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.
Those photos of Scranton leave one thing to be desired.... PEOPLE! There isn't one pedestrian in any one of those shots! Heaven knows Omaha isn't bustling with them, but some pedestrians can help remind you that the place isn't a ghost town.
I intentionally try to avoid capturing people in my images. Why, may you ask? Well one time I was photographing homes and didn't realize one of the owners was sitting on the front porch. I was met with a very unpleasant confrontation because apparently some people don't like the fact that others want to show off their homes' beauty for others on the Internet to enjoy. Now I just wait (and wait...and wait) until pedestrian traffic clears most of the time to snap my images.
Well, I've never been to either Scranton or Omaha.
But thoses pictures we're pretty nice, Scranbarre. Lots of cool architecture.
Plus I'd much rather be within driving distance to New York City, Philly, the ocean, and Boston, than I would to Des Moines or Lincoln.
AND, as an added bonus, one my favorite TV shows is set there!
Soooooooo, I'm gonna have to go with Scranton on this one.
Sorry Omaha.
I agree with this finding. I don't think I'd ever choose to relocate to Scranton or Omaha, but if I HAD to make a choice between the two, I think I'd go with Scranton. Because if I'm gonna be in a town I don't like, I'd at least like to be able to escape easily. I think Scranton has more places to escape to (BosWash cities, Shore, mountains, etc.). In Omaha if I wanna go for a hike, I'd be hiking in a cornfield. If I wanted to go to the beach, I'd be soaking up rays in a cornfield near a pond. If I wanted to go skiing, I'd be cross-country skiing in a cornfield. Camping? cornfield.
BUT, Omaha almost makes up for it because they have a convention center.
In Omaha if I wanna go for a hike, I'd be hiking in a cornfield. If I wanted to go to the beach, I'd be soaking up rays in a cornfield near a pond. If I wanted to go skiing, I'd be cross-country skiing in a cornfield. Camping? cornfield.
BUT, Omaha almost makes up for it because they have a convention center.
In Omaha, if you wanted to hike, you would be hiking in the hilly woods outside of town. If you wanted to go to a beach, you would be going to a lake inside the city limits. Camping? Once again, the hilly woods, or on the Platte river.
Neither is very appealing, but I went with Scranton because it has rowhomes and is much closer to some of the most interesting cities in the US, and the Poconos. Omaha isn't near anything that interests me.
Omaha does have rowhomes and is close to Kansas City, Des Moines, Lincoln, Chicago etc.
Omaha does have rowhomes and is close to Kansas City, Des Moines, Lincoln, Chicago etc.
Nice try but I'm not impressed. I Googled "Omaha rowhomes" and all I found were some pics of really ugly, unappealing new construction. Scranton has some beautiful classic architecture--yeah, Omaha has a few nice older neighborhoods as well but nowhere near as prolific as in east coast cities.
Oh, and Omaha is NOWHERE NEAR Chicago. Come on. What is it, an 8 hour drive? And the other cities you mentioned are barely worth a visit. Kansas City has a few things to offer, but let's see...living 3 hours from KC vs. living 2 hours from New York AND Philly?
The comparison of "hilly woods" and a few man-made lakes to real mountains, forest and the Atlantic ocean is laughable as well.
Scranton is sounding more and more appealing the more I think about it!
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.