Business Week Ranks America's Best Cities...

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 08, 2012 8:34 PM GMT
    I don't know how I feel about this list. While the top 10 seem to be in order, cities like LA are ranked way below places like Baltimore, and mutherfuckin Anchorage, Alaska. Da fuq? And Miami is nowhere on the list. Not saying Miami is not without it's problems, but come on now!!!!

    http://images.businessweek.com/slideshows/2012-09-26/americas-50-best-cities


    1. San Francisco
    2. Seattle
    3. Washington DC
    4. Boston
    5. Portland, OR
    6. Denver
    7. New York City
    8. Austin
    9. San Diego
    10. Saint Paul
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 08, 2012 11:33 PM GMT
    Yeah the fact that Miami is not even on the list makes absolutely no sense. You got the beach, great weather, cosmopolitan atmosphere, tons of places to go out to. I mean really?

    I am glad they put Boston as number 4 definetly deserves its place right there.icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 08, 2012 11:43 PM GMT
    Portland and Boston definitely deserve their rightful place! But I'm surprised Colorado Springs isn't any higher up the rankings.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 08, 2012 11:44 PM GMT

    Not suprised at all. Los Angeles is a dump, overrun by low density and cars.

    Miami as America's best city - LOL.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 12:00 AM GMT
    Whenever you look at lists like this (and they're manifold), you must look at the methodology and what they're measuring to make sense. And also know, measuring the best of anything is almost ways subjective (even when using objective measurements)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 12:53 AM GMT
    calique saidYeah the fact that Miami is not even on the list makes absolutely no sense.
    The list is for heteros, not homos.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 1:10 AM GMT
    Why is OKC even listed?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 1:22 AM GMT
    I think Seattle and DC are spot on. Those two cities rank pretty high in other polls in terms of job opportunity and quality of life, at least.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 1:23 AM GMT
    paulflexes said
    calique saidYeah the fact that Miami is not even on the list makes absolutely no sense.
    The list is for heteros, not homos.


    Seems like the opposite, actually.
    SF, Seattle, Boston, and NYC are gay.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 2:48 AM GMT
    tanlejos said
    Not suprised at all. Los Angeles is a dump, overrun by low density and cars.

    Miami as America's best city - LOL.




    But yet the safe, family friendly cultural metropolises such as Baltimore and Philly are much better???
  • RaggedyMan

    Posts: 7185

    Oct 09, 2012 2:52 AM GMT
    yay! (san jose is close enough damnit)
  • ggst82

    Posts: 83

    Oct 09, 2012 3:12 AM GMT
    Just glad Boston is on the list!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 3:15 AM GMT
    Boston should be 1 icon_cool.gif
  • ggst82

    Posts: 83

    Oct 09, 2012 3:17 AM GMT
    I'm not gonna disagree with that!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 3:18 AM GMT
    NYC should be number one icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Montague

    Posts: 5205

    Oct 09, 2012 3:19 AM GMT
    How did D.C. make the list lol
  • Montague

    Posts: 5205

    Oct 09, 2012 3:20 AM GMT
    OneSongGlory saidNYC should be number one icon_rolleyes.gif


    Surprised it made the list too.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 3:20 AM GMT
    st paul!!! icon_smile.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 3:25 AM GMT
    Only NYC and San Francisco can compete with Chicago's cultural assets such as our symphony, opera, museums, and universities. Only NYC is of greater financial importance, in fact Chicago ranks third in the world by flow of funds. Yet despite our cultural and financial assets, not to mention our beaches, lake, river, and direct flights to every major destination, rainy Portland makes the list over us? What were the judging criteria?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 4:38 AM GMT
    swimguychicago saidOnly NYC and San Francisco can compete with Chicago's cultural assets such as our symphony, opera, museums, and universities. Only NYC is of greater financial importance, in fact Chicago ranks third in the world by flow of funds. Yet despite our cultural and financial assets, not to mention our beaches, lake, river, and direct flights to every major destination, rainy Portland makes the list over us? What were the judging criteria?


    They probably go for who has the most, appealing, well groomed suburbs where schools are good, crime is low and commuting to work is reliable. It IS business weekly, cultural amenities don't apply to this mostly suburban nation.

    As for LA/MIA. They spread their crime and poverty through sprawl, with weather to make it look more appealing than it actually is. They're great cities, but overrated with mediocre burbs. Crime/poverty in the northeast hardly leaves the innercities, yea BMore, Philly, DC, etc may be some of the most crime ridden cities, but it's all very confined and their suburbs are, for the most part, well established with better school systems.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 4:48 AM GMT
    Lsje92 saidst paul!!! icon_smile.gif


    Minneapolis!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 5:32 AM GMT
    swimguychicago saidOnly NYC and San Francisco can compete with Chicago's cultural assets such as our symphony, opera, museums, and universities. Only NYC is of greater financial importance, in fact Chicago ranks third in the world by flow of funds. Yet despite our cultural and financial assets, not to mention our beaches, lake, river, and direct flights to every major destination, rainy Portland makes the list over us? What were the judging criteria?


    I've been to most of the cities on the list (plus Chicago) and I can see why Seattle and Portland are near the top. I really like Chicago (kind of like an edgier, more dangerous version of Toronto) but I'd feel much safer in Portland, frankly.

    Here's the criteria used and reading through that I can well see why some of the cities ranked as they did.

    "Businessweek.com evaluated 100 of the country’s largest cities based on leisure attributes (the number of restaurants, bars, libraries, museums, professional sports teams, and park acres by population); educational attributes (public school performance, the number of colleges, and graduate degree holders), economic factors (2011 income and June and July 2012 unemployment), crime, and air quality. Major professional league and minor league teams, as well as U.S.-based teams belonging to international leagues in that city were included. The greatest weighting was placed on leisure amenities, followed by educational metrics and economic metrics, and then crime and air quality. The data come from Onboard Informatics, except for park acreage, which comes from the Trust for Public Land."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 8:19 AM GMT
    I would definitely put Chicago in the top ten - and would not rank San Francisco (where I live) first - But like YVR pointed out, the ratings were based among other things on crime, number of professional sports teams, and number of restaurants.. Chicago's murder rate is WAY up, and San Francisco's is down. And there are more restaurants per capita in San Francisco than any other place in the US I can think of. In a couple years though, all the major professional sports teams may have left San Francisco, and so it may be dropped. I think everyone loves San Francisco because of the Bridge and Fisherman's Wharf - a great tourist hangout and T-shirt shop where the only fishermen are ghosts. San Francisco is more of an ovesized town than a real city.

    The real curiosity is St. Paul. Is there really a There there? Or just occasional visits from Garrison Keillor?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 09, 2012 9:14 AM GMT
    paulflexes said
    calique saidYeah the fact that Miami is not even on the list makes absolutely no sense.
    The list is for heteros, not homos.


    Miami's no longer a homo city. Sure, there are still circuit parties in SoBe, but it seems the queers with money and/or the ability to leave Miami have packed their bags and hightailed it out of there.

    The last time I was in Miami, I was shocked at how wretched SoBe had become.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Oct 09, 2012 4:13 PM GMT
    Bullwinklemoos said
    Lsje92 saidst paul!!! icon_smile.gif


    Minneapolis!


    icon_biggrin.gif