what city do you think has the most laid-back vibe in the US?

In order to have the true laid back thing I think the city would have to be smaller and loose and carefree. Ya know real slow paced.

All the cities listed are pretty much overtaken by the sprawly daily rush hour traffic cussing and stresses of a metro etc.

other...

the most laid-back cities are in the MIdwest IMO, which you named none from it. I am going to say...

for example- not in the midwest but in Montana, Ismay, MT have 26 inhabitants.

Maybe most suburbs and some rural area are laid back.

BTW, what is the minium population, we should be discussing...

I think a small southern town would be a good choice, like Natchez, MS.

ok, let me clear that up.. most laid-back LARGE city in the US ;)

wow, what a retarded poll.


First, Azn Boi is right. Despite having some of the largest cities in the country, you managed to exclude every major midwestern city form your poll. Chicago, Cleveland, Minneapolis and Detroit don't meet your criteria for a "big city??"


Either way, the big city criteria is bullshit, too. Big cities are inhernetly not laid-back. I would put cities like Monterrey, Calif or Charleston, SC on there if I were smart. But, uhh........ :)

^^^^Accept I wouldn't consider those mid-western cities to be laid back at all. Having to shovel in the snow, then go through everything else. And I would have to say San Diego is inhernetly laid back. Or at least it was until everything feel apart...but yeah, other then that I would say maybe Miami, or San Antonio.

^^^^Accept I wouldn't consider those mid-western cities to be laid back at all. Having to shovel in the snow, then go through everything else. And I would have to say San Diego is inhernetly laid back. Or at least it was until everything feel apart...but yeah, other then that I would say maybe Miami, or San Antonio.


well if you're going to argue semantics, you could say that sun belt cities like San Diego are stressful due to overcrowding, traffic, pollution and opressive heat.


And San Antonio? Laid back? i'm sure it's not Manhattan, but I dont think of laid back when I think of San Antonio. And Miami is a very stressful city. Very aggressive people, very aggressive reputation. Don't let the weather fool you.

LA

^^^^Accept I wouldn't consider those mid-western cities to be laid back at all. Having to shovel in the snow, then go through everything else. And I would have to say San Diego is inhernetly laid back. Or at least it was until everything feel apart...but yeah, other then that I would say maybe Miami, or San Antonio.

^^^ THANK you. That's the reason why I didnt include cities from the midwest...

^^^^Accept I wouldn't consider those mid-western cities to be laid back at all. Having to shovel in the snow, then go through everything else. And I would have to say San Diego is inhernetly laid back. Or at least it was until everything feel apart...but yeah, other then that I would say maybe Miami, or San Antonio.
so you're saying that snow shoveling makes a place not laid back.... oh and some other vague undefined stuff that midwesterners apparently have to go through?



SSC: setting new lows for mental retardation everyday.

^^^ THANK you. That's the reason why I didnt include cities from the midwest...

and yet you inlcude boston? you are aware that people have to shovel snow in boston as well, aren't you? oh wait.... the california bubble..... i forgot.... my apolgies.

^^^^Accept I wouldn't consider those mid-western cities to be laid back at all. Having to shovel in the snow, then go through everything else. And I would have to say San Diego is inhernetly laid back. Or at least it was until everything feel apart...but yeah, other then that I would say maybe Miami, or San Antonio.


^^^ THANK you. That's the reason why I didnt include cities from the midwest...

I am speechless. You have to be kidding me.

Of the cities on the list that Ive actually been to Id vote San Antonio.

Other than that, Sacramento. When I lived there in the 80s it really was a laid back place, or the part of town I lived in was. Just mellow and cool (well, not the summer weather, just the attitude).

And believe it or not there where stats to back this up... sort of....

Someone did a study of walking paces..how fast people walked down sidewalks or in malls or such, and Sacramento had one of the slowest walking paces in the US. So, people there just took it easy. Laid back.

the good thing about LA is that there are a lot of laid back parts and a lot of rush-rush parts

good point about LA. I spent two weeks there once. The part of town I liked was San Pedro...I know it wasn't a fashionable neighborhood, but I liked the feel of that area...right on the ocean, hills, just an interesting vibe down there.

between Austin & LA, And Austin wins. There is just a little bit more commosion going on in LA.

Austin immediately comes to my mind when it comes to a city that is laid-back, especially here in Texas. Dallas is certainly not laidback its like Houston a full force business city. New Orleans is also an easy laid back city

and yet you inlcude boston? you are aware that people have to shovel snow in boston as well, aren't you? oh wait.... the california bubble..... i forgot.... my apolgies.

what California bubble? and yes, I am FULLY aware that people shovel snow there, too. I knew this poll was going to upset the midwesterners.. I have visited all the cities on this poll and many more cities like Minneapolis, St. Louis, Chicago, Cleveland, etc., and they just don't have the same laid-back feel as say, Austin or even Boston. It's not that they're bad places, they just have a different essence to them. ;)

what California bubble? and yes, I am FULLY aware that people shovel snow there, too. I knew this poll was going to upset the midwesterners.. I have visited all the cities on this poll and many more cities like Minneapolis, St. Louis, Chicago, Cleveland, etc., and they just don't have the same laid-back feel as say, Austin or even Boston. It's not that they're bad places, they just have a different essence to them. ;)

ok, but I still cna't see HOW you could view boston as laid back? Boston is a a wonderful city with many great aspects, being laid-back isnt one of them.

