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.
Having lived in both cities, they are very different.
Chicago is much more livable. San Francisco is a difficult place in which to live. Not only can you not find a parking space for your car, you can't hail a cab.
Housing prices, and rents, are vastly different. You need more money to live in San Francisco.
The are both very beautiful, but San Francisco is quirky, European and more polished. Chicago is down-to-earth, more diverse in both racial and economic make-up and it's staid.
There are six million things to do in, and around, San Francisco. Your choice are much more limited in Chicago.
Both have great culture and museums, sports and restaurants. Actually, San Francisco gets the nod in the restaurant department and, believe it or not, good food is cheaper. The same meals I love in San Francisco at $15 would be $18 in Chicago.
I think it's easier to be both a young single and a married couple with a child(ren) in Chicago. SF is not child-friendly in the least bit.
Of course politics are much different in both areas. I think San Franciscans are more engaged and in-tune with their representatives. There's a feeling that they really do represent you but in Chicago, the politicians are more removed from the people.
You will find people in Chicago to be more rough around the edges so to say. Chicagoans are typically more in your face, to the point, and are looking to get things done in a prompt manner. If they don't like you they will let you know it. This is not to say that people here are not friendly because generally they are, but like everywhere, we have a few bad apples.
Having lived in both cities, they are very different.
Chicago is much more livable. San Francisco is a difficult place in which to live. Not only can you not find a parking space for your car, you can't hail a cab.
Housing prices, and rents, are vastly different. You need more money to live in San Francisco.
The are both very beautiful, but San Francisco is quirky, European and more polished. Chicago is down-to-earth, more diverse in both racial and economic make-up and it's staid.
There are six million things to do in, and around, San Francisco. Your choice are much more limited in Chicago.
Both have great culture and museums, sports and restaurants. Actually, San Francisco gets the nod in the restaurant department and, believe it or not, good food is cheaper. The same meals I love in San Francisco at $15 would be $18 in Chicago.
I think it's easier to be both a young single and a married couple with a child(ren) in Chicago. SF is not child-friendly in the least bit.
Of course politics are much different in both areas. I think San Franciscans are more engaged and in-tune with their representatives. There's a feeling that they really do represent you but in Chicago, the politicians are more removed from the people.
I live in San Francisco right now, but being from Wisconsin, I have been to Chicago many times. I think you hit the nail on the head, especially concerning food, politics and the higher cost of living.
But, I don't think you can say Chicago is more liveable. That's a personal opinion, and while it may hold true for you, others will have a different view. I am one such other. To me, San Francisco is more liveable. You don't need a car in San Francisco, and the ONLY times I ever have problems hailing a cab are on Friday and Saturday nights when everyone is trying to get a cab after bar close. But, there are many more things that make one city more liveable than another, and all of them are opinion based. To someone who has a family, I could certainly see Chicago being a heck of a lot more of a liveable city than San Francisco. To each his own.
I love Chicago. It's a great city. If I ever move back to the midwest, that is where I'll go. But, it feels more like a big midwestern town than the 3rd largest city in the country to me. Cities like San Francisco, Seattle and Boston feel bigger to me than Chicago, because Chicago is so spread out and has a much lower population density, or so it seems. The Magnificant Mile really isn't "magnificant" at all. There's much better shopping in San Francisco.
Like the previous poster said, there is so much more to do here than in the midwest, and part of that stems from the fact that you can be outside (comfortably) all year round here. Sure there are those that love winter and are more active in winter (I know some of them), but for me - I hated being outside when it was 10 below zero, and snow is such a hassle.
I find people in San Francisco generally more friendly than any where in the midwest. When I visited friends in Chicago in May we went to a couple bars and everyone was in their little clics not talking outside their group. It's a typical midwest experience. In San Francisco, it's not uncommon for me to talk to new people ever time I go out, and I've made a lot of new friends that way. Put it this way, I made more friends in my first 6th months in San Francisco than I made in 7 years in Minneapolis and 5 in Seattle. Part of this may be due to the fact that people in San Francisco live here because they want to. Not that people who live elsewhere don't do so because they want to, but it's different here. It's different because we willingly pay a huge premium to live here. So the people that make that choice do so because they love the city and don't want to be any where else. I know a lot of people in Minneapolis, Seattle and Chicago who wished they lived and bigger and more exciting places, but don't do so because they don't want to pay for it. When I was visiting Chicago, any friends of friends I met said "wow" or their jaws dropped and eyes bugged out when I said I was from San Francisco. There was a sense of envy that made me uncomfortable. I am not used to that, because no one ever acted like that when I said I was from Madison, Minneapolis or Seattle
IMO, San Francisco is the most unique city in the US, on so many levels.
SF is obviously far more expensive, and I find that attitudes about income and earning power differ accordingly, due to that.
Agreed. I pretty much know what all my friends make here and I never knew what anyone made in Minneapolis or Seattle. People are much more open about it here. They're much more open about a lot of things.
