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.
But how so? I mean I know New Orleans doesn't have the best economy, but if you could get a good job, is it really still worse than Birmingham?
Have you spent any extensive time in Birmingham to compare it to New Orleans? I mean the French Quarters, Garden District and historic and urban areas of New Orleans hands down are more unique and exciting than anything in Birmingham. If you lived in New Orleans though how often are you spending time in these areas on a regular basis. Wouldn't these touristy areas get old after a while if you actually lived there?
But how so? I mean I know New Orleans doesn't have the best economy, but if you could get a good job, is it really still worse than Birmingham?
New Orleans is wonderful to visit, but its crime-ridden and corrupt and badly run, plus there's an entrenched good-ole-boy and quasi-feudal culture that limit opportunities for people there. Too many QOL issues that people take for granted in most places are either minor or missing in NOLA. It's really hard for outsiders to adjust there unless they're really ready to totally embrace the culture and ignore their past lives from other areas. It's just THAT different there. I lived 90 miles away in Mississippi for many years and it was a world away from New Orleans. Birmingham isn't my favorite city by a long shot and has its share of issues, but it's miles more livable than New Orleans. There's a reason why there's been a pronounced brain drain from NOLA to Texas for professionals seeking greener pastures or a peaceful area to raise their families. I knew people who moved from NOLA to Houston years before Katrina. And I'm saying this as someone who loves visiting New Orleans but know that isn't a city I'd choose to live in if I had to relocate to the Gulf Coast region. And speaking of that, it's not a matter of IF another catastrophic hurricane decimates the city, but WHEN. Birmingham's inland location would definitely be an advantage in that case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntsville_secede
Have you spent any extensive time in Birmingham to compare it to New Orleans? I mean the French Quarters, Garden District and historic areas of New Orleans hands down are more unique and exciting than anything in Birmingham. If you lived in New Orleans though how often are you spending time in these areas on a regular basis. Wouldn't these touristy areas get old after a while if you actually lived there?
^ This. BUT a lot of people in New Orleans work in the touristy areas since tourism/service economy has become a huge part of the economy there. And people do live in the Garden District. But if I lived in say, Kenner or Metairie or Da East, I probably would rarely go to those neighborhoods. And if I lived on the Northshore, definitely would rarely go to those areas. Probably mostly work in the CBD and go back home and that's that.
New Orleans is wonderful to visit, but its crime-ridden and corrupt and badly run, plus there's an entrenched good-ole-boy and quasi-feudal culture that limit opportunities for people there. Too many QOL issues that people take for granted in most places are either minor or missing in NOLA. It's really hard for outsiders to adjust there unless they're really ready to totally embrace the culture and ignore their past lives from other areas. It's just THAT different there.
I think you could have replaced NOLA here with Memphis and it would still be largely true. Birmingham has had its issues with corrupt administrations and crime also, but I'd say the current leadership sets it apart from the other two and in a good way.
Quote:
I lived 90 miles away in Mississippi for many years and it was a world away from New Orleans. Birmingham isn't my favorite city by a long shot and has its share of issues, but it's miles more livable than New Orleans. There's a reason why there's been a pronounced brain drain from NOLA to Texas for professionals seeking greener pastures or a peaceful area to raise their families. I knew people who moved from NOLA to Houston years before Katrina. And I'm saying this as someone who loves visiting New Orleans but know that isn't a city I'd choose to live in if I had to relocate to the Gulf Coast region. And speaking of that, it's not a matter of IF another catastrophic hurricane decimates the city, but WHEN. Birmingham's inland location would definitely be an advantage in that case.
Birmingham has definitely had its issues with brain drain, especially to Atlanta which is a good bit closer to Birmingham than Houston is to NOLA. But you're right with respect to natural disasters.
Quote:
^ This. BUT a lot of people in New Orleans work in the touristy areas since tourism/service economy has become a huge part of the economy there. And people do live in the Garden District. But if I lived in say, Kenner or Metairie or Da East, I probably would rarely go to those neighborhoods. And if I lived on the Northshore, definitely would rarely go to those areas. Probably mostly work in the CBD and go back home and that's that.
For me, I think the special events and entertainment options in NOLA would be a big reason to visit downtown on at least a semi-regular basis and there's something going on down there all the time it seems.
Have you spent any extensive time in Birmingham to compare it to New Orleans? I mean the French Quarters, Garden District and historic and urban areas of New Orleans hands down are more unique and exciting than anything in Birmingham. If you lived in New Orleans though how often are you spending time in these areas on a regular basis. Wouldn't these touristy areas get old after a while if you actually lived there?
Yeah the French Quarter would get old the same way a lot of cities' major destinations do. But having that there with all the culture and the festivals? Yeah I'd love the ability. I wouldn't be going to Mardi Gras every year, but I'd head there for culture and nights out once in a while. And all the locals know the bars to avoid that are just filled with tourists.
