Thread Rating:
Quote: EvenBob"I can't believe people live here on purpose."
I think NYC is great. When I visited there last summer I had a great time and the people were generally friendly. You would not have to twist my arm very hard to live there.
Quote: WizardI think NYC is great. When I visited there last summer I had a great time and the people were generally friendly. You would not have to twist my arm very hard to live there.
You must have been drunk the whole time. I love San Francisco,
homeless people and all. Its gorgeous, has great restaurants,
beautiful homes, beautiful weather. I had a business in the 70's
that took me across the GG bridge from Marin into the city every
day and it never ceased to thrill me. There's a feeling in the air I've
never experienced anywhere else, a sense of mystery. In NY all
I feel is a sense of danger and desperation.
The sun is even different there. Its so bright because
there's no smog, it makes everything glisten and shine.
Sometimes its so gorgeous you just walk around in disbelief.
"I love it here. I absolutely love everything about living
in this city and I’ve never felt anything like that in any
other place that I have ever been. You would pay more
to live with the person that you love wouldn’t you? That’s
how I feel about San Francisco. Everyone else here is in
the same boat. I often say that one of the things I love
most about this city is the fact that everyone who is here
really and truly wants to be here. There are very few people
who just ended up here and who gripe about the problems
of the place. It’s not easy to live somewhere that costs so
much and so the people who do it are people who truly
love this place. That makes for a city where people are
happy and that is a place that I want to live!"
San Francisco is much more laid back. It's much easier to navigate, but for me, there isn't as much to do.
Actually, I would prefer Chicago over both SFO and NYC
They are both great cities for a variety of reasons, but SF is obviously a lot more beautiful.
Much better climate.
I don't know what the SF people think of NY but I think we can agree we wouldn't want to live in Vegas!
Quote: WongBo
I don't know what the SF people think of NY but I think we can agree we wouldn't want to live in Vegas!
I was seriously thinking of moving to Vegas, but I was
kidding myself. I would hate it in a very short time. The
scenery stinks, the tourists would drive me insane, the high
crime rate is ridiculous. I can take it in short doses, but I
have to have an escape clause, I have to know the exact date
I'm leaving.
I think SF and NYC each have their own individual personalities. Both have positive and negative aspects. And both can be attractive to some peopel and unattractive to others.
To each his own.
Quote: DJTeddyBearThere's something to be said for being on a beach, facing the ocean, and having the sun on your face rather than on your back..
You mean on the West coast after 6pm in the summer? Or on the
East coast before 10am?
Quote: boymimboActually, I would prefer Chicago over both SFO and NYC
Amen to that. I lived outside of Chicago for 6 months and those 6 months were some of the most fun I ever had. It's also the only time in my adult life that I actually gambled considerably less (like 3 trips in those 6 months, and one was to redeem a huge slot play offer). Chicago has so much to offer, and it's in the Midwest, which is considerably friendlier than any East Coast or West Coast town.
Plus Giordano's pizza and Portillo's food is sure to put the pounds you in the most pleasing manner.
Something has to be good about the place if 12 million people want to live there.
SF is more cosmopolitan. Its dining is fantastic. The city is cool most of the year because of the fog rolling in off the ocean. Golden Gate park is very very nice. Chinatown is unparalleled. However, I find SF difficult to navigate. Many of its attractions are outside of the city or are not as accessible. The beaches are fine if you want to wear a jacket.
NYC is gritty. Its dining is phenomenal. You can't run out of things to do there. Your beach there is Central Park.
I'm planning on retiring from New York to move to Las Vegas. I think Las Vegas is a fine city. Other than the lack of mass transit rail service, I'd venture to say that Las Vegas has superior infrastructure than either New York City or San Francisco. I love New York and I like San Francisco but let's face it, the worst rush hour traffic in Las Vegas is a Sunday drive by comparison to either NYC or SF.Quote: WongBo..I don't know what the SF people think of NY but I think we can agree we wouldn't want to live in Vegas!
Here on Long Island, you get world class Jones Beach, Robert Moses State Park, Isla del Fuego and Smithpoint Beach which all face South giving you sun all day long.Quote: DJTeddyBearThere's something to be said for being on a beach, facing the ocean, and having the sun on your face rather than on your back.
Quote: s2dbakerI think Las Vegas is a fine city. .
The biggest problem I have with Vegas is lack of scenery, unless
you love brown, and its a pizza oven 3 months out of the year. The
heat really drives me nuts, its insanely hot sometimes.
Quote: EvenBobThe biggest problem I have with Vegas is lack of scenery, unless
you love brown, and its a pizza oven 3 months out of the year..
Only 3 months? You mean 3 months over 120 degree?
What about the other 6 months between 100 and 120 degree?
Quote: pokerfaceOnly 3 months? You mean 3 months over 120 degree?
What about the other 6 months between 100 and 120 degree?
I can take it when its 100. Its when its between 110 and 120 that
does me in.
Quote: jml24SF and NYC are both great cities and I would enjoy living in either one.