I know a lot of people in Minneapolis, Seattle and Chicago who wished they lived and bigger and more exciting places,
Say what? I can see the "I wish I lived in a bigger, more world class city" thing from Mpls or Seattle (both of which I've spent extensive time in). But Chicago? No size envy from Chicagoans. There are only two other cities in the U.S. that are bigger than Chicago, and cities like SF feel small to me after having lived in Chicago.
I live in San Francisco right now, but being from Wisconsin, I have been to Chicago many times. I think you hit the nail on the head, especially concerning food, politics and the higher cost of living.
But, I don't think you can say Chicago is more liveable. That's a personal opinion, and while it may hold true for you, others will have a different view. I am one such other. To me, San Francisco is more liveable. You don't need a car in San Francisco, and the ONLY times I ever have problems hailing a cab are on Friday and Saturday nights when everyone is trying to get a cab after bar close. But, there are many more things that make one city more liveable than another, and all of them are opinion based. To someone who has a family, I could certainly see Chicago being a heck of a lot more of a liveable city than San Francisco. To each his own.
I love Chicago. It's a great city. If I ever move back to the midwest, that is where I'll go. But, it feels more like a big midwestern town than the 3rd largest city in the country to me. Cities like San Francisco, Seattle and Boston feel bigger to me than Chicago, because Chicago is so spread out and has a much lower population density, or so it seems. The Magnificant Mile really isn't "magnificant" at all. There's much better shopping in San Francisco.
Like the previous poster said, there is so much more to do here than in the midwest, and part of that stems from the fact that you can be outside (comfortably) all year round here. Sure there are those that love winter and are more active in winter (I know some of them), but for me - I hated being outside when it was 10 below zero, and snow is such a hassle.
I find people in San Francisco generally more friendly than any where in the midwest. When I visited friends there in May we went to a couple bars and everyone was in their little clics not talking outside there group. It's a typical midwest experience. In San Francisco, it's not uncommon for me to talk to new people ever time I go out, and I've made a lot of new friends that way.
IMO, San Francisco is the most unique city in the US, on so many levels.
I agree that it's the most unique and I do like it, but I wouldn't ever want to live there again. OK, so most of it for me was the weather, I missed having hot weather. The five-eight days a year of hot, sunny weather wasn't enough for me. I hated having to bring six different layers of clothing with me every time I stepped out the door, though the lack of the brutal Chicago winters was not lost on me! That's also why I moved from Madison, where I lived for eight years. Love that city!
Maybe the taxi union has opened up and allowed more taxis in the City since 2001 when I moved, but I rarely ever took a cab. In Chicago I had a monthly cab budget. Being a woman, being able to hail a cab after bar time was a big safety, as well as convenience, factor. Big grocery trips without a cab, and with SF's hills, was a pain.
I found people in SF to be more friendly out and about, that's true. But I also found them to be a lot more superficial and it was hard to really connect or bond with people. I realize a lot of this was due to the dot-com time period in which I lived in SF, but I think it's kind of a Cali-thang too. Does SF has a branch of the Sport & Social Club yet? That was a godsend in Chicago, and a great way to really meet people, both friends and potential dates.
Agreed. I pretty much know what all my friends make here and I never knew what anyone made in Minneapolis or Seattle. People are much more open about it here. They're much more open about a lot of things.
The context I was thinking of is, as my friend and her husband, Bay area residents, point out, "We HAVE to be conscious that we're always on track for better jobs, better promotions, it's a constant ladder climb," because even at six figures apiece, they can't afford to be home owners in the area where they live. Call me cynical, but it's funny to me that an area with such a mythology for being "so laid back, man," forces one to be shackled to a game of chasing six figure incomes just for something as basic (and affordable,in other areas of the country) as owning a home. That, to me, seems not worthwhile.
The thing to remember here is that Chicagoans are midwesterners. That means that we shut our mouths and keep these things to ourselves. Talking about them in public is rude, it's not shocking. This is a point most people on the coasts no longer understand. I don't care what your sexual orientation is and I don't want to hear about your latest BSDM session, there's a time and a place to discuss those things and it is not in the subway. Add to this our cold climate, and everything is indoors anyway-- nothing here is out in the open, either in cultural expression or social activity. You'll have to *gasp* learn how to be subtle
I think that's a HUGE generalization. It depends on who you surround yourself with. If you're around more open people, you'll likely become more open. If you're around closed-lip people, you're not going to be open and forthcoming with personal information.
Personally, I like that I can be open and honest with my friends about such matters, but I was just as open and honest in Minneapolis and Seattle as I am in San Francisco. In almost 2 1/2 years in San Francisco, I have never heard anyone discuss such matters on the subway or any where else in public.
Yes, you definitely see more shocking things here, but it's not like you see them walking down the street. Rather, they take place at certain street fairs (Folsom, Dore Alley), and you you know well ahead of time that these things happen there.
I think you do see more riskee things on the streets here, but so what. Life is too short to be closed-minded and judgemental.
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.
Gay Bay vs. City of Big Shoulders?
