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.
That you think southern Missouri is better than KCMO tells me we do not value the same things. I'd live in St. Louis (city or suburbs) or Kansas City over anywhere in southern Missouri.
Well, we definitely don't value the same things. I would never live in St. Louis or even near St. Louis; not even in the suburbs. I have lived in Kansas City Missouri, didn't like it, and moved. I have never been impressed with Springfield. In the 80s it was too hickish and slow-paced for my tastes. Now it's bigger, less hickish, but still just not my cup of tea. Branson is great to visit, even though traffic has become a nightmare, but I wouldn't want to live there.
And wow - yes, southern Missouri is about 100% better than Kansas City. It's much prettier and people in general have better values. I would live in southern Missouri over either Kansas City or St. Louis, although the pace is slower than I'd like. I guess I would live in the Kansas City suburbs over southern Missouri for that reason, but would not live in the city of Kansas City. Luckily I can live in Johnson County, which suits me perfectly.
Well, we definitely don't value the same things. I would never live in St. Louis or even near St. Louis; not even in the suburbs. I have lived in Kansas City Missouri, didn't like it, and moved. I have never been impressed with Springfield. In the 80s it was too hickish and slow-paced for my tastes. Now it's bigger, less hickish, but still just not my cup of tea. Branson is great to visit, even though traffic has become a nightmare, but I wouldn't want to live there.
And wow - yes, southern Missouri is about 100% better than Kansas City. It's much prettier and people in general have better values. I would live in southern Missouri over either Kansas City or St. Louis, although the pace is slower than I'd like. I guess I would live in the Kansas City suburbs over southern Missouri for that reason, but would not live in the city of Kansas City. Luckily I can live in Johnson County, which suits me perfectly.
St. Louis is an old city with a rich history-in its heyday it was a much more prestigious city than Kansas City ever was. It has old, leafy suburbs and overall more interesting architecture in the city than KC. It is not far from the beauty of southern Missouri and is a short trek from Chicago. St. Louis is also home to one of the truly regal MLB franchises. And that is just St. Louis. But its image has really been tarnished. Sure there's crime in the city but there are plenty of suburbs where you can avoid that type of thing.
I'd rather live in either of those two cities than anywhere else in Missouri or the surrounding states (except for Chicago)
St Louis has nicer suburbs than anything in the KC area. The inner ring suburbs of StL County blow away anything in Johnson County outside of super tiny mission hills. It's more affluent, more walkable and just has a more classy old suburban feel. The outer ring suburbs of west and south StL County are just nicer than most of suburban KC. Better topography, more "metropolitan" etc. Rather than open farmland, you have forested areas filling in the underdeveloped areas. Roads don't have super excessive grassy right of ways that have six lanes and many turn lanes making them impossible to cross on foot and they follow the terrain so they are more curvy and hilly compared to the gridded out upgraded farm access roadway system of Johnson County. Even terrible St Charles and all their sprawl at least has a pretty vibrant and historic downtown area which is the starting point of the KATY trail.
Johnson County is a joke compared to St Louis County. And I don't think every development in St Louis County is subsidized to anywhere near the extent they are in JoCo.
St Louis City has tons of very cool areas to live in just like central KCMO.
Springfield has more to offer than Wichita.
The state of Missouri has more to offer than the state of Kansas could ever dream of (tourism, recreation, scenery, cultural attractions).
The only thing Kansas has to really brag about is KU and JoCo, neither of which are all that unique or special on a national scale of things. They are average at best and can be compared to almost any other metro area or college town.
Luzianne, can you give specific reasons why you think Kansas is a better state to live in than Missouri? Also, I'm not sure if you are correct about hicks. I find a lot of the KC area to be hickish (north of the river, Blue Springs, Lee's Summit, and further south into Grandview). St Louis doesn't feel at all that way to me.
Egypt, KS doesn't seem too much different from Egypt, MO. But I like MO because you are never too far away from a bigger city for shopping. It takes a special person to live hours away from a city of even 100,000.
One thing I've noticed is that most people from rural areas were born and raised in the same area. Not too many people move to a rural area from another part of the state or country.
kcmo, I completely agree with you. I love St Louis. It's very unique feeling. KC is okay but doesn't feel all that unique to me.
Luzianne, can you give specific reasons why you think Kansas is a better state to live in than Missouri? Also, I'm not sure if you are correct about hicks. I find a lot of the KC area to be hickish (north of the river, Blue Springs, Lee's Summit, and further south into Grandview). St Louis doesn't feel at all that way to me.
Egypt, KS doesn't seem too much different from Egypt, MO. But I like MO because you are never too far away from a bigger city for shopping. It takes a special person to live hours away from a city of even 100,000.
