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.
Go visit Scarsdale, Rye, Greenwich, in the NY area. Los Gatos, Palo Alto, Redwood City in the SF area. Rosslyn, Alexandria, Fairfax, Montgomery in the DC area. Go see suburbs of every large metro above 3 million then come back and say Philly has the best suburbs. Starting to think you Philly homers have never left your area the way you talk these clueless remarks and how other philly boosters just let their partners in crime say these outlandish things
So this is from another thread and likely the catalyst for this one. To that end I ask you, have you spent considerable time in Ardmore, Bryn Wawr, Wayne, Radnor, Blue Bell, Haddonfield, Moorestown, Yardley, Washingtons Crossing, Newtown, Doylestown?
I am suspecting not
Also you bring up Greenwich, are you really familiar with the Main Line of Philly, some of the most storied and wealthy in all the country and have been consistently for over a century. These burbs have been notable for many years and continue today, played prominant roles in novels, plays, movies, books etc. and along with Greenwich are considered in most ways the original and still today the first of the main affluent suburbs still today home to extreme wealth (far too many trust fund babies for my own preference) but these are same same suburbs that were the catalyst for the Catcher in the Rye, The Philadelphia Story, The show Thirty Something, Art of war, hell the redhead in Titanic was a wealthy girl from the Main Line of Phildelphia. It has some of the top schools (both private and public) in the country and is extremely cultural etc. Home to Americas first "Town Center" called suburban square etc.
Do you have first hand knowledge of this area as you seem to come off very opinionated and I see very little evidence that you actually have first hand knowledge
I have spent considerable time in DC and know the burbs well, while there are differences I am failing to see where any would be any landslide if even better than the main line of Philly. Not nitpicking but I read what you write and truly wonder what experience you have to make your assesement.
To discuss Philly burbs for a moment, the region I'd highlight is Valley Forge. Wayne is a the 'model town', and King of Prussia provides the shopping and dining options. King of Prussia mall is a beast and you'd be hard pressed to find better. In the region is Villanova University & Bryn Mawr College. Also, Valley Forge National Historical Park is there, see where Washington defeated the Brits! right in the middle of the suburb.
Philly suburbs are as nice as NYC,Bos,DC suburbs at 65 cents on the dollar mainly due to its inland non-coastal,non Uncle Sam leeching location.
Philly has some amazing suburbs, and some that are downright awful, so the term is far from all encompassing, but all things considered including col and qol, Philly is in the top three with NY and Boston. They are very low-key considering their actual clout. Philly's suburban structure is different, in that it has more municipalities per sq mi than any other metro. This causes competition on a level that enhances the col to qol ratio unseen in most other places. To put it into perspective, Philly is a city of 1.5 mil and a metro of 6 mil, yet the largest suburban municipality by population is only 80k, this is because in reality they are micro-municipalities, more like districts, and since competition is the mother of quality, suburban Philly is the most competitive driven developed environment in the US, and possibly all of north america, and thus inevitably by the laws of competitive nature offer the most bang for buck in the entire nation.
So this is from another thread and likely the catalyst for this one. To that end I ask you, have you spent considerable time in Ardmore, Bryn Wawr, Wayne, Radnor, Blue Bell, Haddonfield, Moorestown, Yardley, Washingtons Crossing, Newtown, Doylestown?
Not nitpicking but I read what you write and truly wonder what experience you have to make your assesement.
You're taking my post out of context, I never stated that Philly did not have good burbs I quoted one of your delusional boosters who said Philly has the best burb in the entire nation. Philly's burbs can lay claim as good as any DC, SF, LA, Dallas, Houston, Miami, etc.
Philly does not have the best burb in the nation that would be NY, really putting anything on the level of Greenwich or Scarsdale is absurd and it was your campanion who did so. I'm pointing out his absurdity and you are trying to change the topic. I have not spent significant time in Philly's burbs to answer your question have only passed through or seen minimally but I don't need to see them to know they can not compete with what are the best burbs in the country Greenwich and Scarsdale. If you personally are saying any of Philly's burbs or any place else can surpass Scarsdale or Greenwich then I apologize for my loss of words, 20 billionaires living in one burb with unmatched wealth speaks on its own in a much higher level than every other place. I recommend you try to position Philly to not be on NY's level because its not and neither are its burbs IMO.
Mainline burbs of Philly are not on the same level as Greenwich, if you disagree then please tell me more why. I am curious to know. Next thread should be Philly's mainline vs Greenwich to let the masses decide if they agree with you or not
The main line of Philly can can toe to toe with any, suggesting that any are the best is absurd (to your point almost all lerger metros will have very wealthy/exclusive enclaves probably some more notable than others), but to me equally absurd to say a place like Upper Merion or Lower Merion would not be in the discussion
Last year in one of the silly PR lists the Philly suburban area of Moorestown was ranked the top place to live in America, but these forbes lists are what they are and mostly silly in the first place.
I just believe NY has the best burbs and the best burb in the nation and that can be backed many times but after NY there is a drop to DC, SF, Boston, Philly, Dallas, LA, Houston, Miami, etc which are all on equal footing IMO.
If your point is to defend cpomp to say Philly has the best burbs in the nation including better than NY, then sorry I disagree and really pity that logic. However if you're trying to say Philly's burbs are some of the best in the nation then I may agree with you. To say any of Philly's burbs outmatch Greenwich, Rye, Scarsdale is my focus on absurdity.
