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.
There was already a Oklahoma City vs Birmingham poll. Oklahoma City won it 63 to 37%.
Doubtless I think OKC vs. Bham in particular, OKC does beat Bham.
BUT when you're taking Alabama vs. Oklahoma as a whole, I can see why Alabama pulls ahead. You've got Orange Beach/Gulf Shores, Mobile's colonial architecture, Huntsville's Marshall Space Center and booming aerospace industry, and lots of civil rights history. And much more uniformly green than Oklahoma.
Both Alabama and Oklahoma are in the dumpster for quality of life statistics. However, as this chart shows, Oklahoma out ranks Alabama in most quality of life criteria: Alabama vs Oklahoma. Surely, some people would say quality of life rankings among states are meaningless. An individual's quality of life depends on how much he or she wants to put forth the effort to make it better, not on what state is lived in. In that case, it seems too many people in Alabama and Oklahoma are too lazy to make for a better life, while happily indulging in fattening food.
Both Alabama and Oklahoma are in the dumpster for quality of life statistics. However, as this chart shows, Oklahoma out ranks Alabama in most quality of life criteria: Alabama vs Oklahoma. Surely, some people would say quality of life rankings among states are meaningless. An individual's quality of life depends on how much he or she wants to put forth the effort to make it better, not on what state is lived in. In that case, it seems too many people in Alabama and Oklahoma are too lazy to make for a better life, while happily indulging in fattening food.
Yeah neither is known for high QOL. But within state limits, I'd still have to put AL over OK since it has a beach within state borders. I mean, when its cities really aren't all that different, and QOL is low in both, might as well have a beach to enjoy and take your mind off? Lol.
Both Alabama and Oklahoma are in the dumpster for quality of life statistics. However, as this chart shows, Oklahoma out ranks Alabama in most quality of life criteria: Alabama vs Oklahoma. Surely, some people would say quality of life rankings among states are meaningless. An individual's quality of life depends on how much he or she wants to put forth the effort to make it better, not on what state is lived in. In that case, it seems too many people in Alabama and Oklahoma are too lazy to make for a better life, while happily indulging in fattening food.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jessemh431
Yeah neither is known for high QOL. But within state limits, I'd still have to put AL over OK since it has a beach within state borders. I mean, when its cities really aren't all that different, and QOL is low in both, might as well have a beach to enjoy and take your mind off? Lol.
Judgemental, much?
Places like NYC, LA, Bay Area, etc. have huge underclass populations themselves, who are barely getting by.
Quality of life always comes down to the individual and their situation. At least in the context of the US, where even the lowest rank states provide plenty of opportunities to become middle class.
Places like NYC, LA, Bay Area, etc. have huge underclass populations themselves, who are barely getting by.
Quality of life always comes down to the individual and their situation. At least in the context of the US, where even the lowest rank states provide plenty of opportunities to become middle class.
It's not judgmental. The states don't have good public schools. They are both some of the least healthiest states in the country. Their economies are not great. Alabama is quite synonymous (for good reason) with racism and continuing inequality. Objectively, these two states do not provide a high QOL for most people. Yes, some people are able to enjoy a life in either. But that doesn't mean that they objectively are good places to live.
It's not judgmental. The states don't have good public schools. They are both some of the least healthiest states in the country. Their economies are not great. Alabama is quite synonymous (for good reason) with racism and continuing inequality. Objectively, these two states do not provide a high QOL for most people. Yes, some people are able to enjoy a life in either. But that doesn't mean that they objectively are good places to live.
It's not judgmental, it called an "opinion", which are not 100% factual. Take it with a grain of salt. You feel the way you do, other feel the way they do. Nobody is 100% certain. Everybody criterial is different.
It's not judgmental. The states don't have good public schools. They are both some of the least healthiest states in the country. Their economies are not great. Alabama is quite synonymous (for good reason) with racism and continuing inequality. Objectively, these two states do not provide a high QOL for most people. Yes, some people are able to enjoy a life in either. But that doesn't mean that they objectively are good places to live.
Just a few points to add - with the acknowledgment that Alabama and Oklahoma (and much of the South in general) isn't a good fit for many folks, which is perfectly understandable.
Both states have a significantly lower cost of living compared to national averages. Incomes that would be a struggle to get by with in the urban Northeast and California are very sufficient in the South.
Both states (especially Alabama) have many historically poor rural areas. Their lower economic performance negatively impacts statewide averages, but has little relevance on an everyday basis for residents in the more prosperous metropolitan areas.
Racism and inequality in 2020 are legitimate nationwide problems, and not limited to the South. Many of the more "progressive" northern states also tend to have higher white/black racial segregation than the South. Oklahoma has by many measures some of the most assimilated and middle class Native American population in the country, and is the headquarters for influential tribal organizations.
It's not judgmental. The states don't have good public schools. They are both some of the least healthiest states in the country. Their economies are not great. Alabama is quite synonymous (for good reason) with racism and continuing inequality. Objectively, these two states do not provide a high QOL for most people. Yes, some people are able to enjoy a life in either. But that doesn't mean that they objectively are good places to live.
I agree, they both usually rank last or next to last for progress. There are some positives to both, but the bad largely outweighs that. The pros for both would be very low cost of living. As a young person, one could actually afford to live in the city centers of each and potentially purchase a home while enjoying some of the recreation and amenities of their larger counterparts. However, outdated state laws, lack of investment in education, overabundance of conservative culture, poor infrastructure, and the failure to compete economically with peers will hold them back.
It's not judgmental. The states don't have good public schools. They are both some of the least healthiest states in the country. Their economies are not great. Alabama is quite synonymous (for good reason) with racism and continuing inequality. Objectively, these two states do not provide a high QOL for most people. Yes, some people are able to enjoy a life in either. But that doesn't mean that they objectively are good places to live.
NYC is filled with terrible public schools, and a large chunk of the population is impoverished and not socially mobile. There are plenty of neighborboods with Alabama tier household incomes, but without the low cost of living.
I agree, they both usually rank last or next to last for progress. There are some positives to both, but the bad largely outweighs that. The pros for both would be very low cost of living. As a young person, one could actually afford to live in the city centers of each and potentially purchase a home while enjoying some of the recreation and amenities of their larger counterparts. However, outdated state laws, lack of investment in education, overabundance of conservative culture, poor infrastructure, and the failure to compete economically with peers will hold them back.
I doubt there's an "overabdunance of conservative culture" in any mid to large city proper. That type of thing tends to be a rural vs urban divide, and the South simply has a larger share of its population living in rural areas.
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.
