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 will say that it's surprising to see that Pittsburgh has the lowest percentage of its workforce being six-figure-earners out of all five being compared. I swear every other vehicle near me is a BMW or Mercedes or Ranger Rover these days. Are these vehicles just coming down in price now to the point where progressively lower-earning people are able to afford them, or are an increasingly high portion of Pittsburghers overextending themselves by being "car poor" instead of being "rent poor" as they are in many other cities?
Maybe there are a lot of people who earn $80,000-$99,999 per year, and what they save in housing costs can be splurged on cars.
The question was based on just this group.
Philadelphia certainly has many cosmopolitan elements / offerings, just more limited to specific areas. I think its national perception is very underrated in this regard.
If we are talking metro area, I think the case for "cosmopolitan" is even stronger due to the rich history, cultural enclaves, ethnic enclaves, and world class institutions in high concentration.
The "bougie" part doesn't really apply to any of these areas, but I guess its most prevalent in the Philadelphia area due to the higher amounts of wealth.
Bougie to me is Atlanta, Miami, Dallas, even DC, and also note that bougie doesn't equate always equate to wealth. The "Main Line" a string of extremely affluent towns outside of Philadelphia does not give off a bougie vibe, its much more understated, besides a parking lot full of mercedes and range rovers.
Just a note on the word "cosmopolitan":
It's widely used as a synonym for "sophisticated," but its original sense was "attracting people from diverse backgrounds and ethnicities."
In the Ellis Island years of American immigration, there was an organization in Cleveland called the Cleveland Cosmopolitan Council whose purpose was to assist the people pouring into the city from the various nations of southern and eastern Europe adjust to life in America.
Philadelphia historically hasn't had a reputation for this kind of cosmopolitanism, but when you examine where new arrivals to the region are coming from these days, I'd say that the original sense of the term fits it too.
But: I'm now curious as to what you define as "bougie," cpomp. I will grant that the communities of the Main Line, in keeping with finest Quaker tradition, aren't given to flashy displays of wealth (though I could find some houses in Gladwyne for you that fit that description), but I'd hardly call the vibe either Ardmore or Wayne give off as downmarket.
But: I'm now curious as to what you define as "bougie," cpomp. I will grant that the communities of the Main Line, in keeping with finest Quaker tradition, aren't given to flashy displays of wealth (though I could find some houses in Gladwyne for you that fit that description), but I'd hardly call the vibe either Ardmore or Wayne give off as downmarket.
Very true. I surmised that some essentially look at the term "bougie" as a synonym for "new money," as in more blatantly materialistic and ostentatious, to the point of being somewhat tacky.
Main Line communities are quintessentially and still very evidently affluent towns based on the "vibe" alone, although I get what I think cpomp was referring to in that residents in places like Ardmore or Wayne generally take the more refined, "old money" approach to affluence. For example, there are plenty of folks who could afford top-of-the-line designer or the biggest/most impressive everything, but choose not to because material consumption is not critical to their self-worth or well-being.
Very true. I surmised that some essentially look at the term "bougie" as a synonym for "new money," as in more blatantly materialistic and ostentatious, to the point of being somewhat tacky.
The OP specifically said:
Quote:
yuppie, politically and socially aware, well educated, white collar
Thus, he's really asking about where NPR-listening, yoga-practicing liberal-types are found in high concentrations.
Thus, he's really asking about where NPR-listening, yoga-practicing liberal-types are found in high concentrations.
Understood, but there was a bit of "sidebar" conversation about how "bougie" can, in fact, mean different things to different people. That's all I was addressing.
If we strictly refer to the OP's personal definition of "bougie" and "cosmopolitan," then it fits the Main Line of Philadelphia to a "T."
In which case I'd join just about everyone else who has responded to this query in placing Philadelphia at the top of this particular heap.
I'm not as familiar with Detroit as I am with those other metros, but I do know that the Motor City has some serious wealth in the counties that surround it - the chief difference between Philly and Detroit in this regard is that there's still some serious wealth in the core city in Philly too, while the money has all but fled Detroit proper. I'm not even sure it's gingerly returning to the city of Detroit, which is coming up off the ropes. So it probably rates second.
The other three cities are probably on par, with Pittsburgh at a disadvantage because it's an island of tech-led resurgence in a region that's otherwise still rusting away. All of the money there resides in Allegheny County, which includes several tony suburbs (Sewickley probably the best known) in addition to Pittsburgh itself.
2008 did not wallop StL like it did Detroit, Pitt and Cleveland. While StL stagnated, it did not contract like those metros.
Cleveland and Pittsburgh continue to contract at this moment.
For me, I'd put 1. Philly 2. Detroit 3. Stl 4. Cleveland 5. Pittsburgh
The Great Recession actually didn't hit Pittsburgh as hard as the rest of the country. For one, Pittsburgh did not experience the same real estate bubble, so there was no collapse. Pittsburgh did, in fact lose jobs, but it took the city 45 months to get back to 2007 Job numbers. It took the COUNTRY 78 months.
The Great Recession actually didn't hit Pittsburgh as hard as the rest of the country. For one, Pittsburgh did not experience the same real estate bubble, so there was no collapse. Pittsburgh did, in fact lose jobs, but it took the city 45 months to get back to 2007 Job numbers. It took the COUNTRY 78 months.
The Pittsburgh Metropolitan area has lost nearly 400K people since 2000.
How much of that is attributable to 2008, I dont know. However, Pitt continues to bleed residents.
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.
