Eastern Cities: Most Overrated and Least Overrated (living, best, cost)

[m1a1mg]

I have heard many people say they like it, and then move to, Orlando. Obviously, given their rise in population, a lot of people must like it. And tourism wise? Yeah.

[UrbanCheetah]

Originally Posted by m1a1mg

I have heard many people say they like it, and then move to, Orlando. Obviously, given their rise in population, a lot of people must like it. And tourism wise? Yeah.

Tourism is unfair though, because no one goes to Orlando to see or vacation in the actual city of Orlando. They go to the theme parks, so even though Orlando's metro gets some of the most visitors in the world, it's overwhelmingly not because people want to see the actual city of Orlando.

Eh, but the rise of population in most places I don't attribute to it being because of city being highly rated. I think it's more about $$$, jobs, weather, etc. People are moving in droves to places like Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Tampa, Orlando, etc. I don't think that means people think those cities are the cream of the cro, rather just really good places to live.

[MrKnight]

Originally Posted by m1a1mg

I have heard many people say they like it, and then move to, Orlando. Obviously, given their rise in population, a lot of people must like it. And tourism wise? Yeah.

You are contradicting yourself, you previously stated that you think Orlando is overrated.. Orlando is more than just tourism, Orlando has a thriving downtown scene, local arts, culture, professional sports, the 2nd largest university in the country, and has a rapidly growing population of young professionals.. Orlando is hence actually underrated.

[m1a1mg]

I was responding to UrbanCheetah about why I think Orlando is overrated. A lot of people go to Orlando for more than the theme parks.

MrKnight, I'm old enough that I remember Orlando before it became huge. It's all too packed. I don't like the feel, or the vibe. And I'm not sure you can call the Magic professional.

[pwduvall]

Originally Posted by MrKnight

I beg to differ, having lived in the DC metro area for about four years, it seems to me that those who spoke about and boosted Baltimore constantly are those who either grew up there or have some kind of deep affiliation with the city (family, favorite sports team, etc.).. Other than these people, very rarely did anyone mention or even bring up the existence of Baltimore, in fact, most Washingtonians seem to turn a cold shoulder to Baltimore and would rather not be associated with the city in any way or form.

IMHO, I personally visited Baltimore a few times on weekend trips in hopes of understanding the hype and passion that some people have about the city, unfortunately every time I went I found the city to be dirty/poorly maintained, crime-ridden, overall visually unappealing, and far from what I would consider an ideal place to live..

I grew up in the DC metro area also, though I now live in Baltimore. I felt like I needed to check out the place because of its very very (almost unbelievably) bad reputation. I found a place with a lot of problems but also with more open and friendly and far less snobby people than in the DC area. Heck, if you live in Baltimore there is nothing to be snobby about! In other words, I found a place that suited my personality. It is not a great place for most people to live, but if you are an outsider or an outcast, it might work for you.

I'm kind of wondering when MrKnight heard positive hype about Baltimore. I doubt if that was during the past 15 years. When I first moved to Baltimore 30 years ago there was a lot of positive hype, but that is long gone at this point. City boosters defend the city against over the top attacks but that is about all you can get away with. I'm hoping that the city's reputation has bottomed out, but I fear that are looking forward several more years of bad press.

[boulevardofdef]

I vote for Boston as most underrated.

Every time you see a thread about overrated cities, it gets mentioned the most, but I really feel like people are discounting it. I suspect it's because due to its long history as a rival to New York, with which it compares poorly in most categories, as does every other U.S. city. I also think it's because it has a reputation for wealth, and wealth isn't cool, though it's got some really interesting traditionally working-class areas.

Sometimes I ask people why they think Boston is overrated. By far the answer I get most often is that the nightlife sucks. I understand that's important to some people, but it's also not very important to others -- and is the nightlife really that bad? There are loads of bars. I'd thought there weren't many clubs, but according to a local magazine I've got here, there are more than 80, which seems pretty good for a city of its size. People complain that bars close at 2 a.m., and if that's your thing, yeah, that's bad, but I suspect that a huge majority of people in any city aren't staying out that late. I think I've been at a bar past 2 maybe four or five times in my entire life.

The second most common answer I hear is that it's provincial. I'm not even sure what's meant by that, but if it's "people think Boston is the center of everything," I kind of like that. It gives the city an air of importance. And while it may not be the Hub of the Universe, it most certainly is the Hub of New England. It's the uncontested primate city of the region.

It also gets some crap for having a small footprint. I don't think that's really true, either. I tried an experiment: I mapped a walk from the Museum of Fine Arts to the Charlestown Navy Yard. The fastest route will take you 1 hour 20 minutes, and you'll never leave a dense, walkable area. Walking the same amount of time in New York will take you from the Lower East Side deep into the Upper East Side. Given that nobody denies New York is a much larger city, that's quite respectable -- and I'm sure there are even longer walks you can take in Boston without escaping the density. I didn't even leave the city limits, but places like Cambridge and Somerville are very much part of the contiguous fabric of the city.

Anyway, Boston is big, dense, active, beautiful, charming, historic, clean, safe, on the water, plenty of parkland, restaurant scene way better than it gets credit for (though it's relatively weak on ethnic food, I'd say), great economy, close to some amazing getaways, some of the nation's best culture, lots of entertainment, one of the nation's best public-transit systems. I don't really understand what's not to like.

[tocoto]

Oliver Wendell Holmes coined the phrase in 1858 [Boston is] "The Hub of the Solar System" in a series of articles in the Atlantic Monthly called The Autocrat of the Breakfast-Table.

