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.
Kansas City is in the middle of nowhere yet Indianapolis is isolated?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjlo
I don't know why this bothers me, other than it's statistically inaccurate. Indianapolis is the least isolated city on this list.
I was just reviewing a map of the US -- sorry, Indianapolis is less isolated than I portrayed. I've lived in several regions in the US to include the midwest, but I'm not really a midwest guy. I see it's fairly well tied in with other regional cities.
I was just reviewing a map of the US -- sorry, Indianapolis is less isolated than I portrayed. I've lived in several regions in the US to include the midwest, but I'm not really a midwest guy. I see it's fairly well tied in with other regional cities.
As is Louisville, I'd say from a mileage stand point Nashville is the 3rd "least isolated" on this list based on mileage between cities. Which is not saying it's isolated at all.
Your best argument is look around the city data forum and Google Fiber? Lol.
No, there's plenty more arguments. Google Louisville hip and you will see. It is well known, yet you will not admit it nor throw Louisville a bone, so it is ok. Indianapolis has an inflated image of itself. I have never seen this in any other midsize city I have live din.
No, there's plenty more arguments. Google Louisville hip and you will see. It is well known, yet you will not admit it nor throw Louisville a bone, so it is ok.
I like Louisville a great deal. Being fairly well connected to Louisville, it is a city I am pretty intimately familiar with. As well as an outsider can be anyway.
The problem in this case, is not the city. It is the representation of the city.
If Louisville wasn't in the state of Kentucky, it would be a much better and bigger city. The stereotype of Kentucky is Kim Davis and her clones. She's more than 2 hours from Louisville and basically everyone in Louisville supports the LGBT population and hates the Kim Davises of the state. In fact, I've come to learn that most of the state hates Louisville for being too liberal and big and progressive and diverse, while Louisville hates the rest of the state for giving it a bad image of being filled with backwards rednecks who carry their guns with them and sleep with their sisters and live in double wides if they're real fancy. Louisville couldn't be more different from Kentucky. Even cross the river into Southern Indiana and it's basically just as bad as small town Kentucky.
Basically, none of these cities sound like the worst places to live. Nashville sounds like the best and probably is the best at nearly everything. But honestly, until I visited Louisville, I had no idea it was going to be like this. After moving here, I've actually come to love the city. I don't plan on living here forever because I want to live in Europe or Latin America anyways. I think if Louisville can shake the image of "Kentucky" then it will look much better nationally. It has a lot going for it and definitely has a cooler vibe than Indy. UofL and the city in general have a lot of people from Indiana (the whole state, not just Southern Indiana). They choose Lou over Indy because it's more liberal, it's more fun, the food scene is better, etc. Thrillist has a page for Louisville and Nashville, but not KC or Indy, for example.
If Louisville wasn't in the state of Kentucky, it would be a much better and bigger city. The stereotype of Kentucky is Kim Davis and her clones. She's more than 2 hours from Louisville and basically everyone in Louisville supports the LGBT population and hates the Kim Davises of the state. In fact, I've come to learn that most of the state hates Louisville for being too liberal and big and progressive and diverse, while Louisville hates the rest of the state for giving it a bad image of being filled with backwards rednecks who carry their guns with them and sleep with their sisters and live in double wides if they're real fancy. Louisville couldn't be more different from Kentucky. Even cross the river into Southern Indiana and it's basically just as bad as small town Kentucky.
Basically, none of these cities sound like the worst places to live. Nashville sounds like the best and probably is the best at nearly everything. But honestly, until I visited Louisville, I had no idea it was going to be like this. After moving here, I've actually come to love the city. I don't plan on living here forever because I want to live in Europe or Latin America anyways. I think if Louisville can shake the image of "Kentucky" then it will look much better nationally. It has a lot going for it and definitely has a cooler vibe than Indy. UofL and the city in general have a lot of people from Indiana (the whole state, not just Southern Indiana). They choose Lou over Indy because it's more liberal, it's more fun, the food scene is better, etc. Thrillist has a page for Louisville and Nashville, but not KC or Indy, for example.
I think most of the country, including the people on this site have a more balanced view of Louisville and Kentucky than this paragraph gives credit for. Granted I don't have the stomach or the time to go back and read all of this, but I don't see anywhere in this thread Kim Davis being referenced, or somehow associated with Louisville. In fact I think most people have a fairly positive view of Louisville and it's above average gay scene in general. You have a penchant for reminding us that you're from LA, so perhaps this reflects your own internal views, preconceived notions, in terms of the above stereotypes.
I think most of the country, including the people on this site have a more balanced view of Louisville and Kentucky than this paragraph gives credit for. Granted I don't have the stomach or the time to go back and read all of this, but I don't see anywhere in this thread Kim Davis being referenced, or somehow associated with Louisville. In fact I think most people have a fairly positive view of Louisville and it's above average gay scene in general. You have a penchant for reminding us that you're from LA, so perhaps this reflects your own internal views, preconceived notions, in terms of the above stereotypes.
It definitely gets a lot of credit here. I wasn't referencing anyone here. But I know some other places even around here do have that sentiment. Of all places, WV seems to have a very negative view of KY. No offense to WV, but WV doesn't have much room to talk. Maybe people in this part of the country know more about it, but almost nobody in California has a positive view of it. I have friends here from NJ and NY and they've also said that their areas don't have a positive view of KY. I think it's part of the coast mentality that everything in the middle sucks. But anytime any of the CA or NJ/NY friends visit Louisville, they all leave with a positive view
I'm not going to address all the opinion stuff in this thread, but I thought I would clarify on this point....
Nashville already has a commuter rail line. It's not much (single track most of the way, ~30 miles), and it serves our 4th busiest commuter county. It was created as a starter line on existing track at low cost (something like $45 million for the entire distance) to help prove the viability of commuter rail. It hasn't exactly done that, for a variety of reasons (like mentioned above....single track, 4th busiest commuter county). But it does, in fact, exist.
The BRT proposal is something entirely different. It was more of a local transit (7 miles across the axis of the city) plan and was introduced and promoted poorly IMO by a mayor with too many other big projects on the table. The main controversy/opposition comes from a ultra conservative car dealer with prime property which would be affected (quite mildly) by the proposal, and with the help of Americans For Prosperity went to a hayseed rural state legislator to propose legislation to get it stopped. The legislation that finally came out is a little muddy, and what I think it amounts to is that you have to get state permission to make dedicated lanes for BRT on a state highway. It also happens to be a US highway...so I think if push came to shove (funding-wise), it wouldn't be a big issue.
In any case, the new mayor elect seems to favor LRT. We'll see what happens. Hopefully the rubes in the state legislature don't find a way to get in the way of the only real economic driving force in the state.
Thanks for clarifying.
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.
