Grand Haven, Here We Come
EmailHere’s a surprise, at least for pastoralists: Well-being in the United States is highest for residents of large cities, and lowest for people who live in small towns and rural areas.
Or try another: The metro area with the nation’s worst access to basic necessities also has the highest optimism about becoming a better place to live. Welcome to McAllen, Edinburg and Mission, Texas.
Those nuggets and others come from a study being released today by the Gallup Organization examining data it collected across 2009 among more than 350,000 survey respondents nationally. With a sample that large Gallup’s able to drill down to the country’s 187 metropolitan areas.
What’s it see? Overall, Gallup says, compared to small-town and rural residents, city dwellers are more apt to evaluate their present and future lives positively, report better health and have greater access to basic needs. Example: More people in cities have health insurance and visit the dentist, and fewer smoke.
Rolling these and other measures up into a series of indices, Gallup and its survey partner, Healthways, identify the 21 cities with the nation’s highest well-being, and the bottom 20. Top of the list are Boulder, Colorado; Holland-Grand Haven, Michigan; Honolulu, Hawaii; Provo-Orem, Utah; and Santa Rosa-Petaluma, California. The bottom five, counting down, are Hagerstown-Martinsburg, Maryland-West Virginia; Fort Wayne, Indiana; Erie, Pennsylvania; Utica-Rome, New York; and Topeka, Kansas.
Within cities, Gallup says those with the greatest well-being scores have the highest high-school graduation rates, lower crime rates, robust “opportunities for learning new things,” strong workplace partnerships and low obesity.
One of Gallup’s specific indices measures “basic access,” defined as the availability of necessities in 13 individual areas, ranging from safe places to exercise to easy access to fresh fruits and vegetables to the share of residents with health insurance, a personal doctor and enough money for food, shelter and health care. This index peaks in Holland-Grand Haven, the study says, followed closely by Madison, Wisconsin, and two metro areas in Iowa, Des Moines-West Des Moines and Cedar Rapids.
Bottom of the “basic access” list is McAllen-Edinburg-Mission; not coincidentally, Gallup notes, it also has the highest unemployment rate in Texas. Remarkably, though, Gallup says “this area’s residents are the most optimistic in the country about their area getting better as a place to live.” That’s the case, it notes, “despite the current poor conditions, or perhaps because of them.”
There’s a wealth of other factlets in the Gallup data. Residents of Worcester, Massachusetts, are the most likely to have health insurance and a personal doctor. Cedar Rapids leads the nation in residents having enough money for health care, and in visiting a dentist. Holland-Grand Haven leads in safety – and Gallup notes that its Basic Access Index overall correlates with lower violent crime and property crime alike, even when separated by income categories.
Best metro area in terms of satisfaction as a place to live? That’s San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles, California, says Gallup. Worst? Flint, Michigan.
But no worries – from Flint it’s less than a two-and-a-half-hour drive to beautiful downtown Grand Haven.
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
I’ve lived in cities and in the country. The only thing I consider worse in the country than in the city is technology.
We have to use satellite for both TV and broadband. Satellite broadband has limitations and cost more than cable or DSL.
Despite that…I will take country life over city absolutely, positively.
Posted by: malcat | May 10, 2010, 12:34 pm 12:34 pm
Great! Now you are comparing homegrown to corporations. Of course the rural areas are going to be unhappy about finances and economics when all local jobs are consumed by corporations with their legal clauses and no grow/no job agreements. But whether the city dwellers are happier lies in whether or not each can get a job or shelter. With today’s economic and financial climate, along with genetic farming techniques, I believe the apples and oranges are looking more and more alike. Question is, does it really matter when none of US are doing well?
Posted by: Peggy Martin | May 10, 2010, 1:42 pm 1:42 pm
I have lived in both. I prefer the city.
You don’t have to drive and you have all the transportation right at your fingertips. You really don’t appreciate the city til you move to the country. It’s all relative.
Posted by: Kathy | May 10, 2010, 2:51 pm 2:51 pm
I live in a large city in Texas and I travel to a town about 80 miles away every so often to visit family, and there is NO WAY I would live there on a permanent basis. The only shopping options they have are Wal-mart, Bealls or mail order from Sears where they go to a small retail storefront to pick up their goods. The only dining options are Dairy Queen, Sonic or the local mom & pop restaurants that close when the sun goes down. Now, they live in beautiful old Victorian era homes on quiet picturesque streets and I am jealous of that because if I were to buy a similar home in the city I’d pay big bucks for it, whereas they bought their homes for under $100,000.
Posted by: Judy | May 10, 2010, 3:21 pm 3:21 pm
I would prefer to live in the country or a small town except that I would have trouble finding a virtuoso piano teacher, couldn’t take the kids to see “The Wiggles” or, on the spur of the moment, to a major league game, etc. I probably wouldn’t be able to pay $50 to take a one-day college class on “Striped Bass (Rockfish) Fishing” since you need a town with enough people tired of paying $100/lb for fish because they can’t catch them!
