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.
An interesting point noted in an earlier post. Of course, the criteria of cosmpolitan/diverse don't really relate to that, but is it entirely possible that cities like Cleveland, Pittsburgh, St. Louis are more well known/cosmopolitan than Minneapolis because of their legacy status/institutions, in spite of their size? Similarly to how Detroit will for some time be more well known than Minneapolis will, even if their GDPs are moving closer and closer together. However, I'm sure that argument about those cities has been beaten to death, so I'll let someone else answer on any of those. Obviously, Minneapolis is an awesome city, and it's economy is performing well, and it has higher favorables probably than any city in this list, especially because several cities in this group easily have higher unfavorables than just about any city, regardless of reality. To Minneapolis posters: What things historically, culturally, etc., would you feel are internationally renowned? I know that it was (is?) home to General Mills, but I don't know if most people would. I think Minneapolis for the lakes and I think others do, but in general, they think of Minnesota being the place with the lakes (I'd guess there are many people who think Minnesota is the name of the city). The Mall of America I think is pretty well known. Also the Mississippi River, though, I think it is less known for being a river city than St. Louis or New Orleans. Minneapolis park and recreation system gets a lot more press than just about any other, and it certainly is among the best, but there are other similar park systems that don't get as much praise. I'm trying to think out loud here: I'd say that Minneapolis and Cleveland are more or less peers culturally, both with impressive scenes that punch well above their weight. Target? Ironically, I still think Cleveland and probably Pittsburgh are still better known than Minneapolis, but ironically probably more for their supposed and actual shortcomings.
This feels like little more than a backhanded attempt to belittle Minneapolis position. More than anything this post displays a lack of knowledge on the authors part rather than any sort of general consensus. In terms of if Minneapolis is as cosmopolitan as Cleveland. I'm not sure anyone outside of our beloved Cleveland contingent would even question that. Also are you trying to assert that Minneapolis is somehow NOT a legacy city? It peaked in population in 1950 like every other legacy city. It emerged like every legacy during the industrial revolution. It along with it's core counterpart St Paul have still not recovered to their 1950 peak like most other legacy cities. Perhaps the question should be raised as to why the Twin Cities have made such a profound transition a knowledge based economy from a legacy industrial economy where the aforementioned cities have struggled harder.
The mention of knowing that General Mills is headquartered there but not being sure if a lot of other people would is more telling of a lack of personal knowledge, rather than knowledge in the general population. The Twin Cities are are home to 18 Fortune 500 companies. Seven of which are larger than General Mills and they are not companies that are unheard of. That doesn't even include private companies like Cargill $120B+ in revenue:
Pittsburgh isn't a Midwest city. Or, is it, Pittsburgh posters? If not, it shouldn't really be a part of this discussion, unless Pittsburgh posters agree that it's in the Midwest.
I agree. Pittsburgh isn't Midwestern along with Buffalo, Rochester, and Louisville. They shouldn't have been included in this thread.
I'm really sorry, but Washington University exceeds in academic prowess over any university in Cleveland or Pittsburgh, it's just an empirical fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by U146
Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands
Carnegie Mellon and Wash U are peer institutions
Quote:
Originally Posted by U146
Wash U is a much better school than Carnegie Mellon.
Washington University being a "much better school than Carnegie Mellon" is honestly news to me. I didn't know Washington University's engineering program had courted UBER, Apple, Google, Intel, Facebook, etc. to set up shop in St. Louis the way CMU has for Pittsburgh. Interesting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NowInWI
Pittsburgh isn't a Midwest city. Or, is it, Pittsburgh posters? If not, it shouldn't really be a part of this discussion, unless Pittsburgh posters agree that it's in the Midwest.
If Pittsburgh shouldn't be part of this discussion, then why is it included in the poll? Why not ask the OP why he included Pittsburgh in the poll if he didn't want it to be voted upon and/or discussed?
SteelCityRising-- of course Carnegie Mellon is a prestigious university and it excels in certain areas over Wash U, but in national overall rankings, Washington University in St. Louis outranks it.
SteelCityRising-- of course Carnegie Mellon is a prestigious university and it excels in certain areas over Wash U, but in national overall rankings, Washington University in St. Louis outranks it.
SteelCityRising-- of course Carnegie Mellon is a prestigious university and it excels in certain areas over Wash U, but in national overall rankings, Washington University in St. Louis outranks it.
I'm aware of how esteemed Washington University is and how well it ranks academically. My concern is that I don't see it as having the same level of synergy with St. Louis as CMU does with its own host city in terms of attracting jobs. Graduating hordes of gifted researchers, physicians, and attorneys is useless if their only option to stay in their host city then is to either go into private practice or to work directly for the university in some capacity or for the WU Health System.
If CMU wasn't in Pittsburgh, then UBER wouldn't be developing its self-driving car technologies here. Google wouldn't be expanding here. Apple wouldn't have just moved into a new office in the Strip District.
I view WU as being a better intellectual/academia/liberal arts university that produces brilliant philosophers, laureates, and "thinkers" while CMU produces the "doers". The problem is that the latter creates momentum that provides greater economic growth in most cases while the former just creates more prestige for the university when the graduates move to other cities and make names for themselves while having no incentive to stay put.
What major employers have set up shop in St. Louis to tap into the potential of WU? That's the problem. If there's nothing of significance then city/county leaders really SHOULD be looking for ways to utilize WU's presence to attract more jobs. If MIT, Stanford, and CMU have all succeeded in courting "tech" start-ups and companies to their respective host cities, then what has WU done to court commerce to St. Louis? I'm just curious. I like St. Louis a lot, but I don't see WU as being as big of an economic driver for St. Louis, despite its reputation.
I'm aware of how esteemed Washington University is and how well it ranks academically. My concern is that I don't see it as having the same level of synergy with St. Louis as CMU does with its own host city in terms of attracting jobs. Graduating hordes of gifted researchers, physicians, and attorneys is useless if their only option to stay in their host city then is to either go into private practice or to work directly for the university in some capacity or for the WU Health System.
If CMU wasn't in Pittsburgh, then UBER wouldn't be developing its self-driving car technologies here. Google wouldn't be expanding here. Apple wouldn't have just moved into a new office in the Strip District.
I view WU as being a better intellectual/academia/liberal arts university that produces brilliant philosophers, laureates, and "thinkers" while CMU produces the "doers". The problem is that the latter creates momentum that provides greater economic growth in most cases while the former just creates more prestige for the university when the graduates move to other cities and make names for themselves while having no incentive to stay put.
What major employers have set up shop in St. Louis to tap into the potential of WU? That's the problem. If there's nothing of significance then city/county leaders really SHOULD be looking for ways to utilize WU's presence to attract more jobs. If MIT, Stanford, and CMU have all succeeded in courting "tech" start-ups and companies to their respective host cities, then what has WU done to court commerce to St. Louis? I'm just curious. I like St. Louis a lot, but I don't see WU as being as big of an economic driver for St. Louis, despite its reputation.
This is yet another example of how perception is out of step with reality. Wash U is in fact VERY heavily invested in growing STL's economy. A booming example is Cortex, which is growing by leaps and bounds and attracting scores of new and expanded employers.
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.
