Started By
Message

re: Are landlocked states off-putting compared to their coastal counterparts?

Posted on 6/10/15 at 8:51 am to
Posted by Epic Cajun
Lafayette, LA
Member since Feb 2013
37499 posts
Posted on 6/10/15 at 8:51 am to
I don't think it would bother me, we are considering Colorado when my wife finishes school.

It's a possible sticking point for one of my relatives, he's lived in Louisiana, North Carolina, DC, and Hawaii and is debating the move to Colorado, too.

I don't think I would live in Kansas, Nebraska, or Oklahoma but that doesn't really have to do with proximity to water
This post was edited on 6/10/15 at 8:52 am
Posted by meeple
Carcassonne
Member since May 2011
11503 posts
Posted on 6/10/15 at 8:55 am to
quote:

I'd much rather live in Colorado over MS, Alabama, Florida, etc

Posted by Patrick_Bateman
Member since Jan 2012
17823 posts
Posted on 6/10/15 at 8:55 am to
quote:

Are landlocked states off-putting compared to their coastal counterparts?

Nah. To a certain extent, I'd say the opposite actually.
Posted by Pettifogger
I don't really care, Margaret
Member since Feb 2012
87755 posts
Posted on 6/10/15 at 8:56 am to
quote:

Tennessee and Colorado and much more attractive states to live in than say....Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana.



Yes. In general, coast line is helpful. But for Mississippi and Alabama the coast is a tiny percentage of the state, and Louisiana isn't what most people value in coastlines.
Posted by Artie Rome
Hwy 1
Member since Jul 2014
8757 posts
Posted on 6/10/15 at 8:57 am to
I was stuck in Reno last week. It was 74 degrees with no humidity. A bunch of skinny white people walking around. No trash on the side of the roads. Not at all off-putting.
Posted by yellowhammer2098
New Orleans, LA
Member since Mar 2013
3864 posts
Posted on 6/10/15 at 8:58 am to
quote:

Tennessee [...] much more attractive states to live in than say....Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana.



Posted by Paul Allen
Montauk, NY
Member since Nov 2007
78731 posts
Posted on 6/10/15 at 9:03 am to
Me too. Landlocked states give me the heebie-jeebies.
Posted by USMCTiger03
Member since Sep 2007
71176 posts
Posted on 6/10/15 at 9:11 am to
I've lived in many of both and really enjoy living near the coast, it's not just the hobbies and recreation I like, but also just being there.
Posted by Dandy Lion
Member since Feb 2010
51416 posts
Posted on 6/10/15 at 9:13 am to
Living in a coastal state to me, means nothing.

Living on the ocean, yes, it´s very important, and both the body and psyche note the difference (I am now landlocked in Atlanta).
Posted by Pettifogger
I don't really care, Margaret
Member since Feb 2012
87755 posts
Posted on 6/10/15 at 9:24 am to
quote:

Tennessee [...] much more attractive states to live in than say....Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana.


Nashville is a better city to live in than any city in those three states. Also the most economic upside. Further, Tennessee has a national park, cooler climate, great outdoor opportunities, etc.
Posted by Sisyphus
Member since Feb 2014
2011 posts
Posted on 6/10/15 at 9:28 am to
Living on the coast doesn't matter to me as much as living somewhere warm.
Posted by Paul Allen
Montauk, NY
Member since Nov 2007
78731 posts
Posted on 6/10/15 at 12:48 pm to
Posted by goldennugget
NIL Ruined College Sports
Member since Jul 2013
26376 posts
Posted on 6/10/15 at 12:50 pm to
Each state has its advantages... I live in Iowa which is boring as hell but its also super affordable. Same could be said for Alabama or Mississippi

I am about to move to Seattle that will be better in terms of geography and things to do but it will also be more expensive. If I want to live within walking distance to work I'll have to pony up about $1,100 for a small studio apartment
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 2Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram