• 56!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    They are both too big for me. I like a small rural community, where everything is close enough that no car is needed (an island in my case). I grew up in a city, and I’m so glad I got out of there.

  • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    US Centric Answer:

    Somewhere in between.

    Somewhere there is still a downtown, the arts, interesting things to do.

    But also, just not to massive. I don’t want actual skyscrapers. 6 stories is tall enough for me.

    There’s only a handful of US cities like this, that straddle the line between having big city amenities and small town charm where it feels like you know a bunch of the locals.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’m always confused when I hear people say this. I’m in an actual one-watertower small town and I see people I don’t know constantly. If you go up to tens of thousands you might as well be in the city, because you’ll mostly be interacting with strangers.

      Is everyone else just really great at keeping track of everyone, or something?

    • PonyOfWar@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      What are some places in the US that would fit this description? I’m guessing maybe something like Burlington, VT?

      • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Asheville, North Carolina used to be one, but it’s been almost 16 years since I knew anyone out that way, so I don’t know if it still has the same vibe. Easy for that vibe to be killed by too many people moving there.

        Also yes, Burlington is pretty much exactly the kind of city I’m thinking about (never been there, just looked it up on Wikipedia).

      • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        A lot of big state university towns that are not part of major metros probably fit this. They are going to have a lot of amenities due to the university.

        • Ms. ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          They can definitely fit this, and are my preferred town type. I grew up and spent most my life around college towns and they’re pretty great.

          To add examples about the nearby metros: Moscow/Pullman on the Idaho/Washington border are college towns in the middle of a large farming community. Never any real need to travel to a city because they’re too far away and the needs of the college keep the town in stock with everything you’d want anyway. Cheney on the other hand is close enough to Spokane that it uses Spokane’s bus system (or used to idk haven’t been there in years). Cheney is lacking a lot of essentials because people just go to Spokane for them.

          Moscow/Pullman have tight knit communities while also being open and friendly. You just see so many people from different places coming in through the colleges. College towns are really the best middle ground of small town feel with city convenience I’ve been able to find.

  • pixelscript@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    City. Around 100k is the comfortable size.

    Not like I require the city’s wider array of amenities all that much. I will still be spending 97% of my time at work or at home.

    But if I lived in a small town again (born and raised in a town of <8,000), that extra 3% of the time I wanted to go out I’d have to remind myself, “Oh yeah, I live in a dead end town in the middle of nowhere that services none of my personal interests,” and that 3% would rapidly become 0%. I’d live fine with that, but eh. Why take a strict net loss when I can simply not?

    The walkabiity and community arguments for small towns are complete non-factors for me, seeing as I go basically nowhere and talk to basically no one. And I’m not persuaded by the cost of living argument for small towns, since lower rent would be almost equally counterbalanced by lower salary opportunities.

    • Tak@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Not only does the salary go down in small towns but the number of positions are greatly reduced. All it takes is a layoff and that “cheaper” small town could be too expensive because there are no more positions to fill.

      • pixelscript@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        The exception would be high-paid remote work, I guess. But with the reputation that corpos big enough to field those salaries have been recently building, going mask-off with no warning for no reason and asking employees to start filling desks again, I don’t know if I’d risk it.

  • TeaHands@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    UK answer: city 100% no question.

    Being able to actually get places and do things and have people to do those things with, I don’t even know how a small town could ever compare. Grew up in one, currently living in another one, both crap.

  • LalSalaamComrade@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    I have lived in a tier-2 city, and I hated it. My house used to be next to the highway, the sound was so irritating, the house kept getting dusty, there were too many pigeons shitting and making that irritating noise. I would rather live in a forest farm in a remote area, but I guess small town is the closest to what I’m looking for.

    • taladar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      My house used to be next to the highway, the sound was so irritating

      You don’t dislike the city, you dislike cars. Cars in cities are often people who live outside the city imposing the cost of their life style onto the city.

      • LalSalaamComrade@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Not really. Yes, I dislike large cars, but that’s just a part of why I don’t like cities. I hate living in the city as a whole. Living in Navi Mumbai was a horrible experience. Sure, you have stores and malls nearby, and it is cheaper and more modern than Mumbai, but the vibe sucked. It was nothing like Worli, one of the many high-end parts of South Mumbai. The air was heavily polluted, there was trash thrown everywhere, and I am more of a recluse. Living next to a highway flyover with huge traffic, cars beeping everyday, even at night will make you lose your mind.

