Which American city would Bostonians consider relocating? (Worcester, Springfield: unemployment, college)

[Cantabridgienne]

I'm originally a New Yorker and may end up moving back. I briefly lived in San Francisco, but it's not for me. I'd be open to New Orleans--something about the local culture really speaks to me. I think Chicago is fantastic. I've lived in a few cities in Europe and Asia and would definitely be open to more international experiences.

I like living in Boston (and now Cambridge) for now but I feel like there are more places I'd like to experience as a resident.

[dravogadro]

Minneapolis is probably the only other place we would consider a long-term move; it is a hidden gem. I'm glad people think it is a frigid wasteland so they don't move there and destroy it.

Unfortunately, many of its tech jobs are in the suburbs and city to suburb transportation is terrible there.

Chicago is great. Madison is too small. Denver would be intriguing as well.

[gf2020]

I lived in Minneapolis as a child, I wouldn't go back. I'll put in another nod for Seattle.

[a bag of it]

I've never lived in the city, I live on the south shore, but I would consider NYC, SF, Chicago for major cities. Basically anywhere that is not too hot. Miami is appealing for some reason, but I think it would get old very fast. Better for a short stay. The only warm place I would consider long term would be Honolulu, but I would need a boatload of cash. I'm much more at home in a rural setting though.

[TAM88]

The West Coast. I lived out in the Los Angeles area for about 4 and a half years after college and enjoyed it.

Either Seattle or San Francisco would be my choices.

[dragon0524]

I used to live in a suburb of Boston and chose to relocate to a town in Kentucky with a population of 800. Talk about culture shock! Such is the mind of an independent 19 yr-old. :-)

[accufitgolf]

I like Boston but I also liked NYC, LA, San Francisco, Columbus (OH), and Chicago. I have lived in them all. They all "fit" me well at the time.

As I am retired and like to play golf 3-4 times a week, some that I liked would not "fit" me now.

As I am retired and do not make the big bucks anymore, some that I liked would not "fit" me now.

The times they do change.

[bostonguy1960]

I chatted with someone a couple years ago in Boston, who told me his favorite American places to live are his home of Port Townsend, WA, and Portland, ME.

Portland may be cool, being that it's close to Boston and perhaps even closer to Montreal than we. Of course, it's renowned for its restaurant scene, like Providence. Though I like small areas of Providence, it's too dirty, seems dangerous in some neighborhoods, and the state's unemployment is awful in recent years. So I'd take Portland over Providence if staying in New England. Burlington, VT, seems ideal but too small...

Pittsburgh is a possibility. It's probably underrated, has been at the top of most livable cities (as many other cities have), low cost of living, culture, Univ. of Pittsburgh Medical Center (on par with Brigham and Women's), colleges, pro sports, but some would consider it too insular.

A poster mentioned Columbus as a nice place he's lived. Seems somewhat interesting from what I've heard. Very liberal, Fortune 500 companies, Ohio State plus NHL Blue Jackets in a nice downtown arena, MLS Crew in a new soccer-specific stadium and AAA minor league baseball for years. Hmmm....

[FCMA]

Seattle has more Red Sox caps than Mariners caps already! For good reason, it's wonderful there. Sunny May to October, no humidity, 75 degrees, epic mountains in the distance. So it rains for a few months in winter instead of a deep freeze? Fine, I'll take it! Oh and microbrews are $2.50 a pint in the early evening because happy hour is actually LEGAL? And no Dunks in sight? Sealed deal.

[lrfox]

I'd easily live in San Francisco or New York. Both are cities I'm very familiar with and comfortable with and the adjustment wouldn't be too bad. It wouldn't take much persuasion to get me to move to either.

I lived in DC and would do it again, but I'd rather experience a different place. DC wasn't my cup of tea, but it's vibrant, urban, and has excellent transit. It's also comparable in size to Boston so the transition back would be easy. Same goes for Providence. Great little city.

Chicago, Portland OR, and Seattle are cities that I'd consider without much hesitation. I like all three, but don't feel drawn to any of them like i do SF or NYC.

Philadelphia looks good on paper, but I have very little attraction to the city. Same with Baltimore.

For change of pace cities, I'd definitely consider Austin, Pittsburgh or Minneapolis. Potentially Milwaukee which I've heard good things about.

Originally Posted by bostonguy1960

Portland may be cool, being that it's close to Boston and perhaps even closer to Montreal than we. Of course, it's renowned for its restaurant scene, like Providence. Though I like small areas of Providence, it's too dirty, seems dangerous in some neighborhoods, and the state's unemployment is awful in recent years. So I'd take Portland over Providence if staying in New England. Burlington, VT, seems ideal but too small...

I lived in Portland. Loved living Boston and Providence, but not so much Portland. I'd toss Portland into the "too small" category with Burlington. It's really not all that much larger (65,000 city, 188,000 in the urban area) and got underwhelming pretty quickly. It's got more of a cutesy seaport town charm than a big city feel. I know some people prefer that, but I got bored in Portland fairly fast. Of all of the places I've ever lived, Portland is the one that I wouldn't ever even consider gain. Portland may be closer geograpgically to Montreal, but Boston is the shorter driving distance by a decent margin(straight up 93 essentially). I was impressed by Portland when I visited which is part of what motivated me to move there. After living there, my opinion changed. It's a great place to visit, but not the most wonderful place to live.