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.
Patently false most of the time, unless the metro area is heavily geared toward retirees. Most metro areas will experience faster growth through in-migration of population via greater job growth, not as much through natural increase compared to previous decades. In terms of population age structure demographics St. Louis is a hybrid of Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Milwaukee. All three are slower job growth metro areas compared to the US as a whole, although I don't have very recent data that compares total employment change since 2010 on a year to year basis.
Yes, but if you happen to have a good job in those areas with a decent income, they are great places to live with the amenities still there and the cost of living and relatively short commutes.
Great post, but you are waiting your time on this forum and with "most" KC people in general. Trust me.
Forever the master at winning hearts and influencing people.
But you're absolutely right. KC people know better and understand the good thing they've got. Many even like the summer weather , but I digress.
KC's greatest asset is it's people. And, since most of its adults are not still trying to figure out what they want to be when they grow up, the left's alternate reality - where relaxation, elbow room, and nice lawns are to be scorned - will always get the same reaction.
^ I find people to be great EVERYWHERE. Not just KC. I find people to be pretty awesome all across the country and world, but that's just me. And you can have a nice lawn in any metro area. I don't understand your logic. You will find ****ty people in KC just like you will find them in the rest of the country and world, but by far and large, I pretty much only run into great people everywhere I go. If you think KC is the only place that has great people, then that is just weird.
There is nothing wrong with wanting to see KC progress and evolve. If KC never evolved it would not be the city it is today. However, the growth there has slowed greatly since the area's glory years (which believe it or not was long before Johnson County was more than a blip on the metro map).
Every city has positives and negatives and one of KC's negatives right now are that the metro lacks a civic minded corporate community that takes pride in KC. KC has become a satellite office park town, so it's hard to move the needle when your business community is just not very involved in civic matters and does't care if KC becomes Buffalo a "has been city" or if KC takes itself to the next level (and improves quality of life etc). Other than lack of traffic, KC does lack some quality of life amenities.
The other major issue that seems to continue to plague KC is just the stubborn refusal to change. KC didn't used to be that way. Again, it wouldn't be the city it is today if it was as "status quo" during its growing years as it is today.
Forever the master at winning hearts and influencing people.
But you're absolutely right. KC people know better and understand the good thing they've got. Many even like the summer weather , but I digress.
KC's greatest asset is it's people. And, since most of its adults are not still trying to figure out what they want to be when they grow up, the left's alternate reality - where relaxation, elbow room, and nice lawns are to be scorned - will always get the same reaction.
I knew eventually you'd bring politics into this. So unnecessary. But since you did, I'll just say that I actually find the left to be less pro growth than the right. Republicans (not the alt righters who would prefer to be on a compound with only people who agree with them) tend to be more pro business, pro growth and pro development. Dallas, Houston, Phoenix and other sunbelt metros that are growing like crazy are far more conservative than Boston, Chicago and the Bay area, which are growing more slowly.
Yes, but if you happen to have a good job in those areas with a decent income, they are great places to live with the amenities still there and the cost of living and relatively short commutes.
So as long as you're ok, who cares if it becomes a dying metro that makes it more difficult for others to get jobs, that has crumbling infrastructure? Such a Kansas City way of seeing things.
This argument has become as ridiculous as the KCI terminal debate. The OP said the city needs "some" traffic. KC hardly ever feels like a city. I think it could use a little more traffic on the streets and sidewalks. The freeway system is built for a metro of 4 million and it's either overbuilt like in JoCo where I think everybody will eventually have their own lane to commute on or it's barely been touched since 1960 (most of rest of metro). Downtown has almost no bustle. Nobody is saying KC should have chronic traffic and congestion problems. It's so far from that it's not even an issue.
It's like KCI. People want a new terminal to make KCI better. Everybody starts talking about ATL, DFW, DEN, LAX etc as if somehow KCI it going to go from a airport that serves 10 million people a year to an airport that serves 80 million a year. KCI will never ever be like airports people bring up just like KC's traffic will never be like the bay area, DC area, Chicago area, LA area etc. But like KCI's current terminal, does it freaking HAVE to feel like a half deserted ghost town with antiquated infrastructure?