I just think it would be fair to include midwestern cities so EVERYONE could voice their opinion with many options, not be forced to choose based on your beliefs. Just because you think midwestern cities aren't laid-back doesn't necessarily mean others do, too. Isn't that the point of a poll?

Boston, laid back? Hehe

I love Boston, don't get me wrong and I'm very fond of the place, but laid back is not quite how I'd describe it.

Wow there are a lot of jerks on this thread...I think San Antonio is laid back because I see there little river walk, meanwhile in Miami I see the little Havana shops and sunny beaches and I was joking about San Diego, its still great I was reffering to the politcal climate.
Im not retarded, nor did I intend for anyone to get mad enough or take this seriously enough to say I am. Some of you people need to be more laid back. I only responded in such a way since you people were acting like haters to this guys thread.

As for the midwest I have to admit that I over exagerated that, but hey Im not perfect here. And since when has any mid-western city been seen as laid back?

Finally Californians aren't in there own little world, and thats very ignorant of you to say that. Im done for now.

^^^ thanks.

San Diego.

^^^ thanks.

your welcome.

SSC: setting new lows for mental retardation everyday.

Hey aren't you a mod here?

Out of the cities that I have visited (some not on the list given). The ones that I personally thought were laid back in comparison to where I live (Chicago duh..).

Indianapolis very laid back
Milwaukee laid back but not as much as Indy (I thought)
Detroit not really laid back but definetely not as fast paced as Chicago
Miami pretty laid back
Pheonix is asleep
Las Vegas 24 hour city but outside the strip I thought the pace was pretty slow
Los Angeles laid back for a huge city. Although it has it's definite hustle and bustle as well.
Houston snore...
San Diego extremely laid back lifestyle
New York City very fast pace no city in the U.S. comes close.
Boston not really slow paced
Philly similar to Boston imo
St. Louis slow pace
Kansas City same as St. Louis
San Fransisco probably the fastest pace city on the West Coast

I've been to all on the list and I would have to say with no hesitation, Seattle.

I've been to all on the list and I would have to say with no hesitation, Seattle.


You think Seattle is laid back... I lived there 2 years ago for about 4 months and it was OK but not at all as laid back as some of the others mentioned... The Traffic is terrible also.

Yeah compared to say... New Orleans or Nashville etc, I think that Seattle would be a little fast.

Oh, I really think it's New Orleans. I've been to plenty of cities in North America and they all have "cool" spots, but, I've yet to see a City so truly laid back from one end to the other as New Orleans. It's so laid back here, that people don't even give others "trying to be laid back," a second thought. They just move on and we let them wonder and celebrate the fact within themselves that they think they are "cool." LOL...it's really laid back in New Orleans..And it's so unpretentious if you are real to the locals. We spot a real person a mile away in this city and we smell "bullshit," two miles away...and, if you haven't ever been to New Orleans, ask anyone that has visited here and they will know exactly what I'm talking about. It only takes one good visit to catch on....

hmmm...i dunno, Columbia, SC's pretty laid back. so's Birmingham. and even Knoxville, despite the horrid traffic and outside of the anal baptists.

the most laid back cities are the more tolerant ones in the southeast.

-

LA is not laid back. It's very stressful living here because of all the congestion. LA, SF, and Boston are the least laid back on this list with LA probably being the most rush rush of the three.

Out of the cities that I have visited (some not on the list given). The ones that I personally thought were laid back in comparison to where I live (Chicago duh..).

Indianapolis very laid back
Milwaukee laid back but not as much as Indy (I thought)
Detroit not really laid back but definetely not as fast paced as Chicago
Miami pretty laid back
Pheonix is asleep
Las Vegas 24 hour city but outside the strip I thought the pace was pretty slow
Los Angeles laid back for a huge city. Although it has it's definite hustle and bustle as well.
Houston snore...
San Diego extremely laid back lifestyle
New York City very fast pace no city in the U.S. comes close.
Boston not really slow paced
Philly similar to Boston imo
St. Louis slow pace
Kansas City same as St. Louis
San Fransisco probably the fastest pace city on the West Coast


I disagree that LA is laid back, in fact I felt Chicago (outside downtown area) has more of a laid back feel to in than LA. I don't even feel that SF is all that fast paced. Its not a laid back city either, but it feels small and quaint in many ways.

