Which U.S cities have good quality of living?

Which U.S cities do you think have good qualities of living?

 

Would it be possible for a city which has no major company establishments, such as those in the competition against other retailers/providers, that the job market would be comparable to those cities where there are?

Take, for example, the outer skirts of Miami or main Los Angeles. Would those outer skirt cities/towns be in comparable jobs as those living within the larger towns where the GDP of that town was above median to U.S national levels?

And so, how would one exceed the median income, salaried or hourly, in a town or city where promotions within a competitive company are limited because of the lack of fair business competition?

If not a private small business owner in these towns/cities, where does a resident secure a job which offers above median income? And what is the promotion rate and feasibilty within these?

And.. would these towns/cities be more likely to have an above or below national average of quality of living? Would these towns/cities be prone in having higher numbers of unemployed?

If a town had 3000 independent job seats within that town but the population was 5000 of working age, where and how would the remaining 2000 residents secure gainful employment?

How many independent job seats would a town, with a certain population, need in order to keep the town running smoothly?

Much less than the total working aged population.

Lets take any random U.S city or town and compare the numbers of working aged residents to its total population to its total job seats.

If the job seat numbers are below the working aged and if private small business is not the option, where would a resident secure a job within that town?

If family members were home owners in that town then that person could live with or alongside them. But if there were no family members, how would a person maintain livlihood in a town/city that doesn't even have enough job seats to accomodate for its own residents, family home owners and relatives, being on the top of the list.

The person would need to migrate to another city/town, even if that person had family ties in the previous town/city, for a possibility to secure gainful employment, IF, he or she did not want to be unemployed.

If unemployment was not an issue, then monthly living expenses or costs would be supplied for by another mean, than employment, which would have an effect on the quality of living.

But on the whole picture of that city/town, what would be the ratio to total job seats, whether filled or vacant, to total 'working aged' population?

Job market over saturation.

So every person a resident would see would either be:
#1. A family member to a home owner (home owner meaning Head of household; bill payer).
#2. Employed
#3. Visitor
#4. Temporary resident; college or other.
#5. Recently moved in.

But the job seats availability to total population still remains.

Now lets add on top to this; crime, hate crimes, illicit drug usage, homeless, unemployed, children, elderly, senior homes and try to see the reasonable logic behind lying to residents about personal, yet necessary, information.

Lying, from the start, means a truth, is being kept hidden.

But why would any town/city resident need to keep a certain truth hidden from the other town/city residents?

Hese are the only possible reasons for why any person would be in a town or city regardless of time or day, in my opinion.

#1. A family member to a home owner (home owner meaning Head of household; bill payer).
#2. Employed
#3. Visitor
#4. Temporary resident; college or other.
#5. Recently moved in.

And don't forget that other born and raised residents are seeing these, also.

If not born and raised, then those who have lived there long enough to have purchased a home or homes for their living purposes, until their work retirement or even possibly, death.

All other non pen and ink reasonings are more on the psychosis' line of reasonings such as excuses and lies.

 

Any 'city' above 1000m, and surrounded by nature.

 

I'm country folks and hate cities. Being 25 miles south of Atlanta is living too close to the city for me. I like breathing space. I don't like people living on top of people. It's time for me to move, way too many city folks have been moving in down here.

 

The qualities you want are dependent on your situation. Some are shared like no state tax, and low crime. Others are not. I am now retired so I find Naples Florida ideal. Great golf, low crime, close to water for fishing, no snow, friendly people. When I had children I lived in cities with good private schools. I chose private schools because the public school systems in this country suck. Recreation is also important, I used to ski but now I prefer water sports and golf. Recreation also includes things like sports teams, good bars and restaurants. I also hate traffic which is one drawback in Naples. Weather is also a big consideration. I will take hot in the summer over cold in the winter, however some don't mind the cold. Bigger cities have more employment opportunities but usually a higher cost of living as well. I have lived in the suburbs of both Dallas and Denver. Dallas had a cheaper cost of living but I enjoyed both.

 

Excuses and lies are the beginnings to future delusions and corruptions.

 

So you understand thst suburban life and city life are not the same.

It would be like comparing a village town in China to Shanghai.

Or a suburb of Detroit to Detroit itself.

 

And to even wonder how the newly arriving into the town is getting their 411 on relocating to a place with limited job retirement opportunities, is even more unreasonable.

 

You know... with all the blame being put on GOD about HIM sending natural disasters and things, cities and States sure doesn't do too much to not have such occurrences to occur.

 

I disagree, the suburbs are the life of any city. The invention of the automobile caused that. People want space and fresh air, not crime, drugs and bums. The urban areas in any real city with the exception of a few revitalized concaves is no place where any person with means would live or raise a family.

 

If USA population was back at 150 million people one could make a choice.

 

The obvious choice is that when you look at taxes and crime rates, all cities suck for raising a family. They might be OK if you are single. Even with our current population, you can always move to the country or to a small isolated city that suits your needs. I live 25 miles outside of Dallas on one acre outside of any city limits. It was great when I got here 14 years ago. It's still OK, but Dallas is starting to make me feel a little crowded. I have one more move in me after my youngest finishes high school. I'm looking 45-50 miles from Dallas on 5-15 acres, where I can build a house.