Due to the wide circulation of the Atlantic Monthly, and the fame of Holmes in literary circles, the term Hub of the Universe was considered arrogant and even offensive at that time. A western newspaper stated that if Boston was Hub of the Universe, then the Northwest was the "axle" of the hub. In Life and Society in America by Samuel Phillips Day (1880), the author conjectures that the nickname was originally bestowed upon Boston by New Yorkers—induced by jealousy—to make Boston appear to be a more commercial and greedy community than New York.

Origin of Hub of the Solar System (Hub of the Universe)


No one except local newspapers or news outlets calls Boston the hub. Everyone knows Boston is not as big or important on the world stage compared to many other cities.

IMHO few CD forums have been to Boston (maybe due its location far to the northeast USA) and many that have been were students with limited resources, time and experience. Bars close at 2AM in LA and San Francisco, too. If you can't find nightlife or ethnic food in Boston you just aren't looking very hard. Provincial? Almost everybody thinks their city is the best, just look at all the homers on CD.

In Boston, on any given day you will hear both local homeboy accents and a huge international population speaking languages from around the world, the same as any other cosmopolitan city in the USA or anyplace else. Boston is a big, complex city, but there are many others in the US and around the world that are bigger, more complex and more important in world affairs and that is not lost on Bostonians.

[DC4ever]

IMO, DC is one of the most underrated cities because the city has a huge perception problem that stems entirely from the federal government. Even with all the revitalization and rapid population growth, most people in the country and around the world believe that DC is a one sided government town/ swamp in which little to no people live in. The food scene and the culture in the city is getting better and more interesting by the year.

[odurandina]

Originally Posted by tocoto

No one except local newspapers or news outlets calls Boston the hub. Everyone knows Boston is not as big or important on the world stage compared to many other cities...
...Boston is a big, complex city, but there are many others in the US and around the world that are bigger, more complex and more important in world affairs and that is not lost on Bostonians.

First in the case of cities, size isn't everything. i won't mention Bostons' 100, 150, 200, and 250 year old treasures.

tell you what, if you could post a number, where would you rank Boston on America's cities' power rankings? and then on a world's power rankings. Did you know there's a few groups that give ratings after crunching data and then crunches that with other groups? –kind of like the way Real Clear Politics combines all the polls and spits out the super number.

the Greater Boston metro ranks as the 10th largest in USA by population. The inner city is called Boston (as you know). it's about 1/16th the size of Los Angeles in land area, but Boston flexes both economic and intellectual might to an extent that many people, (especially people who haven't spent a lot of time learning about the core and metro area) can hardly imagine...

there's an obscene amount of economic activity and intellectual property exchanging hands within the entire Boston Metro and the core city's of Boston and Cambridge....

there's a reason Boston is so high on anyone's list of the world's cities' power rankings... it's tied for 18th most powerful in the world... and all alone in 4th in the United States.... look deep into the city's soul, history, economic and intellectual makeup, and you'll only begin to see why.

Ranking's; check the information in the following link; The World .

Notice how the total office space jibes quite well with the power rankings. Now add education, research and medicine. You begin to see that Boston's actual metro size when measured in office space, investment and economic activity compares quite favorably to Los Angeles, San Francisco, and DC.

office space in Millions of sq ft

updated Q1 2016

1. combined NYC metro - 523.4
Manhattan - 359.3
2. combined Cook County - n/a
Chicago - 159.0
3. combined Los Angeles + Downtown/Century City/Hollywood/Burbank/Glendale - n/a
Los Angeles Downtown (4 neighborhoods) - 33.2
4. combined Boston metro; Boston/Cambridge/Rt 128/495 Technology Belt - 221.6 (87.2 + 134.4)
5. Washington D.C. - 144.4
6. Rt 128/495 Boston Technology Belt - 134.4
7. combined Bay Area metro (S.F./Oak/San Jose) - 128.4
San Francisco - 90.5, East Bay/Oakland - 29.5, San Jose - 10.1
8. Boston/Cambridge - 87.2 (64.04 + 22.44)
9. combined South Florida metro - 79.8
Miami - 30.9, Ft Lauderdale - 27.0, West Palm Bch - 21.8
10. combined Houston metro -n/a
Houston - 43.0
11. *Seattle - 52.5 *updated only to 2011
12. Atlanta - 56.9

13. Pittsburgh metro - 51.1
14. Minneapolis-St Paul metro - 45.9
15. combined Baltimore Metro - 45.2
Baltimore - 22.4
16. Dallas/Ft Worth metroplex - 42.7
Dallas - 32.0, Ft Worth 10.7
17. Philadelphia - 42.0
18. Denver - 35.0

When you look past the superficial comparisons... you begin to see that Boston compares favorably with Los Angeles or San Francisco metros in many statistical categories... Finally, take note;

In the 19th Century Boston ranked quite a bit higher; alongside New York and Philadelphia.

As far as having a world ranking skyline... Boston has severe FAA restrictions on height. Most of the city tops out at about 640-800' throughtout.....

It's also a huge nimby/can't build that here, type of city. It's only nimby rivals are Los Angeles and San Francisco. Boston isn't quite worthy of the Athens of America, moniker. But who else is? if anyone, deserves the title, perhaps you give it to Los Angeles.

Here's the metro from Google Earth with the view tilted to immitate an approach from over Westwood and Canton... https://www.google.com/maps/place/Bo...!4d-71.0588801

Boston skyline in about 4 years as seen from over the islands.... and Arlington.

[krogerDisco]

Overrated: Atlanta
Built up on a ridge, with no interesting topography or river. They think their trees are a big deal.

Underrated: Pittsburgh
Still the butt of jokes, mostly based on assumptions, but it has changed and improved a lot from its polluted past.