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.
Okay, so I may have underestimated the fact that fact that a group of multi-million dollar companies are in and AROUND San Francisco, but that doesn't change the facts.
The city is also influential on the West Coast, but has a less important status with other parts of the country. The city grew the fastest during the Gold Rush and had remained important due to its spot on the West Coast before LA became big. I know that many West Coast flagship stores or locations of large companies are there, but it was a product of its earlier influence over LA.
Now, I'd say that LA has SF in nearly all categories: size, economy( debatable), importance and influence, "TV market", etc.
SF, I would say, does have a large urban landscape, and I do give credit for that, despite the downtown's overall smaller size.
Also, 415, the new growth is mostly due to technology industries. That makes sense, though.
In the end, there is a clear divide in most areas:
LA--#1
SF--#2
So, if SF has an ego, it can be that they're the second best city on the West Coast.
Also, I don't mean to start an argument or be rude. I always try to avoid that sort of stuff and keep a fair and balanced debate.
Okay, so I may have underestimated the fact that fact that a group of multi-million dollar companies are in and AROUND San Francisco
You still underestimate.
Forget that multi-million dollar nonsense, The Bay Area has the 2nd largest concentration of BILLION-dollar corporations in the United States, after only New York.
San Francisco is also still the financial center of the West, even in 2011 long after the Gold Rush(LOL-apparently there has been activity since those Old Wells Fargo stagecoaches were put out of commission). Wells Fargo, Union Bank, Charles Schwab, Visa etc are all headquartered in the city of San Francisco, along with the Federal Reserve Bank of the entire West. SF is also the pacific coast headquarters for nearly every NY bank and financial institution. JP, Citi, BofA, all run their West Coast operations out of SF.
Quote:
Now, I'd say that LA has SF in nearly all categories: size, economy( debatable), importance and influence, "TV market", etc.
Yes despite everything I posted above, I do believe that LA still beats SF as the defacto megacity of the Western United States for sure. LA is the LARGEST by far.
But this thread isnt even about LA?
Quote:
So, if SF has an ego, it can be that they're the second best city on the West Coast.
Okay, so I may have underestimated the fact that fact that a group of multi-million dollar companies are in and AROUND San Francisco, but that doesn't change the facts.
The city is also influential on the West Coast, but has a less important status with other parts of the country. The city grew the fastest during the Gold Rush and had remained important due to its spot on the West Coast before LA became big. I know that many West Coast flagship stores or locations of large companies are there, but it was a product of its earlier influence over LA.
Now, I'd say that LA has SF in nearly all categories: size, economy( debatable), importance and influence, "TV market", etc.
SF, I would say, does have a large urban landscape, and I do give credit for that, despite the downtown's overall smaller size.
Also, 415, the new growth is mostly due to technology industries. That makes sense, though.
In the end, there is a clear divide in most areas:
LA--#1
SF--#2
So, if SF has an ego, it can be that they're the second best city on the West Coast.
Also, I don't mean to start an argument or be rude. I always try to avoid that sort of stuff and keep a fair and balanced debate.
LA is large, but that doesn't mean everything (I am a LA native). The issue with LA is that a lot of its economy is based on servicing its local economy and does relatively little that exercises its economic clout outside of the southland aside from Hollywood (and that is under question over the last two decades). The Bay Area had taken advantage of the possibilities offered by the last decades will LA has done far less with it. It's why the smartest and most inventive of my friends over the last decade relocated to the Bay Area rather than coming back to LA. It's why so many UCLA, Caltech, and USC grads who are worth a damn to innovation and the economy so often relocate to the Bay Area. They have provided a better environment for that kind of work over the last few decades--the immense amount of talent that the California private and public (the best in the world) has funneled itself into the Bay Area and not Los Angeles. It's a very real problem, and something must be done soon.
The Bay Area punches well above its weight in terms of population. It's almost ridiculous in that sense and federal policy still weighs heavily in its stead (in terms of national laboratories). The Bay Area has become the de facto place to try out new and innovative ideas, and Los Angeles has sit on the sidelines while this has happened. It's immensely sad to some extent. The only thing under the radar that's going for Los Angeles (despite its issues, and the erosion of its film and porn industry as other likewise industries have popped up throughout North America), is that we still have the sheer demographic weight. One dark horse is the number of Asian-American bank headquarters (either branches from overseas or local banks) that have consolidated themselves in the San Gabriel Valley. It's a very real economic contribution in an area that's been hit with really terrible economic issues.
New York will always be the best, biggest, and most authentic ego. Miami is not as good as LA so I am not sure why anyone in Miami would be so cocky. Lots of Miami people are from New York and the Northeast anyway. SF is a joke. They are not even the best city on the west coast. Vancouver and Los Angeles are the two best cities on the west coast. Seattle is better than SF in a lot of ways. Also, the East Coast is just so much bigger and better than the west coast. West Coast people all have an inferiority complex towards the East Coast. Especially towards New York. People who live in San Francisco and Seattle have a fake arrogance. Deep down they are insecure while suffering from an inferiority complex. New York arrogance and ego is the real deal. Not fake and wanna be like SF. New York and Los Angeles are the 2 top dogs here in the US. NY is by far #1 and LA is a distant #2. Big difference between real ego and fake wanna be ego.
Agree with this. And not too many will notice until the token smug Bay Arean relentlessly takes offense to not being included in the top 2. I do question the "LA is a distant #2". In certain aspects yes LA falls behind, perhaps in pace, finance, compact urbaness, fashion but not sooo far behind. Others like music scene, art scene, comedy scene, diversity in food, entertainment is a back and forth. LA is a rolled out NYC with beaches and cooler cars.
Yeah, that's why everyone saying "Miami's Ego" confuses me. The whole wealth to poverty disparity, isn't even a hidden secret of Miami anymore, ALOT of people know it exist, through movies, media, etc. People love to bring that topic up, everytime we have threads like these. If anything, the poverty to wealth argument is the most overplayed argument on C-D(and sometimes in real-life) about Miami. They complete ignore the Western and Southwestern middle-class burbs of Miami-Dade, like they don't exsist. But rest-assured they'll bring up those burbs when they want to criticize Miami for not being urban enough and being monotonous. Yeah, so the whole "Real Miami" thing is more overplayed than people will admit. We get it, Miami has bad areas. That's been common sense for a while.
6yrs later, I still echo this sentiment. MOST Miamians know Miami's place and are unabashed about Miami's flaws. Same with folks from Miami who constantly talk about "South Beach isn't the real Miami, as if that isn't common knowledge by now. MOST people know that Miami has alot of crime filled poverty stricken pockets. Miami doesn't really have an ego when it comes to it's city. Most Miamians are painfully honest about Miami's flaws as a city(whether it be crime, public transit, income disparity, etc) and it's fate with the rising sea levels. Miamians are the most honest on this forum....
The rest of ya'll boost your cities with no shame and no honesty.
i notice n.y.c.'s ego in real life especially on t.v. and fashion (it is the biggest city in the world).
i only experience san-franciscos ego on c-d.
miami doesnt have an ego.
Lol I love it here, but if we're talking "ego" I can't imagine any city other than NYC taking the crown.
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.
Yeah, so the whole "Real Miami" thing is more overplayed than people will admit. We get it, Miami has bad areas. That's been common sense for a while.
