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 think it’s sad that you think your “backward” state is holding your city back, like you’re better than the state that you are in.
Exactly.
Rural Missouri is just fine and not backwards, just sleepy and traditional. St. Louis is okay too. Depending on what you like, Missouri has something for almost anyone who doesn’t demand mountains or oceans.
Both areas blame the other for the state’s problems, and from where I’m standing, both have a good argument and both could also tone down the silly rhetoric.
This question has been asked before, but most of those threads I've noticed appear rather old. I have an opportunity to either work in Saint Louis, or in Milwaukee, and I'm wondering which place will be better overall (ignoring the current corvid issue; imagine it doesn't exist right now) for me to move to.
Some Notes: - I don't have a car and will be relying on public transportation and walking. I know Saint Louis has a metro and Milwaukee recently released The Hop tram system, but that's my extent of knowledge.
I frankly would not recommend going car free in either city, but St. Louis at least has the MetroLink light rail connecting you to the major attractions in the central corridor, downtown St. Louis, downtown Clayton, the airport, train station, all the stadiums, etc.
Quote:
- Both job opportunities are as public school teachers, so teaching benefits and the treatment of teachers in the city/state matter. For the sake of comparison, we'll say that the salary and benefits offered to me are within margin of error of each other.
I doubt the public schools in either city proper are all that good. That being said, St. Louis' great divorce means you might very well be talking about somewhere in St. Louis County rather than the city. That could be very different then.
Quote:
- Going by the 1/3 rent rule, my max rent would be $1100, and it'd have to have one hella view for me to pay that.
Easily doable in St. Louis. I live in an updated one bedroom with office in downtown for less than that. This also includes my parking.
Quote:
- I would be interested in investing in property within five years in whatever area I move to. Saint Louis has nicer looking duplexes (that also cost more), but Milwaukee's appear to be cheaper and in more abundance.
Probably can't go wrong with either place for investment, although God only knows what this virus is about to do to the economy going forward.
Quote:
- Rent seems slightly cheaper for slightly nicer apartments in St. Louis, but I just browsed Zillow and Apartments.com, so feel free to chime in. The cheaper (and nicer), the better.
Renting in St. Louis can be a little counter intuitive. One would assume downtown would be the most expensive area to rent in, but in my experience some of the neighborhoods surrounding Forest Park, specifically the Central West End, hold that title.
Quote:
- I don't go out much, don't care for sports, and don't drink (because I'm so square that I'm cubed) so nightlife doesn't matter much right now, though I would be interested in nightlife later on if it means meeting new people . I do enjoy going to thrift stores (and garage sales) a lot, so having an abundance of those would be nice.
Both are hard drinking cities. Both regularly make some of the drunkest in the nation lists. That might be cons for both for you.
Quote:
- The gayer and queerer, the better.
Fine in either, although I can speak with more experience in regards to St. Louis' scene. Don't expect a hyper localized gayborhood. You'll find LGBT oriented establishments spread throughout the city, although The Grove is home to some of the most popular bars.
Quote:
- I care about uncapped data and fast internet speeds. Don't know how much that matters for area.
Spectrum (formerly Charter) is main player in St. Louis. No cap, but the only company I've ever dealt with that was worse than them was Comcast.
Quote:
- I live in Mass, where the weather is typically determined via a game of ethereal Yahtzee, so I'm used to the cold and I'm used to the heat.
Which is what most of the Midwest is like. Expect St. Louis to be hotter and more humid in the summer than Milwaukee, but for Milwaukee to be colder in winter.
Quote:
- If you think there's something that I just gotta have in once city over the other that I didn't think of, I'm all ears.
Other posters were correct about Missouri being more Republican than Wisconsin on the whole. The only Democrat currently holding a statewide office is the auditor, Nicole Galloway. She's currently running for governor, and considering how badly Parsons is currently handling the coronavirus, she might actually win.
Exactly.