I think density is a crucial component of making a great city. Los Angeles has long passed Chicago as the USA's second city in population, and is on the short list of alpha cities, but it's average of 12.6 people per acre makes it seem to spread out to be great. Similar to Las Vegas's 6.7 people per acre.
Obviously density alone is not the only requirement. The Bronx is pretty scary, and no one dreams of living in Calcutta with 38 people per acre and it's urban pollution, traffic congestion, poverty, and other logistic and socioeconomic problems.
People per acre : Cities or Places over 300K in population
105 : Manhattan
55 : Brooklyn
50 : The Bronx
41 : New York City (all five boroughs)
32 : Queens
26 : San Francisco
21 : Boston
20 : Chicago
19 : Santa Ana
18 : Philadelphia
16 : Miami
Quote: boymimboChicago is a hidden world class city. It's got great restaurants. The museums (Shedd Aquarium, Art Institute, Museum of Science and Technology, Adler Planetarium, Lincoln Park zoo -- free) are better than what SF has to offer. It has great sports traditions (Bears, Bulls, Blackhawks, Cubs, White Sox), all of which are easily accessible via the great subway system. Navy Pier is great for kids and adults alike. You have Michigan Avenue for shopping. The city devoted a great deal of its land along the lake shore for parks, including Millennium Park right next to the downtown core. It's the birthplace of skyscrapers and revolving doors. The streets are clean, and the people there are down to earth. The beaches on Lake Michigan are also very nice.
SF is more cosmopolitan. Its dining is fantastic. The city is cool most of the year because of the fog rolling in off the ocean. Golden Gate park is very very nice. Chinatown is unparalleled. However, I find SF difficult to navigate. Many of its attractions are outside of the city or are not as accessible. The beaches are fine if you want to wear a jacket.
NYC is gritty. Its dining is phenomenal. You can't run out of things to do there. Your beach there is Central Park.
Chi-town is the real deal. But winters can be flat out brutal. If you like 4 seasons, take Chicago.
Quote: midwestgbChi-town is the real deal. But winters can be flat out brutal. If you like 4 seasons, take Chicago.
Chicago is less than 2hrs from me and I've been there
many times. I just don't see it, I don't see why people
think its great. The traffic is a nightmare, there's a lot
of crime, there are parts of the city that you do NOT
enter if you're white, there are even parts the cops won't
go into after dark. The winters are the worst and the
heat and humidity in the summer can be brutal. A lot of
the city is run down and worn out. I don't want to live there.
Quote: teddysWhat, no love for L.A.?
Something has to be good about the place if 12 million people want to live there.
I live in Orange County. LA is not the place to be, Ventura, Burbank, OC, sure. The unnoffical motto of LA is "Come to Los Angeles, where we have a lot of pot-holes, and a lot of A-holes."
Certainly not, since of NYC's 5 boroughs, 4 occupy the top 4, but Staten Island isn't even listed!Quote: pacomartinObviously density alone is not the only requirement....
Also, NYC is compact, while LA is a sprawl But doesn't LA have densely populated areas?
Quote: DJTeddyBearNYC is compact, while LA is a sprawl But doesn't LA have densely populated areas?
Sure we have a downtown but no one lives there. It is a ghost town on the weekends.
Quote: bigfoot66Sure we have a downtown but no one lives there. It is a ghost town on the weekends.
Do you really have a downtown? I never saw it and I've
read it doesn't really exist. LA started as a sprawl and
it continues to this day.
Quote: DJTeddyBearAlso, NYC is compact, while LA is a sprawl But doesn't LA have densely populated areas?
Of course! Westlake Village (zip 90057) surrounding MacArthur Park near downtown LA, has 44K people living in 565 acres or 78 people per acre. But the Upper East side is over 100K people packed at about 200 people per acre. That is the upper limit for residential neighborhoods in America.
But there is a visceral thrill of seeing hundreds of thousands of people and visitors within a short walk, I get that feeling more in NY, The loop in Chicago, or in San Francisco, then I do in Los Angeles.
Staten Island is under 12 people per acre, which is more crowded than many cities. Dallas is only 5.5 people per acre, and Oklahoma City is 1.45 people per acre. That seems to barely qualify as a suburb.
Quote: EvenBobChicago is less than 2hrs from me and I've been there
many times. I just don't see it, I don't see why people
think its great. The traffic is a nightmare, there's a lot
of crime, there are parts of the city that you do NOT
enter if you're white, there are even parts the cops won't
go into after dark. The winters are the worst and the
heat and humidity in the summer can be brutal. A lot of
the city is run down and worn out. I don't want to live there.
Here is what I generally like about the Windy City. It's the people. You get folks willing to tell you what's on their mind, but not in an over-bearing way. Also, there is a distinct hardiness there that probably stems from the negatives you point out so well. And btw, I like the airport situation. And the Lake. And the people... did I mention that?
Quote: midwestgbHere is what I generally like about the Windy City.
When I had the cab co, we would get runs
that took us into Chicago. There was a stretch
of freeway as you came out of Gary into the
city that you did not want your car to break down
in after dark. You were going to lose your life
or your car or both.