Little Rock Vs Jackson vs Baton Rouge (populations, cons, difference)
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.
Little Rock is in a very sterile region (Oklahoma, Arkansas, Kansas, Northern LA, Southern Missouri, North & NE Texas). I'm not attracted to that region at all, very bland compared to the Gulf Coast but thats just my opinion.
I can agree with this, but personally I find that Little Rock is better grouped with Memphis, Jackson, and other cities in the upper South than it is anything in Oklahoma, Texas, or Kansas. There is a big difference between Wichita and Little Rock. A lot of people tie Little Rock and Dallas, but the only ties the two cities really have is that Dallas is the closest major city to Little Rock. Culturally and demographically its more similar to Nashville or Birmingham. I would add Atlanta but since its so large and cosmopolitan it really can't be compared, but I think Little Rock is a better fit with the Southeastern United States than it is Texas. Tulsa is somewhat similar but that part of Oklahoma is more like northwest Arkansas than it is most of Oklahoma.
Being currently trapped in Oklahoma City, I can agree that this is probably the most bland region of the entire country. OKC, Amarillo, Lubbock, Wichita, etc are some of the worst places in the country for their size. Even Dallas leaves you not believing you are actually in the fourth largest metro area in the country. Little Rock though is on the western edge of a much better region.
I am not going to dispute that Baton Rouge is in a better location with easy access to New Orleans, one of the most unique cities in the U.S. Memphis is alright but its no New Orleans. If proximity to world-class destinations is a factor, then Baton Rouge takes the cake. If you are looking simply at the cities themselves, it isn't quite as simple.
I can agree with this, but personally I find that Little Rock is better grouped with Memphis, Jackson, and other cities in the upper South than it is anything in Oklahoma, Texas, or Kansas. There is a big difference between Wichita and Little Rock. A lot of people tie Little Rock and Dallas, but the only ties the two cities really have is that Dallas is the closest major city to Little Rock. Culturally and demographically its more similar to Nashville or Birmingham. I would add Atlanta but since its so large and cosmopolitan it really can't be compared, but I think Little Rock is a better fit with the Southeastern United States than it is Texas. Tulsa is somewhat similar but that part of Oklahoma is more like northwest Arkansas than it is most of Oklahoma.
Being currently trapped in Oklahoma City, I can agree that this is probably the most bland region of the entire country. OKC, Amarillo, Lubbock, Wichita, etc are some of the worst places in the country for their size. Even Dallas leaves you not believing you are actually in the fourth largest metro area in the country. Little Rock though is on the western edge of a much better region.
I am not going to dispute that Baton Rouge is in a better location with easy access to New Orleans, one of the most unique cities in the U.S. Memphis is alright but its no New Orleans. If proximity to world-class destinations is a factor, then Baton Rouge takes the cake. If you are looking simply at the cities themselves, it isn't quite as simple.
I can understand this, but I have never herd that before, most folks do include Little Rock in the Dallas sphere so to speak, but I can definitely see where you are coming from being how close it is to Memphis. From what I saw, once you cross the Mississippi River things change quickly, but I can see how you can relate Little Rock with the SE. From my experience, its more of Southern Plains type city than SE city, but I can see the argument for it being in the SE.
From my experience, its more of Southern Plains type city than SE city, but I can see the argument for it being in the SE.
Have you spent much time in Little Rock? What about Wichita or OKC? From my own experience, you leave the Southern Plains when you cross the Arkansas river in eastern Oklahoma. East of the river, its not near as flat, and the trees start to get much larger and the land is much more heavily forested. Rainfall becomes much more reliable.
Culturally, Fort Smith, Arkansas is heavily tied with Oklahoma and eastern Texas, but once you get deeper into Arkansas it changes. The Little Rock metro area for instance has a huge African-American community and it heavily influences the city's culture. This is true in most Southern cities. Oklahoma City's most prominent minority on the other hand is the Latino community and there isn't a huge African-American influence.
