U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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 09-08-2014, 12:48 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
1,704 posts, read 2,761,283 times
Reputation: 2335

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by cheese plate View Post
I like how natives pretend that a good 2/3 of the state of MN isn't flat treeless farmed plains. Certainly there are beautiful forests up north, and the chunk of the Driftless is gorgeous, but you could fit numerous Massachusetts on top of what's basically North Dakota. It's a big state with some very nice nature in places (east), but well over half is quite boring and ugly, from a scenic standpoint. Massachusetts is tiny, but has a lot of variety as such and very little of the North Dakota style look.
This logic doesn't make any sense. Massachusetts is great because it has variety, but Minnesota isn't? Just because... what? It's the wrong kind of variety? There's too much of the kind YOU don't care as much about, despite the fact that there are several Massachusetts-worths of North Shore, Northwoods, state-sanctioned wilderness, Dritfless, and major urban city? If anything Minnesota has far more variety than Massachusetts. In the Twin Cities alone you can go from open prairie to essentially Northwoods lake towns to two starkly different downtowns and urban neighborhoods to river bluffs and Driftless bluffs, all in less than an hour.

I also fail to see what's wrong with the rest of Minnesota? Why is it just a given that North Dakota landscape is bad? Have you seen North Dakota? It's gorgeous big sky country. But most of the prairie areas of Minnesota don't even look like that, they look like Iowa, ie. rolling hills and bright green farms. You definitely can't give Massachusetts a win because of some vague "variety" and then dismiss the variety Minnesota has just because you don't like some of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-08-2014, 01:22 PM
 
Location: Milwaukee
3,451 posts, read 3,395,034 times
Reputation: 2895
Quote:
Originally Posted by steel03 View Post
This logic doesn't make any sense. Massachusetts is great because it has variety, but Minnesota isn't? Just because... what? It's the wrong kind of variety? There's too much of the kind YOU don't care as much about, despite the fact that there are several Massachusetts-worths of North Shore, Northwoods, state-sanctioned wilderness, Dritfless, and major urban city? If anything Minnesota has far more variety than Massachusetts. In the Twin Cities alone you can go from open prairie to essentially Northwoods lake towns to two starkly different downtowns and urban neighborhoods to river bluffs and Driftless bluffs, all in less than an hour.

I also fail to see what's wrong with the rest of Minnesota? Why is it just a given that North Dakota landscape is bad? Have you seen North Dakota? It's gorgeous big sky country. But most of the prairie areas of Minnesota don't even look like that, they look like Iowa, ie. rolling hills and bright green farms. You definitely can't give Massachusetts a win because of some vague "variety" and then dismiss the variety Minnesota has just because you don't like some of it.
I've been in every corner of Minnesota and there isn't a single thing you could tell me about it. This is about which of the two states is "more scenic," and while I love certain areas of MN and consider them my personal stomping grounds (along with WI and the UP of MI), MA is more consistently beautiful, and I don't think it's even close. Sure, considering MA is 1/8 the size of MN, you could throw it in the middle of the northwoods, or it would take up a chunk of MN's Driftless, or whatever, but you could also throw like 4 MA's over flat treeless prairieland. Regardless, the point is that though MA is that small it has much higher mountains, and an ocean instead of Lake Superior. Within its small size, it's very diverse, perhaps more diverse than the entire state of MN combined, which is, if you remember, something like 8 times the size of MA. You don't have to win every single bullet point just because you live somewhere or have an affinity for it.

Last edited by JMT; 09-08-2014 at 06:05 PM.. Reason: language
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-08-2014, 05:57 PM
 
1,000 posts, read 1,502,555 times
Reputation: 729
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheese plate View Post
I've been in every corner of Minnesota and there isn't a single thing you could tell me about it. This is about which of the two states is "more scenic," and while I love certain areas of MN and consider them my personal stomping grounds (along with WI and the UP of MI), MA is more consistently beautiful, and I don't think it's even close. Sure, considering MA is 1/8 the size of MN, you could throw it in the middle of the northwoods, or it would take up a chunk of MN's Driftless, or whatever, but you could also throw like 4 MA's over flat treeless prairieland. Regardless, the point is that though MA is that small it has much higher mountains, and an ocean instead of Lake Superior. Within its small size, it's very diverse, perhaps more diverse than the entire state of MN combined, which is, if you remember, something like 8 times the size of MA. You don't have to win every single bullet point just because you live somewhere or have an affinity for it.
Sorry, regardless of anyone's affinity for a certain place, that just isn't true. Minnesota is large enough that there is automatically going to be way more diversity. Heck, as you go north to south, there is actually a very visible difference in vegetation simply because of latitude.

Last edited by JMT; 09-08-2014 at 06:06 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-08-2014, 05:57 PM
 
Location: Kent, UK/ Rhode Island, US
626 posts, read 574,927 times
Reputation: 711
Wow, those are two very solid states. Both offer a high quality life, with both having a fantastic education system, healthy populace, low crime, great cities, distinct culture etc. You can't go wrong with either of them, they are both very successful.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-08-2014, 06:01 PM
 
36 posts, read 35,337 times
Reputation: 43
Minnesota is almost all trees and water. It has over 15,000 lakes. There are lakes everywhere. You can say a lot of negative things about MN (repressed Scandinavian culture being one) but it is a strikingly beautiful place to live. That includes St. Paul and Minneapolis. The prairie is beautiful. The lakes are beautiful. There are lots of marshlands which are so beautiful. After living in CA (Los Angeles and outside LA) for 12 years I'm ready to move back. You can keep the desert. I am so so so sick of it. CA is going to hell in a handbasket. We have had over 90 days almost 100 degrees. We live a Master Planned community that is filling rapidly with ppl who can't speak English. The trees here were created. If you drive off -- it's all desert, barren. One thing you take for granted in MN (and MA) is the value on education. It's like the wild west in CA. Ppl just don't value education that much. I love diversity. I lived in Manhattan and loved it. But CA is like a foreign country with the world's poorest and the world's richest flocking here in droves. It is not uncommon to have rents that are upwards of $10k or $15k a month. Santa Monica is nice but every park is overrun with homeless. The LAUSD (and other school districts aren't much better) rank below Alabama. I used to love CA but it's hard to not think it's turning into a he--hole. MA or MN? EITHER ONE AND YOU'RE GOOD TO GO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-08-2014, 06:25 PM
 
36 posts, read 35,337 times
Reputation: 43
LOL AJ - jinx! both said same thing same time, must be true!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2014, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Kent, UK/ Rhode Island, US
626 posts, read 574,927 times
Reputation: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by caLa310 View Post
LOL AJ - jinx! both said same thing same time, must be true!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2014, 01:18 PM
 
5,819 posts, read 5,178,928 times
Reputation: 17729
Having lived in both states . . .

Minnesota isn't overpopulated. Massachusetts is. Badly and Sadly.

So the pick is simple. Minnesota offers a much better quality of life if you want a rural life. Greater Boston is a more interesting city than Greater MSP if you want an urban life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2014, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Denver
6,628 posts, read 12,502,634 times
Reputation: 4054
You really think Massachusetts is overpopulated? Even when taking Western Mass into consideration?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2014, 02:35 PM
 
5,819 posts, read 5,178,928 times
Reputation: 17729
Oh gosh, absolutely. It gives me a headache just to think about all of the roads and traffic throughout Mass. MN has much more rural land available for peaceful, quiet living. I'm not just talking about the land reserves (forests and parks) available in each state for short term visiting.

Urban/suburban people would naturally prefer Massachusetts, of course.
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:


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 > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top