Rating: 
Summary: Fair and Balanced Resource for Evaluating Cities
Review: A previous reviewer complained of a liberal slant to Cities Ranked & Rated. Faithfully playing the part of the "I haven't read it, but I'm gonna condemn this communist filth anyhow" conservative, the reviewer's complaints were based on reading a USA Today article and not the book itself. I bought a copy (of the book) and I'm just not seeing a lot of politics here. I am, however, seeing a lot of really useful information based on objective, statistical information (including the unfairly derided quality of life statistics compiled by the U.S. Census Bureau and other agencies). I looked at the authors bios and found a link to www.bestplaces.net, which includes an interactive questionaire that helps you pick your ideal city. It appears to be based on the same data sets as the book. I would recommend anyone who suspects political bias on the part of the authors to go to this site and find out where their personal preferences would actually take them. I was surprised by what it told me.
Rating:
Summary: Fair and Balanced Resource for Evaluating Cities
Review: A previous reviewer complained of a liberal slant to Cities Ranked & Rated. Faithfully playing the part of the "I haven't read it, but I'm gonna condemn this communist filth anyhow" conservative, the reviewer's complaints were based on reading a USA Today article and not the book itself. I bought a copy (of the book) and I'm just not seeing a lot of politics here. I am, however, seeing a lot of really useful information based on objective, statistical information (including the unfairly derided quality of life statistics compiled by the U.S. Census Bureau and other agencies). I looked at the authors bios and found a link to www.bestplaces.net, which includes an interactive questionaire that helps you pick your ideal city. It appears to be based on the same data sets as the book. I would recommend anyone who suspects political bias on the part of the authors to go to this site and find out where their personal preferences would actually take them. I was surprised by what it told me.
Rating: 
Summary: Charlottesville housing costs
Review: Charlottesville rated the best place to live in America. We made a special trip there to check it out. Housing is ridiculously overpriced. It's a nice area, but expect to cut your house size and standard in half if you want to live here. I am surprised the authors didn't factor that in more when they rated it #1.
Rating:
Summary: Great resource
Review: Excellent reference book for anyone out there who is contemplating relocation but don't know where to go. From crime statistics to air quality, from climate patterns to high school graduation rates, this book is the best I have seen. The one minimal complaint I have is a listing of number of Starbucks in each metrolpolitan area. While I am not a coffe drinker, I guess a little advertising never hurts. Overall, though, an excellent choice.
Rating:
Summary: Very disappointing; save your money
Review: Given the volume of information (a huge phonebook-sized volume), it's amazing how many errors or unbelievable statements I have found in just 30 minutes of trying to learn about cities I'm considering for relocation. Here are a couple examples:
- the city of Lowell, MA has somehow moved into central NH
- the city of Santa Fe doesn't have much of an art scene (huh? over 100 art galleries and 13 museums; highest per capita in the US; on par with NYC)
The net is that I cannot trust this guide any further (there were several more errors that I have not yet listed). Facts are questionable; rankings are questionable; the book is questionable.
Five years ago, I read through Rand McNally's "Places Rated Almanac"; my goal was to find an update on this work, and perhaps some new information that PRA had not covered... guess I'll go back and purchase PRA. (Is there a money-back guarantee on a poor book?) Diappointed, Marc.
Rating:
Summary: This Book- Ranked and Rated
Review: Having always been interested in facts, figures, population, and demographic trends, I couldn't help but be intrigued by the nature of this book. After reading several portions of it, I think it's important to make the following observations. The authors list the metropolitan area where I grew up among the bottom 10 in the United States. Granted it's not the place it once was in its heyday, but it's still not as awful as the statistics in this book would indicate. The area is one of the fastest growing regions in Massachusetts, so I guess there are those who like living there. Speaking of "statistics", the authors should know that (1) Philadelphia is not on the Susquehanna River (it's on the Delaware River), and (2) St. Catherines-Niagara, Ontario, is obviously on the Niagara River (not the Ottawa River). If these guys can't get basic geography straight about the metro areas they're evaluating, then they certainly should have no business influencing people on where they choose to live.
