U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Kentucky > Louisville area
 [Register]
Louisville area Jefferson County
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 12-30-2016, 09:58 AM
 
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
9,583 posts, read 20,459,831 times
Reputation: 9077

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ServoMiff View Post
This is true - much of what the 11th poorest statement was looking at wage gap and % of educated. We have some of the poorest people in a metro area, but we also have a very high percentage of $150k+ earners because of a lot of the old money that exists here. Here's the article I'm referencing:

11. Louisville, Kentucky - Americas 11 poorest cities - CBS News

Problem with lists like that based mainly on income is $50k in Louisville goes a lot further than in LA or NYC. Now Louisville does do poorly on some non income based lists, especially health. There is a big gap between how the richest live vs the poor, the East End is a mini Austin / Raleigh with educated and healthy people. There was a study a couple years ago that found that a 15+ year life expectancy gap among Louisville's ZIP codes.


Louisville's problem with income and health has always been that the transplant population is heavily pulled from the poorest counties in rural KY. It drags down income because people are willing to work for less. Cities like Austin heavily pull from high COL coastal states which pulls up incomes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-30-2016, 01:39 PM
 
6,295 posts, read 13,176,543 times
Reputation: 2789
Quote:
Originally Posted by ServoMiff View Post
This is true - much of what the 11th poorest statement was looking at wage gap and % of educated. We have some of the poorest people in a metro area, but we also have a very high percentage of $150k+ earners because of a lot of the old money that exists here. Here's the article I'm referencing:

11. Louisville, Kentucky - Americas 11 poorest cities - CBS News
But if the cost of living is so low, is that really "poor?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2017, 08:24 AM
 
Location: My beloved Bluegrass
14,052 posts, read 9,787,161 times
Reputation: 18870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter1948 View Post
But if the cost of living is so low, is that really "poor?"
I was getting ready to make the same argument. I would never classify Louisville as poor. It does have a large working class population, but I fail to see why test is a problem. It is way better than the inner city blights that most states have in their largest urban area. Louisville also doesn't have as drastic of an average income gap as normally seen in urban areas.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
Helpful links: TOS and FAQ
Why did the moderator.....? A little about deletions and infractions
Moderator - Asia, Kentucky, Lexington, and Louisville
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2017, 08:01 AM
 
Location: IL/IN/FL/CA/KY/FL
1,123 posts, read 797,799 times
Reputation: 1255
I'm not sure I'd classify the entire city as poor, nor do I believe the article was. However, it's very tough to argue that the poor that Louisville has aren't some of the poorest in the country. When you're below the poverty line in a community that relies on car transportation, you're going to be even worse off than someone who lives in a major metro and can take a more reliable public transport to and from their job. The gap between income and expenses might be similar (raised for more major metro areas but still same delta) but I'd argue that the major metro poor person is better off.

Louisville has the same % of people making $150k+ as Baltimore, but with a lot less people - and there's a LOT of old money in Louisville as well, making for a large gap between the haves and have nots.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2017, 06:59 PM
 
Location: Caverns measureless to man...
6,704 posts, read 4,163,830 times
Reputation: 14935
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fwdvision View Post
I may be posting in several different State/City forums on here as I live in Boise, Idaho and am researching to plan a move next year.

Requirements for me - single 53:

LOW COL - especially housing (I want to rent an apartment, save money, pay off bills and be able to buy within 5 years maybe less).

Diversity. I'm very open minded, educated and tolerant, but I am NOT religious. I'm Jewish but not practicing really. Holidays are for family, friends, good times, etc... I vote Democrat but am more left of center than completely left. I don't base my friendships on religion or politics, and can easily NOT have those conversations, such as at work.

Umm how do I say this one - very few bugs/mosquitos. I don't think that's a problem there. I once visited my sister who used to live in Norfolk area of VA - it was August, and the Mosquito situation was intolerable - too much standing water all around that region!

Progressive feel.

Variety of Restaurants, good music scene and culture. Downtown. I'm 53 so I'm not going out all night bar hoppping, but do like to get out.

This one a lot of you may not know on here but I'm doing my own research on this one - I'm a competitive Mountain Bike Racer and Trail Rider, and also have a road bike I like to train on. It seems there are good trails there, from what I've seen. And probably bigger ones within some driving or day trip distance. I'm a bit "spoiled" in that sense here in Boise, because from my place I can ride road on my Mountainbike and be on trail within 10 mins or so and the Boise Front (foothills) has a lot of trails (though a bit lacking in diversity of trails), with trails also up top the local ski mountain and within the state.

What else - I don't want long commute. I could NEVER handle a "Southern California style commute" - I do NOT want to live in my car!

Good healthcare - in terms of access and quality of care. I'm very healthy, but do have some typical issues a 53 year old guy would, and take a few scripts and see doc and specialist periodically.

Airport - ease of traveling out of the city?

Anything else?

Thanks
Fwdvision,

I lived most of my life in Northern Wisconsin and the Twin Cities, and have also live in Northwestern Montana and California. So some of what I say is filtered through the lens of having lived in those areas. Also, like you, I'm somewhat progressive and an avid cyclist - I own 7 bikes (2 mountain bikes, 3 road bikes, and 2 racing bikes), and would generally log around 5000 miles per season in the Twin Cities. So that gives you some idea of the frame of reference that I'm coming from.

Mosquitoes - I hate 'em too. I would say they're bad here in some areas, but really not as bad as Wisconsin and Minnesota. It rains a lot down here, and the terrain is rocky, so water tends to pool up instead of soaking into the soil. It's definitely worse than Montana or California, but it's probably as good as you're going to find anywhere east of the Mississippi. Many other parts of the South are way worse.

