why is what West Coastets prefer to see relevant to the thread? If mountains are importnant, go to Asheville.
The requested criteria asks which of these cities have the best living wages, weather, people, and outdoor activities. Not how many mountains you can see from going up a hill.
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.
