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 enjoyed my time in Denver. Some drop dead views but if you removed the mountains, I thought it was on par with KC. And the mountains were hard to get to and KC was far less expensive.
Definitely disagree here. Living in Oxford is absolutely nothing like living in Boulder, politically speaking. I think all of metro Denver counties went blue in 2020. Mississippi is more conservative Democrat than it is progressive left.
Even New Orleans, a solid blue city, is surrounded by conservative republican parishes, it's nothing like living here in metro Denver where the suburbs are all blue too.
And I would never move to Mississippi, I'm very familiar with it, but I would rather numerous places before Mississippi.
I feel like what you are describing is politics at the city level, which is not the same as "red state / blue state".
Living in Austin I can relate to the state politics being overrated. Texas voting red on average doesn't make people you meet in Austin any less progressive. Texas being red can influence the laws and policies in Austin, but that is a mixed bad and frankly is a good thing as often as not. (I'm a progressive but I find that when progressives have unchecked power things can easily go too far). There is some balance brought by the blue city / red state aspect.
I will say that I do like Colorado's politics a lot, that seems more blueish-purple to me than a true blue state.
This is fairly hyper-specific to C-D....but the mere concept of a "legacy city" is very silly and nonsensical to begin with....let alone being a factor in deciding where to live.
"Legacy City"; at least in the context it is used in this forum; typically is used in a way to characterize a city as having been significantly developed prior to mid 20th century suburbanization....but in reality it often just means "this city stopped growing 70 yeas ago".
Buffalo is considered a "legacy city"
Houston is not.
The population of Buffalo in 1950 was 580,000; population of Houston in 1950 was 596,000
Because Buffalo didn't grow and actually dropped in population for 6 decades after that; it's considered a "legacy city"
Houston has almost quadrupled its population since then; starting from the same (actually slightly larger) "legacy" base. But because a big chunk of the city and metro is newer and built up post WWII in comparison (even though it has a pre-WWII core in similar size to Buffalo).... it is often derided as a sprawly-city lacking in the relative "legacy" of a city like Buffalo.
FWIW....I'd pick Buffalo over Houston personally. But it is still comical how often "legacy city" status gets tossed around as if it isn't largely a figment of C-D imagination.
Last edited by TarHeelNick; 01-25-2023 at 10:02 AM..
Politics. I've seen people on this site as well as hearing conversations in real life talk about how where they currently is "too left leaning" or "too right leaning." Newsflash: both people exists everywhere no matter where you live. It doesn't matter if you live in a blue, liberal city or state or if you live in a red, conservative city or state. Also, there are going to be bills passed that you agree with and disagree with. That's a part of everyday life in cities and states across this country, there are drawbacks in both of them. So, moving to another place for politics is silly and a waste of time and energy because there is no political paradise.
This is fairly hyper-specific to C-D....but the mere concept of a "legacy city" is very silly and nonsensical to begin with....let alone being a factor in deciding where to live.
"Legacy City"; at least in the context it is used in this forum; typically is used in a way to characterize a city as having been significantly developed prior to mid 20th century suburbanization....but in reality it often just means "this city stopped growing 70 yeas ago".
Buffalo is considered a "legacy city"
Houston is not.
The population of Buffalo in 1950 was 580,000; population of Houston in 1950 was 596,000
Because Buffalo didn't grow and actually dropped in population for 6 decades after that; it's considered a "legacy city"
Houston ha almost quadrupled its population since then; starting from the same (actually slightly larger) "legacy" base. But because a big chunk of the city and metro is newer and built up post WWII in comparison (even though it has a pre-WWII core in similar size to Buffalo).... it is often derided as a sprawly-city lacking in the relative "legacy" of a city like Buffalo.
FWIW....I'd pick Buffalo over Houston personally. But it is still comical how often "legacy city" status gets tossed around as if it isn't largely a figment of C-D imagination.
