Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-08-2023, 05:31 AM
 
7,108 posts, read 8,983,971 times
Reputation: 6415

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Losfrisco View Post
LOL, welcome to America's new relevant superstar cities, Austin and Nashville.

Surely great places for a night on the town, but as far as having the basic infrastructure that the average world citizen would expect to see in any city.....yeah they might need a few more decades to get that sorted out!
I know 2 million use to be the size when a city has their starter line in place. Look at KC, Seattle and St. Louis. I guess the cost is so high, that isn't the case anymore.

I would never choose Nashville as my go to spot for nightlife. Miami, New York, Vegas or Chicago yes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-08-2023, 05:33 AM
 
4,159 posts, read 2,860,004 times
Reputation: 5517
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTimidBlueBars View Post
No disagreement there, but how many people are really moving to NYC and Boston to hike in Vermont once a year? As far as the eastern US goes I think the only areas people really move to for the natural amenities are like, western NC/east TN, northern New England, and like Florida if you count the warm weather as an amenity.
Coastal NC and SC have blown up recently in large part due to the natural amenities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2023, 05:36 AM
 
14,034 posts, read 15,048,993 times
Reputation: 10476
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTimidBlueBars View Post
No disagreement there, but how many people are really moving to NYC and Boston to hike in Vermont once a year? As far as the eastern US goes I think the only areas people really move to for the natural amenities are like, western NC/east TN, northern New England, and like Florida if you count the warm weather as an amenity.
There is tons of traffic going to the Whites (and NH Lakes) every weekend from Boston. Not really Vermont cause it’s an extra hour.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2023, 05:42 AM
 
Location: Marshall-Shadeland, Pittsburgh, PA
32,620 posts, read 77,663,615 times
Reputation: 19102
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeignCrunch View Post
Fading--Chicago, St. Louis, Memphis

Growing--Denver, Atlanta, NoVa, Austin, Charlotte, Nashville
I am not familiar with the city of NoVa?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2023, 05:46 AM
 
Location: Brackenwood
9,994 posts, read 5,698,174 times
Reputation: 22158
In my lifetime, Florida has gone from 17 electoral votes to 30 while New York has gone from 41 to 28.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2023, 05:50 AM
 
372 posts, read 204,701 times
Reputation: 457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guineas View Post
No. NYC and Boston offer way more in natural amenities than Chicago. It's not even close. For both NYC and Boston, you can ski within driving distance. Boston has Cape Cod within a weekend trip and some decent trails even within the city (Blue Hills, Fells) and NH and Vermont are drivable. NYC has Long Island too and the Hudson Valley is beautiful. I can't speak for DC area as I've never lived there, but I imagine it being better than Chicago just on proximity to Shenandoah alone.

Chicago has Lake Michigan and that's it. Its forest preserves are some of the lamest hikes I've ever done in the US.

I love Chicago the city, but the natural amenities of the metro area are the pits. It's not controversial except to the biggest homers.
In the same vein as your comment, Chicago has Wisconsin as a backyard playground, and it's pretty awesome. And, they use Wisconsin, as is evidenced every summer week-end, with almost as many Illinois plates, as Wisconsin. I exaggerate a little, but they're all over Wisconsin in the summer. And, Lake Michigan is not a "that's it," it's pretty amazing in beauty, boating, etc.

Lake Geneva, WI, is just over the IL border, and is a favorite of Chicagoans, as are many other lakes in WI. Wrigley had a home in Lake Geneva, that sold within the last couple of years, for millions. Remember, people, Chicago could easily have been a part of WI. The arbitrary border could have been farther south. No one can laugh at Wisconsin lakes.

Also, no one is mentioning the Indiana Dunes National Park. Google that and take a look...practically within the city limits. No one can say that's not pretty amazing for a little "outdoor activity."

Last edited by Bicala; 05-08-2023 at 07:03 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2023, 06:03 AM
 
2,824 posts, read 2,292,611 times
Reputation: 3747
As much as it pains me to say it Chicago has certainly suffered a relative cultural decline in my conscious life. In the late 80s/early 90s Chicago had a massive national prominence. It was home to the world's tallest building and busiest airport. Chicago sports loomed huge nationally you had Jordan and the Bulls, Mike Ditka and Da Bears, it still has 2 MLB teams, but baseball was a far bigger deal back then. In TV and movies, you had all the John Hughes movies/Adventures in Baby Sitting, lots of network TV shows set in Chicago. ER would get 30 million viewers. Oprah and many of the day time talk shows were based there. Jessie Jackson was a huge national presence. WGN was a national TV network that spread Chicago culture far and wide. The Tribune was a nationally renowned newspaper. Siskel and Ebert were the most important film critics.

Economically, Chicago was the heart of then more important Great Lakes industrial economy. The Sunbelt MSAs were far smaller and Silicon Valley was just a niche center of Chip manufacturing. NYC/Boston/SF hadn't undergone their economic and cultural transformations into elite yuppie white collar centers of affluence.

From an urbanism perspective, in the early 90s Chicago was one of the very few cities (NYC, SF maybe Boston) that had managed to maintain a middle class/affluent vibrant urban center. There wewas far less immigration/diversity then, so Chicago was more notable nationally as a melting pot. Chicago's crime was pretty bad and probably worse than now. But it was bad everywhere so Chicago didn't really standout on the downside like it does today. It had far less murders than NYC.

So although Chicago has in many ways improved, grown it's downtown core and reinvented its economy, it feels less prominent nationally. It's still the 3rd largest city, but dosent loom over the next 5 or so the way it used to. Frankly, it just feels more lost in the shuffle nationally.

Last edited by jpdivola; 05-08-2023 at 06:26 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2023, 06:31 AM
 
24,560 posts, read 18,299,405 times
Reputation: 40261
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4 View Post
There is tons of traffic going to the Whites (and NH Lakes) every weekend from Boston. Not really Vermont cause it’s an extra hour.
Woodstock Vermont is 2 hours from the Tip O’Neil tunnel. North Conway is more like 2 1/2 with a ton of secondary roads. You have no clue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2023, 06:32 AM
 
372 posts, read 204,701 times
Reputation: 457
Oprah, Belushi, etc., did not Chicago make. Stars are moving out of LA, as well, does that mean it's lost relevance? Didn't think so. As far as the real things a city is rated by (business, etc.), Chicago is still an Alpha city. I hope I don't have to say that again. Daytime talk shows don't have as much relevance as finance, etc. ER? Seriously?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2023, 06:36 AM
 
14,034 posts, read 15,048,993 times
Reputation: 10476
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
Woodstock Vermont is 2 hours from the Tip O’Neil tunnel. North Conway is more like 2 1/2 with a ton of secondary roads. You have no clue.
North Conway is the Northeastern Whites? The Southernmost 4,000 footers are like 2hrs away? Killington, the Closest Vermont 4000 footer is further than The Kinsmans or Flume

Plus Vermont 4000 footers are few and far between. NH has like a dozen crunched up right off 93
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top