Rural Missouri is just fine and not backwards, just sleepy and traditional. St. Louis is okay too. Depending on what you like, Missouri has something for almost anyone who doesn’t demand mountains or oceans.
Both areas blame the other for the state’s problems, and from where I’m standing, both have a good argument and both could also tone down the silly rhetoric.
I won't comment on that since I highly disagree. However, for OP's purposes, WI's less regressive state government is much better.
I think it’s sad that you think your “backward” state is holding your city back, like you’re better than the state that you are in.
The Republicans in Jefferson City have nothing but contempt for both St. Louis and Kansas City, and they make that fact plainly known. They allege that they believe in small government, but interfere in the affairs of both cities every chance they get. Most notably when they undermined both cities minimum wage increases. **** 'em.
That being said, Missouri's actual people are more libertarian. They vote for these right wingers, but then on ballot initiatives they support medical marijuana and down voted right to work.
The Republicans in Jefferson City have nothing but contempt for both St. Louis and Kansas City, and they make that fact plainly known. They allege that they believe in small government, but interfere in the affairs of both cities every chance they get. Most notably when they undermined both cities minimum wage increases. **** 'em.
Lol yup. It's that kinda stuff that is beyond hypocritical that makes me dislike state governments that act like that. They preach state government, but then ban the bigger liberal cities from taking actions they want to do.
I won't comment on that since I highly disagree. However, for OP's purposes, WI's less regressive state government is much better.
Having lived in both, I too much prefer Wisconsin even as someone who leans right. Culturally, it’s just a better fit. I do wish Missouri would go back to being a bit more purple, but a lot of newcomers move there for it’s more hands off approach, which I can respect.
Why is this a difficult notion to accept? Ever heard of the urban/rural divide? Yes, we city dwellers in St. Louis are quite embarrassed to be trapped in such an oppressive state whose rural-dominated legislature usually works against good urban policy. This is not any unique case to MO, it’s nationwide, but very pronounced here.
Thanks STL, I’m not an ultra anything and we don’t know each other and you know nothing about me. I’ve been to St Louis and the area a few times and I believe St Louis is unique in many ways and also has many nice people. Would it be correct then to say that all city dwellers there, even the transplants and outliers that move to the metro feel embarrassed and trapped in Missouri once they’ve settled in? Just wondering...I’m not trying to be a snit I’m just fascinated by the local culture!
[quote=PerseusVeil;57656900]The Republicans in Jefferson City have nothing but contempt for both St. Louis and Kansas City, and they make that fact plainly known. They allege that they believe in small government, but interfere in the affairs of both cities every chance they get. Most notably when they undermined both cities minimum wage increases. **** 'em.
That being said, Missouri's actual people are more libertarian. They vote for these right wingers, but then on ballot initiatives they support medical marijuana and down voted right to work.[/QUOTE
Perseusveil that’s a very strange state you live in. I was telling another poster above that very same thing.
Thanks STL, I’m not an ultra anything and we don’t know each other and you know nothing about me. I’ve been to St Louis and the area a few times and I believe St Louis is unique in many ways and also has many nice people. Would it be correct then to say that all city dwellers there, even the transplants and outliers that move to the metro feel embarrassed and trapped in Missouri once they’ve settled in? Just wondering...I’m not trying to be a snit I’m just fascinated by the local culture!
The question wasn’t directed towards me, but my take on it is that the average person doesn’t give it much thought and much more is made of the situation on forums and the media than in real life.
Countless St. Louisians vacation all across southern Missouri and seem to like it just fine in at least some way.
The question wasn’t directed towards me, but my take on it is that the average person doesn’t give it much thought and much more is made of the situation on forums and the media than in real life.
Countless St. Louisians vacation all across southern Missouri and seem to like it just fine in at least some way.
It would be interesting to see which city is making more progress on the opening of lgbt owned businesses. Also which city is attracting more young people.
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.