Completely agree. KC will never have an overcrowded airport, roads or sidewalks. It'd just be nice if they weren't desolate.
I knew eventually you'd bring politics into this. So unnecessary. But since you did, I'll just say that I actually find the left to be less pro growth than the right. Republicans (not the alt righters who would prefer to be on a compound with only people who agree with them) tend to be more pro business, pro growth and pro development. Dallas, Houston, Phoenix and other sunbelt metros that are growing like crazy are far more conservative than Boston, Chicago and the Bay area, which are growing more slowly.
This is very true. But conservatives are also generally tied to a different type of development culture. Sprawl. I think most liberals are anti sprawl or at least smart growth even in the suburbs. I live in the DC area and even suburban areas here are mostly democratic. So yes, most people in the DC area are actually less “pro growth” than people in Dallas or Atlanta or Phoenix, not because they don’t want growth, but because they don’t want 12 lane congested highways going to new development in far flung areas and they don’t want to subsidize that sprawl.
They want more sustainable development, more investment in transit, more investment in existing neighborhoods rather than just building everything new. You are right though, you will find more resistance to a new tower in Boston or DC before you would in Dallas or Houston. Because in Boston or DC or Chicago, a new tower will actually affect the surrounding neighborhoods more because they are actually urban functioning neighborhoods vs the towers on parking pedestals they throw up in under developed areas of downtown Dallas and Houston or along their highway frontage roads. It’s a different culture, but they still grow.
Other than lack of traffic, KC does lack some quality of life amenities.
This intrigued me. I'm trying to think of what I miss most, amenity-wise, from other cities I've lived in that aren't replicated here...
- Chicagoland's and Milwaukee's lakefront biking trails and beaches, beach parks, and dunes...not able to
be replicated, here, for obvious reasons
- Widespread access to things sans car, via rail
- A wider array of museums, though I truly appreciate and make good use of what we do have
- Certain niche regional cuisine
- A really impressive public library system-***-cultural center. KC's isn't bad, though. Johnson County's
library system isn't, either, as suburban systems go, come to that.
- A true burgeoning university neighborhood and amenities that typically go hand in hand with that.
Nothing else immediately springs to mind as far as quality of life things for me that make a major impact. For the most part, the metro really ticks all my boxes, which is why I've stayed as many years as I have as a transplant, and made it home. I don't really find it lacking in amenities, as far as what I personally require. Mileage obviously varies, but it suits me well. If it didn't, I'd have surely moved on after a short stint, here, after the circumstances that initially brought me here were no longer applicable.
This certainly won't be the case for everyone; as I noted, YMMV. And, certainly, the heartland of the U.S. as a whole isn't for everyone, obviously...personal tastes and values regarding what are important amenities to a given person come into play. Some truly won't be happy without, say, particular geographic features, etc. that just aren't part of the picture here, and there's really no getting around that. It is what it is. But, barring things you can't actually change, like having no mountains to hit the slopes, I just never find there to be huge gaps in amenities. I'm never bored. There are always things I haven't done or seen yet.
Quote:
The other major issue that seems to continue to plague KC is just the stubborn refusal to change. KC didn't used to be that way. Again, it wouldn't be the city it is today if it was as "status quo" during its growing years as it is today.
I haven't personally noticed this in my years here, so far. Maybe just a difference in perspective as a transplant, with no prior experience of KC before about 2007. But in my time, here, I can't really say that stagnation has been notable, at least in my eyes.
So as long as you're ok, who cares if it becomes a dying metro that makes it more difficult for others to get jobs, that has crumbling infrastructure? Such a Kansas City way of seeing things.
It's pretty obvious that our lenses are quite different, here, but without an ounce of snark, I have to legitimately and sincerely ask...do others really see it as a dying metro with crumbling infrastructure? I just don't see it. And I'm obviously not a native, so I'm not coming at it from a hometown bias or lack of perspective involving other communities, either. I've spent more than my share of time in for-real dying, crumbling communities, so I'm truly no stranger to what those look like, either.