Arkansas is in a weird place geographically where it tends to get misclassified by people who haven't spent much time there. People deeper into the Southeastern United States think its too far west to be the true South and tend to view it more as a Midwestern or Plains state. People farther west are more likely to group it in with the Southeast but they will also tend to include Oklahoma and Texas as well (which in my opinion should not be included). Culturally and geographically however, Arkansas (especially Little Rock and eastward) fits very well with Tennessee and Mississippi and doesn't fit as well with Texas and Oklahoma. The big exception, as I said earlier, is the Fort Smith area, which is more culturally tied to and influenced by Oklahoma City than it is Little Rock.
YES!! Well it at least to me it is. I prefer the Gulf Coast region in the south, which is why I find Baton Rouge more my taste. As far as entertainment, in BR you have Casinos, LSU & Southern also have pretty good events, theirs also museums, historical events (and societies, due to the History of the city and state) and many state events that take place in BR, like the BR Mardi Gras, the Bayou Country Superfest, there is also a pretty good blues festival there as well.
You also have Lafayette which is not to far, and of course New Orleans is close too. I have a few buddies from Port Arthur that currently live there and one of my parents went to Southern so I'm somewhat familiar with the area. I would live there because I enjoy the culture of the region. The area reminds me of a larger Beaumont - Port Arthur..lol, at least to me it does. We fit right on in there.
Little Rock is in a very sterile region (Oklahoma, Arkansas, Kansas, Northern LA, Southern Missouri, North & NE Texas). I'm not attracted to that region at all, very bland compared to the Gulf Coast but thats just my opinion.
I can see why you'd like this area better. Downtown is making great strides here too. Lots of potential between Lafayette, BR, and NOLA. Port Arthur is just like a Cajun town straddling Hwy 90 in south Louisiana.
I do have to agree about Little Rocks immediate region, but the Ouchita mountains, Hot Springs, and Fayetteville, and Dallas make up for it at least in my opinion. I don't care for Memphis, North LA, any other part of Arkansas, or even the Dallas area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by llmrkc07
I can understand this, but I have never herd that before, most folks do include Little Rock in the Dallas sphere so to speak, but I can definitely see where you are coming from being how close it is to Memphis. From what I saw, once you cross the Mississippi River things change quickly, but I can see how you can relate Little Rock with the SE. From my experience, its more of Southern Plains type city than SE city, but I can see the argument for it being in the SE.
I'd count Little Rock more into the SE than Texas. Their accents and foods seem more aligned with Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Alabama than Texas. But, east Texas is commonly called part of the SE.
Have you spent much time in Little Rock? What about Wichita or OKC? From my own experience, you leave the Southern Plains when you cross the Arkansas river in eastern Oklahoma. East of the river, its not near as flat, and the trees start to get much larger and the land is much more heavily forested. Rainfall becomes much more reliable.
Culturally, Fort Smith, Arkansas is heavily tied with Oklahoma and eastern Texas, but once you get deeper into Arkansas it changes. The Little Rock metro area for instance has a huge African-American community and it heavily influences the city's culture. This is true in most Southern cities. Oklahoma City's most prominent minority on the other hand is the Latino community and there isn't a huge African-American influence.
Arkansas is in a weird place geographically where it tends to get misclassified by people who haven't spent much time there. People deeper into the Southeastern United States think its too far west to be the true South and tend to view it more as a Midwestern or Plains state. People farther west are more likely to group it in with the Southeast but they will also tend to include Oklahoma and Texas as well (which in my opinion should not be included). Culturally and geographically however, Arkansas (especially Little Rock and eastward) fits very well with Tennessee and Mississippi and doesn't fit as well with Texas and Oklahoma. The big exception, as I said earlier, is the Fort Smith area, which is more culturally tied to and influenced by Oklahoma City than it is Little Rock.
