Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-05-2016, 08:52 PM
 
2,005 posts, read 2,088,545 times
Reputation: 1513

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BicoastalAnn View Post
I think Stamford is more comparable to Burbank/Glendale than Pasadena... both kind of young-ish and urban in the middle of what is otherwise the suburbs. Pasadena is more for families IMO.
You're right....Stamford is more young, hip and less for families... it's a place for young professionals and working class families..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-05-2016, 09:34 PM
 
75 posts, read 132,169 times
Reputation: 87
*To clarify, I'm assuming at $1k I'll live with at least one roommate (similar to LA).

Quote:
Originally Posted by BicoastalAnn View Post
Seems like your heart is back east... you should just go for it! Have you thought about White Plains in New York? It's similar in character to Stamford but a bit closer to NYC and there are a lot of rentals around the train station where you might find a roommate. That area is also fairly walkable. I lived close to the train and liked it a lot. Nothing wrong with Stamford but it might be nice to have a few options to research.
Thank you for the great suggestion! I hadn't considered that area (just didn't think of it) but I'm definitely adding it to the list alongside Stamford.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaDoo342 View Post
You're right...Stamford is more young, hip and less for families...it's a place for young professionals and working class families.
That's great with me, I'd like to meet young professionals around my age.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2016, 06:45 AM
 
2,971 posts, read 3,180,686 times
Reputation: 1060
Quote:
Originally Posted by wander_x View Post
*To clarify, I'm assuming at $1k I'll live with at least one roommate (similar to LA).



Thank you for the great suggestion! I hadn't considered that area (just didn't think of it) but I'm definitely adding it to the list alongside Stamford.



That's great with me, I'd like to meet young professionals around my age.
Pasadena, all the way. Can't compete with the natural beauty of So. Cal.

North Stamford, Springdale, Westover, Shippan have tons upon tons of upper middle class and affluent families.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2016, 07:09 AM
 
21,620 posts, read 31,207,908 times
Reputation: 9775
It depends on your wants and needs. As others have stated, cost of living in both areas is nearly identical. I'd focus on career advancement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2016, 10:55 PM
 
Location: California
1,726 posts, read 1,721,547 times
Reputation: 3771
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaDoo342 View Post
Honestly, IMO, the only thing Pasadena has going for it over the Stamford area is the weather. That's a big thing, but it depends on your preferences.
I'm sorry, but have you ever even been to Pasadena?

Relative to Stamford, Pasadena has a lot more going for it than simply the weather alone.

The Mediterranean-style, craftsman-style, etc. architecture is not like anything you'd find anywhere in Stamford or CT in general, for that matter.

Pasadena is situated at the base of the San Gabriel mountains, and dramatic mountain vistas are visible from just about everywhere in the city. That's not to mention that Pasadena's backyard is a beautiful national park (Angeles National Forest).

The landscaping and vibrant, perennial floral displays one sees in and around Pasadena are stunning and far more colorful than anything you'd ever see in Stamford.

People are noticeably friendlier and more pleasant in Pasadena than in Stamford. Generally speaking, people hold doors open for one another, treat service people with politeness and respect, etc. in Southern CA. The same cannot be said for people in Southwestern CT.

One of the most bizarre interactions I've ever had with a complete stranger in my entire life was in nearby Trumbull, CT.

I remember standing in line at a Dunkin' Donuts at the Trumbull Mall in front of a man sporting a sweatshirt from my alma mater. When I told him that's where I went to school and if he also went there, he just turned his head and looked away. I responded with an "Okay?"

I can almost guarantee that type of blatant lack of acknowledgement wouldn't occur anywhere else in the entire country, save, perhaps, South Florida, which, of course, is filled with rude, entitled people from the Tri-State area.

Also, outdoor recreational opportunities (hiking, skiing, snowboarding, off-roading, etc.) are much better in Pasadena and Southern California in general than Stamford/CT, not to mention there are many more fun, interesting and unique day and weekend trip possibilities from Pasadena as opposed to Stamford.

Pasadena, FTW.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2016, 08:22 AM
 
2,005 posts, read 2,088,545 times
Reputation: 1513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bert_from_back_East View Post
I'm sorry, but have you ever even been to Pasadena?

Relative to Stamford, Pasadena has a lot more going for it than simply the weather alone.

The Mediterranean-style, craftsman-style, etc. architecture is not like anything you'd find anywhere in Stamford or CT in general, for that matter.