You're taking my post out of context, I never stated that Philly did not have good burbs I quoted one of your delusional boosters who said Philly has the best burb in the entire nation. Philly's burbs can lay claim as good as any DC, SF, LA, Dallas, Houston, Miami, etc.
Philly does not have the best burb in the nation that would be NY, really putting anything on the level of Greenwich or Scarsdale is absurd and it was your campanion who did so. I'm pointing out his absurdity and you are trying to change the topic. I have not spent significant time in Philly's burbs to answer your question have only passed through or seen minimally but I don't need to see them to know they can not compete with what are the best burbs in the country Greenwich and Scarsdale. If you personally are saying any of Philly's burbs or any place else can surpass Scarsdale or Greenwich then I apologize for my loss of words, 20 billionaires living in one burb with unmatched wealth speaks on its own in a much higher level than every other place. I recommend you try to position Philly to not be on NY's level because its not and neither are its burbs IMO.
Mainline burbs of Philly are not on the same level as Greenwich, if you disagree then please tell me more why. I am curious to know. Next thread should be Philly's mainline vs Greenwich to let the masses decide if they agree with you or not
First off the qoute was this
[quote=cpomp;21286789]You are out of your mind. I have never heard anyone say the Philadelphia suburbs are bad. One the city isnt even bad, so thats false. And to even compare the suburbs to the city is outrageous. Philly burbs are arguably the best in the nation.
[quote]
arguably.
Secondly please use appropriate language , he is not mine nor do i have any affiliation to this poster nor any other on this site.
Lastly you reference Greenwich etc in NY, well ok that is one specific location or the 20 billion billionares that represent 1/1,000,000th of the metro - hardly a portrayal of the populace of the metro. The Main Line has had (over 100 years) and continues to have have some of best burbs in the country. To me maybe only some select places would even be in the same breadth for the culture, education, refinement etc that exists there. Maybe only places like Greenwich would be similar etc.
I honestly do not see any areas of Dallas or Houston that could compete in all facets as an isolated area like you compared with the specific NYC reference (probably not DC either though there are many nice areas there and the others) with the main line, maybe income levels. Billionares in and of them selves dont make or break a place, especially how rare they are even where there are many. Great for them and admire their earnings but having 1 or 20 doesnt make or break a place.
Accuse me of Philly hoomer but one thing that Philly has is a plethera of exceptional burbs, including amenities.
And Lastly among elite circles the Main Line is discussed in similar ways to Greenwich (not saying equal or better) but among this class the less publicized main line is very well known and respected, this area is still loaded with money and families from the railroad tycoons, industrial powerhouses, movie makers, financial tycoons etc. Money from the past and present. I suggest you do spend some time then to make a fair assessment as it has much more in common with areas like Greenwich than it does with wealthy areas along the Potomac or the new wealthy enclaves in the Sunbelt.
I personally find you to have continually mypopic viewpoints, as to me does cpomp in seeing the posts and simple elusions made by that poster but you articulate better and yet still appear myopic in many ways, and that does not mean any disreagrd to any of the places you beat the drum for, as most are excelletn that you pump but you disregard and use many generalizations and stereotypes to describe others where at times I wonder how well you actually know as you belt an at time monolythic banter.
I imagine I will get a pithy IDGAF type of reply, then so be it
Back to the OP question. I did not find an acceptable poll choice as neither are remotely close to perfect options, so feel there in no value in participating in this poll.
Philly burbs the very best in the nation?
Yes Philly burbs are the best in the U.S.
No that is outlandish
wow that's a nice loaded poll you got there
how about a third option?
It's probably not true, but they're at least in the discussion, it's far from outlandish.
That's the one I would pick.
Honestly if forced to pick between these options I'd probably select the first option because although that's probably not true, it's a lot less ridiculous than calling the idea outlandish.
Philly has some amazing suburbs, and some that are downright awful, so the term is far from all encompassing, but all things considered including col and qol, Philly is in the top three with NY and Boston. They are very low-key considering their actual clout. Philly's suburban structure is different, in that it has more municipalities per sq mi than any other metro. This causes competition on a level that enhances the col to qol ratio unseen in most other places. To put it into perspective, Philly is a city of 1.5 mil and a metro of 6 mil, yet the largest suburban municipality by population is only 80k, this is because in reality they are micro-municipalities, more like districts, and since competition is the mother of quality, suburban Philly is the most competitive driven developed environment in the US, and possibly all of north america, and thus inevitably by the laws of competitive nature offer the most bang for buck in the entire nation.
Actually, the Philadelphia MSA is fragmented because the entire state of Pennsylvania is. Pennsylvania has more municipal governments than any other state except Illinois, and this is one of the consequences of the draconian annexation laws enacted at the state level after Pittsburgh annexed the rich city of Allegheny (Pittsburgh's current-day North Side) about 100 years ago. The annexation laws now make it virtually impossible for one municipal government to annex another, and apparently it's difficult to unincorporate as well, so what Pennsylvania is left with is a bunch of little fiefdoms that might have been self-sufficient 100 years ago, but today have no legitimate reason to exist. This is why Philadelphia's largest suburb only has 80,000 people, and why Pittsburgh's largest suburb only has about 40,000 people. (It's also why Pittsburgh has some suburbs with fewer than 1,000 people.) The bankruptcy of Harrisburg is also a symptom of the hyperfragmentation of local governments in Pennsylvania, because they ended up shouldering the lion's share of the cost for a service that everybody in Dauphin County got to benefit from, and that was the straw that broke the city's back.
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.
.
