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.
In your opinion which one is the most desirable to live and why (ex. What does the South have to offer that the other regions can't live up to). Don't vote for the side you live on because you live there.
I live in the south but I find the Midwest much more appealing and would like to live there for the rest of my life. Cleveland/Chicago/Cincinnati/Kansas City all are the places I am considering moving.
I like the scenery of the west, as far as the mountains go and such but I couldn't see myself living there. I am more into the industrial/urban environment which appeals to me.
I'd say if you can deal with the climate, the Midwest. It has the sanest people, the most functional economy, and in general is balanced. It's also great for the fact it's close to all three of the other US regions.
On one hand I kind of like the FU attitude that so many Northeasterners have, I grew up in a rural area and even got it. I don't have to pretend to care about the waiter or cashier. I like that all of the cities are close and have quite a bit to do.
On the other I like the climate of the west, and the people aren't as friendly as the midwest. Western scenery is a win for me also, and there are quite a few cities clumped together, although they don't have the same patriotic feel that eastern cities have.
If you like the Midwest, you should also strongly consider living in:
St. Louis
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Columbus
Madison
I've lived in all but Madison, but can vouch for all of them. Detroit, Indy and Milwaukee (esp.) shouldn't be overlooked either. Sorry if I missed somebody!
I'd say if you can deal with the climate, the Midwest. It has the sanest people, the most functional economy, and in general is balanced. It's also great for the fact it's close to all three of the other US regions.
You're right about the climate by far being the biggest drawback and it can have a pretty obvious impact on infrastructure (roads and pipes mainly) but I agree with your points.
Personally I'd always been a huge fan of the West and have opened up to the East since traveling there many times in the last year but having been to big parts of all four regions now I say that generally speaking, the Midwest is the most balanced in cost effective with another major cities to keep the region interesting. I believe that former Rust Belt cities have massive potential that can be tapped into for regrowing into cost-effective alternatives to major coastal cities. Just my personal opinion.
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.
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.
