Which of the two areas listed has the best overall quality of life? Which area would you prefer to live in?
Which of the two areas listed has the best overall quality of life? Which area would you prefer to live in?
I like hyphens too.
Pudding will not fill the emptiness inside me... but it will help.
It seems like comparing apples to organes. I think MSP is much larger and much colder than Raleigh. Having been to both places, I'd rather live in MSP- it's more urban, progressive, artsy, and outdoorsy.
You ought to add Chapel Hill to 'Raleigh-Durham.' I live in Chapel Hill but would definitely prefer to live in Minneapolis: more walkable, progressive, urban, there's decent mass transit, diverse culture, etc. Yep, the winters blow but one gets used to it. North Carolina just feels rural and right-wing (yes, even the so-called cities and despite the Triangle being probably the most progressive area not just in NC but in the South overall) and extremely auto-oriented. Yeah, but it's not fair to compare the Midwest's premier city with the Bible Belt's best offering.
Hands down, Raleigh-Durham for the following reasons:
1) Diversity
2) Educational opportunities
3) Cost of living
4) Terrain
5) Access to ocean and mountains
6) Weather
7) Proximity to other urban areas
8) Job market
Originally posted by bocian
I prefer to live in Minneapolis-St. Paul area too, however, I disagree with you on diverse culture. Raliegh-Durham-(Chapel Hill), is far more diverse than Minneapolis-St. Paul.
Minneapolis-St. Paul. Probably why I am here!
K9
... including Chicago. I lived in IN and Chicago, IL for nearly 5 years and would never ever live there again. To a large extent, inhabitants make a place what it is, and the mid-west is overall rather ho-hum. Of course the people are nice and all that, but as I mentioned, ho-hum.
Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill definitely! That area is very historical, more diverse, close to the ocean and mountains, scenic, and it's not walkable because it's 3 cities you're talking about. The accent is better too!
yes, but if you say that a city is what inhabitants make it, how can the history, diversity, etc make raleigh-durham-chapel hill win out with this criteria?
i really think that an individual to a large part carves out their own reality in a place, and this in turn shapes their long term perceptions of it. it's too bad you had a bad experience in chicago, because its one of the more dynamic cities on this continent.
personally i would easily choose MPLS/St.Paul over R-D-CH, it feels overall to be much more progressive, with R-D-CH having nice pockets.
Ah no no... I never had a bad experience living in the mid-west - but neither any exceptionally unusual experiences with places or people! Chicago is in the mid-west - it can never be NYC or SF.
I do think that inhabitants of a place add much to it, and the inhabitants of RDU enhance the area greatly. In fact, it is the mix of Southern character and global representation that makes for a cosmopolitan experience in NC. Contrary to Charlotte, NC which is a bigger city but mostly white Southern. And not very exciting at all.
thats unfortunate, because the midwest is full of trancendent experiences waiting to happen, perhaps they do feel even more special because it's the midwest, but i don't see this as a problem at all.
It's not a problem at all. I just find the mid-west a little provincial compared to the coasts. And after having spent 5-ish years there, I have no desire to live there. That's all I am saying! Just my point of view.
Quote
