Out of the five most populated states, where would you want to live?

[Psychic Octopus]

Out of the five most populated states, where would you want to live?

I'm mixed. I've lived in California my entire life, spending most of the year in Northern California and my summers in Southern California. Out of these five, I've only been to Florida. It was okay. Looking out over the Atlantic Ocean was a pretty cool experience. I am not sure as to whether or not I'd want to live there, though.

Austin, Texas, would seem like a nice place to live. Same with a lot of the areas in Illinois around Chicago. New York, too, would seem like a cool experience.

[Lambsbread]

Plano, Texas

[Franzl]

If money didn't matter? California.

Realistically: A nicer place in/around Chicago.

(Assuming I have to live in the U.S.)

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

NY>>>IL>>>CA=TX>Mordor>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>FL

[Alcon]

New York (City)

Although I do like San Francisco a lot, too.

[LastVoter]

Ca(North)>IL>NY>TX>FL

[Platypus]

When all Texans have to defend themselves in one neighbourhood in their capital, that state is clearly out.

Too much snow in Illinois or New York for permanent residency, despite likely being the best two for shorter stints.

Florida just seems disgusting in every way.

So, California it is. North of Oxnard, obviously, probably somewhere like Sacramento, maybe Lake Tahoe.

[memphis]

New York (City)

Although I do like San Francisco a lot, too.

I visited San Fran this summer. And while it was a very interesting place, I have no idea how people actually live there. The hills make walking around very difficult, but it's an old dense city with little parking, so driving is not practical either. And I'm a 30 year old guy in somewhat decent shape. I assume there are older people who have greater mobility challenges. How does one buy groceries? And then there's the cost of housing, which even by big city standards, is out of control. NPR was talking about how the average studio there now rents for $2000/mo, and to fight this they are now changing zoning laws to allow new apartments as small as 200 sq ft. Yet the city is obviously bursting with money. I always feel out of place in such ritzy locations. Honestly, and I know nobody will understand this, but I much prefer Oakland. Just seems more "real" somehow. A city that could reasonably be home.

[Joe Biden 2020]

The only obvious answer here is Texas and by Texas, I don't mean Dallas, Austin, Houston, or San Antonio.  I mean West Texas like Amarillo, Pampa, Lubbock, Abilene, Midland/Odessa, or San Angelo.  Somewhere with easy access to obviously the greatest State and City in the entire world - Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.  (I'm exaggerating a bit).

[Tender Branson]

NY most likely.

[Franzl]

The only obvious answer here is Texas and by Texas, I don't mean Dallas, Austin, Houston, or San Antonio.  I mean West Texas like Amarillo, Pampa, Lubbock, Abilene, Midland/Odessa, or San Angelo.  Somewhere with easy access to obviously the greatest State and City in the entire world - Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.  (I'm exaggerating a bit).

It's sad to see someone with that little perspective.

[dead0man]

While there are good and bad about them all, I can tell you it won't be Florida or Texas.  I've lived in 3 (Texas was a fairly short "live", but I've visited there a lot throughout the years as well) of these.  The answer is probably California if money and work isn't an issue.  But I'd also like to live in NYC for a year or so at some point in my life.

[Knives]

New York City or Chicago.

[opebo]

If money didn't matter? California.

If money didn't matter, I'd have a big place in LA and an apartment in Manhattan - Larry David Style.

However I have some sympathy with the idea that if one must live in one of these populous states in poverty, Austin Texas (though part of a horrific state), would be the best.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

1. New York - not only would I live here in a second, by that I mean NYC, I plan on it when I'm finished up with law school.  Don't care if it's expensive, it's worth it for me.  Albany's also a nice area, I could vacation up to Canada easily, and some of the concert venues are awesome.

2. California - San Diego, San Francisco... need I say more?

3. Illinois - Chicago's a great town.  I could live there.

4. Florida - uhhhhh, probably not.  Too hot and muggy, and none of the major cities appeals to me all that much.

5. Texas - you could not pay me to live here.  Anywhere.  Maybe I could stay in Austin for a few weeks, at best. 

[Napoleon]

NEW YORK

[Kitteh]

California!

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Schwarzifornia....I love San Diego

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

I'll stick with what I know -- Illinois.

[Redalgo]

Rural, up-state New York would be nice. Otherwise it would have to be somewhere in northern California. Illinois probably wouldn't be bad, per se, but I wouldn't be enthusiastic about the prospect of living there. Texas and Florida are completely out of the question, though if I had to choose between them I would go with Florida.

[RI]

California only. I would never live in any of the others.

[TJ in Oregon]

Upstate NY, maybe Buffalo or Rochester would be ideal for me. If not that, then Illinois would be next on my list. I have no desire at all to live in any of the other three.

[Spanish Moss]

Unless Cuomo gets them fracking, I'm good where I am.

[opebo]

Rural, up-state New York would be nice. Otherwise it would have to be somewhere in northern California. Illinois probably wouldn't be bad, per se, but I wouldn't be enthusiastic about the prospect of living there. Texas and Florida are completely out of the question, though if I had to choose between them I would go with Florida.

Why?  Could you give some reasons?

[Kushahontas]

Austin or New York City...latter if money was no object. former realistically (and hopefully soon).


I wouldn't mind quiet upstate or long island ny either....idk