The rest I'll have to agree with other than Houston, Miami, and Detroit. I've never been to those cities, so I can't say what they're like.

^yeah, people think LA is laid back because there aren't a ton of people riding subways. LA is more fast paced than Chicagoland. That's how I always felt. The best measure of "pace" is stress level. Living in LA is far more stressful than all but a couple of the listed cities. Chicago downtown is quite crowded, but the Chicagoland region is actually slower paced than the LA area.

SF feels absolutely slow paced vs LA.

^yeah, people think LA is laid back because there aren't a ton of people riding subways. LA is more fast paced than Chicagoland. That's how I always felt. The best measure of "pace" is stress level. Living in LA is far more stressful than all but a couple of the listed cities. Chicago downtown is quite crowded, but the Chicagoland region is actually slower paced than the LA area.

SF feels absolutely slow paced vs LA.

Since you are talking about stress. I hope that a nice quiet suburban community has less stress and is more laid back than the city's core. When I was in L.A., I thought people went at their own pace to do things (maybe that's why traffic is always backed up :D ) I definetly felt that Chicago's core was much more fast paced than L.A. I mean much more.....Not only that, I think the attitude is also different. I can't describe it well but it seemed that Califonians are more "carefree".
Anyway here is list of the most stressful U.S. cities. I think it is pretty interesting.


http://www.citymayors.com/features/us_stresscities.html




America's Most and Least Stressful Cities




The cities listed here are 100 largest Metropolitan Statistical Areas, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. Generally, MSAs are defined as a central city and its county, and possibly surrounding counties, if a significant portion of the area's population commutes between the counties on a regular basis.




100 Largest Metro Areas
(Ranked in order from most stressful to least stressful)

Rank Metro Area
1 Tacoma, WA
2 Miami, FL
3 New Orleans, LA The Big Easy?
4 Las Vegas, NV-AZ
5 New York, NY
6 Portland-Vancouver, OR-WA
7 Mobile, AL
8 Stockton-Lodi, CA
9 Detroit, MI
10 Dallas, TX
11 Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA
12 West Palm Beach-Boca Raton, FL
13 Houston, TX
14 Fort Lauderdale, FL
15 Riverside-San Bernardino, CA Everyone's stuck in a traffic jam:)
16 St. Louis, MO-IL
17 Denver, CO
18 Jacksonville, FL
19 Jersey City, NJ
20 Phoenix-Mesa, AZ Don't ge it?
21 Orlando, FL
22 Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC
23 Fort Worth-Arlington, TX
24 Oakland, CA
25 Kansas City, MO-KS
26 Chicago, IL Less stressful than Kansa? ok....
27 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL
28 San Antonio, TX
29 Albuquerque, NM
30 Tucson, AZ
31 Gary, IN I wouldn't live there even if you paid me
32 Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA
33 Baton Rouge, LA
34 Bakersfield, CA
35 Baltimore, MD
36 Sacramento, CA
37 Tulsa, OK
38 Memphis, TN-AR-MS
39 Nashville, TN
40 Birmingham, AL
41 Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC
42 San Francisco, CA
43 Atlanta, GA
44 Colorado Springs, CO
45 Fresno, CA
46 Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI
47 Toledo, OH
48 Indianapolis, IN
49 Philadelphia, PA-NJ
50 Cleveland-Lorain-Elyria, OH
51 Youngstown-Warren, OH
52 Wilmington-Newark, DE-MD
53 Dayton-Springfield, OH
54 Little Rock-North Little Rock, AR
55 Newark, NJ
56 San Jose, CA
57 Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point, NC
58 Wichita, KS
59 El Paso, TX
60 Austin-San Marcos, TX
61 Oklahoma City, OK
62 Louisville, KY-IN
63 Springfield, MA
64 Salt Lake City-Ogden, UT
65 Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN
66 Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland, MI
67 McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX
68 Sarasota-Bradenton, FL
69 Richmond-Petersburg, VA
70 Bergen-Passaic, NJ
71 Charleston-North Charleston, SC
72 Monmouth-Ocean, NJ
73 Akron, OH
74 Pittsburgh, PA
75 San Diego, CA
76 Knoxville, TN
77 Boston, MA-NH-ME
78 Hartford, CT
79 Columbia, SC
80 Ventura, CA
81 Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA
82 Columbus, OH
83 Washington, DC-MD-VA-WV Government jobs :)
84 Middlesex-Somerset-Hunterdon, NJ
85 Providence-Fall River-Warwick, RI-MA
86 Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY
87 Syracuse, NY
88 New Haven-Meriden, CT
89 Rochester, NY
90 Scranton-Wilkes-Barre-Hazleton, PA
91 Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC
92 Honolulu, HI
93 Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport News, VA-NC
94 Omaha, NE-IA
95 Ann Arbor, MI
96 Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI
97 Nassau-Suffolk, NY
98 Orange County, CA This is understandable
99 Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, PA
100 Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY

New Orleans... no contest, without a doubt. Like Sean said, it's a citywide phenomenon. You have to be there to understand.