Diversity - that's a broad subject, but in general I would give the area pretty high marks. It's still the South, and it's still the Bible Belt, but one thing I learned soon after moving here was that the stereotypes are greatly exaggerated. By and large, people here tend not to judge, and accept people for what they are as long as you do the same. Yeah, it's still the South, so you're still going to see a lot of Confederate flags and run into a few intolerant bigots, but it's definitely not the prevailing culture. My wife is a minority, and we have never had an issue. As non-Christians, we're always aware that we're in the minority, but nobody has ever felt the need to remind us of it.

At the same time, you won't see much diversity in terms of demographics - at least, not compared to metropolitan areas on the coasts or in the North. It's not that people of other cultures aren't welcome, because i believe they really are - I think it's just that there doesn't tend to be much here to attract them.

In a similar vein, you mentioned progressivism. Sorry, but that's in short supply. You'll find pockets of it in some Louisville neighborhoods, and overall the area is closer to a progressive vibe than many other areas of the South, but it's not a progressive culture. Louisville is a fairly liberal city by southern standards, but I wouldn't call it a progressive liberalism at all. In most of Kentucky, today's Democrats would have been Republicans 20 or 30 years ago. The liberalism tends to be very moderate as opposed to progressive, but at the same time, people here tend to be very respectful of opposing political views and rarely seem to judge - unlike some of the more progressive areas that I have lived in during my life.

Traffic - yeah, traffic is thick at rush hour, and around the malls on weekends, but no worse than most cities. Part of the problem is that the hilly geography forces a lot of major roads into narrow corridors, which jam up quickly when traffic volume spikes. Large areas of the city have only a few ways in and out, so it can clog up pretty fast. But even at that, it's nothing at all like California, Atlanta, or many other major cities.

Airport - Louisville has pretty decent service for a small hub airport, and Cincinnati (a medium hub) is a reasonable drive. Unless you’re looking somewhere on the coasts, you’ll be hard-pressed to find a similarly-sized airport with better service. Unless you're a really frequent traveler, that shouldn't be a problem for you at all.

Eating and drinking - music scene is decent, and the food scene is excellent for a Southern city of this size. As far as nightlife is concerned, there's not much of a downtown; most of the nightspots are spread out in the neighborhoods. That's not say that there isn't any club scene downtown, because there is - it's just that unlike a lot of cities, most of the nightlife seems to be less centralized. If you like to go out at night, you'll find things to do.

Now, for other side of the coin....

Bicycling - no offense to Peter, but from a bicyclist's point of view, there's no way at all that Louisville is one of the top bicycling cities in the country. It's a terrible place for serious bicycling. The city makes occasional half-hearted efforts to cater to cyclists, but it's pretty pathetic, and there's no reason to think that's going to change. The city has a decent network of trails, but you really can't rack up serious training miles on urban trail networks, and if you want to do any significant road-riding, you're taking your life into your hands. Louisville (and Kentucky as a whole) has one of the highest crash rates and highest fatality rates for cyclists in the country. Roads are narrow, hilly, and winding, people drive like lunatics, and because bicycles are so rare here, they're not expecting to see one - so they're not looking out for them.

The League of American Cyclists placed Kentucky 49th on their list of bicycle-friendly states last year. As much as I love cycling, I don't even ride anymore. I went from 5000 miles a year to 0, and I'll never do any serious riding again as long as we live here. Up north I'd do around 20-30 miles a day on weekdays, and around 70 to (rarely) 100 on weekends, but down here the country roads are so winding and hilly that people can't see more than a quarter mile - and when they're roaring along at 50 miles an hour and come over a hill, there you are, on a narrow road with no shoulder. If road riding is important to you, you won't do much of it here.

Health care - mediocre at best, generally poor. Healthcare in Kentucky is consistently ranked in the bottom 10 states.

My wife is disabled, and I have a couple of medical issues myself, so we have a lot of experience with the health care system in this region. We're fortunate enough to have found an excellent internist in Bardstown, but for any kind of specialist we usually go to Cincinnati, sometimes Nashville, or even Indianapolis. That's not to say there aren't good specialists in this area, but when trying to find doctors who are up to date on the specialties we need, we consistently found that the specialists here are miles behind their contemporaries in neighboring states. Cincinnati is one of the top cities in the country for health care, and that kind of culture seems to attract the best and the most cutting-edge doctors.

Another thing you want to be aware of if you’re moving from a cooler, drier climate is that Louisville is the worst city in the country for allergies. Nobody ever seems to ask about that when checking out the area, and I suspect it’s because a lot of people don’t have allergies where they live now, so it doesn’t occur to them – but when they get down here, they suddenly find they have a lot of allergies. That was what happened to me… I never had an allergy issue in my life until I moved here, but within 3 days after moving, I found out what allergies were all about. I suffered constantly for the first couple of years, but the last year or two it seems to have leveled off somewhat. I may be adjusting to the environment; I don’t know for sure yet.

If you're into serious outdoor recreational pursuits, you might also want to consider the climate. If you're used to northern and/or maritime climates, the heat and humidity can come as a rude shock. This is a humid subtropical climate zone. 90+ temperatures usually begin in early May and continue into October, with long periods of continuous 90-degree days throughout the summer. Dewpoints are generally in the 70s, and you can expect around 40 90+ days a year. Even if it doesn't hit 90, it's usually in the mid to high 80s, and with those dewpoints it's still pretty rough for extended outdoor activities. Some people handle it better than others, and only you can determine how it affects you personally.

