Milwaukee comparable to which midwestern city? (Columbus, Rochester: fit in, renewal, housing)

[KC3700]

Cleveland. As a matter of fact, a lot of things that are tried in Milwaukee wind up having the same effect as they did in Cleveland.

Originally Posted by city414

CLEVELAND IS ACTUALLY A MINI CHICAGO, AS THEY SAY CHICAGO HAS THE CHARACTERISTICS OF EAST COAST CITIES, CLEVELAND HAS THOSE OF CHICAGO

Not at all really. Cleveland is not like Chicago. Cleveland is actually a very troubled city, with high poverty and unemployment. They also had a stunning population exodus comparable to Detroit. They went from being a city of about the same population as Milwaukee in 1960, to having a population of 442,000.

Cleveland is actually smaller than Milwaukee.

[Wingfoot]

MKE and Buffalo seem alike to me.

[Milwaukee City]

Milwaukee is simalar to the following:

1. Kansas City
2. Twin Cities
3. Pittsburgh
4. Cincy
5. St.Louis
6. Buffalo
7. Detroit
8. Chicago(a very mini Chicago)
9. Bmore
10. Cleveland

[jefffla01]

I have spent a lot of time in Pittsburgh, and I agree that Milw and Pitts. are similar in a lot of respects.

The people are hard working throughout the generations in both towns----both towns have slavic and East European ethnic backgrounds.

Both cities have great people---very friendly towns.

Both cities have down a nice job on urban revitilization----ie --downtown areas.

I like Pittsburgh----I like Milwaukee.

[Napoleon357]

Originally Posted by Fishtacos

St. Louis has a lot more amentities and conveniences because of its bigger size.

Are you talking population or square miles? I could have sworn Milwaukee was larger population wise.

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by Milwaukee City

Milwaukee is simalar to the following:

1. Kansas City
2. Twin Cities
3. Pittsburgh
4. Cincy
5. St.Louis
6. Buffalo
7. Detroit
8. Chicago(a very mini Chicago)
9. Bmore
10. Cleveland

Somehow, I don't think so. I would say the closest comparison would be St. Louis. Some buildings in Milwaukee do look like parts of Pittsburgh and Buffalo. Those cities are not part of the Midwest. Milwaukee is a Great Lakes city. It is a midwestern city, but not in the same way that Cincinnati or Minneapolis is.

[Kenozia]

Cleveland?

I'd say it's in between Cleveland and Columbus. Milwaukee is far cleaner, not nearly as run down and has more culture than Cleveland; essentially swap out some of the excessive bad traits of Cleveland with the positives of Columbus, add a few of the characteristics of the lake front/life of Chicago a couple brats and you've got Milwaukee.

[Solas]

Physically, Milwaukee looks similar to Pittsburgh or Baltimore. There's a lot of older, european style architecture here that would look right at home on the east coast, or even in Munich for that matter.

Economically, Milwaukee is similar to St. Louis or Cleveland.

Culturally is probably the hardest of the three. On a good day, Milwaukee belongs up there with Chicago and Minneapolis. On a bad day, we're no better than Detroit or Buffalo.

[Solas]

Originally Posted by Drover

You've just described about half the cities east of the Mississippi. Doesn't make 'em all the same.

But IIRC, the only city anywhere with a greater disparity in income between city residents and suburbanites than Milwaukee is St. Louis.

Plus I've known plenty of St. Lousians my age who complain about the older residents who can't get over the fact that the city has evolved past beer, bowling and baseball and seem to think anything that deviates from the St. Louis they knew as a kid somehow isn't the "real" St. Louis. All of which would sound pretty familiar to someone coming from Milwaukee.

[Kenozia]

I agree with both your posts Solas. Pittsburgh has struck me with some Milwaukee qualities. And I could easily see a hypothetical war if Milwaukee saw rapid growth - over the quote on quote "real Milwaukee" of its German roots, breweries, etc.