One thing I've noticed is that most people from rural areas were born and raised in the same area. Not too many people move to a rural area from another part of the state or country.
kcmo, I completely agree with you. I love St Louis. It's very unique feeling. KC is okay but doesn't feel all that unique to me.
Blue Springs is blue collar, not hick. It's just a working class suburb. There are a lot of well off people in Blue Springs, they just drive Ford F250s. There are also plenty of white collar people there too though, but Johnson County is the most white collar suburban area of KC. Most suburban white collar jobs are located there and most blue collar jobs are in WyCo, the industrial river bottoms, Clay County etc. Well, most of JoCo is white collar anyway. Olathe, which is 1/4 of the county is pretty much just like Blue Springs. Lee's Summit is sort of blue collar, but not as much as Blue Springs and Independence. Lee's Summit people have a long commute whether it's to downtown, joco or a factory somewhere. Lee's Summit is similar to Shawnee or Lenexa. Clay County is also more blue collar, as lots of people there work at places like the Ford plant or are KCMO firefighters etc. Platte County is definitely more white collar. Independence has some VERY poor areas but also some affluent areas, but it's mostly just working class. Seems like Olathe and Liberty are the two more traditional conservative/religious suburbs while Leawood is the mega church capital of the metro. Raytown and Grandview are diverse yet still middle class.
Rural Missouri and Rural Kansas are the same north of the ozarks. Just agricultural and working class I guess you can call it redneck. Southern Missouri is full blown redneck and parts of southern Missouri like south of Branson are true hillbilly. Some of the smaller towns in rural Kansas have some very serious crime and drug problems though, but rural Kansas as a whole is more agricultural, while rural Missouri is more true redneck.
Not much difference between Lawrence and Columbia other than one is dominated by St Louis County culture and the other is dominated by Johnson County Kansas culture. Both of which have more in common than not culturally. (affluent suburban parents and often snotty kids). Lawrence and Columbia are both liberal towns in conservative states, which is typical for college towns to be liberal regardless of location.
Urban KCMO and StL are not in the slightest bit hick, redneck or country. Although far south and southeast KCMO has some ozark type areas near Raytown. KCK is totally different story. It's a mix of urban hicks, black rednecks, white trash, ozarks and working class minorities and even some middle class blacks and whites. To this day, KCK is one of the oddest places I have visited, especially for a city in the heart of a major metro.
And while parts of Missouri may be somewhat "southern". Metro KC and StL are not at all unless compared to Minneapolis or something
St Louis has nicer suburbs than anything in the KC area. The inner ring suburbs of StL County blow away anything in Johnson County outside of super tiny mission hills. It's more affluent, more walkable and just has a more classy old suburban feel. The outer ring suburbs of west and south StL County are just nicer than most of suburban KC. Better topography, more "metropolitan" etc. Rather than open farmland, you have forested areas filling in the underdeveloped areas. Roads don't have super excessive grassy right of ways that have six lanes and many turn lanes making them impossible to cross on foot and they follow the terrain so they are more curvy and hilly compared to the gridded out upgraded farm access roadway system of Johnson County. Even terrible St Charles and all their sprawl at least has a pretty vibrant and historic downtown area which is the starting point of the KATY trail.
Johnson County is a joke compared to St Louis County. And I don't think every development in St Louis County is subsidized to anywhere near the extent they are in JoCo.
St Louis City has tons of very cool areas to live in just like central KCMO.
Springfield has more to offer than Wichita.
The state of Missouri has more to offer than the state of Kansas could ever dream of (tourism, recreation, scenery, cultural attractions).
The only thing Kansas has to really brag about is KU and JoCo, neither of which are all that unique or special on a national scale of things. They are average at best and can be compared to almost any other metro area or college town.
No, both are nice suburbs with alot to offer. Thats like saying "KC is a joke compared to STL." Its just not true
Besides recreational activities what does Springfield offer? The Zoo in Wichita in on par with the KC Zoo in many ways (they both do things better where the other lacks), Old Town is really cool, the Cowtown Museum is what Boothill in Dodge City wishes it could be, nice suburbs with good schools, a good university, nice botanical garders, good smyphony, the show offerings at Century II and Intrust Arena have really picked up in quality, downtown is seeing some massive improvements, and the newer shopping is no more or less subsidized than it is in other citys... I don't see why Wichita needed to be dragged into this when it's just a city trying to deal with post industrialization. If you want to fairly bash Kansas bring up Topeka and the communities south and east of Wichita that the state truly neglects. I mean people try to say "oh well Southwest Kansas is awful", but in reality it's better off than rural parts of several other states (looking at the South, Southern Illinois, Colorado, Oklahoma, even Colorado...), but Southeast Kansas is definitely on par with Rural Texas, Rural Oklahoma, and Rural Colorado. So lets leave Wichita and Lawrence out of this when Southeast Kansas is the poster child for what over a hundred years of neglect will do to what was, and what could have become a viable economic area for the state. Kansas Subsidizes projects outside of JoCo too so if we want to bash the state for that it does and doesn't do lets bash them for what they've done to SE Kansas because JoCo wouldn't be where it is now without Missouri developers gently pushing people over there starting with towns like Fairway and Prarie Village...
