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.
I could easily move to more suburban and rural looking NE burbs outside of the cities, which tops any of those gross sprawling cities i.e... Connecticut, Westchester, etc. in looks, amenities, demographics, proximity to the center of the world, etc.
I am calling B.S. most of the Connecticut is lily white dude and extremely expensive anywhere near NYC and other places. Those are like the top wealthiest neighborhoods in the country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10013
I don't want a backyard. I lived in a 8,000 sq ft house with a sprawling back yard for the latter part of my childhood and I probably went into that back yard about 5 times total (I think it was to take out the trash...I never just went to the back yard to hang out). What is the point of a back yard ? I honestly don't understand the purpose it serves.
Sounds like a sad childhood. Please give your children a choice.
I didn't even care to look at the surrounding areas to be honest. 8,000 people per square mile is a great start, but the vast majority of the city is a sprawling mess, and you could never find a fact to support otherwise.
how freaking rude of you to call my home a sprawling mess? You act like you live in paradise
Quote:
It doesn't matter if they're apartment dwellers or not, and that would mean that many of the residents would be living in Government Housing would they not? The average household had 2.8 people. That's a little over $11,000 per person per year [when rounded to $32,000 because I'm being generous ]. There's no denying that's not the best economic position to be in.
most apartment dwellers are single, Genious
Most families move to homes
Quote:
Again, you're boosting. I don't think anyone would ever argue that Cleveland and especially Detroit are more desirable places than Houston, mainly because they've fallen on hard times, although I could see an argument being made for Pittsburgh.
Why don't you start comparing Houston to these cities:
1. New York City
2. Los Angeles
3. Chicago
4. Philadelphia
5. Boston
6. Washington D.C.
7. San Francisco
I've never seen anyone state that all of New York is like Manhattan and all of Chicago is like its north side. The Northwest side of Chicago is extremely suburban, even though it maintains something like 10,000 people per square mile, and so are the outer parts of Queens.
If defending your city's name from horrid A-holes so always slams your city then yes I am one.
Those Cities have been compared thousands of times. Yes Houston is economically better off than DC, Than Philly by a quarter, than Boston by a third and SF by a half.
People make it seem like the whole city is super dense.
There are different variations.
Exactly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dncr
I've never seen anyone state that all of New York is like Manhattan and all of Chicago is like its north side. The Northwest side of Chicago is extremely suburban, even though it maintains something like 10,000 people per square mile, and so are the outer parts of Queens.
I have, not in this thread though. And you're right they have a lot of suburban areas.
how freaking rude of you to call my home a sprawling mess? You act like you live in paradise
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove
most apartment dwellers are single, Genious
Then explain to me why the average household size is almost 3 people, GENIUS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove
Most families move to homes
Which contributes to Houston's already devastating sprawl...
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove
If defending your city's name from horrid A-holes so always slams your city then yes I am one.
Okay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove
Those Cities have been compared thousands of times. Yes Houston is economically better off than DC, Than Philly by a quarter, than Boston by a third and SF by a half.
It is just a few on here who use the density nonsense to put down cities like Houston, Phoenix and Atlanta.
90% would prefer their own backyard in those very north eastern cities if they could afford it, but since they can't they get all jealous and turn it into a bad thing.
So very untrue not to mention some of the most expensive real estate in the US is in the densest neighborhoods - there is a reason for that too
Though based on US homes the 90% is closer to reality, the cant afford it is very innacurate
I am calling B.S. most of the Connecticut is lily white dude and extremely expensive anywhere near NYC and other places. Those are like the top wealthiest neighborhoods in the country.
Sounds like a sad childhood. Please give your children a choice.
Sad childhood?
Hilarious. The pages of my passport has been completely filled more than once growing up and I assure that my childhood it was more interesting than yours.
But hey, you got to walk on grass in a back yard! Fun!
How is Houston gaining ? Brooklyn has a population density of 36,000+ per a square mile Houston has a population density of 3,900- per a square mile . Taking these stats into consideration one wold have to say Brooklyn is a very urban area and that Houston is more suburban . I would even say with that low of a population density for a city its more of a overgrown sprawling suburb than a city.
Hilarious. The pages of my passport has been completely filled more than once growing up and I assure that my childhood it was more interesting than yours.
But hey, you got to walk on grass in a back yard! Fun!
So you moved around constantly, never being able to make any solid friends or relationships? Different values I guess.
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.