Does Pueblo make you... (Denver, Boulder: camping, incomes, living in)

[j1n]

...feel cheated?
Let me explain:
I keep coming back to considering Pueblo as a possible relo destination. It's inexpensive, and still my beloved CO!
I've spent time around Denver, Boulder, Vail, Telluride, and also more desert-y areas of UT (Moab, etc).
I know that Pueblo is not Telluride. But fact of the matter is that living in Pueblo would give someone access to the mountains and all the good stuff most people are looking for in CO. I live in VA currently. 5 hours puts me in the Smokies. I lived in NJ previously. 5 hours used to put me in the Adirondacks. From Pueblo, 6 hours would put me in the San Juans.
But is this mindset a common one? Do folks move to the front range, rubbing their hands together because they've found a way to make CO work... only to find out that if you want the true CO experience, you do have to shell out the $$ for a Boulder or a Gunnison?
Hope that all makes some sense...

[junZ]

So, you're saying if I move to Pueblo I won't feel the CO experience?

[j1n]

Originally Posted by junZ

So, you're saying if I move to Pueblo I won't feel the CO experience?

I'm asking.
Do people move to Pueblo and then say "this isn't CO" or "I'm too far from what I wanted out of CO"...

[jazzlover]

I always couch my advice about living in Colorado with my greater view of what I believe is going to happen in this country within a few years--mainly that energy costs are going to explode, with possible severe energy shortages, that are going to render the current ability of most people to take off on a 500-mile roundtrip drive on a whim a nostalgic memory of a time that has passed. In that view, wherever one chooses to live, one had better be pretty happy with what is in pretty close proximity--because that may be all that is available. Some of my old friends, who grew up in Colorado in the 1930's and 1940's, recount how a trip across the state was maybe a once a year event in those days. That very likely will be the way that things are going to become again. I know that mine is very minority view, but my reading of the tea leaves tells me that is where we are headed.

In this scenario, none of Colorado may fare very well. Colorado's economy is heavily reliant on cheap energy and high mobility, so--if those disappear--so does a lot of our current economy. Pueblo, at least, is still somewhat well-served by rail transportation and it does have a smidgen of heavy industry--the steel mill--that will likely survive and even prosper in the crisis ahead. But, like a lot of Colorado, Pueblo is also heavily reliant on government employment, and that is likely to crater in the more austere years ahead. Unfortunately, while Pueblo's living costs are indeed lower than those in much of Colorado, there is a reason--so are salaries and incomes, and those will likely get worse, not better, in the years ahead.

As for the resort towns, for all but the uber-wealthy, they are going to be horrible places to live in the crisis ahead. Lack of employment, isolation, rigorous climate, lack of agriculture, high transportation costs--all of that will work against them. Cheap energy and high levels of discretionary income in the middle class were the only things that took most of Colorado's mountain areas out of decades of isolation that followed the Silver Panic of 1893; the end of cheap energy, cheap transportation, and abundant discretionary incomes will send those areas back into that isolation once again.

[junZ]

Originally Posted by j1n

I'm asking.
Do people move to Pueblo and then say "this isn't CO" or "I'm too far from what I wanted out of CO"...

i.. umm... wouldn't know.
i'm still trying to convince myself to move over there.

[j1n]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

I always couch my advice about living in Colorado with my greater view of what I believe is going to happen in this country within a few years--mainly that energy costs are going to explode, with possible severe energy shortages, that are going to render the current ability of most people to take off on a 500-mile roundtrip drive on a whim a nostalgic memory of a time that has passed. In that view, wherever one chooses to live, one had better be pretty happy with what is in pretty close proximity--because that may be all that is available. Some of my old friends, who grew up in Colorado in the 1930's and 1940's, recount how a trip across the state was maybe a once a year event in those days. That very likely will be the way that things are going to become again. I know that mine is very minority view, but my reading of the tea leaves tells me that is where we are headed.