I think a lot of people who are from this area are acclimated to it, but if you're from a milder climate, it can be a tough adjustment. I think I'm getting used to it, but I definitely don't spend anywhere near as much time outside in the summer as I was used to spending; when the heat index is 100 degrees or more, you just max out after an hour or two of strenuous exercise.

So, that's the good and the bad as i see it. Sorry if some of it sounds like a downer, but it is what it is. When people ask that kind of question on this forum, the advice tends to be very one-sided, and anything that could be construed as criticism is often met with a rather negative reaction - but if you're thinking of moving here you need to know all sides of the issue, not just the promotional material. There are a lot of good things about living here, but it's not necessarily all good, and you have a right to hear honest answers.

Having said that, if you do move here, let me know. Sounds like we have a lot in common, and I'd be glad to show you around and help you settle in.

Last edited by Mr. In-Between; 01-04-2017 at 07:28 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2017, 12:48 AM
 
6,295 posts, read 13,176,543 times
Reputation: 2789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. In-Between View Post
Fwdvision,

I lived most of my life in Northern Wisconsin and the Twin Cities, and have also live in Northwestern Montana and California. So some of what I say is filtered through the lens of having lived in those areas. Also, like you, I'm somewhat progressive and an avid cyclist - I own 7 bikes (2 mountain bikes, 3 road bikes, and 2 racing bikes), and would generally log around 5000 miles per season in the Twin Cities. So that gives you some idea of the frame of reference that I'm coming from.

Mosquitoes - I hate 'em too. I would say they're bad here in some areas, but really not as bad as Wisconsin and Minnesota. It rains a lot down here, and the terrain is rocky, so water tends to pool up instead of soaking into the soil. It's definitely worse than Montana or California, but it's probably as good as you're going to find anywhere east of the Mississippi. Many other parts of the South are way worse.

Diversity - that's a broad subject, but in general I would give the area pretty high marks. It's still the South, and it's still the Bible Belt, but one thing I learned soon after moving here was that the stereotypes are greatly exaggerated. By and large, people here tend not to judge, and accept people for what they are as long as you do the same. Yeah, it's still the South, so you're still going to see a lot of Confederate flags and run into a few intolerant bigots, but it's definitely not the prevailing culture. My wife is a minority, and we have never had an issue. As non-Christians, we're always aware that we're in the minority, but nobody has ever felt the need to remind us of it.

At the same time, you won't see much diversity in terms of demographics - at least, not compared to metropolitan areas on the coasts or in the North. It's not that people of other cultures aren't welcome, because i believe they really are - I think it's just that there doesn't tend to be much here to attract them.

In a similar vein, you mentioned progressivism. Sorry, but that's in short supply. You'll find pockets of it in some Louisville neighborhoods, and overall the area is closer to a progressive vibe than many other areas of the South, but it's not a progressive culture. Louisville is a fairly liberal city by southern standards, but I wouldn't call it a progressive liberalism at all. In most of Kentucky, today's Democrats would have been Republicans 20 or 30 years ago. The liberalism tends to be very moderate as opposed to progressive, but at the same time, people here tend to be very respectful of opposing political views and rarely seem to judge - unlike some of the more progressive areas that I have lived in during my life.

Traffic - yeah, traffic is thick at rush hour, and around the malls on weekends, but no worse than most cities. Part of the problem is that the hilly geography forces a lot of major roads into narrow corridors, which jam up quickly when traffic volume spikes. Large areas of the city have only a few ways in and out, so it can clog up pretty fast. But even at that, it's nothing at all like California, Atlanta, or many other major cities.

Airport - Louisville has pretty decent service for a small hub airport, and Cincinnati (a medium hub) is a reasonable drive. Unless you’re looking somewhere on the coasts, you’ll be hard-pressed to find a similarly-sized airport with better service. Unless you're a really frequent traveler, that shouldn't be a problem for you at all.

Eating and drinking - music scene is decent, and the food scene is excellent for a Southern city of this size. As far as nightlife is concerned, there's not much of a downtown; most of the nightspots are spread out in the neighborhoods. That's not say that there isn't any club scene downtown, because there is - it's just that unlike a lot of cities, most of the nightlife seems to be less centralized. If you like to go out at night, you'll find things to do.

Now, for other side of the coin....

Bicycling - no offense to Peter, but from a bicyclist's point of view, there's no way at all that Louisville is one of the top bicycling cities in the country. It's a terrible place for serious bicycling. The city makes occasional half-hearted efforts to cater to cyclists, but it's pretty pathetic, and there's no reason to think that's going to change. The city has a decent network of trails, but you really can't rack up serious training miles on urban trail networks, and if you want to do any significant road-riding, you're taking your life into your hands. Louisville (and Kentucky as a whole) has one of the highest crash rates and highest fatality rates for cyclists in the country. Roads are narrow, hilly, and winding, people drive like lunatics, and because bicycles are so rare here, they're not expecting to see one - so they're not looking out for them.

The League of American Cyclists placed Kentucky 49th on their list of bicycle-friendly states last year. As much as I love cycling, I don't even ride anymore. I went from 5000 miles a year to 0, and I'll never do any serious riding again as long as we live here. Up north I'd do around 20-30 miles a day on weekdays, and around 70 to (rarely) 100 on weekends, but down here the country roads are so winding and hilly that people can't see more than a quarter mile - and when they're roaring along at 50 miles an hour and come over a hill, there you are, on a narrow road with no shoulder. If road riding is important to you, you won't do much of it here.

