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.
1. Milwaukee--a smaller version of Chicago, reasonable cost of living, great views of Lake Michigan, near Chicago, Madison
2. Pittsburgh
3. Cincinnati
4. St. Louis
Anyone who docked Pittsburgh for having a "bad economy" is unresearched.
Pittsburgh has one of the healthiest economies of any major metro in the country right now.
So sad this great city that's become so nice in the 15 years, keeps getting old and outdated stereotypes thrown on it from research laziness.
Acutally outdated stereotypes are what unite all of the cities mentioned. To many outsiders they think the above cities haven't changed their trends from 1985.
Providence is another old industrial city that hit hard times and looks to be stabilizing.
I like Pittsburgh best, but I think Baltimore will probably have the brightest future due to its location in the northeast corridor.
Baltimore would be better off more for being close to DC than being a part of the Northeast Corrider. The NE Corridor has largely slow growth rates comparable to the cities on the list, the difference is higher immigration rates, lower birthrates, and higher native-born emigration. Although Baltimore could have issues being too close to DC and ending up in its shadow.
There are many places I'd rather live in than Baltimore but this thread reminds me there are an equal if not greater number of places I'd rather NOT live in! I'll be visiting St. Louis in the summer, my impression of the place tends to be favorable as a proud all-American heartland city on the Mississippi River. Pittsburgh and Milwaukee are too cold and Pittsburgh feels depressing. But overall I'm biased since I"m in Baltimore.
I'm not sure how much crime there is in ST. Louis and Cincinnati, probably less than here.
Acutally outdated stereotypes are what unite all of the cities mentioned. To many outsiders they think the above cities haven't changed their trends from 1985.
And whaddayaknow -- 1985 is the year when net domestic outmigration from Pittsburgh was at its worst!
There are many places I'd rather live in than Baltimore but this thread reminds me there are an equal if not greater number of places I'd rather NOT live in! I'll be visiting St. Louis in the summer, my impression of the place tends to be favorable as a proud all-American heartland city on the Mississippi River. Pittsburgh and Milwaukee are too cold and Pittsburgh feels depressing. But overall I'm biased since I"m in Baltimore.
I'm not sure how much crime there is in ST. Louis and Cincinnati, probably less than here.
Baltimore would be better off more for being close to DC than being a part of the Northeast Corrider. The NE Corridor has largely slow growth rates comparable to the cities on the list, the difference is higher immigration rates, lower birthrates, and higher native-born emigration. Although Baltimore could have issues being too close to DC and ending up in its shadow.
That's true, but the major cities of the Northeast Corridor seem to be rebounding across the board and are a major attraction. And though the growth of the metro is small percentage-wise, the percentages are working off of a huge population base.
How can someone from Baltimore call Pittsburgh depressing? That's like Paula Jones telling Judy Greer she has a big nose.
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.