Things you can do in Denver you can't do in San Diego (and vice versa) (homes, school districts)

[BarryK123]

Con - It's very hard to find good pizza and Italian food in Denver.

Pro - the Denver area casinos are subject to state and Federal laws. In SD, they are sovereign nations and can do whatever they want, without recourse.

[Lost Roses]

In Denver we don't worry about the San Andreas Fault, only about that giant "dormant" volcano under Yellowstone National Park.

[SkyDog77]

Originally Posted by BarryK123

Con - It's very hard to find good pizza and Italian food in Denver.

Pro - the Denver area casinos are subject to state and Federal laws. In SD, they are sovereign nations and can do whatever they want, without recourse.

Let me chime in on this as someone who has worked in the industry for a long time.

Colorado casinos are subject to Colorado Division of Gaming (CODOG) rules more than anything else. Federal laws regarding gaming pretty much leave everything up to the state.

California tribal casinos contract with Gaming Labs International (GLI)to inspect all products that are placed on their floors for regulatory compliance. CODOG also contracts with GLI to test games for Colorado. Some of the laws that the California tribes operate under are different than CODOG standards, but to insinuate that you are not getting a fair game in the CA tribal casinos is not very accurate. The software used in the slot machines in Colorado is identical to the software used in California in almost every case.

[denverian]

Originally Posted by Lost Roses

In Denver we don't worry about the San Andreas Fault, only about that giant "dormant" volcano under Yellowstone National Park.

There was a quake estimated at 6.6 that caused damage in Denver in 1882. There's actually more risk for earthquake along the Front Range than most people think.

[bluescreen73]

Originally Posted by denverian

There was a quake estimated at 6.6 that caused damage in Denver in 1882. There's actually more risk for earthquake along the Front Range than most people think.

The risk is higher than Kansas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska, but considerably lower than Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico. The odds of the Front Range experiencing the effects a mm 6 or above quake in our lifetime is practically nil. The same cannot be said for the Bay Area or the LA Basin.

[Timmyy]

Originally Posted by denverian

How does the Gaslamp District stack up against LoDo? For some odd reason, in all my times in San Diego, I never got a chance to hang out there. Downtown seemed nice and comparable to downtown Denver, minus the 16th St. Mall.

The Gaslamp is awesome now. They have really spruced it up around the ball park. I still think LoDo is better but downtown San Diego has come a long way. There used to be a time when you didn't want to be caught dead down there.

[stricklandia]

Just want to take a moment to thank you all for the comments. Keep 'em coming!

[KaaBoom]

Originally Posted by bluescreen73

The risk is higher than Kansas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska, but considerably lower than Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico. The odds of the Front Range experiencing the effects a mm 6 or above quake in our lifetime is practically nil. The same cannot be said for the Bay Area or the LA Basin.

I think the earthquake danger in California is way overrated. The majority of people living in California today have never experienced a major damage causing earthquake in their lifetime, and there is a fair chance, they never will. Sure there are the little tremors every now and then. But thats the equivalent the F1 - F2 tornados in Denver. Something to talk about, but not really something to worry about.

[denverian]

Originally Posted by KaaBoom

I think the earthquake danger in California is way overrated. The majority of people living in California today have never experienced a major damage causing earthquake in their lifetime, and there is a fair chance, they never will. Sure there are the little tremors every now and then. But thats the equivalent the F1 - F2 tornados in Denver. Something to talk about, but not really something to worry about.

Apparently you weren't there when Northridge cracked!

I've only been in two big ones (Northridge, and then the Hector quake in '99) and they were kind of scary. Enough to know that when sitting in traffic to try not to get caught under an overpass for very long.

[KaaBoom]

Originally Posted by denverian

Apparently you weren't there when Northridge cracked!

I've only been in two big ones (Northridge, and then the Hector quake in '99) and they were kind of scary. Enough to know that when sitting in traffic to try not to get caught under an overpass for very long.

But that was 20 years ago. The last big one in the Bay Area was 25 years ago. That's an entire generation of Californians who have never experienced anything like that. And IMHO, the ground seems to be pretty stable at this time. I'm cautiously optimistic that another generation will go by before it happens again. At that point, I'll be too old to care.

Major destructive earthquakes in the Bay Area. 1838, 1868, 1906, and 1989. With that data, the next big one is due anytime between 2019 and 2072. The trend seems to be for longer intervals. I'm betting it will be later then sooner.