OMG, this totally resonates. In the real world, nobody even talks about this and I doubt it's even a passing thought. "I want to live in a legacy city." LOL
Lots of posts regarding politics. To me, from a micro level, it really doesn't matter but being in a larger area where your politics may differ,, it could be important.
This is fairly hyper-specific to C-D....but the mere concept of a "legacy city" is very silly and nonsensical to begin with....let alone being a factor in deciding where to live.
"Legacy City"; at least in the context it is used in this forum; typically is used in a way to characterize a city as having been significantly developed prior to mid 20th century suburbanization....but in reality it often just means "this city stopped growing 70 yeas ago".
Buffalo is considered a "legacy city"
Houston is not.
The population of Buffalo in 1950 was 580,000; population of Houston in 1950 was 596,000
Because Buffalo didn't grow and actually dropped in population for 6 decades after that; it's considered a "legacy city"
Houston ha almost quadrupled its population since then; starting from the same (actually slightly larger) "legacy" base. But because a big chunk of the city and metro is newer and built up post WWII in comparison (even though it has a pre-WWII core in similar size to Buffalo).... it is often derided as a sprawly-city lacking in the relative "legacy" of a city like Buffalo.
FWIW....I'd pick Buffalo over Houston personally. But it is still comical how often "legacy city" status gets tossed around as if it isn't largely a figment of C-D imagination.
Buffalo is a legacy city because it stopped growing. Cities that lacked investment were frozen in amber. (More or less)
Even compare Providence (which went broke) to Hartford. Hartford’s city center was gutted while Providence was not because there was no reason to “rebuild” Providence in the 1970s-1980s. Compare Syracuse to Rochester. Rochester had a corporate base in the 1980s that invested in the city which lead to a much more disjointed city center today
The issue with Houston was explosive growth in the anti-urbanism 60s-90s meant the urban core went backwards in that time. Like Downtown Houston in 1970 was literally a parking lot
Buffalo is a legacy city because it stopped growing. Cities that lacked investment were frozen in amber. (More or less)
Even compare Providence (which went broke) to Hartford. Hartford’s city center was gutted while Providence was not because there was no reason to “rebuild” Providence in the 1970s-1980s. Compare Syracuse to Rochester. Rochester had a corporate base in the 1980s that invested in the city which lead to a much more disjointed city center today
The issue with Houston was explosive growth in the anti-urbanism 60s-90s meant the urban core went backwards in that time. Like Downtown Houston in 1970 was literally a parking lot
I was just in suburban Houston for a week with family and spent a day downtown (brewpub hopping) this past Xmas. There's no issues with that city as it relates to anything, that I saw. The transportation was efficient, and there was definitely vibrancy and growth.
I was in NYC for six weeks in 1979 before moving to DC. The shock from the difference in the building heights was something I didn’t get over my entire five years in DC.
When I returned to South Carolina, I picked Columbia because it was the largest municipality and had the most tall buildings. I was only 25.
But now, it just so happens that Charleston is the state’s largest municipality. It became the largest after I relocated here from Columbia, but I had long since stopped caring about tall buildings, trading them in for greater density in South Carolina’s case.
Heck, I even like DC’s low skyline now. There are a couple of angles in Charleston that remind me of it a little. Not that Charleston needs a reference other than itself. Here’s to low-slung skylines that afford visibility of buildings farther across the landscape than tall skylines do.
Politics. I've seen people on this site as well as hearing conversations in real life talk about how where they currently is "too left leaning" or "too right leaning." Newsflash: both people exists everywhere no matter where you live. It doesn't matter if you live in a blue, liberal city or state or if you live in a red, conservative city or state. Also, there are going to be bills passed that you agree with and disagree with. That's a part of everyday life in cities and states across this country, there are drawbacks in both of them. So, moving to another place for politics is silly and a waste of time and energy because there is no political paradise.
Depends. How do the state and local agencies treat public transit? Do the voters pass school bonds, park bonds, etc.? Is the area welcoming to immigrants, domestic and international? A lot of stuff falls under politics in some way.
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.