Health care - mediocre at best, generally poor. Healthcare in Kentucky is consistently ranked in the bottom 10 states.

My wife is disabled, and I have a couple of medical issues myself, so we have a lot of experience with the health care system in this region. We're fortunate enough to have found an excellent internist in Bardstown, but for any kind of specialist we usually go to Cincinnati, sometimes Nashville, or even Indianapolis. That's not to say there aren't good specialists in this area, but when trying to find doctors who are up to date on the specialties we need, we consistently found that the specialists here are miles behind their contemporaries in neighboring states. Cincinnati is one of the top cities in the country for health care, and that kind of culture seems to attract the best and the most cutting-edge doctors.

Another thing you want to be aware of if you’re moving from a cooler, drier climate is that Louisville is the worst city in the country for allergies. Nobody ever seems to ask about that when checking out the area, and I suspect it’s because a lot of people don’t have allergies where they live now, so it doesn’t occur to them – but when they get down here, they suddenly find they have a lot of allergies. That was what happened to me… I never had an allergy issue in my life until I moved here, but within 3 days after moving, I found out what allergies were all about. I suffered constantly for the first couple of years, but the last year or two it seems to have leveled off somewhat. I may be adjusting to the environment; I don’t know for sure yet.

If you're into serious outdoor recreational pursuits, you might also want to consider the climate. If you're used to northern and/or maritime climates, the heat and humidity can come as a rude shock. This is a humid subtropical climate zone. 90+ temperatures usually begin in early May and continue into October, with long periods of continuous 90-degree days throughout the summer. Dewpoints are generally in the 70s, and you can expect around 40 90+ days a year. Even if it doesn't hit 90, it's usually in the mid to high 80s, and with those dewpoints it's still pretty rough for extended outdoor activities. Some people handle it better than others, and only you can determine how it affects you personally.

I think a lot of people who are from this area are acclimated to it, but if you're from a milder climate, it can be a tough adjustment. I think I'm getting used to it, but I definitely don't spend anywhere near as much time outside in the summer as I was used to spending; when the heat index is 100 degrees or more, you just max out after an hour or two of strenuous exercise.

So, that's the good and the bad as i see it. Sorry if some of it sounds like a downer, but it is what it is. When people ask that kind of question on this forum, the advice tends to be very one-sided, and anything that could be construed as criticism is often met with a rather negative reaction - but if you're thinking of moving here you need to know all sides of the issue, not just the promotional material. There are a lot of good things about living here, but it's not necessarily all good, and you have a right to hear honest answers.

Having said that, if you do move here, let me know. Sounds like we have a lot in common, and I'd be glad to show you around and help you settle in.

Alot of what you say is true however there is some gross bias in some of your opinions IMO.

There's no offense to me. Almost nothing I post here that is opinion is not based on fact.

http://www.bikeleague.org/sites/defa...pring_2015.pdf


The fact is, there are 4 Outstanding cycling cities, 15-20 great ones, and then about 30-40 above average cycling cities. Louisville, being a silver city, is well above average. That's the facts. But I appreciate your opinions. It's no San Fran or Portland but its not this podunck Bible Belt town you are painting a picture of in some of your post. Louisville has an avid cycling culture, and its city of parks with its 100 mile loop will be one of the finest biking attractions in the country. As is, the Big Four and the Ohio River Greenway are world class attractions. If they were in NYC or San Fran, the Big Four would be nationally famous. As is, it draws 90,000 people a month in warm months. Not bad for a metro area of 1.3 million.

Louisville is not the Bible Belt really at all. Especially within the 264, and to a lesser extent, inside I265. That's not to say that most aren't Christians...but theres tons of churches in Milwaukee, Minneapolis...it's the heartland man! There are also a dozen mosques, a half dozen Jewish temples, and every other religion, agnostic, or atheist imaginable.

Like I said, I appreciate your post, but its painted by a person who has lived in the west coast and in a fairly larger VERY northern, practically Canadian metro area. So of course it will seem way different and I am sure you have had some culture shock. I know I did and still continue to. There are parts of KY I am literally scared to go to.

Your negatives about the allergies is spot on. Lots of great allergists here because of it.

And speaking of medicine....I travel around the region and country in the medical field. Louisville is a GREAT medical city. Home to the first artifical heart transplant and first hand transplant in the world! The Gardasil HPV vaccine was invented here. Lots of great medicine here. It just sounds like you haven't found them.
What you may not realize is that high level medical specialists have become very "niche" by city. So while folks in Cincinnati may drive to Louisville for any major hand injury, folks in Louisville may drive to Cincinnati for rare pediatric thoracic surgeries.

You are making it sound like Louisville's regional competitor cities are "world class" medical centers. I'd certainly give a nod to Vandy in Nashville. But medicine overall in Indy and Cincinnati overall is only marginally better, and thats a fact.

