Albany vs Rochester (New York, Buffalo, Syracuse: taxes, living, price)

[acnemaster]

I think what JiminCT is doing is just giving the Weg-maniacs more rope to hang themselves. He is baiting you into bragging about your grocery stores people! Think about that for a minute...bragging about a grocery store, even going as far as to say Cher likes their grocery stores.

Would anyone be impressed if I told you that Albany has the best linen shop in the US and that David Hassalhauf wishes he had one in Beverly Hills? I bet not. Maybe the Hauff is a bad example because he is too tied up eating a hamburger on his bathroom floor...but anyway. What if I bragged the CT had the most amazing post office in the world? Lame-o...not a selling point.

JiminCT is good...he is playing the roch-towners like a fiddle. You gotta debate with important stuff, not grocery chains. The weather argument and job market are valid points.

But I like Albany better, some people like western NY, i just don't happen to be one of them. I feel like I am visiting Iowa or Nebraska when I go there. Not interms of weather, geography or population patters, just in terms of culture, accents, and attitudes.

I prefer the culture that is typically associated with the Northeast U.S, a combination of cosmopolitan culture of the nations largest population belt and small picturesque New England towns.

I"m not being mean...just my honest opionon. Albany isn't for everyone, but It gets my vote.

[I'minformed2]

It's pretty funny that you said you thought Albany was more cosmopolitan...considering that Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse all have larger city AND metro populations, higher city and metro population density, more universities, Greater Rochester has the most affluent communities in the census defined Upstate region (which unforuntely does include Albany) and has hosted several PGA tournaments at the presigious Oak Hill Country Club (ironically enough, they also host the WEGMANS tournament there). But hey, Albany has that egg thing right?!?!?! Oh yeah, and they're the seat of one of the most corrupt state governments in the country! You're right....you have more to be proud of and more "prestige"

[garmin239]

I really don't see any difference people wise in any of the upstate cities. When ever I go to Albany people behave like they do here, Buffalo or Syracuse. I don't notice any accent difference either. The only difference in upstate cities i've seen is older architecture in certain parts of the capitol region. Otherwise there really is not much difference between those 4 cities. I start to see a change in people when I hit Springfield MA and go east.

[acnemaster]

[quote=i'minformed;966858]It's Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse all have larger city AND metro populations, QUOTE]

That is false Table of United States Metropolitan Statistical Areas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

check out that link. You are wrong, syracuse has the smallest metro area. Please don't lie anymore, it hurts peoples feelings. And Albany is the only city with a positive growth rate...your town is shrinking, congratulations.

And population isn't everything. If it was, Birmingham Alabama would be more cosmopolitan that rochester. I doubt you think it is.

The egg is nice by the way, I saw Dane Cook there, he is no Cher, and the Egg is no wegmans but hey...we cant have it all.

[I'minformed2]

Albany city is not growing, it's shrinking just like every other major city in the Northeast with the exception of NYC...and the metro region isn't exactly growing by leaps and bounds either (Buffalo metro is shrinking, Syracuse and Rochester are pretty much stagnant). Take a trip down your local wastewater treatment plant, and take a wiff...maybe then you'll realize that even the s**t of everyone in Albany stinks. Albany metro is larger than Syracuse because of Troy and Schenectedy....I'm sure Syracuse is glad to let you claim those all to yourself.

[acnemaster]

You are tyring to upgrade your cities shrinking population to a stagnent population. It is a poor indicator of your city if you have to use hyperbole to reach the stagnent level. Rochester is not stagnent...it is shrinking. Slowly but surely people are boxing up their belongings and moving somewhere else. That is how cities shirnk. Now Albany is growing at 3% annually...that may seem small but it is growth...which is superior to reduction.

And metroplitan areas include other cities..that is what a metro area is. You brought up metro areas. And most of the growth is coming from north of Albany in Saratoga and Clifton Park....very nice areas.

Now nothing I said is false...which is more than I can say for your posts. Why not stick to facts son?

And trust me..my **** stinks...ask anyone. I'll be the first to admit it.

[Genghis]

This is really the clash of the titans... which city is better, Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, or Albany. Gee, how about "the difference is so small that you'd barely notice; these cities are all more like each other than anywhere else" It took me over a year to be able to start to notice the differences between Rochester and Buffalo.

One thing that is true is that Wegman's is the best grocery chain I've ever seen. Probably the only thing I'm going to miss when I finally get out of here.

[rochacha]

Originally Posted by i'minformed

has hosted several PGA tournaments at the presigious Oak Hill Country Club (ironically enough, they also host the WEGMANS tournament there).

Actually, the Wegmans LPGA is at Locust Hill if you want to get technical. Either way, Rochester gets my vote, but it is true that Rochester is similar but different. Rochester is a culture built upon entrepreneurship and arts and being proud of where you are from. Albany is a culture built upon public service, funneling tax money, and being able to get away to a real city easily.

[I'minformed2]

Originally Posted by acnemaster

You are tyring to upgrade your cities shrinking population to a stagnent population. It is a poor indicator of your city if you have to use hyperbole to reach the stagnent level. Rochester is not stagnent...it is shrinking. Slowly but surely people are boxing up their belongings and moving somewhere else. That is how cities shirnk. Now Albany is growing at 3% annually...that may seem small but it is growth...which is superior to reduction.

And metroplitan areas include other cities..that is what a metro area is. You brought up metro areas. And most of the growth is coming from north of Albany in Saratoga and Clifton Park....very nice areas.

Now nothing I said is false...which is more than I can say for your posts. Why not stick to facts son?

And trust me..my **** stinks...ask anyone. I'll be the first to admit it.

please use actual statistics and numbers and try to read slowly....yes, the city of Rochester is shrinking, so is the city of Albany, and so is every other major city in the Norhteast except for NYC. The Rochester metropolitan area is stagnant meaning its population it hasn't changed significantly...going up or going down...since the 2000 census.(actually, if you want to get really specific, according to the July 2005 estimate, the Rochester metropolitan area's population rose from 1,037,831 to 1,039,028 since 2000, but thats not a significant increase, so I'd call that stagnant) The same is true for the Syracuse metropolitan area, while the Buffalo area has had a significant decrease in its population. Albany has had a slight increase in its metropolitan population....oh boy! Rochester had the largest population gains of all the upstate metros in the 90's....does that mean Rochester was superior to Albany then? This whole argument is peddy and childish..the maker of this thread didn't wan't a Rochester v. Albany bitchfest I'm positive of it.

[garmin239]

Originally Posted by Genghis

This is really the clash of the titans... which city is better, Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, or Albany. Gee, how about "the difference is so small that you'd barely notice; these cities are all more like each other than anywhere else"

I have to agree with this statement