I will admit I've been to Little Rock but I'm not familiar with the city, but I have been to OKC and Tulsa plenty of times due to work and from what I saw its more in common with the Southern Plain states and its more in common with Arkansas and North Texas IMO. I've been to Witchita before as well. I did also go to Pine Bluff for a football game (recently) and it was not comparable to the SE region of the country, maybe topography but nothing else. BUT I do spend alot of time in the SE due to work, family and friends and I can tell you that its not on par with that region. Also, bringing race into the argument will only complicate things. The area I am from has a very high black population but its not comparable to the SE region at all. Same with New Orleans, very large AA community but not comparable to the SE region (but you would think it would being so close to Mississippi). Culturally I put the whole state of Arkansas with the Southern Plains. Its not SE state at all to me. Different strokes for different folks..
I can see why you'd like this area better. Downtown is making great strides here too. Lots of potential between Lafayette, BR, and NOLA. Port Arthur is just like a Cajun town straddling Hwy 90 in south Louisiana.
I do have to agree about Little Rocks immediate region, but the Ouchita mountains, Hot Springs, and Fayetteville, and Dallas make up for it at least in my opinion. I don't care for Memphis, North LA, any other part of Arkansas, or even the Dallas area.
I'd count Little Rock more into the SE than Texas. Their accents and foods seem more aligned with Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Alabama than Texas. But, east Texas is commonly called part of the SE.
I will admit I've been to Little Rock but I'm not familiar with the city, but I have been to OKC and Tulsa plenty of times due to work and from what I saw its more in common with the Southern Plain states and its more in common with Arkansas and North Texas IMO. I've been to Witchita before as well. I did also go to Pine Bluff for a football game (recently) and it was not comparable to the SE region of the country, maybe topography but nothing else. BUT I do spend alot of time in the SE due to work, family and friends and I can tell you that its not on par with that region. Also, bringing race into the argument will only complicate things. The area I am from has a very high black population but its not comparable to the SE region at all. Same with New Orleans, very large AA community but not comparable to the SE region (but you would think it would being so close to Mississippi). Culturally I put the whole state of Arkansas with the Southern Plains. Its not SE state at all to me. Different strokes for different folks..
Race is a huge part of the culture of the areas. Where does your family live, the southeast isn't one cultural region it includes the Upper South, SE coastal area, Gulf Coast, etc.
Where are you from?
South Louisiana is completely different. It's impossible to say that New Orleans isn't comparable to the SE when it's culture spreads through southern Mississippi and coastal Alabama. New Orleans has cultural and business links throughout the immediate Gulf Coast.
The Mississippi River is the dividing line for me...
You can't use a strict border in this case. North Louisiana is no more like East Texas than it is like Mississippi and FAR more like Alabama or Georgia than anything west of DFW. The Southeast is a geographical region of the country, not a cultural one. Just like the West includes the PNW and Interior West.
Race is a huge part of the culture of the areas. Where does your family live, the southeast isn't one cultural region it includes the Upper South, SE coastal area, Gulf Coast, etc.
Where are you from?
South Louisiana is completely different. It's impossible to say that New Orleans isn't comparable to the SE when it's culture spreads through southern Mississippi and coastal Alabama. New Orleans has cultural and business links throughout the immediate Gulf Coast.
I agree with this. Race is a huge part of the culture of places. New Orleans, Atlanta, Memphis, etc wouldn't be what they are without their African-American heritage. Likewise, much of the Southwest wouldn't be what it is without its Latino heritage. I have always grouped New Orleans in with the Gulf Coast stretching through coastal Mississippi and Alabama. Even parts of the Florida panhandle might be included.
Little Rock is culturally part of the upper South and has more ties with it than it does with the Great Plains or Texas. I think as you travel west of Little Rock the transition starts but Little Rock itself is very much an upper South city.
Northwestern Arkansas on the other hand is quite a bit different culturally from Little Rock. The Fort Smith area is tied pretty strongly with Oklahoma City. Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers have close ties with Tulsa and with Missouri. Little Rock doesn't strongly influence that part of the state.
Correct. It runs deep in a lot of Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Arizona.
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.