75 San Diego, CA hahaha, thats the same number of our world largest high-rise rank.

Tacoma? stressful? wth?? I just visited my best friend at the University of Pudget Sound in Tacoma this spring, and it was one hell of a sleepy place surrounded by water with lots of pine trees and nice cool weather. Pretty serene if you ask me. I don't get it.. what are the criteria?


and you're right about the Riverside-SB thing. I commute to Riverside City College on weekdays, and its pure hell. It seems like EVERY SINGLE freeway and road in that area is under construction 24/7. The mess should be all done and cleaned up somewhere around 2007, but that doesn't help me one bit! :mad2:

Tacoma? stressful? wth?? I just visited my best friend at the University of Pudget Sound in Tacoma this spring, and it was one hell of a sleepy place surrounded by water with lots of pine trees and nice cool weather. Pretty serene if you ask me. I don't get it.. what are the criteria?


and you're right about the Riverside-SB thing. I commute to Riverside City College on weekdays, and its pure hell. It seems like EVERY SINGLE freeway and road in that area is under construction 24/7. The mess should be all done and cleaned up somewhere around 2007, but that doesn't help me one bit! :mad2:

Yeah I don't quite get how they came to these conclusions I don't think they based qaulity of life and the stress factor solely on traffic snarls in metropolitan expressways (or freeways as use people call them):)
Anyway, any large metro area can be stressful. My limited experience with the West coast gave me the impression that people in general are more "carefree" about the world. That's from speaking with friends and family out there. Observing attitudes......

I still stick by Seattle. I see nothing fast about this place. Traffic is bad but thats about it. Big city with a small town atmosphere imo. New Orleans? I don't think so.

My Omaha came in as the 7th least stressed city. I guess we'll live longer too. :) The traffic is nothing. We have one of the shortest commutes for America's biggest cities. And in an area with around 1.2 Million people 17 minutes isn't bad. I don't know what we'd have to be stressed about really except for people thinking we live on farms.

Since you are talking about stress. I hope that a nice quiet suburban community has less stress and is more laid back than the city's core. When I was in L.A., I thought people went at their own pace to do things (maybe that's why traffic is always backed up :D ) I definetly felt that Chicago's core was much more fast paced than L.A. I mean much more.....Not only that, I think the attitude is also different. I can't describe it well but it seemed that Califonians are more "carefree".
Anyway here is list of the most stressful U.S. cities. I think it is pretty interesting.


http://www.citymayors.com/features/us_stresscities.html




America's Most and Least Stressful Cities




The cities listed here are 100 largest Metropolitan Statistical Areas, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. Generally, MSAs are defined as a central city and its county, and possibly surrounding counties, if a significant portion of the area's population commutes between the counties on a regular basis.




100 Largest Metro Areas
(Ranked in order from most stressful to least stressful)

Rank Metro Area
1 Tacoma, WA
2 Miami, FL
3 New Orleans, LA The Big Easy?
4 Las Vegas, NV-AZ
5 New York, NY
6 Portland-Vancouver, OR-WA
7 Mobile, AL
8 Stockton-Lodi, CA
9 Detroit, MI
10 Dallas, TX
11 Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA
12 West Palm Beach-Boca Raton, FL
13 Houston, TX
14 Fort Lauderdale, FL
15 Riverside-San Bernardino, CA Everyone's stuck in a traffic jam:)
16 St. Louis, MO-IL
17 Denver, CO
18 Jacksonville, FL
19 Jersey City, NJ
20 Phoenix-Mesa, AZ Don't ge it?
21 Orlando, FL
22 Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC
23 Fort Worth-Arlington, TX
24 Oakland, CA
25 Kansas City, MO-KS
26 Chicago, IL Less stressful than Kansa? ok....
27 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL
28 San Antonio, TX
29 Albuquerque, NM
30 Tucson, AZ
31 Gary, IN I wouldn't live there even if you paid me
32 Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA
33 Baton Rouge, LA
34 Bakersfield, CA
35 Baltimore, MD
36 Sacramento, CA
37 Tulsa, OK
38 Memphis, TN-AR-MS
39 Nashville, TN
40 Birmingham, AL
41 Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC
42 San Francisco, CA
43 Atlanta, GA
44 Colorado Springs, CO
45 Fresno, CA
46 Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI
47 Toledo, OH
48 Indianapolis, IN
49 Philadelphia, PA-NJ
50 Cleveland-Lorain-Elyria, OH
51 Youngstown-Warren, OH
52 Wilmington-Newark, DE-MD
53 Dayton-Springfield, OH
54 Little Rock-North Little Rock, AR
55 Newark, NJ
56 San Jose, CA
57 Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point, NC
58 Wichita, KS
59 El Paso, TX
60 Austin-San Marcos, TX
61 Oklahoma City, OK
62 Louisville, KY-IN
63 Springfield, MA
64 Salt Lake City-Ogden, UT
65 Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN
66 Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland, MI
67 McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX
68 Sarasota-Bradenton, FL
69 Richmond-Petersburg, VA
70 Bergen-Passaic, NJ
71 Charleston-North Charleston, SC
72 Monmouth-Ocean, NJ
73 Akron, OH
74 Pittsburgh, PA
75 San Diego, CA
76 Knoxville, TN
77 Boston, MA-NH-ME
78 Hartford, CT
79 Columbia, SC
80 Ventura, CA
81 Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA
82 Columbus, OH
83 Washington, DC-MD-VA-WV Government jobs :)
84 Middlesex-Somerset-Hunterdon, NJ
85 Providence-Fall River-Warwick, RI-MA
86 Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY
87 Syracuse, NY
88 New Haven-Meriden, CT
89 Rochester, NY
90 Scranton-Wilkes-Barre-Hazleton, PA
91 Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC
92 Honolulu, HI
93 Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport News, VA-NC
94 Omaha, NE-IA
95 Ann Arbor, MI
96 Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI
97 Nassau-Suffolk, NY
98 Orange County, CA This is understandable
99 Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, PA
100 Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY


