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.
Did you expect anything different, especially with how the poll options are phrased, and the polar opposites given as examples in your original post? I also don’t know how you can exclude safety from the equation?
Now if you were to ask would you rather have a 1-2 bedroom condo/small house in the heart of things, or a 3-4 bedroom house 10-20 miles away in a boring suburb the results would be much different. I expect this poll to be as lopsided as they come.
Exciting neighborhood - I don't spend that much time in my apartment and I don't care about it looking nice (e.g. decorating) as long as it's not too embarrassing to have people over.
But even more than my own neighborhood, what I like is an exciting metro area. I'm fine living in a dumpy apartment in a boring out-of-the-way neighborhood if it's in a metro of 5 or 6 million people and I can tap into that excitement and novelty through a good public transit system.
Why is Bowling Green your example of a safe area, though? Were you living under a rock when the massacre happened?
I would much prefer a nice house in boring areas like Lubbock,Texas or Roswell,New Mexico over a modest place in Los Angeles or Chicago or New York City.
There's no way I would live in a dump or crappy neighborhood just to live in an exciting area. I spend probably 75 percent of my time at home. If I can't stand my house, I'm not happy. Somewhat of a balance between the two is always ideal.
There's no way I would live in a dump or crappy neighborhood just to live in an exciting area. I spend probably 75 percent of my time at home. If I can't stand my house, I'm not happy. Somewhat of a balance between the two is always ideal.
Usually a dumpy/crappy neighborhood and exciting neighborhood doesn't go hand in hand...
The question was modest living accomodations to live in an exciting area. So a small apartment in New york City, vs a large home in Duluth Ga.
There's no way I would live in a dump or crappy neighborhood just to live in an exciting area. I spend probably 75 percent of my time at home. If I can't stand my house, I'm not happy. Somewhat of a balance between the two is always ideal.
Right, I probably didn't word the OP greatly, but there are quite a few variables. Area could mean different metro, or different neighborhoods.
I have this chat with myself often. I can now live wherever I want. Do I live in a place like Seattle where I would have great scenery and things to do that fit my lifestyle, or I could live in Texas for twice the house (or half the housing costs) but not be in my ideal situation. I teeter back and forth of course.
I would much prefer a nice house in boring areas like Lubbock,Texas or Roswell,New Mexico over a modest place in Los Angeles or Chicago or New York City.
I have a family, that can make sense. I really don't know. I voted modest house in a nicer area, but I can see both arguments.
I’d rather have the worst house in a great neighborhood
than the best house in a crappy neighbourhood.
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.
