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.
The originally criticized post was pretty off base, especially with regards to Chicago. Most of Chicago is safe, there's a huge aggregate of wealth in the area (likely the largest in the Midwest), and there's a large and highly-educated populous, especially for such a large metro area. So it's not surprising that post attracted some ire.
Quote:
its much nicer, richer, safer, educated than those two.
I see where you are coming from for the educated and rich part, it really depends on how you look at it, one doesn't simply just "win" over the other. But, Minneapolis most likely has a more educated population strictly by percentages of residents with high school diplomas, college degrees, etc. etc. (don't hold me to this though, I may be wrong). But, of course, with Chicago being larger, it will have a larger number of more educated people, people with education from top-notch universities, and people with high up jobs in large companies.
For the rich part, Chicago for sure has more people with more money, but Minneapolis beats it (at least by metropolitan area) in median income. Chicago has much poorer areas and much more poorer areas than Minneapolis. Minneapolis' residents are better off financially across the board than Chicago's.
As far as safety, I would agree with the poster. Minneapolis, by crime rate, is much safer than Chicago, although it does have its dangerous parts like any other city. Chicago has many parts that are much more dangerous than Minneapolis' worst. I'm sure than plenty of Chicago is safe, but Minneapolis, statistically, is safer.
As far as niceness, that's just opinion, nothing worth talking about. Both cities are great.
I was more concerned with the poster's full disregard to anything concerning Minneapolis. As if it doesn't hold up at all to the other cities and isn't even worth comparing to them. Simply a "nice town" surrounded by farmland, and that's it.
It's Cleveland! Detroit is a wasteland that looks like Cleveland in the '70's. Minneapolis is too isolated and weird. Cleveland is in the perfect location, has awesome culture, and is on the rise! Not only that, but it's not nearly as vanilla as Minneapolis.
Vanilla and weird are opposites on the same continuum. You can't be both at the same time.
As far as safety, I would agree with the poster. Minneapolis, by crime rate, is much safer than Chicago, although it does have its dangerous parts like any other city. Chicago has many parts that are much more dangerous than Minneapolis' worst. I'm sure than plenty of Chicago is safe, but Minneapolis, statistically, is safer.
I think the difference in size (compared to Detroit and Chicago), and how the city borders are drawn, has a lot to do with Minneapolis being the safer city. In many metro areas, cities like Brooklyn Center and Columbia Heights would be part of Minneapolis which would have a big impact on the perceived safeness of the city.
I think you just dropped your ethos in the Cuyahoga River. But that's okay, at least the water washed all of the bias off of it. Or maybe burned all the ethos off of it.
I think you just dropped your ethos in the Cuyahoga River. But that's okay, at least the water washed all of the bias off of it. Or maybe burned all the ethos off of it.
Really? Burning river jokes? Those stopped being funny 30 years ago. I have lived outside of Cleveland and visited places around the world, but Cleveland is the only place I would ever want to call home. It's not bias, it's justified love of a town that has so much character, and such a unique culture. Why do you think that world renowned chefs, educated in places like New York, are relocating to Cleveland? It's because the city is a hidden gem with wonderful people, rich character, and good taste.
I think the difference in size (compared to Detroit and Chicago), and how the city borders are drawn, has a lot to do with Minneapolis being the safer city. In many metro areas, cities like Brooklyn Center and Columbia Heights would be part of Minneapolis which would have a big impact on the perceived safeness of the city.
Brooklyn Center and Columbia Heights are average suburbs with mild crime rates. They would contribute almost nothing to the crime rate of the city. If you think that Brooklyn Center, which consists of moderately to well kept mid 1900's suburban housing and has a few murders a year, is anything compared to the crumbling, gang ridden, abandoned, poor, and drug infested neighborhoods of large cities, then you are essentially speaking like a student of a middle school in a rural northern Minnesota town.
Really? Burning river jokes? Those stopped being funny 30 years ago. I have lived outside of Cleveland and visited places around the world, but Cleveland is the only place I would ever want to call home. It's not bias, it's justified love of a town that has so much character, and such a unique culture. Why do you think that world renowned chefs, educated in places like New York, are relocating to Cleveland? It's because the city is a hidden gem with wonderful people, rich character, and good taste.
It sounds like you just simply love Cleveland a lot. Which is perfectly fine. Terrific, actually, I like when people actually see a city as something more than just "some buildings" or "just a place." But your opinion is your opinion, not something can immediately makes Cleveland trump all other cities. If you're trying to make a sound argument that Cleveland is the 2nd best city behind Chicago, you need some real facts, not just vague clichés expressing your love for Cleveland. So, at the end, when you said you would never live in any city but Cleveland, which sounds biased and inconsiderate towards all other cities, I said you "dropped your ethos," because you did. Your credibility drops even more when you make it sound like no city could ever satisfy you except Cleveland. That is the definition of bias. That combined with the fact that you act as though your clichés are reasons that the other cities are less worthy of being regarded well.
I think there are a lot of runner ups to this. I also wouldn't be so quick to discount Detroit as in free fall and Minneapolis as ascending some great mountain. Detroit is beginning to turn some important chapters in its history, it's big enough and has enough strings that it could easily start making some serious progress in a short amount of time if the political leadership is there.
My vote goes to "Other". I think there are too many other cities in the midwest that are plain better and more desirable.
Columbus, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, and maybe even Cleveland. Though Indianapolis is definitely behind Minneapolis and Detroit right now, it is the 2nd largest city by city population figures in the midwest after Chicago, and it is a nice city, just falls far short of offering the same amenities.
I think the difference in size (compared to Detroit and Chicago), and how the city borders are drawn, has a lot to do with Minneapolis being the safer city. In many metro areas, cities like Brooklyn Center and Columbia Heights would be part of Minneapolis which would have a big impact on the perceived safeness of the city.
I don't think we should forget just how out of control the crime and murder rate was in Minneapolis in the late 80's and early 90's. It was absolutely out of control, and after D.C. Minneapolis was one of the most dangerous cities in the country.
They really turned things around in the later half of the 90's, but Minneapolis does have a bloody history.
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.
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.