Actually no. LA is congested because overall, its denser than Chicago. That's 314 square miles of CONTINUOUS density surpassing 12,000 persons per square mile, mostly driving cars. The metro also squeezes 80% more people in relatively less space. Therefore even the suburbs are MUCH more crowded than Chicagoland's. LA redefines the meaning of suburb. While in Chicago proper, I was impressed by the city life. But once you see the rest of the metro, you get a much more laid back pace. Chicago proper may be crowded and all that, but that area alone doesnt fool me - many of the suburbs feel downright sleepy and dare I say, provincial. By the way, your list ranks Houston as more stressful than Boston, San Jose is ranked above DC. Ft Lauderdale is more stressful than Philly. Enough said.

Yea this isn't about the most "laid-back" metros though...

Yeah but my point is that even as a city, size and density count too. You don't have to walk to be fast paced. And this discussion spurred off of chrisLA's comment

Well since there's obviously no criteria for what is "fast paced" all of this just is a subjective argument, even though L.A's sunny weather doesn't qualify it in my opinion as laid back, a city that large or any for that matter can't be considered so.

^makes absolute sense. It's totally subjective but a city of 18 million cannot be laid back the way a city of say 6 million can, especially if the former is twice as dense as the latter. I don't care how lazy or slow you think a city's people can be, they can't be that different.

^Agreed.... now im off because very soon I have to take the "El" standing next to people with BO in my glamorous fast paced life.

meh heh

I still stick by Seattle. I see nothing fast about this place. Traffic is bad but thats about it. Big city with a small town atmosphere imo. New Orleans? I don't think so.
I'll definitely give Seattle #2 and Austin #3. I go to Seattle, alot...it's where I go to chill, as well. However, Seattle may be cool, but, I find it, at times to be a little pretentious and unfriendly. Seattle is a city that judges "what people wear," sometimes, and can be somewhat aloof...a touch snobby. Not too bad, but, it's not laid back enough for me, totally. But, like I said, I go there alot and take it all in to get my West Coast fill. Austin is very laid back, but, once you leave certain areas, the good feeling that comes with being laid back, suddenly disappears, and you swear you're in just another city in America.

Actually no. LA is congested because overall, its denser than Chicago. That's 314 square miles of CONTINUOUS density surpassing 12,000 persons per square mile, mostly driving cars. The metro also squeezes 80% more people in relatively less space. Therefore even the suburbs are MUCH more crowded than Chicagoland's. LA redefines the meaning of suburb. While in Chicago proper, I was impressed by the city life. But once you see the rest of the metro, you get a much more laid back pace. Chicago proper may be crowded and all that, but that area alone doesnt fool me - many of the suburbs feel downright sleepy and dare I say, provincial. By the way, your list ranks Houston as more stressful than Boston, San Jose is ranked above DC. Ft Lauderdale is more stressful than Philly. Enough said.

Who said Metro L.A. was not more congested than metro Chicago? I know that the LA urbanized area is the most dense area in the U.S., even more than New York. Chicago has a denser ( I felt much more lively)core. L.A. unlike Chicago or New York is more of a multi-nodel city. Im sure though, there are "sleepy" and "provincial" suburbs in L.A. as well. In fact I've been to Orange County, San Bernardino, and Anahiem, and found life to move just as slow as any Chicagoland suburb.

