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.
I lived in Austin for six years, I'll never go back. Not my type of city.
Portland is like Austin but with a better climate, so really have no interest in going there either.
I like Seattle's music scene. It's nice, but I wouldn't want to live there either.
Boston is too expensive and dangerous.
San Francisco is wonderful, but really expensive.
Are we supposed to be jealous? They're all fine cities in their own right, and I've enjoyed my visits to 4 of the 5 (haven't been to Austin)...but there's no overwhelming feeling that I should move to one of them.
No. Too small, too cold. Great local food scene, excellent craft beer/microbrew scene, great arts scene, but still... too small and too cold.
No. Too grey, too cold, closes down too early. I lived there in 08-09, and it was a mostly-bad experience. I went up there again a couple months ago and had a great time; I suppose I could move back in the right circumstances, but it's still not at the top of my list.
I spent some of my childhood and most of my teens in Boston; my parents and many of my my friends are still there. Love it, but I made the conscious decision to move away from it. I could live there again under the right circumstances, but I don't know if I actually would. I'm pretty happy out here.
You consider Portland and Seattle too cold and yet you lived in Boston as a kid? And Seattle doesn't close down THAT early if you know the right people.
Are we supposed to be jealous? They're all fine cities in their own right, and I've enjoyed my visits to 4 of the 5 (haven't been to Austin)...but there's no overwhelming feeling that I should move to one of them.
The OP seems to have some obsession with the fact that a lot of young college graduates and professionals move to those cities. So much so that he likes to post all five as a non-sequitur answer to threads like "What are the most diverse cities?" or "What are the most interesting cities". He shows up on the Portland forum as well occasionally to make comments about "all the young people moving to Portland" and give his opinion on the city, yet has never actually been to Portland. Not sure if he's just sick of the hype or he really finds repeating the same thing to be interesting.
I can understand why these five cities sort of get grouped together frequently--all of them have high levels of gentrification in their inner neighborhoods(probably the highest in the country for medium-sized or larger cities), all five come up a lot on "Top US places to live" lists pretty often, all of them are liberal, and all of them are stereotyped as being mainly the province of hip white transplants. Which is both true and not true, unless you've never explored the entirety of these cities.
While all five cities are popular locations for college graduates, at the same time, you can probably find higher numbers of people in their twenties still moving to New York, Los Angeles, or Chicago--and those cities all have increasingly large gentrified hip neighborhoods around their central core and further out these days. It's just that those cities due to the fact that they are much larger in terms of population have plenty of more working class or ethnic neighborhoods further out that give the cities a more broad reputation. But every city seems to be going for some level of gentrification in their core these days--everywhere from more gritty East Coast cities like Philadelphia and Baltimore to Midwest cities like Milwaukee and so on is re-investing in older neighborhoods. The fact is that while many people criticize the five cities listed(Portland, Seattle, Boston, Austin, and San Francisco) for feeling overly gentrified, they'll often boast about the newer amenities and cool bars and restaurants opening up in their newly revitalized core neighborhoods. That being said, I don't think anyone really feels "jealous" about not living in those cities--and in part it's the same reason--you can find a lot of the same stuff in cities all over the country these days.
I don't even know what DD/DH/DS mean... can somebody inform me?
I have no clue what they mean either. Maybe its generational?
Meanwhile, I'd love to live in Portland or Seattle but jealous of people who live there? That implies a lot more than just the city they live in so no, I'm pretty happy with my own life even out here in the wastelands of the Midwest. Though, in the future I'd like to move out that way, life decisions pending.
I don't even know what DD/DH/DS mean... can somebody inform me?
"Dear Daughter", "Dear Son", "Dear Husband". I find these "acronyms" to be the most insincere and obnoxious way of casually referring to a family member, and I know others agree (although they may not feel as strongly as I do about it ). In the way that most people use them - e.g. "Oh my gosh, I am so annoyed with DH today" or "DD and I bought a lawnmower today" - it completely patronizes and insults the idea of expressing actual love or gratitude for someone close to you. In a sense, these acronyms encapsulate much of what I dislike about modern society - they are hollow, meaningless, superficial and lazy gestures. And the worst part is they water down and make true gestures of love and appreciation less meaningful. Alright, getting off soapbox and ending rant.
Thankfully, they're not commonly used on this board.
You consider Portland and Seattle too cold and yet you lived in Boston as a kid? And Seattle doesn't close down THAT early if you know the right people.
He probably considers them *both* too cold but would at least have a reason to be in Boston (i.e. family) whereas, there is no reason for him to live in Seattle.
"Dear Daughter", "Dear Son", "Dear Husband". I find these "acronyms" to be the most insincere and obnoxious way of casually referring to a family member, and I know others agree (although they may not feel as strongly as I do about it ). In the way that most people use them - e.g. "Oh my gosh, I am so annoyed with DH today" or "DD and I bought a lawnmower today" - it completely patronizes and insults the idea of expressing actual love or gratitude for someone close to you. In a sense, these acronyms encapsulate much of what I dislike about modern society - they are hollow, meaningless, superficial and lazy gestures. And the worst part is they water down and make true gestures of love and appreciation less meaningful. Alright, getting off soapbox and ending rant.
Thankfully, they're not commonly used on this board.
Hah, yeah... I have seen those, and yes that is obnoxious.
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.
). In the way that most people use them - e.g. "Oh my gosh, I am so annoyed with DH today" or "DD and I bought a lawnmower today" - it completely patronizes and insults the idea of expressing actual love or gratitude for someone close to you. In a sense, these acronyms encapsulate much of what I dislike about modern society - they are hollow, meaningless, superficial and lazy gestures. And the worst part is they water down and make true gestures of love and appreciation less meaningful. Alright, getting off soapbox and ending rant.
