Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Fargo, Bismarck Make “Top 50 Smartest Places To Live”

This is really cool.

Fargo made #23 and Bismarck made #28.

A lot of people complain that North Dakota wages are too low, that we're too rural and that there aren't enough opportunities here for younger generations. I'm just not sure how true those things are. Wages may be low compared to other places, but it doesn't cost near as much money to live here either. Rural living may be an acquired taste, but our bigger cities (like Bismarck, Fargo and Grand Forks) are fairly metropolitan. And as for a lack of opportunities, we aren't exactly the silicon valley out here...but unemployment is under 3% state wide. If you want to work and earn a decent living there is no reason why ND won't work.

Comments

Chicago is not a ‘smart’ place to live in winter - you can’t tell me ND is any better!!!!

Ken McCracken on May 9, 2006 at 07:03 pm
Rob
Rob
19132 comments
Send a private message

Ken, ND actually has a climate a lot like San Diego, CA.  We just tell people about horrid winters to keep them away.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on May 9, 2006 at 07:05 pm

Oh, like the Vikings naming the lush and inviting island ‘Iceland’ and the forbidding chunk of iceberg ‘Greenland’?

You have some clever swedes up there.

Ken McCracken on May 9, 2006 at 07:18 pm
Rob
Rob
19132 comments
Send a private message

Clever Norskies thank you very much.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on May 9, 2006 at 07:20 pm

Looks like I live in the #2 smartest place to live.  I’ve been to #1 and I just have to say, "no thank you"

CV Rick on May 9, 2006 at 07:26 pm
Avatar for Andrew

Three from my state (Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Lancaster). Gotta say I’m not really a big fan of any of them.

Andrew on May 9, 2006 at 08:36 pm
Avatar for Jay Tea

Hmph. Any such list that doesn’t list ANYWHERE in New Hampshire is obviously flawed.

 

I note that the city with the lowest population is Bismarck, at 97,858. Our only city of that size is Manchester, with about 110,000, and the next would be Nashua, which has around 60,000. They must have focused on cities, and we’re just not densely populated enough (thank heavens).

 

J. 

Jay Tea on May 10, 2006 at 01:08 am
Avatar for Sphagnum

50 cities and not one from California?  I mean, I can understand leaving out a small, who-cares state like, oh I dunno, New Hampshire...  But come on, this is California!  10% of the country lives out here, baby!  You gotta rank at least ONE of our cities, although odds dictate more like 5…

Sphagnum on May 10, 2006 at 01:27 pm
Avatar for Jay Tea

Sphagnum, the omission of New Hampshire was obviously an indication of the flaws in the ranking system.

 The omission of California shows that the study wasn’t completely broken.

 J.

Jay Tea on May 10, 2006 at 03:23 pm
Avatar for Sphagnum

Heh, touche!

Sphagnum on May 10, 2006 at 04:43 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.