Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
I haven't worked in the STL area nearly as much over the last several years, but I used to spend several days a month down there and yeah, this is a KC thing.
Just as the Chicago/STL rivalry is an STL thing. And for the same reasons.
Why KC worries about STL is just beyond me. You're absolutely right - KC is BETTER than STL virtually across the board at this point. Yet they still act like the picked on little brother that was routinely dismissed. Fellas - the tables have turned in a big way since 1995 or so (when STL was absolutely better than KC); civic development in the Kansas City area has been exceptional while STL still can't settle their city/county squabbles from a century ago.
Y'all have lapped 'em. It's time to let this shit go.
|
This is an inaccurate statement.
Downtown St. Louis has really developed in the past 10 years or so. Not at the pace of the suburbs, but it has developed.
The city/county divide is a big problem, but to act as if St. Louis and the area isn't developing is inaccurate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GloryDayz
Meh, none taken.
Don't get me wrong, St. Louis has some nice parts, very nice, but they have a lot of very much worse parts. The west 'burbs of St. Louis are like being in Jonson County, KS, it's kind of upscale. If you lived here you'd probably understand that St. Louis, within the state, "get the calls" - kind of like the Patriots do.
The good news is that it might be changing. The MO side of KC might have some leverage to help speed that up (might...), but right now it's not just imagination that St. Louis is the favored child.
Now that my son's out of college and took a job with a firm in St. Louis (so he could have a somewhat quick commute back to see the SO who's still in school), he lives on the west side of St. Louis now (Manchester), and he's pretty happy, so that's good..
|
Please explain. There are bad parts to the city as there are nice parts.
The Missouri side(I don't count the metro east) is really nice for the most part.