Fact is, if anyone needs any boutique specialty or has anything rare, they'd be better leaving Louisville for Houston, Atlanta, Cleveland Clinic, Mayo, Johns Hopkins in Baltimore, etc. Trumping medicine in Cincinnati over Louisville is marginal at best. I appreciate your opinions though and certainly hope your health improves!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2017, 12:54 AM
 
6,295 posts, read 13,176,543 times
Reputation: 2789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldhag1 View Post
I was getting ready to make the same argument. I would never classify Louisville as poor. It does have a large working class population, but I fail to see why test is a problem. It is way better than the inner city blights that most states have in their largest urban area. Louisville also doesn't have as drastic of an average income gap as normally seen in urban areas.
I have been saying this for years....Louisville's biggest problem is Louisville itself. It was always a "we cannot do this city." I honestly think that may have been an impetus behind the awfully cheesy slogan "Possibility City"

It has taken me living, exploring, and traveling all over the country to every major metro and also focusing on lots of mid major metros to realize the great potential this place has, and also the gross kinetic energy. That's why its my new hometown, although I must admit I flirted with Nashville and Austin very hard few years back. But they are too overhyped and overplayed. Louisville is more like an old used LP you discover in your dad's attic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2017, 10:37 PM
 
Location: Caverns measureless to man...
6,704 posts, read 4,163,830 times
Reputation: 14935
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter1948 View Post

Alot of what you say is true however there is some gross bias in some of your opinions IMO.
I think would have to say the same about your post, and probably with better justification. I feel that I'm backing my position with factual data, and I'm comfortable citing it and standing by it - but I'm not seeing so much of that getting lobbed back over the net. No offense, but I think you're going a little heavy on the cheerleading here.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter1948 View Post
The fact is, there are 4 Outstanding cycling cities, 15-20 great ones, and then about 30-40 above average cycling cities. Louisville, being a silver city, is well above average. That's the facts. But I appreciate your opinions. It's no San Fran or Portland but its not this podunck Bible Belt town you are painting a picture of in some of your post. Louisville has an avid cycling culture, and its city of parks with its 100 mile loop will be one of the finest biking attractions in the country. As is, the Big Four and the Ohio River Greenway are world class attractions. If they were in NYC or San Fran, the Big Four would be nationally famous. As is, it draws 90,000 people a month in warm months. Not bad for a metro area of 1.3 million.
Your original point was that Louisville was one of the top cycling cities in the country, and now we've gone to "not bad." But even that I don't agree with, especially in the context of the OP's question. He's a competitive cyclist who wants a city where he can do serious road training, and the fact remains that Louisville is a terrible city for logging major road miles. For all the reasons I outlined in my first post - none of which you rebutted, so there's no need for me to repeat them. None of the things you said address my points, and the link you cited doesn't offer any supporting data at all.

Again, if you're looking at this from the point of view of a serious cyclist, Louisville is a terrible city for putting on serious road miles - as is the state as a whole. In the summertime, I'll often go a month or more without seeing a single bicycle on a Louisville street, and in 5+ years here, I can easily count on one hand the number of times I've seen cyclists on rural roads. This is not a bicycle-friendly state or city, and while the trail networks are a step in the right direction, the streets do not lend themselves to road training. As a veteran hobby cyclist and Cat. 3 road racer, Louisville is a terrible town (and Kentucky is a suicidal state) for high-mileage road riding.

You have to understand that for dedicated riders, toodling along on a trail network is useless for training - if I were still competing, just to stay in proper shape I'd need to ride from our Crestwood house to someplace like Shelbyville on a regular basis, and then back again. That's how we train. You can't do that on a trail network. You need a large-scale road network that is safe enough for you to roll it out, crack the throttle wide open for 30 or 40 miles, have lunch in a different area code, and then go home. Several times a week, to the tune of several thousand miles per year. And if that's the sort of thing the OP is looking for, he simply is not going to find it in Louisville. Not if he wants to survive more than a month or two.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter1948 View Post
Louisville is not the Bible Belt really at all. Especially within the 264, and to a lesser extent, inside I265. That's not to say that most aren't Christians...but theres tons of churches in Milwaukee, Minneapolis...it's the heartland man! There are also a dozen mosques, a half dozen Jewish temples, and every other religion, agnostic, or atheist imaginable.
According to most conventional definitions of the Bible Belt, Kentucky is a Bible Belt state. So you'd have to argue that either Louisville is not part of Kentucky, or that you prefer a definition of the Bible Belt that does not include Kentucky. Since Louisville is obviously in Kentucky, I doubt you're asserting the former, and if your argument is the latter, you're entitled to that opinion. In that case, you've simply chosen a different definition of the Bible Belt than most people accept. Sure, some areas of Louisville defy the Bible Belt stereotype, but by most commonly accepted standards, Louisville is in the Bible Belt. The American Bible Society seems to agree, ranking Louisville the 17th most bible-minded city in the country -

The Most Bible-Minded Cities in America | American Bible Society

Bible Belt.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter1948 View Post
And speaking of medicine....I travel around the region and country in the medical field. Louisville is a GREAT medical city. Home to the first artifical heart transplant and first hand transplant in the world! The Gardasil HPV vaccine was invented here. Lots of great medicine here. It just sounds like you haven't found them.
What you may not realize is that high level medical specialists have become very "niche" by city. So while folks in Cincinnati may drive to Louisville for any major hand injury, folks in Louisville may drive to Cincinnati for rare pediatric thoracic surgeries.

You are making it sound like Louisville's regional competitor cities are "world class" medical centers. I'd certainly give a nod to Vandy in Nashville. But medicine overall in Indy and Cincinnati overall is only marginally better, and thats a fact.
Oh, I never realized that was your field of endeavour. Cool! But still, I have to disagree.

Sure, every city in the country has some good doctors, and we can trade anecdotes for pages on end, but the available data is pretty strongly in favor of my assertion. Kentucky as a whole consistently ranks in the mid-to low 40s nationwide in health rankings, and according to livability.com, Louisville's health care ranking isn't even one of the best in the state - whereas they rank Cincinnati #2 in the nation.

