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.
Dyadic, I don't know man. If you knew me, you would know I'm not shy about pointing out KC's faults. Not in the least.
But you are really selling KC short and putting Indy on this ridiculous pedestal as if it were Denver or Seattle or something.
I think KC has more to do for tourists and locals. I'm not backing down from that. I would even have a difficult time believing that Indy gets more tourist than KC. It might get more conventions, but why would people choose Indy over Cincy, Chicago, St Louis etc, heck even Louisville is pretty equal to Indy. KC amusement parks and MLB team alone probably draw more actual tourists to the city than Indy does. KC's museums, theater venues etc are also a notch above Indy.
And KC just feels totally different than Indy. One you leave the core of Downtown Indy, the city leaves a LOT to be desired and I'm talking just blocks from the core, not miles.
I don't get these numbers you are throwing around. If the city has truly spent tens of billions on downtown, then you better have a subway system or something to show for it.
Indy is not growing that much faster than KC. They are nearly identical when it comes to economic growth relatively speaking and KC has been a larger, more important city than Indy for some time and it has the amenities to prove it.
And it has been shown in this thread that KC has been doing very well lately for both downtown apartments and metro growth:
Indy reminds me of Oklahoma City. KC,Mo resembles cities like Pittsburgh and Cincinnati. Go Royals!
I can see a Pittsburgh-Kansas City resemblance, but Kansas City seems it's own thing, very Plains-y, very Midwestern; Pittsburgh seems more cosmopolitan. Kansas City has a thicker Southern undertone, even if only slightly, but I would say Little Rock (incidentally considered Midwestern in some circles) jumps out as more similar to KC than Pittsburgh, in an obviously smaller scale...
I can see a Pittsburgh-Kansas City resemblance, but Kansas City seems it's own thing, very Plains-y, very Midwestern; Pittsburgh seems more cosmopolitan. Kansas City has a thicker Southern undertone, even if only slightly, but I would say Little Rock (incidentally considered Midwestern in some circles) jumps out as more similar to KC than Pittsburgh, in an obviously smaller scale...
KC and Pittsburgh feel similarly-sized...
Little Rock resembles Shreveport but a little nicer. To a lesser degree, Memphis. Not Kansas City in the least in my opinion, outside of having generic big city traits like downtown-midtown-ghetto-suburbs. Not remotely midwestern.
I agree Kansas City is more Plains, generally northern plains like Omaha but bigger and more interesting. Also grittier at times. Teetering on the border of the Ozarks, it also has that southern influence. A lot of people from that area have moved to KC for work over the years.
Dyadic, I don't know man. If you knew me, you would know I'm not shy about pointing out KC's faults. Not in the least.
But you are really selling KC short and putting Indy on this ridiculous pedestal as if it were Denver or Seattle or something.
I think KC has more to do for tourists and locals. I'm not backing down from that. I would even have a difficult time believing that Indy gets more tourist than KC. It might get more conventions, but why would people choose Indy over Cincy, Chicago, St Louis etc, heck even Louisville is pretty equal to Indy. KC amusement parks and MLB team alone probably draw more actual tourists to the city than Indy does. KC's museums, theater venues etc are also a notch above Indy.
And KC just feels totally different than Indy. One you leave the core of Downtown Indy, the city leaves a LOT to be desired and I'm talking just blocks from the core, not miles.
I don't get these numbers you are throwing around. If the city has truly spent tens of billions on downtown, then you better have a subway system or something to show for it.
Indy is not growing that much faster than KC. They are nearly identical when it comes to economic growth relatively speaking and KC has been a larger, more important city than Indy for some time and it has the amenities to prove it.
And it has been shown in this thread that KC has been doing very well lately for both downtown apartments and metro growth:
KCMO posters are also playing the pedestal game, in fact, they started it so na-na-na-boo-boo.
I'll be honest when I say I don't care who has more tourists. I think the fact that there is such a heated debate over such trivial matters speaks to the low quality of dialogue on this forum. The number of tourists I run into in downtown Indy is annoying. Some are conventions, some are not. Why do people choose Indy? Because they want to? Because regional tourism is a thing in this part of the country? I don't know for sure why so many are coming here, but they are. How many relative to Kansas City, IDGAF. KCMO has better museums? The Indianapolis Children's Museum is regarded as one of the best of its kind in the country. Though to be fair, they didn't give Kaleidoscope the old Kansas City bump you hear so much about. Kansas City has an MLB team? That is purely subjective based on someone's preferences. Considering how low Royals attendance was before they started winning, I don't know that you can really quantify that as a bigger tourism draw than Indy's AAA baseball team or NBA team.
This is right across the river from downtown KCMO. Don't play like there are not undesirable areas abutting central KCMO. I know how sensitive some folks can be, so here is a sad face view in central Indianapolis.
The new transit center was completed last year. No, it does not make Indianapolis an elite transit city, yes, it was built with the ultimate plan of a BRT system.
Last edited by Toxic Toast; 06-21-2017 at 07:08 AM..
I can see a Pittsburgh-Kansas City resemblance, but Kansas City seems it's own thing, very Plains-y, very Midwestern; Pittsburgh seems more cosmopolitan. Kansas City has a thicker Southern undertone, even if only slightly, but I would say Little Rock (incidentally considered Midwestern in some circles) jumps out as more similar to KC than Pittsburgh, in an obviously smaller scale...
KC and Pittsburgh feel similarly-sized...
Trust me. Pittsburgh is not more cosmopolitan than KC. Pittsburgh is very blue collar.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,940,305 times
Reputation: 40635
Oh man, bad choices. But, KC for the BBQ and remnants of jazz. Indy has nothing other than central location.
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.