It could be that my particular professional sector within human services, because it doesn't happen to be one where it is difficult to get jobs (in fact that are more professionals needed than currently practicing), isolates me from a reality where others are struggling to get jobs. That's certainly possible. I don't even pretend to have my finger on corporate culture and outlook, by any means, not really my area. In doing my job, I'm dealing with people who are addressing unemployment in their lives, so I'm not that isolated. But they're also mainly struggling with employment issues for reasons that really don't have anything to do with KC's jobs outlook, they're internal problems versus external.
So, I don't know. I'm sure my view is skewed to a particular vista, as it everyone's. But I'm personally just not feeling a bleak outlook...I see things happening and moving forward. Maybe I'm just looking at different things?
Most of these types of complaints, though, I'll be honest...they just come off like people for whom the city simply isn't their cup of tea (and if that's the case, fair enough), and they'd find fault no matter what, based on that.
It's pretty obvious that our lenses are quite different, here, but without an ounce of snark, I have to legitimately and sincerely ask...do others really see it as a dying metro with crumbling infrastructure? I just don't see it. And I'm obviously not a native, so I'm not coming at it from a hometown bias or lack of perspective involving other communities, either. I've spent more than my share of time in for-real dying, crumbling communities, so I'm truly no stranger to what those look like, either.
It could be that my particular professional sector within human services, because it doesn't happen to be one where it is difficult to get jobs (in fact that are more professionals needed than currently practicing), isolates me from a reality where others are struggling to get jobs. That's certainly possible. I don't even pretend to have my finger on corporate culture and outlook, by any means, not really my area. In doing my job, I'm dealing with people who are addressing unemployment in their lives, so I'm not that isolated. But they're also mainly struggling with employment issues for reasons that really don't have anything to do with KC's jobs outlook, they're internal problems versus external.
So, I don't know. I'm sure my view is skewed to a particular vista, as it everyone's. But I'm personally just not feeling a bleak outlook...I see things happening and moving forward. Maybe I'm just looking at different things?
Most of these types of complaints, though, I'll be honest...they just come off like people for whom the city simply isn't their cup of tea (and if that's the case, fair enough), and they'd find fault no matter what, based on that.
You're probably right about our lenses. I'm originally from Dallas. And I've lived in Chicago (which admittedly is having problems right now too) and a few other cities that are either bigger or feel more ambitious than KC. That's what I compare KC to.
KC is not currently a dying city. But it will be if it's not careful ... if it remains complacent. Because it is definitely struggling against its peers. St. Louis is already just about there. It's growth rate is, I believe, less than 1% per year. I don't have evidence, but I'd guess all of its growth is based on births and not on in-migration.
Here's an anecdote that I think illustrates what I wish for KC. I was in San Antonio last fall, and had to be driven up to Austin for my flight back. I spoke with the driver for a long time. He mentioned that he so badly wanted to move to Austin because the jobs and wages were so much better there. He was working out his plan, and hoped to move sometime in the next few months. He said the difference between Austin and San Antonio, in terms of job opportunities, was night and day. San Antonio is currently one of the fastest growing cities in the country. But Austin is still way ahead of it. If the perception of someone in a fast-growing city is that another city like Austin would be better because the jobs and wages are even that much better, where does that leave a city like KC, which is WAY down the list in terms of population growth and job growth?
People here are going to see places like San Antonio, Austin, Dallas, Denver, Houston, as the place to be because, even though we're not dead, those places have more opportunity. And many of the people who leave will be some of the better educated. They'll take their ideas and ambition with them. I went to two years of high school here, then moved away for 20 years and now I'm back (only because of family; I'd quickly leave if my family wasn't here). A huge number of my classmates moved away after college. Some came back, like me. Others never returned. Why? There was more opportunity elsewhere. Not just for jobs. But for lifestyle. KC will never be Austin or Dallas. But right now Des Moines and Omaha are attracting more people and jobs. That's a problem. They're colder and smaller. There's no reason they should be beating us. If the trend continues, I do believe that KC will become like St. Louis, and then like Cleveland.
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.
, but I digress. 