The Health Collaborative – Cincinnati Ranks #2 in Nation for Health Care

Health and Health Care in Louisville, KY

Cincinnati Children's (where we go) is ranked by US News and World Report the 3rd-best children's hospital in the country; not a single hospital in the state of Kentucky (much less Louisville) even made the national rankings. Indianapolis also has at least 2 hospitals that are nationally ranked that I'm aware of (at least in some specialties). I don't know a lot about how Nashville stacks up overall, but I do know that Vanderbilt (where we go) also is ranked nationally in some areas. Those are just a couple of surveys, but they're very representative of and consistent with the vast majority of all other rankings.

Sorry, but that's just the way it is. The OP asked about the quality of health care in the area, and by any available metric, it sucks compared to the rest of the country and the surrounding cities. If you're sick (or planning to become sick) Kentucky is one of the last places in America you want to live, unless you're fortunate enough to have one of the apparently very few ailments that someone in Kentucky is on the leading edge of.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter1948 View Post
Fact is, if anyone needs any boutique specialty or has anything rare, they'd be better leaving Louisville for Houston, Atlanta, Cleveland Clinic, Mayo, Johns Hopkins in Baltimore, etc. Trumping medicine in Cincinnati over Louisville is marginal at best. I appreciate your opinions though and certainly hope your health improves!
Yeah, we go to Atlanta too, and Johns Hopkins. And New York. And Cedar-Sinai in LA. And I'm sure we'll get around to Mayo at some point. I remember one of the first doctors we saw, when we first found out how sick my wife really is, looked at us very seriously for a moment and said (in an elegant Italian accent) "You two are going to be doing a lot of flying." We both nodded as though we knew what he was talking about, but man. How little we knew at the time.

Thanks for the well-wishes, though. I know it's sincere, and it means a lot. Personally, I'm OK now (it's kind of odd being married to someone over 20 years younger and being so damned much healthier than she is), and for now we sort of have the resources to fly her to wherever she needs to go most of the time. Trouble is, for her there really is no one place where she can go for everything, so we'd be flying no matter what. So I'm not really griping about the medical care here, because even if we lived across the street from Cincinnati Children's or on the Vanderbilt campus, we'd still be flying for 80% of it. My main point is simply that the care here is very lacking compared to most of the rest of the country.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter1948 View Post
I have been saying this for years....Louisville's biggest problem is Louisville itself. It was always a "we cannot do this city." I honestly think that may have been an impetus behind the awfully cheesy slogan "Possibility City"
No argument with this one. Not to sound like I'm dissing L-ville, but I really believe the only thing keeping this city from being more than it is is the fact that it doesn't want to be anything more than it is. This is why I said earlier that Louisville is not a progressive city; it really doesn't want to progress. And there's nothing wrong with that - it has a fine tradition, and a unique culture. The rest of the world is moving forward, accelerating at an ever-greater pace - but Louisville does not seem to want to speed up and catch up to the pack. They want to move at their own pace, and i respect that.

Last edited by Mr. In-Between; 01-05-2017 at 11:30 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2017, 11:24 PM
 
6,295 posts, read 13,176,543 times
Reputation: 2789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. In-Between View Post
I think would have to say the same about your post, and probably with better justification. I feel that I'm backing my position with factual data, and I'm comfortable citing it and standing by it - but I'm not seeing so much of that getting lobbed back over the net. No offense, but I think you're going a little heavy on the cheerleading here.






Your original point was that Louisville was one of the top cycling cities in the country, and now we've gone to "not bad." But even that I don't agree with, especially in the context of the OP's question. He's a competitive cyclist who wants a city where he can do serious road training, and the fact remains that Louisville is a terrible city for logging major road miles. For all the reasons I outlined in my first post - none of which you rebutted, so there's no need for me to repeat them. None of the things you said address my points, and the link you cited doesn't offer any supporting data at all.

Again, if you're looking at this from the point of view of a serious cyclist, Louisville is a terrible city for putting on serious road miles - as is the state as a whole. In the summertime, I'll often go a month or more without seeing a single bicycle on a Louisville street, and in 5+ years here, I can easily count on one hand the number of times I've seen cyclists on rural roads. This is not a bicycle-friendly state or city, and while the trail networks are a step in the right direction, the streets do not lend themselves to road training. As a veteran hobby cyclist and Cat. 3 road racer, Louisville is a terrible town (and Kentucky is a suicidal state) for high-mileage road riding.

You have to understand that for dedicated riders, toodling along on a trail network is useless for training - if I were still competing, just to stay in proper shape I'd need to ride from our Crestwood house to someplace like Shelbyville on a regular basis, and then back again. That's how we train. You can't do that on a trail network. You need a large-scale road network that is safe enough for you to roll it out, crack the throttle wide open for 30 or 40 miles, have lunch in a different area code, and then go home. Several times a week, to the tune of several thousand miles per year. And if that's the sort of thing the OP is looking for, he simply is not going to find it in Louisville. Not if he wants to survive more than a month or two.





According to most conventional definitions of the Bible Belt, Kentucky is a Bible Belt state. So you'd have to argue that either Louisville is not part of Kentucky, or that you prefer a definition of the Bible Belt that does not include Kentucky. Since Louisville is obviously in Kentucky, I doubt you're asserting the former, and if your argument is the latter, you're entitled to that opinion. In that case, you've simply chosen a different definition of the Bible Belt than most people accept. Sure, some areas of Louisville defy the Bible Belt stereotype, but by most commonly accepted standards, Louisville is in the Bible Belt. The American Bible Society seems to agree, ranking Louisville the 17th most bible-minded city in the country -

The Most Bible-Minded Cities in America | American Bible Society

Bible Belt.




Oh, I never realized that was your field of endeavour. Cool! But still, I have to disagree.