Do tourists actually frequent the Garden District all that much? Again, though, the culture and amenities it provides can't be matched. My friend that lived there took me to some really unique and local bars and restaurants throughout the area from the FQ to Uptown. Uptown has some great eateries and local vibes to it also. We only did the FQ one night. Even then, we went to a restaurant that wasn't that touristy, and then we of course did the actual Quarter after dinner. I could see it getting old, but not the entire neighborhood is like that.
To think that just because a city's downtown is a major attraction, that it's all like that, is not logical. I avoid Times Square, but it doesn't mean nobody sees a play there. It doesn't mean I avoid restaurants on 8th or 9th Ave just because they're close to touristy areas. I avoided Hollywood for the most part when I lived in LA, but I still went to the rooftop bars for fun and some of the restaurants near it can be pretty good. Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica is also very touristy, but there are still some great restaurants there and the shopping is still amazing there. I shopped in Union Square in SF even though it's full of tourists and I ate around there sometimes.
You can't hold it against New Orleans that it attracts a lot of tourists. If your argument is the schools suck and you have kids, that's fine, but I'd still argue back my personal opinion is that if you parent well your kids can go to public school and I would gladly raise children in the city to avoid living in suburbs. If your argument is that it's dangerous, that's fine, but again, I'd argue back that it varies by neighborhood. But to say that living in New Orleans would not be good because the FQ and Garden District get too many tourists? That one doesn't make sense. Would you also say living in NYC sucks because Manhattan is full of tourists? LA sucks because Hollywood and Santa Monica are full of tourists? SF sucks because Union Square is full of tourists? You may not go to those places all the time when living there, but they're definitely amenities. And the FQ and Garden District are amenities that Birmingham and Memphis just simply can't compete with. Now, if you don't think the FQ and Garden District are something you'd value in a city you choose to call home, again, that's fine. But for someone like me who would explore and find local establishments and appreciate the culture and architecture and avoid tourist hotpots, New Orleans is hands down the best choice.
It seems like everyone posting is talking down on New Orleans for not being a place to raise a family in comparison to Birmingham. That doesn't mean it's the worse city, though, and clearly the poll is not reflective of what everyone posting about Birmingham said.
New Orleans is wonderful to visit, but its crime-ridden and corrupt and badly run, plus there's an entrenched good-ole-boy and quasi-feudal culture that limit opportunities for people there. Too many QOL issues that people take for granted in most places are either minor or missing in NOLA. It's really hard for outsiders to adjust there unless they're really ready to totally embrace the culture and ignore their past lives from other areas. It's just THAT different there. I lived 90 miles away in Mississippi for many years and it was a world away from New Orleans. Birmingham isn't my favorite city by a long shot and has its share of issues, but it's miles more livable than New Orleans. There's a reason why there's been a pronounced brain drain from NOLA to Texas for professionals seeking greener pastures or a peaceful area to raise their families. I knew people who moved from NOLA to Houston years before Katrina. And I'm saying this as someone who loves visiting New Orleans but know that isn't a city I'd choose to live in if I had to relocate to the Gulf Coast region. And speaking of that, it's not a matter of IF another catastrophic hurricane decimates the city, but WHEN. Birmingham's inland location would definitely be an advantage in that case.
^ This. BUT a lot of people in New Orleans work in the touristy areas since tourism/service economy has become a huge part of the economy there. And people do live in the Garden District. But if I lived in say, Kenner or Metairie or Da East, I probably would rarely go to those neighborhoods. And if I lived on the Northshore, definitely would rarely go to those areas. Probably mostly work in the CBD and go back home and that's that.
This is more explainable. Thank you. What would you say the QOL issues are. For someone with a good job and steady income, able to afford a home, etc. Not talking about someone in generational poverty. But say someone got a job offer in both Birmingham and New Orleans. Young single person or young couple with no kids. What QOL issues would they face more in New Orleans than Birmingham? Is it hard to make friends because it's insular? Hard to move up a corporate ladder due to the same insular nature?
I had also posted either on this thread or somewhere else on the forum about how Louisiana's legal system is likely leading to a large brain drain as well. As a lawyer myself, I could never move there because I could never work there. And I bet a lot of people going into law/politics leave the state so as to not limit their future by forcing themselves to live in LA forever. Then, those who do want to stay in LA forever are likely the ones that create that insular good ole boy scene in the law/government/politics of the city. That's my best guess as to at least the brain drain and corruption issue from the law student/lawyer standpoint.
But how so? I mean I know New Orleans doesn't have the best economy, but if you could get a good job, is it really still worse than Birmingham?
Unfortunately, yes. I couldn’t bring myself to live in New Orleans or its suburbs. I can’t say the same about Birmingham. B’ham definitely has its share of problems, but they are no where near the scale of New Orleans IMO. Birmingham doesn’t get nearly enough credit for the quality of life that it can offer.
For me, I think the special events and entertainment options in NOLA would be a big reason to visit downtown on at least a semi-regular basis and there's something going on down there all the time it seems.
