Wisconsin or Minnesota? (square footage, to live in, metro area)
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.
I'd love to visit the midwest especially MN and WI, looks very like here especially the architecture - very beautiful indeed
Though is WI bitter cold, colder than Canada in winter with long winters?
P.S Buchanan Street is in Glasgow hahahaha
Overall, Minnesota is colder than Wisconsin. This might have something to do with the fact that almost 1/3 of the state of Minnesota lies more north than Wisconsin.
Why do birds fly upside down over Wisconsin? Cause there's nothing there worth sh**ing on.
J/K Born and raised in Minnesota but I actually spent my four years in college at Madison. Great university (Go Badgers!) But still, I'd rather live in Minnesota over Wisconsin any chance I could get.
They only thing Wisky has over us are two things: more hilly terrain (Minnesota is as flat as a pancake throught 90% of it) and a better flagship university.
And no, Wisconsin does not have more lakes. The reason they claim they do is becasue the Wisconsin DNR classifies lakes as a body of water covering over 5 acres while in MN a lake has to be atleast 10 acres. If MN classifed lakes like Wisconsin, we would have over 30,000. As it is, the combined surface area of all lakes in WI (not counting Superior and Michigan) is less than just the top 12 largest lakes in MN combined.
I've always wondered who was right when they said their state had more water area. Actually, Wisconsin does have more water square footage than Minnesota. Minnesota has 83,574 square miles with 7,326 square miles covered by water. Wisconsin has 54,314 square miles, with 11,190 square miles covered by water. Thus, more of Wisconsin is definitely covered by water.
Wisconsin ain't so bad, but I must go with Minnesota. The people and vibe of MN is more progressive to me, and MSP > Milwaukee. Minnesota's population can be varied and interesting as well: we can elect nutjobs like Bachmann, hardcore progressives like Wellstone, the first black muslim ever elected to congress, an Independent governor, etc..
The east side of MKE is nice and has a great bibe...but that vibe just seems to be all over Minneapolis (not just in Uptown), and the existence of two large and different cities, both with important functions, directly bordering each other is unique in the United States.
The North shore is beautiful too -- I don't know if there's a city that has a natural setting like Duluth anywhere else in the Midwest.
Really, an nearly impossible choice. MSP is more appealing than Milwaukee ( but not by much), but WI has the great city of Madison, and is much closer to Chicago for weekend trips, so ....
Both are truly great states; would not mind living in either one.
Although I'm a native Minnesotan and currently live here, I also went to UW-Madison and really enjoyed living there. I think both states are great places to live with lots of positives. Wisconsin is generally more beautiful, given the non-glaciated terrain in SW and western Wisconsin--beautiful rolling dairy farms. Minnesota has a little bit of that type of scenery in SE Minn.
Wisconsin's Door County and Bayfield are comparable to the North Shore of MN
I like Milwaukee and think its definitely improved, but I still prefer Minneapolis and St. Paul as a major metro, given the large number of interesting neighborhoods (Uptown, Dinkytown, Lyn-Lake, Northeast, Grand Ave, Highland, Midway, St Anthony park, Eat Street).
There's nothing in Minnesota to rival Madison, and really nothing in Wisconsin to rival Duluth--both are very unique cities.
I've always wondered who was right when they said their state had more water area. Actually, Wisconsin does have more water square footage than Minnesota. Minnesota has 83,574 square miles with 7,326 square miles covered by water. Wisconsin has 54,314 square miles, with 11,190 square miles covered by water. Thus, more of Wisconsin is definitely covered by water.
Probably because large chunks of Lake Michigan and Superior are included as part of Wisconsin's "territory".
Beyond the eternal Vikings/Packers struggle, are Minnesota and Wisconsin rivals?
MN and WI are competitive, but usually in a good way I serve on the MN AP advisory board (AP as in the Advanced Placement tests high school kids can take to get college credit) and when the annual reports come out, one of the first things we do is see how we compare to Wisconsin. Both states have a good reputaton for education. Driving through Wisconsin, it seems their school facilities are generally newer that Minnesota's (even in smaller towns and rural areas), but Wisconsinites pay notoriously high property taxes to fund those things.
Recently there has been talk between the governors of the two states to save money by sharing some resources, an example of a unique show of cooperation between state governments...pretty cool, actually.
As far as scenery, I would say Wisconsin's overall countryside is probably prettier with its rolling hills, but Minnesota still has some true wilderness left (namely the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.) There are lots of other wild places to explore in NE Minnesota. I would give the north shore the nod over the Bayfield area. Both are pretty, but the north shore is more rugged with its cliffs and rocks vs. south shore sand beaches. I've never been to door county, so can't comment.
The fishing in Minnesota is better, but Wisconsinites can drink more beer than anyone in the USA. (That's a compliment!)
It's close, but I'm biased, so I'm going with Minnesota.
Not too bad of a rivalry going on between us. The big rivalries are WI and IL while Minnesotans and Iowa are always going at it. Seriously, walk around St. Paul and you'd be hard pressed not to hear a number of Iowa jokes.
Lived in WI for 2 years, live in MN now (but I am not a native Midwesterner, so no bias that way). Tough choice, I like em both. All in all, though, I'd have to say WI by a hair.
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.
I serve on the MN AP advisory board (AP as in the Advanced Placement tests high school kids can take to get college credit) and when the annual reports come out, one of the first things we do is see how we compare to Wisconsin. Both states have a good reputaton for education. Driving through Wisconsin, it seems their school facilities are generally newer that Minnesota's (even in smaller towns and rural areas), but Wisconsinites pay notoriously high property taxes to fund those things.
