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.
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,098,363 times
Reputation: 1028
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by graterdaze
yeah, I agree, u can't really count Chicago in that catergory.
The reason I included Chicago is because certain areas of the city did experience severe decline....and Gary, Indiana is about as quintessential rustbelt as it gets. But I agree, overall you could probably make a better case for it not being rust belt, despite the fact that it had the same heavy manufacturing as the rest of the Great Lakes cities. In any case, you could also argue for Indy and Columbus, solely based on their manufacturing history. What is true of Chicago, Indy, and Columbus was that they never ended up suffering the long-term decline of places like STL, Detroit, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, or Buffalo (although some of these places are rebounding now, like Pittsburgh).
I'd rather live in the Northeast (NYC, Philadelphia, Boston) than the Sun Belt, but ultimately I love the Midwest andd Upper Midwest (Minneapolis). I would either choose Minneapolis or Chicago (even Toronto). I would never ever live in Detroit, St. Louis, Cleveland, Pittsburgh (then again, maybe I would live in Pittsburgh), Buffalo, etc. by choice. They're nice places to visit, but not to live.
Last edited by 313Weather; 06-10-2012 at 09:44 AM..
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,098,363 times
Reputation: 1028
Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticEars
My preference to live in the Sun Belt is subjective: generally better weather, nicer people and more interesting and diverse scenery compared to the Rust Belt. However, I think I would like the upper LP and UP of Michigan, Eastern Iowa, Wisconsin, or Minnesota, minus the winter weather.
IMO, I would rather deal with an Upper Midwest winter than a Deep South summer.
If there is anything I hate with a passion, it's sweating profusely and having to hydrate myself constantly...taking a shower if you're going to be out for long periods in extreme heat and humidity is almost pointless as well. Being a hairy man like myself who sweats easily only makes things worse where this is concerned.
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,098,363 times
Reputation: 1028
Quote:
Originally Posted by 313Weather
I'd rather live in the Northeast (NYC, Philadelphia, Boston) than the Sun Belt, but ultimately I love the Midwest andd Upper Midwest (Minnapolis). I would either choose Minneapolis or Chicago (even Toronto). I would never ever live in Detroit, St. Louis, Cleveland, Pittsburgh (then again, maybe I would live in Pittsburgh), Buffalo, etc. by choice. They're nice places to visit, but not to live.
I'd have to disagree. It depends on your taste...if you only want metros of 4 million or above, then I'd agree. But Cleveland, Detroit, and St. Louis all have among the nicest suburbs in the country.
In St. Louis proper (in the city limits), I think that most of South City, and the Central West End are great places to live. In neighboring St. Louis County, which has the biggest chunk of the metro's population and is now every bit as urban as the city (with Clayton developing into a major downtown area), where I grew up, are some of IMO the best suburbs ever. St. Louis and Cleveland both offer extremely affordable costs of living. St. Louis County is practically crime-free, has excellent schools, etc.
Also, I'd strongly recommend most cities in the Rust Belt if you are looking for Catholic schools, all the way from kindergarten to the university level.
Although i'm pretty sure that Florida, Louisiana, and Texas could offer those same areas.
I'd have to disagree. It depends on your taste...if you only want metros of 4 million or above, then I'd agree. But Cleveland, Detroit, and St. Louis all have among the nicest suburbs in the country.
In St. Louis proper (in the city limits), I think that most of South City, and the Central West End are great places to live. In neighboring St. Louis County, which has the biggest chunk of the metro's population and is now every bit as urban as the city (with Clayton developing into a major downtown area), where I grew up, are some of IMO the best suburbs ever. St. Louis and Cleveland both offer extremely affordable costs of living. St. Louis County is practically crime-free, has excellent schools, etc.
Also, I'd strongly recommend most cities in the Rust Belt if you are looking for Catholic schools, all the way from kindergarten to the university level.
Although i'm pretty sure that Florida, Louisiana, and Texas could offer those same areas.
That's the thing, I'm not a fan of suburbs. Once you exclude the walkable town centers of the older city centers in the Northeast, once you've seen one suburb you've pretty much seen them all.
I like, one, being a city that's not as provincial or set in its ways. A city that has remained stagnant, or is even slowly shrinking, would be fairly provincial. I also like a city that offers a vibrant urban environment and unique experience as well. There's only one MAgnificant Mile or Times Square for example. However, there are tons of Grosse Pointes and Shaker Heights (as in every city has one).
My political/economic/social views are also more progressive as well, so I would be happier in an area with more people who share my views than not.
That's the thing, I'm not a fan of suburbs. Once you exclude the walkable town centers of the older city centers in the Northeast, once you've seen one suburb you've pretty much seen them all.
The eastside suburbs of Cleveland were originally build by transplants from Conneticut. They have walkable town centers. On the westside, Lakewood is the densest city between Philadelphia and Chicago and the rest of the westside suburbs are concentrated along the coast of Lake Erie as well.
On the westside, Lakewood is the densest city between Philadelphia and Chicago and the rest of the westside suburbs are concentrated along the coast of Lake Erie as well.
The reason I included Chicago is because certain areas of the city did experience severe decline....and Gary, Indiana is about as quintessential rustbelt as it gets. But I agree, overall you could probably make a better case for it not being rust belt, despite the fact that it had the same heavy manufacturing as the rest of the Great Lakes cities. In any case, you could also argue for Indy and Columbus, solely based on their manufacturing history. What is true of Chicago, Indy, and Columbus was that they never ended up suffering the long-term decline of places like STL, Detroit, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, or Buffalo (although some of these places are rebounding now, like Pittsburgh).
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,098,363 times
Reputation: 1028
Quote:
Originally Posted by 313Weather
That's the thing, I'm not a fan of suburbs. Once you exclude the walkable town centers of the older city centers in the Northeast, once you've seen one suburb you've pretty much seen them all.
I like, one, being a city that's not as provincial or set in its ways. A city that has remained stagnant, or is even slowly shrinking, would be fairly provincial. I also like a city that offers a vibrant urban environment and unique experience as well. There's only one MAgnificant Mile or Times Square for example. However, there are tons of Grosse Pointes and Shaker Heights (as in every city has one).
My political/economic/social views are also more progressive as well, so I would be happier in an area with more people who share my views than not.
Different for different folks obviously.
I don't share the same view of suburbs, but I respect your opinion anyway. However, St. Louis' suburbs are far more than suburbs...St. Louis County is very, very urban, with several skylines....St. Louis and Cleveland both have very good suburbs...nice rolling topography, lots to do...the suburbs of both these areas are much more than just neighborhoods.
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.
