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.
I’m confused. The only thing you’re able to see from most of Denver is the mountains. It’s not until you get closer to the Front Range where the foothills block the actual mountains from view.
For the OP, I'd definitely say Chicago is the front runner. It's just a lot bigger than the others and offers a lot more. I just visited for the first time a few weeks ago and I loved having endless things to do. I'd pick Charlotte next since it's a good sized city and on the cheap side. I don't know much about it but it's in NC so I personally wouldn't pick it but it suits your criteria well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil P
Denver's a good city, but it's overpriced for what it is. It's not really exceptional (the views and location are not that exceptional, there's many other cities out west that are better), except for in a few key areas: access to the Rocky Mountains, sports, the fitness lifestyle, dogs, beer, weed, and DIA. If those aren't big priorities, there's other cities, like Chicago, that give you a lot more bang for your buck.
One thing I think is worth mentioning is that Denver only just got really expensive about 5-6 years ago. Also I haven't really seen a COL index where Denver is in the top 20, yet. It hasn't always been like this and once growth slows I'm sure prices will as well. Hopefully.
I see Denver and Charlotte compared a lot, but they are very different cities. The climate is one factor, either you like a colder arid climate or a wetter sub tropical climate. Both are good climates, but if you like one, you probably don't like the other. Charlotte is sprawled, but full of trees and green space while Denver is one of the most paved over cities in the US, but it's significantly denser.
Denver's a good city, but it's overpriced for what it is. It's not really exceptional (the views and location are not that exceptional, there's many other cities out west that are better), except for in a few key areas: access to the Rocky Mountains, sports, the fitness lifestyle, dogs, beer, weed, and DIA. If those aren't big priorities, there's other cities, like Chicago, that give you a lot more bang for your buck.
Nothing wrong with comparing different cities. One thing I will say. They are both growing at a much faster pace than Chicago. In fact many people from Chicago are moving to Denver and Charlotte. There is a reason for that.
If the OP is looking for a true big city experience then it's Chicago without a doubt. Great nightlife, great population density, great public transportation. That being said, here's my take on The Windy City.
Spent a week in Chicago in July for the first time for work a couple years ago. It was fun overall. Would I live there? Sure, if it were 20 years ago and I didn't have any kids. Would I raise a family there? Not a chance, and here's why.
Taxation. Illinois and Chicago are both over-taxed fiscal dumpster fires. Nobody there can balance a budget to save their lives. Even after raising the income tax rate a couple years ago, the state is still projected to run a $3 billion budget deficit this year. Chicago isn't immune, either. The city spends hundreds of millions of dollars every year on pension obligations, and said pension funds are chronically underfunded. In Colorado you can't raise taxes without putting it to a vote. You don't get that option in Illinois. I would not be at all surprised if they (Illinois) have to raise income taxes again in the next year or two. Unless they figure out a way to get their craptastic finances in shape, my long-term outlooks for both Chicago and Illinois are poor.
Growth. Compared to Denver and Charlotte, Chicago is stagnant. Denver and Charlotte are adding people like gangbusters. Chicago is lucky to break even. At its current pace, Chicago will lose its 3rd place population ranking to Houston within the next 15-20 years, and its 3rd place MSA ranking to DFW within 30 years.
Crime. I know the common refrain from high-crime apologists (think St. Louis, Indy, Chicago, etc) is "most of ABC is safe, it's just XYZ that's bad." My response to that is if XYZ is so bad that it drags your entire city down then you need to own it.
When I was in Chicago I stayed at a swanky hotel in The Loop. While I was there someone was murdered in their car next to Millennium Park, and another person survived a stabbing in an alleyway a few blocks from my hotel. Not exactly "the southside." I couldn't help but notice that the Chicago news is 20 minutes of drugs, gang violence, shootings, stabbings, etc, and if there's time left, political corruption.
Climate. Everyone knows winters there blow, but summers are no picnic because they're muggy as f***. I'm friends with a couple former Chicagoans who affectionately refer to summer as "Swamp Ass Season." It was in the 80s the entire time I was there, but it was super humid. I walked a couple miles after work one day, and when I got back to my hotel I was drenched in sweat. I would take a 95 degree day in Denver over an 85 degree day in Chicago.
Denver isn't immune to crappy weather. What I call "snow season" can last pretty long (worst case mid September to late May, but typically mid October to early May) , but overall, the average date for the first 70-degree day is a full three weeks earlier in Denver than Chicago, and Denver's average daytime highs in the winter never fall below 40 degrees. The same cannot be said for Chicago. Daytime highs there are 40 or below for roughly 3 months.
Scenery/Outdoor Recreation. Yeah, Lake Michigan is awesome, but if you want something other than that you pile into the car and join all the other FIBs who invade Wisconsin every summer.
Denver doesn't have a water element, but we have the Rocky Mountains. Chicago is so flat in every direction that the week I was there I think the maximum number of floors I recorded on my Fitbit was 5. Additionally, when it's hotter than hell in Denver you drive up a few thousand feet in elevation and the temperature will drop 15-20+ degrees. In Chicago you go to the lake and hope for the best.
Overall Denver has markedly better winters than Chicago, and markedly better summers than Charlotte. It's not as urban as Chicago, or as mild in the winter as Charlotte, but for my money is a perfect compromise.
I personally wouldn't live in the southeast. Summers are hot garbage, I find the Appalachians to be far less appealing than the Rockies, and the political climate is way too uptight and conservative for my tastes.
