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.
Which of these cities is a better place to live, and why?
I am gravitating toward Manchester because it's in New Hampshire, an awesome state with a live and let live attitude.
As someone who used to live in metro detroit and now lives in new hampshire, I don't really think they're comparable, since troy is part of the metro and manchester really isn't (or at least I don't think it is but maybe there are some boston commuters there). I feel like a more reasonable comparison would be manchester vs ann arbor. It's not that practical to get to boston, especially on fridays or during rush hour, the traffic seems a lot worse than in metro detroit to me, probably because more people are going in and out of the city. Last friday I drove home from boston in rush hour after dropping my friend off at the train station and it took 2 hours to get from downtown boston to manchester. Although I think they're expanding I-93 to have more lanes so it might get a little better by next year.
The main impressions I have after having lived here for almost a year are that new hampshire really has a lot less diversity in culture. It's mostly middle aged "professional" white people. It's probably the most "boring" state in new england, from a trendiness perspective. You are right though about the "live and let live" attitude. I think people here are nicer, I have not really met a single person who wasn't nice to me. One thing I've noticed in new england is that people seem to treat their kids like crap while they're out shopping together, maybe it's just coincidental that I experienced that while I've been here.
I -think- the cost of living in manchester would still be higher, but I'm not totally certain because I didn't live in troy when I was around there, I lived in dearborn. It's possible that if you factor in the lack of state income tax that it might not be that different.
So the main things to consider are:
> boston area and also new hampshire is obviously more prosperous than detroit and you will probably make more money
> boston area has worse traffic
> detroit area has more diverse culture and has more of a "indie" cultural feel (to me)
> new hampshire is more professional (to me)
> new hampshire is close to better NATURE attractions... you have the white mountains, the lakes region, the atlantic ocean, and lots of other stuff in maine and vermont. the only thing troy / detroit has is the lakes.
> you can drive or take a bus to nyc in 5 hours or less (you can drive to chicago in about the same time from detroit but I think chicago is lame)
Dunno what else to say. Is there a reason you're considering those two cities specifically, or would you be open to other cities in the surrounding areas?
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
10,742 posts, read 23,798,187 times
Reputation: 14630
There are definitely better places to live in New Hampshire than Manchester. It's not a go to city the way Portland is to Maine or Burlington is to Vermont. Manchester has a very dull and average downtown, three decker neighborhoods like you see in the cities in Mass, and it's really just an old mill town/workaday city with a few malls. It's just not that attractive and not really well thought of by people around NH, though it has a great little airport that is a nice alternative to Boston.
If I had to choose a city in New Hampshire, I'd go with Portsmouth. Yeah its more expensive but its a nice little seaport city, good dining and nightlife (great pub crawl town), lots of history and charm too. Nashua is OK, probably more affordable, lots of shopping/retail options, and not a bad commute to decent paying jobs in Mass. Concord and Dover are decent as well.
Last edited by Champ le monstre du lac; 10-11-2014 at 08:26 AM..
As someone who used to live in metro detroit and now lives in new hampshire, I don't really think they're comparable, since troy is part of the metro and manchester really isn't (or at least I don't think it is but maybe there are some boston commuters there). I feel like a more reasonable comparison would be manchester vs ann arbor. It's not that practical to get to boston, especially on fridays or during rush hour, the traffic seems a lot worse than in metro detroit to me, probably because more people are going in and out of the city. Last friday I drove home from boston in rush hour after dropping my friend off at the train station and it took 2 hours to get from downtown boston to manchester. Although I think they're expanding I-93 to have more lanes so it might get a little better by next year.
The main impressions I have after having lived here for almost a year are that new hampshire really has a lot less diversity in culture. It's mostly middle aged "professional" white people. It's probably the most "boring" state in new england, from a trendiness perspective. You are right though about the "live and let live" attitude. I think people here are nicer, I have not really met a single person who wasn't nice to me. One thing I've noticed in new england is that people seem to treat their kids like crap while they're out shopping together, maybe it's just coincidental that I experienced that while I've been here.
I -think- the cost of living in manchester would still be higher, but I'm not totally certain because I didn't live in troy when I was around there, I lived in dearborn. It's possible that if you factor in the lack of state income tax that it might not be that different.
So the main things to consider are:
> boston area and also new hampshire is obviously more prosperous than detroit and you will probably make more money
> boston area has worse traffic
> detroit area has more diverse culture and has more of a "indie" cultural feel (to me)
> new hampshire is more professional (to me)
> new hampshire is close to better NATURE attractions... you have the white mountains, the lakes region, the atlantic ocean, and lots of other stuff in maine and vermont. the only thing troy / detroit has is the lakes.
> you can drive or take a bus to nyc in 5 hours or less (you can drive to chicago in about the same time from detroit but I think chicago is lame)
Dunno what else to say. Is there a reason you're considering those two cities specifically, or would you be open to other cities in the surrounding areas?
Troy is alot nicer than Manchester, which didn't impress me at all, just an old mill town with an airport that is a great alternative to Logan. Troy itself has a great mall and is very corporate along Big Beaver road. LOL to a guy who moved from Detroit to NH and thinks Chicago is lame.
Troy is alot nicer than Manchester, which didn't impress me at all, just an old mill town with an airport that is a great alternative to Logan. Troy itself has a great mall and is very corporate along Big Beaver road. LOL to a guy who moved from Detroit to NH and thinks Chicago is lame.
I also thought I'd add that I second the notion that Manchester is one of the least interesting places in NH. I agree with Desert_SW that places like Portsmouth and Concord and much nicer if you have the option. I think Portsmouth is my favorite NH town and Concord is my second favorite. Manchester is not even on the list. I also agree that Portland, ME is cool but that's kind of far away from the area.
Also, Justabystander: I don't know w hat is so funny about me saying Chicago is lame. Is it because both Detroit and NH are lamer than Chicago? Because if so, that is true lmao, but the point of me saying that is they're both 4-5 hours from the cities in question. Which would you rather be 4-5 hours from? I personally think NYC is way more interesting and I'd rather be 4-5 hours from NYC than 4-5 hours from Chicago.
Chicago population: 2,719,000
Boston population: 645,966
Wrong again, NOLA. Just embarassing.
Uh, I hope you're making a joke here, because, if not, you just made a complete fool of yourself.
First, population has nothing to do with relative desirability. Mozambique isn't more desirable than Switzerland.
And second, you just completely fabricated population numbers. The Boston area has around 7 million, not that different from the 9-10 million in the Chicago area. But again, this has nothing to do with relative desirability, as if Zurich is less desirable than Lagos.
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.