Rating:
Summary: Best book on the market
Review: I have been a reader of these types of books for years as i am a real estate investor--this one is packed with lots of great information that is very useful for my occupation. Can't wait till the next edition--I hope there is going to be one for retirement cities too!
Rating: 
Summary: Packed with information, but did they hire a fact checker?
Review: I love looking at this book, but I, too, have found many discrepancies in the facts and figures they offer. I think the authors just didn't have the resources to put it all together in a coherent manner.
As was mentioned earlier, the rankings for employment opportunities are baffling. They contradict every other study that you'll find online and in newspapers and magazines, and at times, they even contradict their own numbers.
Actually, of all of the rankings they offer, I found their most subjective rankings to be the most valuable. They offer a "quality of life" ranking that is based on their own experiences. I believe that these subjective rankings are more valuable than all of the facts and figures that they've assembled throughout the rest of the book.
I do hope that they will work on improving the book, because it certainly has a lot of potential. But when I see that Billings, MT, and Elkhart, IN supposedly have the strongest economies in the U.S., and that Las Vegas is at the bottom, well, I think this book loses a lot of credibility.
Rating: 
Summary: not quite accurate .. hoping for 2nd edition
Review: I was happy to see this book come out since I only had found the
older "Places Rated Almanac" up to this point. I am looking to
relocate and so this sort of information is very useful to me.However, I am going to return this book since I am disappointed
with the rankings and question the accuracy of the information. I
know two towns rather well, and both were mis-characterized in
the rankings. Example 1 - Macon, GA: "Snows occurs during most winters." This
is simply not true. There was a dusting of snow 2 years ago that
lasted maybe a day and a half. Previous snow, 10 years before
then. Long time locals tell me that it's extremely rare to get
any snow here. Example 2 - Iowa City, IA: IC received a score of 7 for Arts &
Culture, Macon a 25 - this is totally ridiculous. There are a lot
of things going on in Iowa City, Macon doesn't even come
close. To award Macon a score nearly 4 times higher than Iowa
City boggles the mind. I know these two places well, and for me the information about
these two places puts into question the rest of the information
in the book. I hope there will be a revised, and more accurate second edition
out. I give it two stars since the rankings/editorial comments are
important to me. While I can't comment on the
accuracy of the statistics, the rankings/editorials were one of
the main reasons for my getting this book. Raw statistics can
be used to look up specific information, but the other material can guide your search.
Rating:
Summary: not quite accurate .. hoping for 2nd edition
Review: I was happy to see this book come out since I only had found the
older "Places Rated Almanac" up to this point. I am looking to
relocate and so this sort of information is very useful to me. However, I am going to return this book since I am disappointed
with the rankings and question the accuracy of the information. I
know two towns rather well, and both were mis-characterized in
the rankings. Example 1 - Macon, GA: "Snows occurs during most winters." This
is simply not true. There was a dusting of snow 2 years ago that
lasted maybe a day and a half. Previous snow, 10 years before
then. Long time locals tell me that it's extremely rare to get
any snow here. Example 2 - Iowa City, IA: IC received a score of 7 for Arts &
Culture, Macon a 25 - this is totally ridiculous. There are a lot
of things going on in Iowa City, Macon doesn't even come
close. To award Macon a score nearly 4 times higher than Iowa
City boggles the mind. I know these two places well, and for me the information about
these two places puts into question the rest of the information
in the book. I hope there will be a revised, and more accurate second edition
out. I give it two stars since the rankings/editorial comments are
important to me. While I can't comment on the
accuracy of the statistics, the rankings/editorials were one of
the main reasons for my getting this book. Raw statistics can
be used to look up specific information, but the other material can guide your search.
|