I'm partial to the Dallas area because I grew up here and my family is here. I also like the value of the cost of living and low taxes.

 

Definitely the biggest downside to living in Dallas is the commute time. North Dallas is a nightmare. You can find some great bargains in Fort Worth if you don't mind an even longer commute.

 

I don't commute. I do field service all over the metroplex and sometimes all over the US. I am dispatched from home and am on the clock while driving to job sites. As long as I don't move too far out, I can make more money commuting in a company vehicle. My company is 35 miles East of Dallas(in Terrell), so I can look in that direction and justify it by being closer to the shop. Right now I'm 30 miles South of Dallas.

 

Yes, but who wants to live in the suburbs?

I sure don't. I prefer inner city (our inner cities are expensive and 'gentrified'), or rural. Not a fan of the bit in between. Seems like the death zone, to me. Nothing happens, and no access to nature.

 

To each his own. I have a small acreage in the subs. I have deer, birds, lizards and occasionally an alligator checking out my pond. I ride my golf cart to the course and shoot a round. My neighbor has horses we can ride any time. I never worry about parking, my grandkids can play in my yard without worry or constant supervision, most of my meals are cooked on the grill and my dog can run wild. What do you have in the city besides smog, non-existent expensive parking, dog crap covered sidewalks, crime, and bums?

 

I was around back when America's population was around 150 million.

That was back during the good old days when America was still great.

 

I don't regard 'a few acres' as the suburbs. That's semi-rural. Agree that it's preferable to city living, though. Unless it's an architect designed apartment or grand old town home, in a gentrified city .. that would be pretty nice.

Having said that, I still choose wilderness/rural.

 

You describe a situation more-or-less similar to the one I live in here in Colorado.

In general, it's probably good to live in a healthy climate, but what's "healthy" for one person may not be so for another. Probably best to live in a semi-rural area above 3,500 - 4,000 feet in altitude, where the air tends to be cleaner (my living room is just over 6,300 ft. above sea-level). I have used carbon-block filters for over 40 years to get rid of all the chlorine and other chemical crap out of our drinking water, but that would be true anywhere in the U. S.

More than anything else, I think that you need to live in an area that is not overpopulated, and that's not easy -- especially in a lovely, desirable state like Colorado. Since the early 1990's we've had waves of immigrants from other states, and in particular -- KALIFORNIA! After turning California into an overpriced, over-taxed shithole, they pour into states like Colorado -- bringing all their Loonie-Tunes 'tax-and-spend' ideas with them, along with every kind of idiot-fringed, hyperliberal, 'progressive' idea with them. They swamp everything with their sheer numbers, and they jack up taxes and increases in the costs of living that affect everything.

I WISH that California would secede -- NOW -- before they completely contaminate everything else in the Western United States....

 

A "Good City" is heavily dependent on Individual likes and dislikes, Demographic preferences, Financial desires...etc...and more and more climatic influences. When I grew up San Diego was awesome but today is very crowded, crime infested, fire/water risky and extremely expensive. New York was okay outside the city itself but had brutal winters and way too many road idiots. Louisville is a fine city but it is in Kentucky which carries its own negatives just by existing.
I guess what I am saying is...every city has its plus and minus so you'll find the best city when you get there.

 

The only US city that could have a good quality of living would be the one without liberals. Good luck finding it. Go rural, you'll never be happier...

 

Good point. You need to limit your exposure to the pollutants caused by over population as much as possible. Evidence is accumulating that the major cause of many cancers is water pollution. I noted when I was in Denver that all the buildings have a smog line on them where the building below that line is stained by smog. What do you think that does to your lungs? What I find most interesting about the Californians is they want everyone else to meet their standards while they are left alone to do as they like.

 

I have used a countertop water purifier called a "Multi-Pure" which evidently isn't made anymore. I can still get filters for it, but the water purifier itself is not anywhere on the Multi-pure website. I bought it in 1978, almost exactly forty years ago. I will not drink water with any of the crap chemicals in it that nearly all American cities put into their water because people are too stupid to brush and floss their teeth by themselves. Chlorine? Well, chlorine gas (I know there's a huge difference) was so horrible that not even Nazi Germany used it in World War II. Why the hell would anybody willingly drink this sh*t in their tap water...? Hey, "city-fathers" everywhere -- use chlorine to kill germs and bacteria -- but then FILTER ALL of that chemical sh*t OUT of the drinking water before it goes into people's homes!

Anyway, overpopulation -- especially with the WRONG kind of people, is a sure way to destroy your town and your state, and your happy way of life.

Hint: you'll know that THEY have arrived in your town when you are besieged with one tax increase proposal after another for "feel-good" socialist crap... where YOU get taxed even more, for things you derive NO direct benefit from....

 

None. I wouldn't live in any of them.

 

Depends on how you define "quality of living", doesn't it? That's why I live in Mexico.