In this scenario, none of Colorado may fare very well. Colorado's economy is heavily reliant on cheap energy and high mobility, so--if those disappear--so does a lot of our current economy. Pueblo, at least, is still somewhat well-served by rail transportation and it does have a smidgen of heavy industry--the steel mill--that will likely survive and even prosper in the crisis ahead. But, like a lot of Colorado, Pueblo is also heavily reliant on government employment, and that is likely to crater in the more austere years ahead. Unfortunately, while Pueblo's living costs are indeed lower than those in much of Colorado, there is a reason--so are salaries and incomes, and those will likely get worse, not better, in the years ahead.

As for the resort towns, for all but the uber-wealthy, they are going to be horrible places to live in the crisis ahead. Lack of employment, isolation, rigorous climate, lack of agriculture, high transportation costs--all of that will work against them. Cheap energy and high levels of discretionary income in the middle class were the only things that took most of Colorado's mountain areas out of decades of isolation that followed the Silver Panic of 1893; the end of cheap energy, cheap transportation, and abundant discretionary incomes will send those areas back into that isolation once again.

hey jazzlover, thanks for that response. You are right. My thinking is indeed based on the idea of "jump in the car, drive 6 hrs, and go camping in the SJ's" and that is already becoming less possible than it was 10 years ago. Or maybe even 5.
Thanks for the perspective!

[sesamekid]

Originally Posted by j1n

...feel cheated?
Let me explain:
I keep coming back to considering Pueblo as a possible relo destination. It's inexpensive, and still my beloved CO!
I've spent time around Denver, Boulder, Vail, Telluride, and also more desert-y areas of UT (Moab, etc).
I know that Pueblo is not Telluride. But fact of the matter is that living in Pueblo would give someone access to the mountains and all the good stuff most people are looking for in CO. I live in VA currently. 5 hours puts me in the Smokies. I lived in NJ previously. 5 hours used to put me in the Adirondacks. From Pueblo, 6 hours would put me in the San Juans.
But is this mindset a common one? Do folks move to the front range, rubbing their hands together because they've found a way to make CO work... only to find out that if you want the true CO experience, you do have to shell out the $$ for a Boulder or a Gunnison?
Hope that all makes some sense...

j1n,

your words make perfect sense to me - I totally understand what you are talking about.
I was in a fortunate position to chose any place to live in Colorado, as long as it was AFFORDABLE. I considered Pueblo and decided aginst it because it just did not feel like Colorado to me. Not to knock Pueblo - it is a great city with loads of potential, but it may as well been located in Kansas or any other city on the plains.

However, I did find a solution a mere 45 minutes west of Pueblo in Canon City. It just has so much more of a Colorado feel. It is still high desert-y here but it does NOT feel like a prairie town like Pueblo does. In Canon City we are surrounded by mountain ranges on three sides. The topography is much more varied than Pueblo. White water rafting is big around here. A one hour drive through Bighorn Canyon will put you in the mountain town of Salida, a few more miles to Monarch Ski area.

If you can handle more snow and a little higher elevation, then I would suggest you check out the Bailey Colorado area. Just beautiful mountain, evergreen, continental divide scenery but still affordable and close to the ammenities of Denver.
Good luck

[j1n]

hey Sesamekid, thanks for the reply. Glad my original post made some sense! I'm going to look into your suggestions.

[Let's Go Here]

Pueblo, like most cities on the eastern plains, doesn't give the "true" Colorado feel. Cities that give the "true" Colorado feel are Boulder, Vail, Aspen, Golden, Durango, Montrose, Gunnison, and many more. Grand Junction feels somewhat like Colorado, but it reminds me more of Utah.

Even though you can see the mountains from Pueblo, I compare it to cities like Amarillo, Cheyenne, Salina, Lubbock, Sioux Falls, and other small cities that are located on the plains. The cost of living is lower because of this.

[Josseppie]

It depends by what you mean by "Colorado feel". If you want to live in the mountains and have that kind of "Colorado feel" then no as Pueblo is on the front range. Personally I think Pueblo provides a "unique Colorado feel". We are located on the front range so its only a hour to the mountains and hour and a half to great skiing at Monarch. Yet because of our more southern location we are usually warmer and get less snow then the rest of the state. Its almost like living in Arizona, just not as hot in the summer, with all the benefits of living in Colorado. Personally I think as Pueblo grows you will see that get noticed more and more and it will be advantage Pueblo has over the rest of the front range.