  • Björn Tantau@swg-empire.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Always a small town. I like to have a big house and a semblance of nature available. Although I could do with less right wing neighbours.

    • jeffw@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Philadelphia has Fairmount park, the largest inner city park (not counting Central Park, which was manufactured). You can live in a house right up against it. I imagine other cities have plenty of nature too. And even not next to giant parks, many larger cities have home with large yards and tons of trees

  • scoobford@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    City.

    Fewer bigots, fewer people in your business, there’s community spaces other than the church, the food is better, and most of all, there’s work to be had.

    It is a matter of personal preference, but there is a reason most people are migrating into cities right now.

    • SkippingRelax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Isn’t that reason return to office policies though, and the majority of people would happily leave the city life behind if they were not forced to go back?

      Appreciate you are answering a question and each one of us has their own preference but not sure you can say most people agree with yours.

      • scoobford@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        So I looked it up, and this isn’t true anymore most places.

        It used to be, young people flocked to cities both for work and for things to do. It looks to me based on where this is/isn’t happening now that the main factor is cost of living.

          • scoobford@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Most places, the current trend right now is moving out of cities. In my local area, people are still moving into cities for some reason.

  • PonyOfWar@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Definitely small town for me. I couldn’t live with the noise, pollution, crowds and lack of nature of a big city for long. I wouldn’t want to live completely out in the sticks either though, so a decently sized city should be within at least an hours reach or so. Thankfully such places are pretty easy to find in Germany and working from home gives me the option to live pretty much anywhere I want.

      • PonyOfWar@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        No, why? I take the train to the nearest bigger city maybe once a month, do my shopping/visit the theatre or whatever and go back. If anything, I’m doing the people there a favor, by not driving the apartment prices up even further by living there.

  • GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    City, no doubt in my mind.

    Being able to walk, bike and take transit instead of having to own a car is important for me. I’m not interested in the additional maintenance involved with owning a house, an apartment suits me a lot better. I also like having good access to plenty of things to do in the form of a great selection of restaurants and being close to international transportation options. Good access to nature without having to drive a car is also important to me.

    • tetris11@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      that includes mini scooters for me, and guys on racing bikes in full spandex gear yelling “cmon!” to people

      • Venator@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        And if they’re not yelling “c’mon” at you they’ll be yelling “cheater!”. Like bro this isn’t tour de france, I’m just tryna get to work…

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      What’s that? Big city filled with cars, roads and useless pocket greenspaces, but with no small town community or flexibility?

      - North American city planners, circa one city construction ago.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          It wasn’t just them, or the auto manufacture lobbyists that were probably more powerful at the time. There was also the influence of slightly older conspicuous consumption, so suburban lots were designed to look like mini country estates, and generally the re-emphasis of connection with the outdoors and nature that came in the midcentury. Plus, if it’s a totally new neighborhood, you can keep minorities out from the start.

          It seems designers thought people in suburbs would, like, be close friends with everyone on the cul-de-sac, and they’d spend all weekend chilling outdoors and having barbecues. Maybe make one giant croquet course all down the street. Instead, you barely know your immediate neighbor’s names, and anyone two doors down is under suspicion of being a violent criminal.

          To be fair, they aren’t the first or last designers to fundamentally misunderstand how the public will interact with the infrastructure; that’s still a source of surprises today. I just wish we had changed course as soon as the truth became clear.

  • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Mid-sized stand-alone city. Think 50-200K people.

    If I explicitly have to choose between big city or small town, then it comes down to employment options. If that is a non-factor (e.g. remote work) then small town.

    For those saying culture or whatever, I’m ok with commuting to a big city once a month or whatever for that stuff. I don’t need cultural attractions for my day-to-day life.

    • RedWeasel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Agreed. You go to a small town and everyone knows your business. Big cities end of up terrible commuting experiences as everything needs a vehicle. Yeah, you get often public transportion, but spend most of the day trying to get anything done as everything gets spread out.

      Mid size usually has everything reasonably nearby, public transport and cycling is generally safer/practical.

  • ian@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    I’d love to live in a European styled city, but I live in the US. The best option here is a small town.

  • kugel7c@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Big city for sure, I don’t want to need a car and I do want to be able to get groceries 23.40 at a Saturday night. It’s nice to have a group of 500k+ people actively trying to supply for all of the needs and wants I might have.