Yes, job poaching is bad, but where is the backlash towards the companies who CHOOSE to take the incentives? Kansas wouldn't be throwing them out if the company hadn't made it clear that they are considering moving within the metro or out of the metro. It's not like the city of KCMO couldn't make a counter offer (even if it's significantly smaller) to keep companies like AMC from making a massive move. If the companies were truly loyal to downtown they would stay down there.. I've been told that Chicago does the opposite where they poach suburban companies and drag them downtown. Well, when downtown KCMO's residential population gets to a certain point I'm sure you will see some companies return to downtown to take advantage of the convenience like they have in other metro areas. The one move that makes sense is the DFA move because they're getting a good deal from China and the State of KS to build a milk powder plant way out in Garden City. So while I think it's wrong for companies like Sprint and AMC to have taken incentives to move to JoCo, it's not like anyone forced them to take the incentive to move. In some cases these companies may have just left all together. Hallmark is a good example of a company that cares about KCMO and there's no reason that AMC or any other company had to take the bait instead of staying put like Hallmark has done all these years.
No, both are nice suburbs with alot to offer. Thats like saying "KC is a joke compared to STL." Its just not true
Thank you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by empires228
Besides recreational activities what does Springfield offer? The Zoo in Wichita in on par with the KC Zoo in many ways (they both do things better where the other lacks), Old Town is really cool, the Cowtown Museum is what Boothill in Dodge City wishes it could be, nice suburbs with good schools, a good university, nice botanical garders, good smyphony, the show offerings at Century II and Intrust Arena have really picked up in quality, downtown is seeing some massive improvements, and the newer shopping is no more or less subsidized than it is in other citys... I don't see why Wichita needed to be dragged into this when it's just a city trying to deal with post industrialization. If you want to fairly bash Kansas bring up Topeka and the communities south and east of Wichita that the state truly neglects. I mean people try to say "oh well Southwest Kansas is awful", but in reality it's better off than rural parts of several other states (looking at the South, Southern Illinois, Colorado, Oklahoma, even Colorado...), but Southeast Kansas is definitely on par with Rural Texas, Rural Oklahoma, and Rural Colorado. So lets leave Wichita and Lawrence out of this when Southeast Kansas is the poster child for what over a hundred years of neglect will do to what was, and what could have become a viable economic area for the state. Kansas Subsidizes projects outside of JoCo too so if we want to bash the state for that it does and doesn't do lets bash them for what they've done to SE Kansas because JoCo wouldn't be where it is now without Missouri developers gently pushing people over there starting with towns like Fairway and Prarie Village...
Yes, job poaching is bad, but where is the backlash towards the companies who CHOOSE to take the incentives? Kansas wouldn't be throwing them out if the company hadn't made it clear that they are considering moving within the metro or out of the metro. It's not like the city of KCMO couldn't make a counter offer (even if it's significantly smaller) to keep companies like AMC from making a massive move. If the companies were truly loyal to downtown they would stay down there.. I've been told that Chicago does the opposite where they poach suburban companies and drag them downtown. Well, when downtown KCMO's residential population gets to a certain point I'm sure you will see some companies return to downtown to take advantage of the convenience like they have in other metro areas. The one move that makes sense is the DFA move because they're getting a good deal from China and the State of KS to build a milk powder plant way out in Garden City. So while I think it's wrong for companies like Sprint and AMC to have taken incentives to move to JoCo, it's not like anyone forced them to take the incentive to move. In some cases these companies may have just left all together. Hallmark is a good example of a company that cares about KCMO and there's no reason that AMC or any other company had to take the bait instead of staying put like Hallmark has done all these years.
Thank you.
Each and every challenge to the misinformation that has, for many years, polluted the KC forum is to be treasured.
No, both are nice suburbs with alot to offer. Thats like saying "KC is a joke compared to STL." Its just not true
I'm not so sure about this. "Joke" may be a bit harsh but JO County does not even compare to St Louis County. Clayton alone is on a different level. JO County has very limited housing and lifestile options compared to stl cty. It's half the size too.
JO County is to St Louis County as KC,Mo is to Denver. Different tier. I prefer the wooded terrain, diversity and architectural style of St Louis County myself.
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.