Talking about the difference in suburbs and central cities. In L.A. there is less of a difference. It is hard to tell where the city ends and where suburbia begins. L.A. has been called A 100 suburbs in search for a city. In Chicago and New York (and most other midwest and east coast cities), the central city is dense and active while suburbs are relativley quiet, of course, there are lively suburbs in Chicago as well as in other cities. I always thought that the whole purpose of living in the suburbs is to get away from the noise and rat race of the central city. Suburbs are supposed to have there big back yards and white picket fences blahblahbhah.... As for L.A. redefining what suburbs should be, that's great. I hope it's successful. L.A. is forced to build more densly populated suburbs becuase at this point, there is less room to grow outwards.Developers are limited with regards to lot sizes and such.
Density and traffic snarls are indicators of stress in cities, but there are definitely other variables including crime, poverty, unemployment, even climate may play a role. Anyway, I do not live in the burbs, and I never will. I will much rather keep my constant all night traffic , the sound of the El screaching one block from my house, and the constant police and ambulance sirens, than to go into a vegitative state out in Naperville or elsewhere. But that's just me.

BTW LAUniverse,
The list I provided was purely for enjoyment. I do not take stock in it. I have no clue as to how they came up with these rankings. If you noticed, I even questioned so of the rankings. So don't get your panties in an uproar just because Chicago is considered more stressful than L.A. by this meaningless list

I'll definitely give Seattle #2 and Austin #3. I go to Seattle, alot...it's where I go to chill, as well. However, Seattle may be cool, but, I find it, at times to be a little pretentious and unfriendly. Seattle is a city that judges "what people wear," sometimes, and can be somewhat aloof...a touch snobby. Not too bad, but, it's not laid back enough for me, totally. But, like I said, I go there alot and take it all in to get my West Coast fill. Austin is very laid back, but, once you leave certain areas, the good feeling that comes with being laid back, suddenly disappears, and you swear you're in just another city in America.

Pretentious? Seattle? You've got to be kidding. Judges people in what they wear. LOL!! You must be on crack. I've been here for 5 years now and it is by far the most casually dressed city. Seattlites absolutely do not give a damn what you wear. You must have been in some other city.

This is the most ridiculous thread. How can someone say one city is more laid back than another?

This is the most ridiculous thread. How can someone say one city is more laid back than another?
^^^
Everyone has varying opinions. And this is where to express them. :)

lol...it doesnt make any sense though.

I live in Milwaukee. I am very laid back...as are alot of people here. Now, how does this compare to the likes of Seattle, Indianapolis, or Tampa? What are we judging this on? :)

Seattle?! Hahahahahahaha...Seattle is only laid back when you compare it to Baghdad. Even the people who pretend to be laid back are usually completely frustrated and half-insane on the inside...I know I am. It may succeed in creating the illusion of being laid-back, but in its depths, in the hearts of minds of most residents, it is hopping mad.

This is the most ridiculous thread. How can someone say one city is more laid back than another?

Like I said before about New Orleans... if you go there, you'll see. It's weird but the city seems to have a laying-back effect on people.

^New Orleans must have an incontenency and diuretic effect, too. That would explain the stink.

Who said Metro L.A. was not more congested than metro Chicago? I know that the LA urbanized area is the most dense area in the U.S., even more than New York. Chicago has a denser ( I felt much more lively)core. L.A. unlike Chicago or New York is more of a multi-nodel city. Im sure though, there are "sleepy" and "provincial" suburbs in L.A. as well. In fact I've been to Orange County, San Bernardino, and Anahiem, and found life to move just as slow as any Chicagoland suburb.

Talking about the difference in suburbs and central cities. In L.A. there is less of a difference. It is hard to tell where the city ends and where suburbia begins. L.A. has been called A 100 suburbs in search for a city. In Chicago and New York (and most other midwest and east coast cities), the central city is dense and active while suburbs are relativley quiet, of course, there are lively suburbs in Chicago as well as in other cities. I always thought that the whole purpose of living in the suburbs is to get away from the noise and rat race of the central city. Suburbs are supposed to have there big back yards and white picket fences blahblahbhah.... As for L.A. redefining what suburbs should be, that's great. I hope it's successful. L.A. is forced to build more densly populated suburbs becuase at this point, there is less room to grow outwards.Developers are limited with regards to lot sizes and such.
Density and traffic snarls are indicators of stress in cities, but there are definitely other variables including crime, poverty, unemployment, even climate may play a role. Anyway, I do not live in the burbs, and I never will. I will much rather keep my constant all night traffic , the sound of the El screaching one block from my house, and the constant police and ambulance sirens, than to go into a vegitative state out in Naperville or elsewhere. But that's just me.