Sure, every city in the country has some good doctors, and we can trade anecdotes for pages on end, but the available data is pretty strongly in favor of my assertion. Kentucky as a whole consistently ranks in the mid-to low 40s nationwide in health rankings, and according to livability.com, Louisville's health care ranking isn't even one of the best in the state - whereas they rank Cincinnati #2 in the nation.

The Health Collaborative – Cincinnati Ranks #2 in Nation for Health Care

Health and Health Care in Louisville, KY

Cincinnati Children's (where we go) is ranked by US News and World Report the 3rd-best children's hospital in the country; not a single hospital in the state of Kentucky (much less Louisville) even made the national rankings. Indianapolis also has at least 2 hospitals that are nationally ranked that I'm aware of (at least in some specialties). I don't know a lot about how Nashville stacks up overall, but I do know that Vanderbilt (where we go) also is ranked nationally in some areas. Those are just a couple of surveys, but they're very representative of and consistent with the vast majority of all other rankings.

Sorry, but that's just the way it is. The OP asked about the quality of health care in the area, and by any available metric, it sucks compared to the rest of the country and the surrounding cities. If you're sick (or planning to become sick) Kentucky is one of the last places in America you want to live, unless you're fortunate enough to have one of the apparently very few ailments that someone in Kentucky is on the leading edge of.





Yeah, we go to Atlanta too, and Johns Hopkins. And New York. And Cedar-Sinai in LA. And I'm sure we'll get around to Mayo at some point. I remember one of the first doctors we saw, when we first found out how sick my wife really is, looked at us very seriously for a moment and said (in an elegant Italian accent) "You two are going to be doing a lot of flying." We both nodded as though we knew what he was talking about, but man. How little we knew at the time.

Thanks for the well-wishes, though. I know it's sincere, and it means a lot. Personally, I'm OK now (it's kind of odd being married to someone over 20 years younger and being so damned much healthier than she is), and for now we sort of have the resources to fly her to wherever she needs to go most of the time. Trouble is, for her there really is no one place where she can go for everything, so we'd be flying no matter what. So I'm not really griping about the medical care here, because even if we lived across the street from Cincinnati Children's or on the Vanderbilt campus, we'd still be flying for 80% of it. My main point is simply that the care here is very lacking compared to most of the rest of the country.

So you've lived in the exurbs for two years and you are on expert on Louisville? Hmmm. Yes you CAN ride hundreds of miles on streets in Louisville! That is why it is a silver cycling city. Tons of bike lanes. I don't disagree Louisville doesn't need to improve, but come on.

Look, you still feel like an outsider here. Part of that is you chose to live in Oldham County. There is no way, not even a small chance, that you have a pulse on the city like I do. Maybe you know lots about NE Louisville, but not the urban areas. You don't know about the miles of bike baths along the Ohio River.

You fail to mention some of the major events that occur here, like IronMan, Cyclocross, etc. There are so many cycling groups here that it is not funny. Granted, I do not race competitively, but I doubt there is more than a dozen or so cities which are advanced in this. I can certainly nam off Portland, Seattle, San Fran, Chicago, and NYC. Even Minneapolis isn't that grand for biking. I'd place it a half a notch above Louisville, if that, for biking. At least Louisville is more temperate.

Like I said, I think we actually agree on alot.

I think Cincinnati DOES have better medical care but number two ranking? That's laughable. Cincinnati has only slightly better overall care. We aren't talking NYC here. Louisville is ranked higher than Cincinnati on pretty much every other ranking on livability!


12 Kentucky hospitals named to U.S. News Best Hospitals list

Kosair Children's is ranked nationally in 6 specialties and Louisville has several hospitals ranked nationally in US News.

When I read your post as an outsider, I think of Louisville as some backwoods Bible thumping town that is regressive and not up with the times. You make it sound like Pikeville combined with Lexington. The fact is it is a progressive mid major city with some good, bad, and in between.

Fact is, it couldn't be further from the truth.

One thing I can say is this: you DEFINITELY belong in the Highlands, not Oldham County. Your entire perspective would change.


And although Louisville is technically in KY (by what, a mile?), which I agree is part of the Bible Belt, Louisville is not Bible Beltish at all. If you are trying to group Louisville with the state of KY, then that is a serious misrepresentation. Either that, or you have never been to Appalachia, etc.

Last edited by Peter1948; 01-05-2017 at 11:49 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2017, 08:53 PM
 
Location: Caverns measureless to man...
6,704 posts, read 4,163,830 times
Reputation: 14935
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter1948 View Post
So you've lived in the exurbs for two years and you are on expert on Louisville?
Well, here we go. That was as predictable as it is tiresome. Please leave the petty sniping out of the conversation, and try to confine this to a simple factual discussion. You do this all the time – whenever someone says something about Louisville that you don’t like, you look for ways to discredit the poster. Can we please try to remain objective?


Quote:
Hmmm. Yes you CAN ride hundreds of miles on streets in Louisville! That is why it is a silver cycling city.
OK, great. It’s a “silver cycling city.” So tell us – what exactly does that mean?

I guarantee you don’t know the answer to that question. It’s just the only thing you could find that seemed to support your position, so you threw it up there without having any clue what it means. You’ll probably google it now, but when you put it up there you had no idea what it meant, and you still don’t. It’s just something that sounded good.

Go find out what the criteria are for a silver city designation, then come back here and use that data to refute my argument that this is not a good city or state for long distance road training. Until then, it doesn’t mean a thing.