Pasadena is situated at the base of the San Gabriel mountains, and dramatic mountain vistas are visible from just about everywhere in the city. That's not to mention that Pasadena's backyard is a beautiful national park (Angeles National Forest).

The landscaping and vibrant, perennial floral displays one sees in and around Pasadena are stunning and far more colorful than anything you'd ever see in Stamford.

People are noticeably friendlier and more pleasant in Pasadena than in Stamford. Generally speaking, people hold doors open for one another, treat service people with politeness and respect, etc. in Southern CA. The same cannot be said for people in Southwestern CT.

One of the most bizarre interactions I've ever had with a complete stranger in my entire life was in nearby Trumbull, CT.

I remember standing in line at a Dunkin' Donuts at the Trumbull Mall in front of a man sporting a sweatshirt from my alma mater. When I told him that's where I went to school and if he also went there, he just turned his head and looked away. I responded with an "Okay?"

I can almost guarantee that type of blatant lack of acknowledgement wouldn't occur anywhere else in the entire country, save, perhaps, South Florida, which, of course, is filled with rude, entitled people from the Tri-State area.

Also, outdoor recreational opportunities (hiking, skiing, snowboarding, off-roading, etc.) are much better in Pasadena and Southern California in general than Stamford/CT, not to mention there are many more fun, interesting and unique day and weekend trip possibilities from Pasadena as opposed to Stamford.

Pasadena, FTW.
I've been to Pasadena many times...

So....Pasadena has nice views of mountains and people are nice, woohoo! Means nothing economically. Stamford is a powerhouse in comparison...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2016, 09:00 AM
 
1,329 posts, read 2,630,032 times
Reputation: 959
I've lived in Pasadena and CT (been to Stamford a number of times). Pasadena is asthetically much nicer in my view, although I do agree that the stereotype of superficiality in greater Los Angeles holds a lot of truth. If I hadn't been part of a university there, it probably would have driven me away... Fortunately there are a lot of people in Pasadena who aren't there for LA.

Also, Pasadena is heavily dependent on irrigation for its greenery -- would otherwise be more of a desert.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2016, 09:29 AM
 
2,152 posts, read 3,398,152 times
Reputation: 1695
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaDoo342 View Post
I've been to Pasadena many times...

So....Pasadena has nice views of mountains and people are nice, woohoo! Means nothing economically. Stamford is a powerhouse in comparison...
Stamford's economy thrives off of NYC, the city itself isn't a hotbed for jobs.. Similar to Pasadena and LA
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2016, 09:49 AM
 
2,005 posts, read 2,088,545 times
Reputation: 1513
Quote:
Originally Posted by howdydoody342 View Post
Stamford's economy thrives off of NYC, the city itself isn't a hotbed for jobs.. Similar to Pasadena and LA
Not really... Stamford has a huge corporate presence, far more than Pasadena... here is a tiny list:

UBS/RBS
NBC Sports
NBC Universal (branches, not headquarters)
Affinion
GE Capital
Frontier
Starwood/Westin Hotel Group
Kayak
WWE
Indeed

Countless hedge funds, some with multi billion dollars in revenue (SAC Capital)... can't list them all
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2016, 11:13 AM
 
Location: Connecticut
34,933 posts, read 56,945,109 times
Reputation: 11228
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaDoo342 View Post
Not really... Stamford has a huge corporate presence, far more than Pasadena... here is a tiny list:

UBS/RBS
NBC Sports
NBC Universal (branches, not headquarters)
Affinion
GE Capital
Frontier
Starwood/Westin Hotel Group
Kayak
WWE
Indeed

Countless hedge funds, some with multi billion dollars in revenue (SAC Capital)... can't list them all
Correct. I am not sure why Stamford's location near New York even matters. Would Pasadena be what it is if it was not located near LA? Would any city be what it is if it was not located where it was? The whole point is kind of convoluted.

The point is Stamford is a city that is home to MANY major corporations and has a lot of employment options. Pasadena is more of a large suburban city. It does not have a dense downtown with high-rise buildings. It has a sprawl of one and two story buildings with a few 10 to 12 story buildings here and there. That poster makes it sound like it is a garden but it is not and you can't see the mountains from everywhere. Stamford is a waterfront city with some very nice waterfront parks. Pasadena does not have that. Stamford is in the middle of some of the country's most desirable suburbs. Pasadena is not. While very nice, particularly for southern California, Pasadena is not really comparable to Stamford IMHO. Jay
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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


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 > Connecticut

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:20 AM.

© 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