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.
Pittsburgh is much more conveniently located to the Northeast Megalopolis and also to the Great Lakes cities. Kansas City is not close to any large city other than St. Louis. The other larger cities are further drive away, generally over 8 hours. Some people don't like flying all the time to get somewhere so that could be a factor to consider.
A city by city comparison would find Pittsburgh well on top. I didn't think this was a suburb vs suburb thread?
Well it can be about the suburbs but within the cities only not individual small cities in the metro area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo
So, again, KC is a nice city and I don't think 99% of the country knows how much KC does offer (KC is just not seen as a large urban city due to its association with Kansas which is too bad because it is so much more than most people know), but Pittsburgh is more my style.
Yeah that's pretty much what's stopping me from saying Kansas City sounds like a better city. How much Kansas influence is there in Kansas City?
How much Kansas influence is there in Kansas City?
No more than "Pensyssippi" influence in Pittsburgh.
I think its more a question of reputation. Kansas City, in large part because of its name, often has the perception of being a dusty little cowtown on the prairie. Pittsburgh has a reputation of being a gray, dead rustbelt shell with empty smokestacks and crumbling row houses. Neither one of which is true, and anyone who has been to either one usually knows it.
Yeah that's pretty much what's stopping me from saying Kansas City sounds like a better city. How much Kansas influence is there in Kansas City?
While Kansas City, MO (and even the state of Kansas) is pretty much nothing like the stereotypes that Kansas would lead people to believe, the state of Kansas has quite a bit of influence over the city of Kansas City, MO and the entire metro. I would say possibly even more than the state of MO and Jeff City.
KC is all but ignored by Jeff City and treated like collateral damage. The state would rather KCMO take a beating from Kansas than help it out because doing so would risk creating even more problems in the St Louis area which does not have near the same problems with Illinois and has an economy over twice the size of the Missouri side of KC they want to protect first.
The state line in KC is what keeps the city from competing. It's too busy competing within its own metro to even think about competing with other major metros. The place acts like four small metros that fiercely compete in their own little isolated world and suburban development and sprawl there is subsidized and supported at a level I have never seen anyplace else, especially when most of it comes at the expense of thier own core cities of KCMO and KCK and inner ring suburbs (not new eco activity from denver or dallas etc).
pittsburg is loved on city data, not so much in real life
How so? The population is recovering, housing prices are up, and transplants are settling there. A lot of major companies, especially in tech, have set up regional offices there. It gets love in a lot of publications, too. And c'mon, it was Mister Rogers' neighborhood, you can't **** on Mister Rogers' neighborhood. The guy was so friendly to everyone and he was an ex-marine who could break your face in half.
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.