Yeah I probably would not live in the French Quarter. But there's no denying that having all that entertainment and culture nearby is a bonus. Other cities have similar neighborhoods that locals avoid on a day to day basis, but they're fun for exploring once in a while and add a level of uniqueness to the city. That "different" vibe and the culture make me love New Orleans. I'm not sure there's anything that would make me choose living in Memphis or Birmingham over it, unless I literally could not get a job, which in my line of work would be very likely in New Orleans lol. But if I had a different job or changed career paths, I'd highly consider moving there because I'd enjoy having something like the FQ in my backyard. But I equally love Magazine Street and Uptown.
Yeah the French Quarter would get old the same way a lot of cities' major destinations do. But having that there with all the culture and the festivals? Yeah I'd love the ability. I wouldn't be going to Mardi Gras every year, but I'd head there for culture and nights out once in a while. And all the locals know the bars to avoid that are just filled with tourists.
Do tourists actually frequent the Garden District all that much? Again, though, the culture and amenities it provides can't be matched. My friend that lived there took me to some really unique and local bars and restaurants throughout the area from the FQ to Uptown. Uptown has some great eateries and local vibes to it also. We only did the FQ one night. Even then, we went to a restaurant that wasn't that touristy, and then we of course did the actual Quarter after dinner. I could see it getting old, but not the entire neighborhood is like that.
To think that just because a city's downtown is a major attraction, that it's all like that, is not logical. I avoid Times Square, but it doesn't mean nobody sees a play there. It doesn't mean I avoid restaurants on 8th or 9th Ave just because they're close to touristy areas. I avoided Hollywood for the most part when I lived in LA, but I still went to the rooftop bars for fun and some of the restaurants near it can be pretty good. Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica is also very touristy, but there are still some great restaurants there and the shopping is still amazing there. I shopped in Union Square in SF even though it's full of tourists and I ate around there sometimes.
You can't hold it against New Orleans that it attracts a lot of tourists. If your argument is the schools suck and you have kids, that's fine, but I'd still argue back my personal opinion is that if you parent well your kids can go to public school and I would gladly raise children in the city to avoid living in suburbs. If your argument is that it's dangerous, that's fine, but again, I'd argue back that it varies by neighborhood. But to say that living in New Orleans would not be good because the FQ and Garden District get too many tourists? That one doesn't make sense. Would you also say living in NYC sucks because Manhattan is full of tourists? LA sucks because Hollywood and Santa Monica are full of tourists? SF sucks because Union Square is full of tourists? You may not go to those places all the time when living there, but they're definitely amenities. And the FQ and Garden District are amenities that Birmingham and Memphis just simply can't compete with. Now, if you don't think the FQ and Garden District are something you'd value in a city you choose to call home, again, that's fine. But for someone like me who would explore and find local establishments and appreciate the culture and architecture and avoid tourist hotpots, New Orleans is hands down the best choice.
It seems like everyone posting is talking down on New Orleans for not being a place to raise a family in comparison to Birmingham. That doesn't mean it's the worse city, though, and clearly the poll is not reflective of what everyone posting about Birmingham said.
I've stayed in the Garden district several times when visiting New Orleans. It's not as busy as the other areas but you can't say the area isn't frequented with tourists. I'm not holding it against New Orleans that it attracts a lot of tourists, I'm saying outside of the touristy areas there aren't a lot of great parts of the city as a whole. The same can't be said for New York, San Francisco, LA as there are a plethora of nice areas outside the touristy areas in all of those cities. It is absolutely a QOL issue. IMO the Birmingham region as a whole has a lot more areas that are satisfactory to live in than New Orleans. Even though the crime isn't what it was before the hurricane there are absolutely a lot of horrific areas outside of the main areas in New Orleans that people frequent. I know personally I probably couldn't afford to live in those nice areas of New Orleans that are close to the core of the city so that probably puts it down a notch for me. To be fair I voted for New Orleans overall as a city, but if we're talking places to live I don't think I can put it at the top. None of these cities are on my list of cities I would want to live in, but having spent extensive time in all three I'd have to vote Birmingham as overall the best for the typical person as far as overall quality of life.
Last edited by Huntsville_secede; 05-13-2019 at 03:04 PM..
I've stayed in the Garden district several times when visiting New Orleans. It's not as busy as the other areas but you can't say the area isn't frequented with tourists. I'm not holding it against New Orleans that it attracts a lot of tourists, I'm saying outside of the touristy areas there aren't a lot of great parts of the city as a whole. The same can't be said for New York, San Francisco, LA as there are a plethora of nice areas outside the touristy areas in all of those cities. It is absolutely a QOL issue. IMO the Birmingham region as a whole has a lot more areas that are satisfactory to live in than New Orleans. Even though the crime isn't what it was before the hurricane there are absolutely a lot of horrific areas outside of the main areas in New Orleans that people frequent. I know personally I probably couldn't afford to live in those nice areas of New Orleans that are close to the core of the city so that probably puts it down a notch for me. To be fair I voted for New Orleans overall as a city, but if we're talking places to live I don't think I can put it at the top. None of these cities are on my list of cities I would want to live in, but having spent extensive time in all three I'd have to vote Birmingham as overall the best for the typical person as far as overall quality of life.
Ok I understand your POV more now.
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.