BTW LAUniverse,
The list I provided was purely for enjoyment. I do not take stock in it. I have no clue as to how they came up with these rankings. If you noticed, I even questioned so of the rankings. So don't get your panties in an uproar just because Chicago is considered more stressful than L.A. by this meaningless list


To talk about the city and ignore the metro is inaccurate as the pace of a city is interdependent on its regional populace - especially in a city as multi-faceted as LA. LA is like Tokyo in that it has enormous suburbs which function as major employment and cultural centers. How many suburbs in Chicagoland compare to the 350,000 that reside in OC's 13,000 ppsm Santa Ana? Or the 500,000 people that make up Long Beach's 10,000 ppsm density? How about Pasadena? Santa Monica? Glendale? Culver City? The 17,000 ppsm suburb of East LA? I don't know what you did in LA but fuck Naperville...The drop-off in LA vs suburbs is less dramatic not because LA itself is sparse and un-urban, but rather because LA's suburbs are extremely urban relative to those of NY or Chicago - often surpassing Chicago's very own density. It's also why we have traffic jams regularly at 3:00 AM just like how people there ride the el. Noone is trying to make anything happen that way here, it's just how LA evolved. If we were at all concerned in whether crime was an indicator of stress or pace, I'm sure we would have had to announce it. As far as most people here are concerned, where congestion has to do with stress is what we're referring to. And if we had cared for crime I'd have asked about Gary, IN but who gives a rats ass about that place right? And LA has plenty of congestion. This extends far from LA proper, and well into the night - "pace" is not just about taxi's, barhopping, and walking to cafes - That's all I'm saying - get out of your box.

And the only reason my "panties are in a bunch" is because you even bothered to use such a shitty list to advance your agenda knowing well it's lack of worth.

To talk about the city and ignore the metro is inaccurate as the pace of a city is interdependent on its regional populace - especially in a city as multi-faceted as LA. LA is like Tokyo in that it has enormous suburbs which function as major employment and cultural centers. How many suburbs in Chicagoland compare to the 350,000 that reside in OC's 13,000 ppsm Santa Ana? Or the 500,000 people that make up Long Beach's 10,000 ppsm density? How about Pasadena? Santa Monica? Glendale? Culver City? The 17,000 ppsm suburb of East LA? I don't know what you did in LA but fuck Naperville...The drop-off in LA vs suburbs is less dramatic not because LA itself is sparse and un-urban, but rather because LA's suburbs are extremely urban relative to those of NY or Chicago - often surpassing Chicago's very own density. It's also why we have traffic jams regularly at 3:00 AM just like how people there ride the el. Noone is trying to make anything happen that way here, it's just how LA evolved. If we were at all concerned in whether crime was an indicator of stress or pace, I'm sure we would have had to announce it. As far as most people here are concerned, where congestion has to do with stress is what we're referring to. And if we had cared for crime I'd have asked about Gary, IN but who gives a rats ass about that place right? And LA has plenty of congestion. This extends far from LA proper, and well into the night - "pace" is not just about taxi's, barhopping, and walking to cafes - That's all I'm saying - get out of your box.

And the only reason my "panties are in a bunch" is because you even bothered to use such a shitty list to advance your agenda knowing well it's lack of worth.

Please, you make it sound that Chicago outside the Loop is like freaking Mayberry, and that there are no sleepy suburbs in L.A. I stayed in Orange County for a week, and I though it was extremely slow paced. Im not excluding the entire metro area from the discussion. Im just stating that in Chicago, there is a big difference between the city and the suburbs when it comes to "atmosphere". Most of the husle and bustle occurs in the city.
No, there are no Chicago suburbs like Long Beach, although a few are in the process of developing like it. Joliet, and Aurora are growing extremely fast, each having a population approaching 150,000. Long Beach was a satelite city of Los Angeles before sprawl merged the two. There are a few suburbs that have 13-14,000 people per square mile here as well. Cicero is an example. It seemed that in L.A. the city and the suburbs grew independently from each other, while in Chicago the city and the suburbs served a specific purpose.
Anyway, I will say this again, I like Los Angeles. I have no agenda as you claim. The list I provided is from the city mayors website. What possible agenda can I be promoting with a list that puts Tacoma as the most stressful city. Maybe you would have been happier if Los Angeles was in the top rankings of the list? And no, I do not live in a box.

Like I said before about New Orleans... if you go there, you'll see. It's weird but the city seems to have a laying-back effect on people.

well I can understand alot of those southern cities. I wouldnt be doing much if I had to put up with that humidity or heat. Southern culture in general is very laid back. However, my point is-how do you compare New Orleans to Atlanta, or Jacksonville to Houston? I am just assuming most Southern cities are more laid back than Northern ones.

Please, you make it sound that Chicago outside the Loop is like freaking Mayberry, and that there are no sleepy suburbs in L.A. I stayed in Orange County for a week, and I though it was extremely slow paced. Im not excluding the entire metro area from the discussion. Im just stating that in Chicago, there is a big difference between the city and the suburbs when it comes to "atmosphere". Most of the husle and bustle occurs in the city.
No, there are no Chicago suburbs like Long Beach, although a few are in the process of developing like it. Joliet, and Aurora are growing extremely fast, each having a population approaching 150,000. Long Beach was a satelite city of Los Angeles before sprawl merged the two. There are a few suburbs that have 13-14,000 people per square mile here as well. Cicero is an example. It seemed that in L.A. the city and the suburbs grew independently from each other, while in Chicago the city and the suburbs served a specific purpose.
Anyway, I will say this again, I like Los Angeles. I have no agenda as you claim. The list I provided is from the city mayors website. What possible agenda can I be promoting with a list that puts Tacoma as the most stressful city. Maybe you would have been happier if Los Angeles was in the top rankings of the list? And no, I do not live in a box.