Oh, and while you're looking for supporting data, be careful about using that site. They're the same ones who ranked Kentucky the 2nd most bicycle-unfriendly state in the country. You want to be careful not to use that data point.


Quote:
Look, you still feel like an outsider here. Part of that is you chose to live in Oldham County.
Please stop derailing discussions with psychological analyses and personal remarks that have no relevance to the topic.

Quote:
There is no way, not even a small chance, that you have a pulse on the city like I do.
And here you fall back on another of your favorite logical fallacies, the appeal to authority. If you want to win an argument, you need to make a better argument, not just keep pontificating about what an expert you are. If you have such a pulse on the city, throw up some factual data to refute the facts that I am posting. All you’re doing is complaining because you don’t want to hear the data I post; that’s not a counrterargument.


Quote:
Granted, I do not race competitively, but I doubt there is more than a dozen or so cities which are advanced in this. I can certainly nam off Portland, Seattle, San Fran, Chicago, and NYC. Even Minneapolis isn't that grand for biking. I'd place it a half a notch above Louisville, if that, for biking.
And now you’ve really jumped the shark. Minneapolis is the city where I used to log 5000 miles a year, most of it on long-distance road rides. 40 or 50 miles west to Hutchinson or Watertown, 40-some miles east to Wisconsin, 40 miles northeast to Taylor’s Falls, north to Anoka, northwest to Elk River, southeast to Hastings, southwest to Shakopee, south to Rosemount or Apple Valley… and on every ride, I’d see scores or even hundreds of cyclists crowding the wide, spacious, safe roads. I used to see more cyclists in a single daylong ride than I’ve seen in Kentucky the entire 5 years I’ve lived here. When was the last time you saw hundreds of cyclists in a single day anywhere in Kentucky, much less in Louisville? I'll answer that for you - never. And why do you think that is?

Minneapolis is light-years ahead of Louisville as a cycling city, and anyone who is familiar with both cities wouldn’t even question that.

You know absolutely nothing about this subject. You are in completely over your head. Why do you keep pressing this?



Quote:
I think Cincinnati DOES have better medical care but number two ranking? That's laughable. Cincinnati has only slightly better overall care. We aren't talking NYC here. Louisville is ranked higher than Cincinnati on pretty much every other ranking on livability!
Two things. First of all, we’re not talking about “just about every other ranking” – we’re talking about health care. Please stop trying to muddy the waters. And the second thing is, if you think the poll I posted is “laughable”, explain why you think it’s flawed. I didn’t exactly make it up on my own, you know. Or find some rankings that you support your argument. And good luck with that, especially if this next one is the best you’ve been able to do so far…

12 Kentucky hospitals named to U.S. News Best Hospitals list

Quote:
Kosair Children's is ranked nationally in 6 specialties and Louisville has several hospitals ranked nationally in US News.
You need to read your own link more closely. Yes, Kosair has several specialties that are nationally ranked in the 30s and 40s, but the hospital itself is not ranked nationally, and no other hospital on that list has any specialties that are ranked nationally.

Quote:
Jewish Hospital in Louisville was ranked No. 5 in Kentucky and No. 2 in the Louisville area…
Quote:
Baptist Health Louisville was ranked No. 2 in Kentucky and No. 1 in the Louisville area. It performed nearly at the level of nationally ranked U.S. News Best Hospitals in 10 adult specialties…
Quote:
Norton Hospital in Louisville was ranked No. 6 in Kentucky and No. 3 in the Louisville area. It performed nearly at the level of nationally ranked U.S. News Best Hospitals in gastroenterology and GI surgery;…
Your own link supports my argument and undermines yours.

Quote:
When I read your post as an outsider, I think of Louisville as some backwoods Bible thumping town that is regressive and not up with the times. You make it sound like Pikeville combined with Lexington.
Then perhaps you’re overly sensitive, because when I re-read that post, I’m unable to think of any reason that anyone would gather that from my post. It was very balanced and objective by any reasonable standard. Why do you take these things so personally?

Quote:
Fact is, it couldn't be further from the truth.

One thing I can say is this: you DEFINITELY belong in the Highlands, not Oldham County. Your entire perspective would change.
What does my perspective have to do with it? Unlike you, I am backing up everything I say with factual data. Do you think that if I lived somewhere else I’d have found different links for the health care rankings? Do you think if I lived somewhere else the road system in and around Louisville would suddenly become straighter, wider, and safer? Please just address the facts, and stop trying to find reasons to discredit me personally.

Quote:
And although Louisville is technically in KY (by what, a mile?), which I agree is part of the Bible Belt, Louisville is not Bible Beltish at all. If you are trying to group Louisville with the state of KY, then that is a serious misrepresentation. Either that, or you have never been to Appalachia, etc.

Fail again. Almost all of my Louisville-area friends live in the Highlands, J-town, and Crescent City, and St. Matthews. Most of my friends live in the mountains, and I spend very little of my free time in Oldham. I’m either in greater Louisville or the mountains most of the time. I know Kentucky far better than you think, and in many ways probably a lot better than you do when you consider how unrealistic and one-sided so many of your posts are.

Peter, we can go back and forth on this for page after page, but unless you can find factual data that refutes the factual data that I post, you’re just going to keep losing. I’ve said this many times - as far as I know this forum is not intended to be a branch of the tourism department; people who are thinking of making some of the most important decisions of their lives come here looking for factual information to help them decide whether to pick up and move to an entirely new part of the country. When they ask honest questions, they deserve honest answers, and your cheerleading and browbeating of anyone who does try to post factual data does those users a very grave disservice.
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:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 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 > Kentucky > Louisville area
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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