U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
Old 06-28-2011, 07:42 AM
Location: San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties
6,390 posts, read 7,654,855 times
Reputation: 2622


Nope. I know nothing. I am stupid black man.
Holy cowabunga, how would anyone here know your race if you did not play the race card, sounds like that Herman Cain guy.

The Panama-Pacific International Exposition (PPIE) was a world's fair held in San Francisco, California between February 20 and December 4 in 1915. Its ostensible purpose was to celebrate the completion of the Panama Canal, but it was widely seen in the city as an opportunity to showcase its recovery from the 1906 earthquake
As a matter of interest to no one but me, that is where my grandparents met, they had adjoining exhibits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 06-28-2011, 08:06 AM
2,226 posts, read 1,763,091 times
Reputation: 901
Default Well, well

Originally Posted by .highnlite View Post
Sure it does, United and Sky West fly out of the area. Forgot that area did have a smaller airport. But difficult to get flights in and out like LA the Bay area, both Oakland and SF and Sacto Intl. The air travel you mention came long after I left the area and my sis-in-law complains there aren't any flights to be had there constantly. So had forgotten it.

Hardly North California to Californians it is.

This is a strange post, it is constructed in such a manner that it is hard to figure out what was being said. I was speaking directly to a poster who obviously knew the areas in which I spoke. He/she would have know exactly what I was talking about. Should it be "constructed" in a manner difficult for you to follow...just skip on to the next post.

Big Sur refers to the mountainous coast from Monterey to San Simeon, that is it. True, but it is the area in which those of us born and raised in Calif. consider the "cutoff from North and Central Calif.

Lord knows where that "empty space" south of Santa Barbara is. There actually used to be a space (but actually I'm speaking more along the coast South of where Vandenberg AFB. Again those that lived there, thought of Santa Barbara as sort of the beginning of where you headed into Southern Calif. Of course Santa Barbara being very special, Central Calif dubbed it as theirs and all points South belonging to Southern Calif.

Lord knows what a "jefferson backroads" is. It appears to be a book from the poster who menioned it, I've never read it myself.

Lord knows what a "native Californias" is. A native Calif. as is a native any other state is someone born and raised there. Are you acting naive on purpose?

Anyone who says "ALL" about any subject under the sun is likely to be wrong. Sorry, just "conversational" jargon....not meant to be considered an actual representation of every native Californian, human being in the state. Didn't know "conversation" had to be so specific, in such a light thread as this one. Lighten up, before you are accused of being a boor.

It is important to note the distinction between the geographical split, where half of CA is Southern California and half of CA is northern California, and North California, which is a distinctive region and less than half the state.
It really isn't important AT ALL. As I said "all" native Californians think of the state as split into thirds. We recognize the central coast and the central valley as CENTRAL Calif. As well as the north and south of Calif having distinction as well. We believe it to be more a "cultural" phenom rather than a geographical split on a map. But since you are not giving the slightest identificaion as having been a Californian to begin with..... stick to you're geograpy books, they are way more fun!

Last edited by 60sfemi; 06-28-2011 at 08:10 AM.. Reason: missed some points
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-28-2011, 08:16 AM
2,226 posts, read 1,763,091 times
Reputation: 901
Default True

Originally Posted by EscapeCalifornia View Post
I'd say the airline service is limited because its small, not the other way around. It definitely has grown a lot in the nearly 20 years I've been going up there but its still pretty small and isolated.

My sis-in-law complains constantly that she can't get flights going where she needs to go. My husband keeps putting off visiting her because he would have to go into Oakland/San Jose and drive south. But that area is gorgeous. I would LOVE to retire there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-28-2011, 08:19 AM
2,226 posts, read 1,763,091 times
Reputation: 901
Default Its the best!

Originally Posted by BlackShoe View Post
Have to wonder if there are even that many. If we exclude Sacramento and Santa Rosa and consider places to the north, no large metro areas, as the OP mentioned. Redding and its surrounding communities would be the largest, followed by Chico and the Butte County towns, and then Eureka and Humboldt County. After that scores of smaller towns. Would be quite a project to tally up the population of NorCal, interesting to see if we could come up with a million folks.

Of course costs come in to play. There really are not any "cheap" places to live anymore, although some not as bad as others. But the fact that there is still so much gorgeous land in California will keep it such a special place to be for generations to come. One can only hope.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-28-2011, 08:24 AM
2,226 posts, read 1,763,091 times
Reputation: 901
Default thanks

Originally Posted by Deezus View Post
Exactly. Grew up in Santa Cruz, had family all over the Bay and Central Valley to the Sierras. We all considered ourselves living in Northern California and identified with being Northern Californians in opposition to Southern California. Anyone who grew up there knows that. People living in the northern Central Valley are still going to be fans of Bay Area sports teams and know San Francisco is being refered to when you say "the City".

