Earlier this week, CNBC threw together one of those clickbaity lists of "15 Cities Where You Live Really Well On $60,000."
Thanks to Oklahoma City's low property values, which are primarily due to cheap land, suburban sprawl and people really not wanting to live here, Oklahoma City made the list in the 13 spot.
Before we get to that, let's see what towns we beat out. You have...
I've been to Atlanta once and really enjoyed it. The pic is of a historic downtown shopping and entertainment area called The Underground. It's a pretty cool spot. Here's more info via Wikipedia.
-
I've never been to Columbus, but wow, what a beautiful downtown. I'm sure Ohio State fans would get annoying after awhile, but if I ever make $60,000 in a year I may have to move there.
Let's see what photo CNBC chose for Oklahoma City. Did they go with the beautiful skyline route like Columbus, or simply pick an obligatory shot of an entertainment district or landmark like they did for Columbus?
Check it out:
Oh, they did neither. They went with a photo of a man, or woman, pumping gas in front of graffiti-laced steel fences and a rusty oil well. Thanks a lot, CNBC! I'm sure all the people who make $60,000 a year selling meth can't wait to move here and live the sweet life.
Seriously, though, WTF is up with that? Sure, OKC has its run down parts of town. What city doesn't? But out of all the photos on Getty Images, how can that be the best one? Every other city on the list gets a beautiful shot of a downtown skyline or area landmark, and we get something from the Video Vigilante's photo archive? Where's the pic of Downtown, Bricktown Canal or Myriad Gardens? Hell, even a pic of the Capitol would better than that one. That's saying a lot!
