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.
Best Cities For Singles 2009 - Forbes.com
1. New York City
2. Boston
3. Chicago
4. Seattle
5. Washington D.C.
6. Atlanta
7. San Francisco
8. Los Angeles
9. Milwaukee
10. Philadelphia
11. Austin
12. San Diego
13. Denver-Aurora
14. Cleveland
15. Providence
16. Portland
17. Dallas
18. Buffalo
19. Minneapolis
20. Virginia Beach-Norfolk
21. Baltimore
22. Las Vegas
23. St. Louis
24. Pittsburgh
25. Houston
26. Orlando
27. San Antonio
28. Columbus
29. Miami
30. Phoenix
31. Indianapolis
32. Charlotte
33. Tampa-St. Petersburg
34. Detroit
35. Sacramento
36. Memphis
37. Kansas City
38. Cincinnati
39. Salt Lake City
40. Jacksonville
Wow...aparently love is in the air up in Milwaukee. These lists kill me though, I don't understand how cities are able to jump around so much on these things from one year to the next. Can a city completely rearrange itself to be more appealing to young singles within the course of a year, haha? I just don't think there's really much validity in any of these things. I'm pretty sure that Cleveland wasn't even on this list during the past 3 years...and that Providence was something like #40 last year or the year before that.
Change indie bands with country bands and you just described Lubbock (Texas Tech), San Marcus (Texas State), and College Station (Texas A&M). I decided to go to college in Houston instead of those towns so I could avoid that scene.
Man, I would have loved to be a part of that scene in college. I love the whole texas music scene thing. Nothing like that up here in Michigan.
I guess the grass is always greener on the other side.
Best Cities For Singles 2009 - Forbes.com
1. New York City
2. Boston
3. Chicago
4. Seattle
5. Washington D.C.
6. Atlanta
7. San Francisco
8. Los Angeles
9. Milwaukee
10. Philadelphia
11. Austin
12. San Diego
13. Denver-Aurora
14. Cleveland
15. Providence
16. Portland
17. Dallas
18. Buffalo
19. Minneapolis
20. Virginia Beach-Norfolk
21. Baltimore
22. Las Vegas
23. St. Louis
24. Pittsburgh
25. Houston
26. Orlando
27. San Antonio
28. Columbus
29. Miami
30. Phoenix
31. Indianapolis
32. Charlotte
33. Tampa-St. Petersburg
34. Detroit
35. Sacramento
36. Memphis
37. Kansas City
38. Cincinnati
39. Salt Lake City
40. Jacksonville
Replace Milwaukee with Minneapolis and the list looks about right.
Milwaukee has way more to do metro wide than Minneapolis and is closer to big daddy Chicago and party town Madison.
LOL!!! Like what, getting drunk waaaaay faster because the Milwaukee area is even more depressing to live in than the Minneapolis area?
And the fact that Chicago is closer doesn't really mean much being those living in the Minneapolis area with money can drive or fly to Chicago anytime they want.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjacobeclark
Yeah, or not. Milwaukee is right where it belongs.
How sad, even Buffalo was rated as being better for singles than MSP.
Haha. I knew you would like my statement.
Buffalo still has people in their 20s living there?
Total number of people Age 20 - 29 per metro area (2008 Estimates):
Minneapolis – St. Paul 218,593
Milwaukee – 98,330
Buffalo – 79,127
Others:
Atlanta – 366,805
Boston – 305,372
Seattle – 228,490
Denver – 176,525
Portland – 148,940
Kansas City – 131,508
Charlotte – 112,952
New Orleans – 73,444
LOL!!! Like what, getting drunk waaaaay faster because the Milwaukee area is even more depressing to live in than the Minneapolis area?
And the fact that Chicago is closer doesn't really mean much being those living in the Minneapolis area with money can drive or fly to Chicago anytime they want.
C'mon, Chicago is (at least) a 6 hour car ride from the Twin Cities, while it's a mere 90 minutes by car or train from Downtown Milwaukee to Downtown Chicago. It's only 30 minutes to Kenosha, the northernmost suburb of Chicago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackOut
Haha. I knew you would like my statement.
Buffalo still has people in their 20s living there?
Total number of people Age 20 - 29 per metro area (2008 Estimates):
Minneapolis – St. Paul 218,593
Milwaukee – 98,330
Buffalo – 79,127
Others:
Atlanta – 366,805
Boston – 305,372
Seattle – 228,490
Denver – 176,525
Portland – 148,940
Kansas City – 131,508
Charlotte – 112,952
New Orleans – 73,444
What orifice did you pull these numbers from? That means a mere 5% of residents in the Greater Milwaukee area are in their 20's, which I find incredibly hard to believe.
Milwaukee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Milwaukee has one of the highest per capita student populations in North America, ranking 6th among U.S. and Canadian cities in number of college students per 100 residents, according to a January 2000 study from McGill University."
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.
. These lists kill me though, I don't understand how cities are able to jump around so much on these things from one year to the next. Can a city completely rearrange itself to be more appealing to young singles within the course of a year, haha? I just don't think there's really much validity in any of these things. I'm pretty sure that Cleveland wasn't even on this list during the past 3 years...and that Providence was something like #40 last year or the year before that.
Like what, getting drunk waaaaay faster because the Milwaukee area is even more depressing to live in than the Minneapolis area?
