[Ivory Lee Spurlock]

Originally Posted by techie_g

[/b]



Surely my point can't be this fleeting for you or anyone else.....but perhaps


For example, I've also lived in in ATLANTA. Do you think Atlanta is ahead or behind the rest of GEORGIA, or do you think it's indicative of the REST of Georgia?? (like Macon, or Rome, or Waycross? lol)
Do you think New York City is indicative or the rest of New York State (e.g. Rochseter, or Buffalo ?) if you do then you're terribly misinformed. Do you think New Orleans is indicative of the rest of Louisiana? Do you think Chicago is indicative of southern rural Illinois, say around Urbana ? My point should be very obvious. Most places outside of NYC are behind NYC. Most places outside of Chicago are behind Chicago in most respects. Most places outside of Paris are behind Paris.Easy stuff to comprehend I would think.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around all that. Best I can decipher is if a person prefers to live in a big city or a smaller town or out in the country. Thats the way I interpret it. But, I could be wrong.

[techie_g]

OH well.


Carry on. Believe, think, contend, or understand what you wish.


God Bless.

[bawac34618]

I've lived in Little Rock. I've spent some time in NW Arkansas but not enough to know the ins and outs of the culture there. This is actually a tough decision. Little Rock feels more like a traditional big city and feels more "urban." I really like the feel Little Rock has in areas like Hillcrest and the Heights. Downtown is quite nice as well as is the riverfront area.

All of those aspects of Little Rock are things you won't find in NWA. NWA has pockets of urbanism in Fayetteville but for the most part feels quite suburban (though much of it is "nice" suburban). NW Arkansas, with its university presence and economic growth, is probably more of a magnet for millennials than Little Rock is. In fact Little Rock struggles in this area as it's a place that young professionals tend to move away from and not move to. Politically, Arkansas as a state is dark maroon red. NWA is reddish-purple and Little Rock is the only truly liberal place in the state. People I know who have lived in both tend to prefer NWA. While Little Rock, on the surface, appears more like a major city, it has a lot of problems like crime, sprawl, and economic inequality that you don't have to contend with in NWA. Weather is overall similar, but NWA is colder in the winter and drier in the summer. Little Rock is climatically similar to most of the Southeastern United States; subtropical and wet.

Personally, I would opt for Tulsa or Memphis over either of them (or better yet Dallas) but if I had to choose, I would probably go with Little Rock. It's by no means a slam dunk, but the riverfront, traditional "city" feel, and easy proximity to Memphis and the Southeastern United States tip the scale in favor of Little Rock for me.

[Rock Climber]

Personally, I would opt for Tulsa or Memphis over either of them (or better yet Dallas) but if I had to choose, I would probably go with Little Rock.

Memphis? Over NWA?

Blasphemy.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by bawac34618

I've lived in Little Rock. I've spent some time in NW Arkansas but not enough to know the ins and outs of the culture there. This is actually a tough decision. Little Rock feels more like a traditional big city and feels more "urban." I really like the feel Little Rock has in areas like Hillcrest and the Heights. Downtown is quite nice as well as is the riverfront area.

All of those aspects of Little Rock are things you won't find in NWA. NWA has pockets of urbanism in Fayetteville but for the most part feels quite suburban (though much of it is "nice" suburban). NW Arkansas, with its university presence and economic growth, is probably more of a magnet for millennials than Little Rock is. In fact Little Rock struggles in this area as it's a place that young professionals tend to move away from and not move to. Politically, Arkansas as a state is dark maroon red. NWA is reddish-purple and Little Rock is the only truly liberal place in the state. People I know who have lived in both tend to prefer NWA. While Little Rock, on the surface, appears more like a major city, it has a lot of problems like crime, sprawl, and economic inequality that you don't have to contend with in NWA. Weather is overall similar, but NWA is colder in the winter and drier in the summer. Little Rock is climatically similar to most of the Southeastern United States; subtropical and wet.

Personally, I would opt for Tulsa or Memphis over either of them (or better yet Dallas) but if I had to choose, I would probably go with Little Rock. It's by no means a slam dunk, but the riverfront, traditional "city" feel, and easy proximity to Memphis and the Southeastern United States tip the scale in favor of Little Rock for me.

good post even if I would not agree with all you are saying. I would never choose Memphis over AR and we left Dallas mainly due to the horrible weather. We did some visiting and research on Tulsa, it is turning into a great city. We just didn't want to live in OK.

[Luvvarkansas]

Originally Posted by techie_g

I expect nothing.LOL.
God Bless. If you think I was 'insulting' anyone, then you're pretty thin-skinned to begin with. Amazing, but not unexpected given my experience having lived in Arkansas and the Midsouth.

You stated an untruth on a public forum where others, who have not experienced all the beauty and adventure that Arkansas offers, will read it and be influenced negatively....for nothing.

There is much to be found outside of Little Rock and NWA that is extremely worthwhile.

[Luvvarkansas]

Originally Posted by techie_g

[/b]Surely my point can't be this fleeting for you or anyone else.....but perhaps Yeah, we dumb rednecks have trouble with logic and stuff like that....

My point should be very obvious. Most places outside of NYC are behind NYC. Most places outside of Chicago are behind Chicago in most respects. Most places outside of Paris are behind Paris.Easy stuff to comprehend I would think. It all depends on your definition of "behind". Easy to comprehend, I would think.

.

[techie_g]

Originally Posted by Luvvarkansas

.

Oh my, it you don't understand what it means for a city to be "behind" others or other regions, I can't help you. I guess it's like being stupid perhaps, in some respects.

[Hollynla]

Originally Posted by techie_g

Oh my, it you don't understand what it means for a city to be "behind" others or other regions, I can't help you. I guess it's like being stupid perhaps, in some respects.

I know exactly what LuvArk means, did you need it explained in more detail? You don't have to be rude in your responses just because you aren't comprehending.

What some would refer to as "behind", others would think is better than the city areas. Many metro areas are advancing in ways that are going backwards. Some of us would rather be in areas you refer to as "behind". Behind doesn't always equal a negative.

[Luvvarkansas]

Originally Posted by Hollynla

I know exactly what LuvArk means, did you need it explained in more detail? You don't have to be rude in your responses just because you aren't comprehending.

What some would refer to as "behind", others would think is better than the city areas. Many metro areas are advancing in ways that are going backwards. Some of us would rather be in areas you refer to as "behind". Behind doesn't always equal a negative.

Bingo.

I saw his reply and just figured it wasn't worth replying to.