Posted by: The_Mick | May 10, 2010, 4:07 pm 4:07 pm
No one is happier. It’s just that city people have more distractions to keep them from realizing it.
Posted by: KsDevil | May 10, 2010, 4:57 pm 4:57 pm
Take the counry anyday over the crowded cities. Especially in a crisis where are all you city folks going to get your food and water…….
Posted by: johnboy | May 10, 2010, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm
Well I live in the big city of Happy Hollow, population 650, and we’re happier than the folks who live down the road in the little burg of Green Acres, population 250
Posted by: zoltan | May 10, 2010, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm
I was born and raised in a big city in Texas, but have always been a country girl at heart and always will be. Other than missing the shopping malls a little, no more city life for me.
Posted by: Debbie | May 10, 2010, 10:50 pm 10:50 pm
Rural pros: large affordable home, more land, more sense of community. Cons: Less pay, boring, everyone knows your business. City pros: More things to do, better paying jobs and better career choices, diverse. Cons: Noisy, dirty, overcrowded.
Posted by: Meep | May 10, 2010, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
i prefer the country/small town, i have lived in a big city and i hate the crime, crowdedness, stress. I live 30 miles from a city with 50,000 people and its much much better, i have smaller stores to go to around me but i live close enough to a bigger city for bigger shopping.
Posted by: phooey | May 10, 2010, 11:05 pm 11:05 pm
We live in a small town of around 450 people. We have lived here for nearly 20 years. In our 30 years of marriage and 4 children, we have never lived in a town of over 1000 population. Our children are grown and married and have children of their own. 3 of our 4 children still live in this town of 450. We have a family doctor that we have gone to for over 30 years. We have friends that we love and can depend on. When a tragedy occurs, the town comes together and helps. We still have our own school, K-12. SMALL TOWN USA is alive and kicking!!!
Posted by: RB | May 11, 2010, 12:06 am 12:06 am
Your survey is slanted toward what you call big city benefits!! With all the big city benefits, happiness doesn’t come with easy access to drs., dentists, shopping centers, hospitals, etc. I am happy with small town life and the slow pace plus the freedom from the city government telling me how and when to mow my yard.
Posted by: EB | May 11, 2010, 12:14 am 12:14 am
I’ve been having this debate with my girlfriend and I am completely against big cities. As someone already mentioned “happiness” in this survey is based on pleasures rather than developing the human soul. Having everything you want at your fingertips is bad for you. That’s called spoiled, not happy.
Posted by: Taylor | May 11, 2010, 1:47 am 1:47 am
The truth is:
1. EVERYONE loves the benefits of living in a big city.
2. Which is why they are overcrowded.
3. Which in it of itself causes Overcrowding.
Reality?
People that do not want to deal with Overcrowding tend to love the country, and everyone else lives in the city.
Posted by: N R | May 11, 2010, 1:53 am 1:53 am
I have noticed people in small towns tend to be unhappier, not much stiumuli and easy to feel “seperated” without knowing it, In a major citys so much is going on that you dont have time to worry or even care about what your neighbor is up to….In smaller towns people like to get in your business or worry to much about what your about, and make assumptions…I see happier crazy people in groups in the city, and lonely paranoid people in the smaller towns…hah
Posted by: Voltaire75 | May 11, 2010, 4:07 am 4:07 am
Glad to hear it. May those who enjoy the cities stay there and seek those things about the areas that give them pleasure. We who choose the peace and small town relationships and slower pace of life will continue to treasure the lifestyle we have chosen. Live and let live. Bloom where you are planted.
Posted by: heart | May 11, 2010, 12:02 pm 12:02 pm
Yes, there are pros to country life and cons to city life, and vice versa. I guess it’s really to each his or her own, whatever or wherever you feel most comfortable. One thing among many that I love about country life is the privacy, of which there really was none in the city. Sure, it’s somewhat inconvenient to have to drive a distance for big shopping, but it’s worth the trip when I get back home to my open spaces. I can walk on my property without having to worry about being shot or mugged, whereas nowdays in the city you can’t. I’ll take the country any day.
Posted by: Debbie | May 11, 2010, 5:01 pm 5:01 pm
For a poll watcher you are pretty sloppy with your statistics. In the fifth paragraph of your post, you accurately listed the Top 5 cities in the Gallup poll. However when you listed the bottom 5, you actually listed numbers #168-172, as opposed to the actual bottom five #181 – #185 of the 185 cities the Gallup poll tracked.
Posted by: Radio Free JoJo | May 15, 2010, 10:41 am 10:41 am