Oh god don't try to turn the tables on me as some sort of agenda pusher. Noone said LA had no sleepy suburbs, I mean what do you expect, that I want you to think LA maintains 13,000ppsm all the way through San Bernardino where development just ends abruptly at a bunch of cactus groves? If you were willing to put things into perspective for a second, you'd realize my point, that Chicagoland doesn't come close to having OVERALL metro development on par with LA's, not especially considering the fact that LA's suburbs are consistently thousands of ppsm higher than Chicagoland counterparts. So what, LA has some sleepy suburbs, so does Tokyo. You haven't even for once acknowledged that LA has 314 square miles of 12,000+ ppsm density continuously surrounding downtown - but you seemed more than glad to point out how LA doesn't drop off from city to suburb. Well how fuxking innocent of you now isn't that? Yeah, try playing victim after addressing that first.

p.s. don't even get into a pissfight about metro density. I START paying attention at 150,000 lol!

^New Orleans must have an incontenency and diuretic effect, too. That would explain the stink.

No, that would be the alcohol.

Oh god don't try to turn the tables on me as some sort of agenda pusher. Noone said LA had no sleepy suburbs, I mean what do you expect, that I want you to think LA maintains 13,000ppsm all the way through San Bernardino where development just ends abruptly at a bunch of cactus groves? If you were willing to put things into perspective for a second, you'd realize my point, that Chicagoland doesn't come close to having OVERALL metro development on par with LA's, not especially considering the fact that LA's suburbs are consistently thousands of ppsm higher than Chicagoland counterparts. So what, LA has some sleepy suburbs, so does Tokyo. You haven't even for once acknowledged that LA has 314 square miles of 12,000+ ppsm density continuously surrounding downtown - but you seemed more than glad to point out how LA doesn't drop off from city to suburb. Well how fuxking innocent of you now isn't that? Yeah, try playing victim after addressing that first.

p.s. don't even get into a pissfight about metro density. I START paying attention at 150,000 lol!

Why must you turn this into a L.A. versus Chicago thing? The topic of this thread is most laid back cities. Of course there is really no scientific way of determining how laid back a city or it's metro is. However, there are regional cultural differences in the U.S. that might make the attitude of people somewhat different from one region to another. This may transcend into metropolitan areas and even the central city. Over all, any large metro will share more common attitudes and other similarities then not. I did see some cultural differences and some difference in attitudes on the west coast. As there are some differences on the east coast, the south and the midwest.


Actually, I did acknowledge that the L.A. metro has an overall density higher than Chicagoland and that of the New York metro. If you look back in my post on June 28th you will see that. L.A.'s over all urban density will continue to increase. Reason being there is just no more room to sprawl. Chicago's urban density as well as NYC's may actually decrease, for there are no natural barriers in the way of sprawl (unless anti sprawl legislation is passed). However, Chicago's center will continue to increase in density, (it's current peak density is 48,000 ppsm) as it becomes more and more residential. There are 140 high rises slated to be constructed in the vicinity of the Loop within the next 5 or 6 years.
As I said before, L.A.'s city and suburbs seem to blend together. That was my impression when I visited. Having 12000 ppsm for 314 sq miles is impressive. Yes, many L.A.suburbs are more developed into mini -cities, because they developed independently from L.A. Chicago suburbs are more inter-dependent on the central city (although this is changing somewhat). I live in a community where there is over 30000 ppsmile, so I know about density. I START paying attention to density at 25,000 LoL

As for playing the role of a victim, and getting into a piss fight about density, don't make me laugh. You brought this topic up. Not me! You may like to talk about density, but I live in it. Stop being so condescending. Im not here to bash any city or anyone. In the future please change your tone before someone tells you to go jump into a fault line or something.:)

and I live in a neighborhood with 30,000 ppsm too. Two can play this game lol!

and I live in a neighborhood with 30,000 ppsm too. Two can play this game lol!
Good for you.

NOT phoenix. Everyone here has jobs, spends 2 hours per day in traffic, and stuff. Soccer moms always shuttle their kids everywhere and the old people honk others for no reason and hold up people in their golf carts. Its a high-stress environment here.

Good for you.

quality over quantity, no ducking and dodging. You sure write a hell lot but you sure as hell can't make a cohesive point. Next.

I think we can safely say that neither LA nor Chicago is the country's most laid-back city. Moving on...