There's a far Northern California mindset(State of Jefferson) that gradually morphs into Southern Oregon, but that really starts around Redding and to the north of there.
True, and geographically they could get the star for being the "most Northern"...if they want it.

I lived in Santa Cruz for 7 years. LOVED IT! Got a little rattled after that earthquake and Hwy 17 closed down and couldn't even get around the bend to Carmel. Scary. But so beautiful that "NORTHERN" Calif. is....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-28-2011, 08:27 AM
2,226 posts, read 1,763,091 times
Reputation: 901
Default Good history lesson

Originally Posted by Phil306 View Post
In the late 1800's and early 1900's, San Francisco was THE place to go. It was the center of culture, arts, etc for the entire west coast of the country. This was fueled by the gold rush. Los Angeles and its environ's were small in comparison. Not too mention, until the addition of the California Acqueduct (sp), one big, huge desert and not very liveable.

One day, a natural disaster changed all that. It was in 1906 and the SF Earthquake. SF was basically destroyed and it took many, many years to rebuild. So much so, it never really recovered. Thus, as someone else rightly pointed out, people started to change its focus to Los Angeles. Their ports, shipping quickly passed that of SF and the north of the state.

A HUGE population boost ensued to the south and, the south of California flourished, while Northern California did not. California has never been the same since.

So true as well. Until Silcon Valley became so populated northern Calif wasn't really too crowed at all. It was wonderful. I remember taking the ferry from Alameda to San Francisco. The Bay Bridge was fairly new and the usual route to Grandma's house. But that whole Bay area was glorius.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-28-2011, 08:29 AM
2,226 posts, read 1,763,091 times
Reputation: 901
Default Also

Originally Posted by majoun View Post
L.A. surpassed Oakland in 1910 and SF remained the biggest city in the state until 1930. There was enough growth to go around for everyone.

World War II was a major force in boosting the Bay Area as well as SoCal. It was the nation's most militarized region, the departing point for most US military en route to the Pacific, and would see its own WW2 and Cold War dividends. SoCal grew faster, but the Bay Area grew as well.
For those a bit older than me...Alameda Naval Air and the Presidio brought in tons of people during WWII
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-28-2011, 11:22 AM
841 posts, read 1,083,056 times
Reputation: 783
Originally Posted by rgb123 View Post
correction .. that was the reason. The same factors that dictate movement, even jobs are not in place and growth trends are different now than 50, 100 or 500 years ago
This does not contradict what I said. If factors change, cities can grow or die. But they generally do so slowly, only over multiple generations.

The point is that in any case there is always an economic reason why a city exists where it does. The following is something I didn't write myself, but it puts it best:

"In classical geographic theory, cities tend to form naturally at one of the following locations:

1) Break-in-bulk points, where goods are moved from one form of transportation to another. Example: Chicago (water to rail, and one railroad to another), any port city.

2) Fall lines, where waterfalls provide a source of power for industry, and create a minor break in bulk point. Example: Minneapolis (St. Anthony Falls)

3) Strategic confluences, such as a point equidistant between raw materials and a large market. Example: Buffalo (equidistant between Upper Peninsula iron deposits, coal deposits in West Virginia, and the Northeast Corridor)."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-28-2011, 12:33 PM
5,835 posts, read 10,779,975 times
Reputation: 4427
I was too lazy to read through all of the posts, so I apologize if I am repeating what has already been said, but:

1. No large, natural harbors. The San Francisco Bay area was destined to be a major point of commerce with a large protected, relatively waveless bay, with flat, low lands that could be converted to docks/industry, close to the gold mines of the Sierra foothills, etc.

2. Along the same lines, little flatland. The LA basin was also destined to become a city, as the large basin was agriculturally productive, with some early oil development, and the mouth of the LA river that could be converted to a massive harbor. Plus, the sunny weather (necessary for early filming) diverse landscapes attracted the film industry which clinched the title of the entertainment capital.

Rugged coastlines with no natural harbors may be beautiful, but are not conducive to commerce on a large scale.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 06-28-2011, 03:01 PM
Location: Oregon or Bust
22 posts, read 31,188 times
Reputation: 15
"Northern Californiia" means different things to different people, even native Californians. Car insurance and HMO companies have different boundaries for northern and southern California.

I use to consider northern California any thing north of Sacramento and then changed it to anything north of the Grapevine. There use to be two trees out on Hwy 99 in Madera County that many considered the center of the state: A Palm tree next to a Pine tree. Anything south of the Palm tree was southern California and anything North of the Pine tree was northern California.

Try this link and read the paragraph under DESCRIPTION.

Northern California - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh - by the way...The area that you're thinking of is the Great State of Jefferson!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.

Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply

Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top