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.
Philly, Cincinnati. Cleveland if you're OK w/ the snow. Philly is the best option; it's more expensive but not crazy like other big cities like NY or Chicago.
There are a limited number of cities bigger than Pgh. that is also in the same price range as it.
Saint Louis
Denver
Minneapolis
Detroit
Atlanta
Cleveland, Cincinnati and Kansas City are slightly smaller than Pittsburgh.
It's called metropolitan area. It is typically a more accurate determinant of a city's size; and Pittsburgh is 22nd by MSA.
Anyway...to the OP; though it depends on what you define as "too big", I'll wager you'd think Philly is a bit overwhelming. It is the cheapest in Bos-Wash, but it's also the second largest in the Northeast. Baltimore isn't outrageously priced; but if you're looking for real cheap...well, there's always Detroit.
It's called metropolitan area. It is typically a more accurate determinant of a city's size; and Pittsburgh is 22nd by MSA.
Anyway...to the OP; though it depends on what you define as "too big", I'll wager you'd think Philly is a bit overwhelming. It is the cheapest in Bos-Wash, but it's also the second largest in the Northeast. Baltimore isn't outrageously priced; but if you're looking for real cheap...well, there's always Detroit.
It's called WHAT? METROPOLITAN AREA!!?!?!?!?! NEVER HEARD of such a thing!
Thanks for the lesson, there, pal.
And I don't really agree that a metro area number is a more accurate reflection of a city's size. It's a more accurate reflection of a metro area's size, and that may or may not mean a larger or more vibrant central area.
Either way, I was looking for Minnehahapolitan to clarify his/her numbers.
It's a more accurate reflection of a metro area's size, and that may or may not mean a larger or more vibrant central area.
Suppose you didn't know anything about Boston, for example, and I told you the city had 600,000 people without also telling you how many people lived in Greater Boston. Suppose I then told you that there were 716,00 people in Charlotte and 1.3 million people in San Antonio, without telling you how many people live in those metro areas. Do you think that with just that information, you'd draw accurate deductions about those cities' relative importance and/or density?
A city's metro area population gives you far more information than a city's population.
Suppose you didn't know anything about Boston, for example, and I told you the city had 600,000 people without also telling you how many people lived in Greater Boston. Suppose I then told you that there were 716,00 people in Charlotte and 1.3 million people in San Antonio, without telling you how many people live in those metro areas. Do you think that with just that information, you'd draw accurate deductions about those cities' relative importance and/or density?
A city's metro area population gives you far more information than a city's population.
Yeah. I know. It's a more accurate reflection, sometimes. Atlanta is another good example.
However, I was just trying to get some clarification on Minnehahapolitan's numbers and you snarky turds jump all over me like any of this is something I don't know. I'm aware that MSA numbers can be a bigger indicator, but since M'politan didn't say "metro" or "MSA" or anything like that, I was just a little confused on his numbers.
That's all.
Jog on.
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.