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.
I LOVED those books. I went through them repeatedly until they were falling apart. I wish they still came out. Yes, info on the internet is more current but still love the book format.
In 2007, the top five cities were Pittsburgh, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco and Philadelphia. In other words, Pennsylvania and the Granola Belt ran the top five.
Anyways, I love them too~!!
Collected all of them and was eagerly awaiting the one planned for after the census.
What happened?
I emailed ol' Bert and David Savageu (sp?) repeatedly but never heard back.
The information online is either A) buried in pages of conjecture and boosterism / OT bickering.
Or B) hidden in reams of technical stats (i.e. the census website itself)
Even Sperling's website is rather lacking and out of date. And the 'comments' on the cities? Fuggetaboutit!
Plus, cities are no longer the best way to think of metro areas, I don't think.
So... there's plenty of room for improvement! (I.e a new edition) And anyways, those books were a godsend!
Wish I could afford the reference set 'America's Top Rated Cities: Eastern, Southern Mid, and Western'
But, at (EDIT: I see the whole set for under 300$, but still...), it'll be awhile before I can convince the wife...
Burt! For heaven's sakes, man! If you're reading this...churn out another edition!!
Last edited by SquareWheel; 04-05-2013 at 04:08 PM..
In 2007, the top five cities were Pittsburgh, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco and Philadelphia. In other words, Pennsylvania and the Granola Belt ran the top five.
One would have to wonder about the criteria utilized if those cities represented the Top 5, which also might help explain why it's no longer being published. I believe the premise was overall livability.
One would have to wonder about the criteria utilized if those cities represented the Top 5, which also might help explain why it's no longer being published. I believe the premise was overall livability.
Or maybe you just need to accept the fact that your opinion of a city is only that and nothing more.
I could just as easily say that Pittsburgh would be ranked #1 regardless of how Places Rated tweaked their forumlas, so they just gave up. It'd make me no more smug than you are snarky.
Or maybe you just need to accept the fact that your opinion of a city is only that and nothing more. I could just as easily say that Pittsburgh would be ranked #1 regardless of how Places Rated tweaked their forumlas, so they just gave up. It'd make me no more smug than you are snarky.
Perhaps it's just my opinion and yes one can sway the criteria anyway one might like. To suggest however through overall popular opinion that Pittsburgh (or Philadelphia) would emerge in the Top 5 most livable cities list is at best ridiculous. Call it smug or snarky, but it's also fact.
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.