Denver was incorporated about 30 years after Chicago....that's hardly new. Also, I don't remember seeing the mountains from Denver, but I could be wrong. Tell me where you can see them from Denver, so I can look it up on Google Maps. Also, I love the water element that Chicago has...that's hard to beat, IMO.
Take in a game at Coors Field. Sit along the first base line and enjoy the views of Longs Peak and Rocky Mountain National Park.
Drive the Cherry Creek Dam Road southwest from Parker Road/225 to Dayton Street. You can see Pikes Peak, Devils Head, Mount Evans, the James Peak Wilderness, the Indian Peaks Wilderness, Longs Peak, and the Mummy Range in RMNP.
Go to the observation deck at the state capitol building for a view similar to the Cherry Creek Dam Road.
Overall Denver has markedly better winters than Chicago, and markedly better summers than Charlotte. It's not as urban as Chicago, or as mild in the winter as Charlotte, but for my money is a perfect compromise.
I personally wouldn't live in the southeast. Summers are hot garbage, I find the Appalachians to be far less appealing than the Rockies, and the political climate is way too uptight and conservative for my tastes.
I really respect your assessment on Chicago and really think you hit it on the money. Hoever, I will have to disagree with your assessment on Charlotte and the Southeast. Denver's summers are no picnic either and that 6,000ft sun literally eats up your skin and living in the Front Range you have no shade to find. I was in Charlotte mowing my lawn for 1.5 hours in 95F humid heat and it felt much more bearable than just walking down the street in Denver and having that sun literally eat up my skin in a matter of minutes. The humidity is really not fun, but your body adapts. I almost enjoy the humidity because my skin feels better even though I am sweaty (which sucks). I find Denver to be a bit too dry and my skin can bleed and when the wind blows I get bad allergies and coughs. Although, now that I am living in Colorado longer and using lots of lotions I am managing this super dry air much better. Another thing about Charlotte is it has huge trees all over and finding shade is easy. When the heat got to me in Charlotte I could just about run to a nice shaded spot anywhere I went. Also, most homes and businesses in the Southeast have top notch air conditioning systems and you really don't feel hot for too long. In Denver, many homes don't even have A/C, yet it can get into the 100s here and is in the 90s for quite a stretch of time.
As far as politics, North Carolina is a real purple state.. Colorado use to be, but now it swings pretty radically left-wing and if you are looking for middle of the road politics you are not going to find that in Colorado anymore. Maybe, back in the 90s, but not today. That was one thing I was hoping for when I came to Colorado and was surprised to see it was every bit as liberal/left in the political realm as Seattle, where I was previously living before I moved to Charlotte. Of course, once you go into the rural areas of either Colorado or North Carolina both states are pretty conservative and I don't feel they are more/less conservative than the other in the rural areas. In fact, I would say Colorado Springs is more conservative than cities like Greensboro or Durham, NC, which are pretty liberal.
As far as which mountain range is more beautiful, well beauty is in the eye of the beholder! The Colorado Rockies have their beauty and I respect that. Being from the Pacific Northwest, I prefer the more lush greenery, biodiversity, large bodies of water, waterfalls and topography of the Appalachian mountains of Tennessee and North Carolina. I felt they were more visually appealing and much more accessible. Colorado has many gems, but you have to drive long distances to get to them. As well, some people have problems with the elevations of the mountains in Colorado. Hiking on a summer day at 10,000 ft in the exposed areas of Rocky mountains is not easy for all people. Taking hikes in the Appalachian mountains is much easier, especially with people with issues with UV sensitivity and struggle with the elevation.
As far as crime, I don't know what is in the water in Colorado, but the mass school shootings and family murders that make the news makes you wonder what is going on there.
I voted for Denver. A medium sized city with United as an Airlines hub. Denver is learning how to be a big city, but it's not cosmopolitan like Chicago. Denver weather can change on a dime one day 80 F next day Snowing and vice versa. Pretty good quality of life, bicycle trails, and things to do outdoors. I lived in SATX for five years and the heat killed me too. You're going to miss the BBQ. Real Estate is crazy in every city right now. It depends what you want out of life. Denver has and continues to invest in infrastructure which is good. I like Chicago too, and never lived in Charlotte. Good luck.
I know this is an old thread, but thought I'd respond anyway. All 3 are good. For BALANCE, I would choose Charlotte. Denver would be a great pick, but is too expensive. Chicago has so much, but its economy is meh and climate isn't great. Charlotte's biggest strength is its balance of QOL. And as someone who travels extensively, unless you're wanting to stay drunk/party 24 hours a day, there's plenty to do in the Charlotte area. We're never bored here. They also have the most friendly residents of the 3. So for overall balance for what you're looking for, I'd go with Charlotte.
Guess your a little bitter someone doesn't see Austin as God's gift to Texas and someone not seeing they are in the best already. But kind to Chicago in post ..... I rarely see from that one..... Generally go into negatives as usual.
Every city has them. Whether heat, humidity, real winters, traffic, crime, COL, dirt, too gritty, bugs more a issue or homeless for some. Most a combination. Some might see NYC as the best you can reach for. Some would say never to live for reasons also. Usually if someone goes into a rant to mock a city... something personal or political is likely involved .....
He said Austin was similar to Denver. Not sure how that dragged the rest of Texas into the conversation
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.
Generally go into negatives as usual. 
