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.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,035,535 times
Reputation: 4047
Advertisements
And another thing, why the hell is Philadelphia in the discussion of this thread anyways? This has nothing to do with Philadelphia the least bit.
As for me, I pick the Bay Area, as a Metropolitan Area, the Bay Area is one sweet place. Beautiful, and powerful all in one. But I would pick it over New York City because of places like Palo Alto, Mountain View, San Jose, & other small and large tech towns. However if this were the Tri-State Area against Bay Area, then I would probably have a hard time figuring which one I would rather live in.
I'm not really too big on San Francisco but the greatest thing about the Bay Area is, you get choices, a lot of them, about where you want to live and the style of living that applies to you. Bay Area is a very unique and amazing place because of that. In many ways, to me at least its a perfect microcosm of all of America in one place.
Population doesn't win an argument or would you argue China with over like 700 million more people than us is a better place to live. I'd compare the UK against the US as a place to live and there's like a 240 million person difference there. If the Bay Area is so nice who cares that the NY Area has 12 million more people, that doesn't automatically make it better.
Like I said, you seem to have already decided that NY already "beats" the Bay with your refusal to compare them because NY is too "big". You point out a difference in numbers as ridiculous which it isn't half as much as comparing 7,000 miles to 300, you don't see how that's ridiculous?
OK then, so you're saying I can compare New Orleans to Tokyo because obviously population and population density has nothing to do with why Tokyo is the way it is
And another thing, why the hell is Philadelphia in the discussion of this thread anyways? This has nothing to do with Philadelphia the least bit.
As for me, I pick the Bay Area, as a Metropolitan Area, the Bay Area is one sweet place. Beautiful, and powerful all in one. But I would pick it over New York City because of places like Palo Alto, Mountain View, San Jose, & other small and large tech towns. However if this were the Tri-State Area against Bay Area, then I would probably have a hard time figuring which one I would rather live in.
I'm not really too big on San Francisco but the greatest thing about the Bay Area is, you get choices, a lot of them, about where you want to live and the style of living that applies to you. Bay Area is a very unique and amazing place because of that. In many ways, to me at least its a perfect microcosm of all of America in one place.
And another thing, why the hell is Philadelphia in the discussion of this thread anyways? This has nothing to do with Philadelphia the least bit.
As for me, I pick the Bay Area, as a Metropolitan Area, the Bay Area is one sweet place. Beautiful, and powerful all in one. But I would pick it over New York City because of places like Palo Alto, Mountain View, San Jose, & other small and large tech towns. However if this were the Tri-State Area against Bay Area, then I would probably have a hard time figuring which one I would rather live in.
I'm not really too big on San Francisco but the greatest thing about the Bay Area is, you get choices, a lot of them, about where you want to live and the style of living that applies to you. Bay Area is a very unique and amazing place because of that. In many ways, to me at least its a perfect microcosm of all of America in one place.
I think the winter blues has got you confused. Of course if you like the vibe of a smaller place (relatively speaking), and nice natural scenery, then I agree with you. Other than that, the winter cold must be affecting your train of thought...San Jose..Mountain View..etc..over NYC..Hmmmm??
OK then, so you're saying I can compare New Orleans to Tokyo because obviously population and population density has nothing to do with why Tokyo is the way it is
Sure, keep spinning it as much you want. You see the inherent flaw in everything but this? 7000 sq. mi. vs. 300 sq. mi.
And you could compare Tokyo to New Orleans if you wanted, some people might prefer NO, but at least it's two cities. And you're suggesting Tokyo is out of New Orleans league, so then based on all your population arguments and why NY has to be restricted you admit you think it's out of SF or the Bay's league in the first place?
Anyway, that's the last I'll say on it cause I helped drag this off topic.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,035,535 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastBay-NowDCarea
I think the winter blues has got you confused. Of course if you like the vibe of a smaller place (relatively speaking), and nice natural scenery, then I agree with you. Other than that, the winter cold must be affecting your train of thought...San Jose..Mountain View..etc..over NYC..Hmmmm??
Yes. I have family in San Jose, family that I am close too, I have family in New York City but they are too distant in the family tree for me to really "care" much about them as much. I like the scenery around the area and I really love the aspiring tech companies in the area. More of my vibe, and absolutely adore Stanford University.
For me its easy. I really like New York City, but its a city being compared to a metropolitan area, and not just any metropolitan area, but the Bay Area. The Bay Area in general has cities of different layouts to appeal to different type of people. I frankly would take San Jose easily over San Francisco. Bigger homes (in various places, not all homes are bigger), more area, and in the proximity of all the action being a short distance away.
If it was Tri-State Area against Bay Area, I would definitely not be able to come up with a decision for it. But the micro environments of the Bay Area, and the differences that exist within the designated Bay Area that make each and every place in there more different than the others, its just too real for me to give up here.
Nineties Flava, I can't continue to argue you as you aren't even speaking in a logical fashion. You say one thing, then double back. If you want to compare a sample set population vs another sample set population then gauge each merit or even the confines of amenities within, pushing it, but sure. But in doing so you acknowledge the sheer availability in a small accessible range if that is the case and you are taking 20-25x the area to accomplish that.
But again, population and amenities that are human in nature is not Geography... It isn't alive. They aren't people nor are they created by people, it is just an AREA and the physical properties should not be included in the comparison when doing 300 sq miles of land tract vs 8000+. It makes no sense whatsoever.
You are already setting a huge handicap towards NYC so it is even comparing, in by doing so acknowledging the superiority of the area. If you weren't, as MissRoxy has already noted, it wouldn't have needed to be handicapped to begin with, as NYC metro is already smaller than the Bay Area.
Either way you look at it, you may have an agenda, you might not. It doesn't matter but the faulty logic you are using is not helping the discussion. It's making my head hurt and frankly sophomoric of you, now normally it wouldn't come to a critique of the style, but of the argument in its self. But your style of argument is so flawed, it doesn't matter if you were arguing cupcakes vs pies, much less NYC vs SF, the argument makes no logical sense at all. You might as well just create a blog and post how great SF, then limit it to no comments, vs post it on a public forum where other people are allowed to discuss it, assuming in a logical fashion, if that is your angle.
Last edited by Big Catfish; 01-23-2011 at 04:32 PM..
And another thing, why the hell is Philadelphia in the discussion of this thread anyways? This has nothing to do with Philadelphia the least bit.
As for me, I pick the Bay Area, as a Metropolitan Area, the Bay Area is one sweet place. Beautiful, and powerful all in one. But I would pick it over New York City because of places like Palo Alto, Mountain View, San Jose, & other small and large tech towns. However if this were the Tri-State Area against Bay Area, then I would probably have a hard time figuring which one I would rather live in.
I'm not really too big on San Francisco but the greatest thing about the Bay Area is, you get choices, a lot of them, about where you want to live and the style of living that applies to you. Bay Area is a very unique and amazing place because of that. In many ways, to me at least its a perfect microcosm of all of America in one place.
GTFO. No way the bay area is a microcosm of America. Haha
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,035,535 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by killakoolaide
GTFO. No way the bay area is a microcosm of America. Haha
More like a microcosm of california.
Then name one major or "MUST HAVE" thing that the Bay Area doesn't have.
I can name one thing in geographical sense: a desert.
Can you name one or more things? (Besides monuments and stuff in Washington DC and history "culture" of the American Independence)
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 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.
