[Exaday]

Originally Posted by olecapt

Well Oklahoma would certainly be preferable to the Dakotas...

They are not "thriving". They are surviving. The GDP growth is all driven by oil and they still trail NV substantially in GDP per capita.

How many tourists fly into OKC each year?

Now your bashing the dakotas.

You realize they have the lowest unemployment rates?
Best 30 Cities for Jobs and Business 2010 - 2020

OKC is constantly a top 10 city to get a job in these days. With so many Casinos opening our out of work cocktail waitresses should all go there. There growth is in mining so it would in theory be good place for all our blue collar people to go.

I'm actually just playing devils advocate :P

But yeah people might want to look at those places first if they are looking to make a new start.

[airics]

Originally Posted by Exaday

Because they are currently building more casinos than Nevada.

so take every casino they are building.. how many rooms... gee our 1 new casino just beat all of yours combined..

and also.. are the drinks free? can you get a beer AND a large pizza slice for $5... oh and what else is on your strip..

and finally.. what is the taxes taken out of the winnings.. in other words, what is the win percentage.. it aint even close..

but then again, we had a woman come work for us from colorado, her "bank" in the colorado cage was $5000..... Mine is $250k and there are 7 windows on the front... so think about it.. your oklahoma casino concept is moot..

[jfkIII]

Yes...but OK's foreclosure rate is nowhere near NV's.

[MadManofBethesda]

Originally Posted by radraja

But that's not why Oklahoma was brought up. The point is that Vegas is dirt cheap, especially compared to Illinois. I believe the intended the point of that comment is that only states like Oklahoma are cheaper.

Thank you. That's exactly why I mentioned Oklahoma. Las Vegas is extraordinarily inexpensive compared to other similar metropolitan areas on the east or west coast, not to mention Chicago (since we're talking about Illinois).

I would imagine that Las Vegas would seem very expensive to someone moving here from anywhere in Oklahoma, including Oklahoma City, but that doesn't mean that it is an expensive city in which to live.

[MomMom]

Originally Posted by jfkIII

Yes...but OK's foreclosure rate is nowhere near NV's.

Yes, you are correcto, because who the hay yell wanted to move to Oklahomey in the first place?

Hmmm...let's see....should I buy a house I can't afford in Vegas or Oklahoma, Vegas, Oklahoma, it's Las Vegas!! ding ding ding ding ding...

[jfkIII]

Originally Posted by MadManofBethesda

Thank you. That's exactly why I mentioned Oklahoma. Las Vegas is extraordinarily inexpensive compared to other similar metropolitan areas on the east or west coast, not to mention Chicago (since we're talking about Illinois).

I would imagine that Las Vegas would seem very expensive to someone moving here from anywhere in Oklahoma, including Oklahoma City, but that doesn't mean that it is an expensive city in which to live.

Then again, any community outlying Washington DC, such as Bethesda...would be some of the most expensive areas in the nation to live. Most areas in the US would be considered more inexpensive to live than there, right?

Quote from Wikipedia...
Bethesda is one of the most affluent and highly educated locales in the country, placing first in Forbes list of America's most educated small towns and eleventh on CNNMoney.com's list of top-earning American towns. In April 2009, Forbes ranked Bethesda second on its list of "America's Most Livable Cities." In October 2009, based on education, income, health, and fitness, Total Beauty ranked Bethesda first on its list of the U.S.'s "Top 10 Hottest-Guy Cities."

Please post some pictures of yourself....for the ladies, of course.

[MadManofBethesda]

Originally Posted by JohnG72

Echo the point that Las Vegas is a city where one can live quite inexpensively. Its why so many retirees have flocked there. Don't believe me? Check out the Orleans lunch buffet on I believe Tuesday where they offer a 2 for 1 senior buffet...........

The 241 for seniors at Orleans on Tuesday is for both breakfast and lunch. But even that is expensive compared to Silverton's Senior Monday special for seniors. The normal $13.99 lunch and dinner buffet is only $5 for seniors. And let's not overlook the fact that "senior" is defined as 50+ in this town.

But it's not just casino buffets that are inexpensive, restaurants in general are fairly inexpensive out here, not to mention groceries. My wife and I were literally laughing to each other the first time we went grocery shopping and picked up item after item and remarked on the low prices.

[MomMom]

According to my sister and nieces in NY, everything here in Las Vegas is cheaper than back there. Rents, car insurance, utilities, property taxes. And we don't have State income taxes.

The only exception is food prices and car registration.

While some food items here in Las Vegas are cheaper, most is the same price and some food items are a bit more expensive here in town, than back in NY.

[MadManofBethesda]

Originally Posted by jfkIII

Then again, any community outlying Washington DC, such as Bethesda...would be some of the most expensive areas in the nation to live. Most areas in the US would be considered more inexpensive to live than there, right?

First of all, as I noted in the post of mine to which you replied, I was speaking of major metropolitan areas all along the east and west coasts, not specifically the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.

Secondly, even when comparing all U.S. areas in general, Las Vegas does not come out more expensive than the mean. According to Kiplinger, where the average city is given a score of 100, Las Vegas also scores out at exactly 100. By comparison, Oklahoma City is 89 and Tulsa is only 85. (BTW, D.C. is 138.)

Kiplinger.com

So getting back to the person to whom I originally replied, in reality, it is not that Las Vegas is expensive, it is that Oklahoma is very inexpensive.

[olecapt]

Originally Posted by MadManofBethesda

First of all, as I noted in the post of mine to which you replied, I was speaking of major metropolitan areas all along the east and west coasts, not specifically the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.

Secondly, even when comparing all U.S. areas in general, Las Vegas does not come out more expensive than the mean. According to Kiplinger, where the average city is given a score of 100, Las Vegas also scores out at exactly 100. By comparison, Oklahoma City is 89 and Tulsa is only 85. (BTW, D.C. is 138.)

Kiplinger.com

So getting back to the person to whom I originally replied, in reality, it is not that Las Vegas is expensive, it is that Oklahoma is very inexpensive.

And household income is down by a larger percentage than the cost of living...so you lose on life style in OKC versus LV.