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.
O.K., both have over 4 million in their metros and 7 million in their CSAs with Boston higher on both.
Both have a GDP of over 310 billion with SF higher (320+).
Both are high ranking financial centers with Boston slightly higher.
Both are known for higher education with Boston higher.
Both are dense walkable cities with SF higher.
Both have great PT (for the US) with Boston higher.
I'd check the number of tourists both get but I don't know where to look and while I think SF would rank ahead Boston probably wouldn't be terribly far behind.
Both are world renowned, powerful cities.
The clout SF has with Silicon Valley, Boston has with education (plus maybe biotech, I'll admit I don't know that myself). But if SF (Bay Area) is the tech capital of the country and world, Boston is the education capital.
Throw in Boston's history, it's not a place to just scoff at.
And I forgot sports, Boston arguably leads the Bay Area in sports.
O.K., both have over 4 million in their metros and 7 million in their CSAs with Boston higher on both.
Both have a GDP of over 310 billion with SF higher (320+).
Both are high ranking financial centers with Boston slightly higher.
Both are known for higher education with Boston higher.
Both are dense walkable cities with SF higher.
Both have great PT (for the US) with Boston higher.
I'd check the number of tourists both get but I don't know where to look and while I think SF would rank ahead Boston probably wouldn't be terribly far behind.
Both are world renowned, powerful cities.
Ah you mean statistics not climate, nature, or density which are all categories that belong to San Francisco not Boston.
On paper you're right, these two places are very similar. If NYC and LA were similar in population then LA and San Francisco against NYC and Boston would be an equal comparison but NYC is 4 million people larger than LA. NYC-DC-Chicago compared to LA-San Francisco-Chicago would be the best comparison or NYC-LA compared to Chicago-San Francisco-DC would be interesting.
San Francisco Bay Area's economy is over half a trillion dollars which is larger than Boston's.
I would like to see a NYC and DC pair up against LA and San Francisco with Chicago being the X factor to both sides.
The big factor is still that no city in the U.S. compares to NYC. LA doesn't come close. Moreover, DC has both a larger population and economy than SF on the MSA and CSA level. DC's downtown office space is larger and public transit is more extensive. However, SF is more consistently urban than DC. And SF's natural setting is close to unbeatable.
So you see, NYC & DC would win handily on overall criteria.
The only city in that post I compared LA to is Boston. I grew up 150 miles west of Boston and visited enough to know it feels like a dense small city.
Oh ok, the wise oracle Oy Cucumber has spoken!
I was quoting you about LA developing much like Sao Paolo, Mexico City, Hong Kong, Osaka, etc. (Latin American and East Asian cities). I grew up in LA and know the city probably a lot better than other people who live there due to the work I did and how often I had to move. I've also spent many years in various East Asian cities. LA's development is very different from those cities and its urban form (especially when talking about the metro) is much more similar to just about any other major US metro than it is to the cities you've listed. Australia's the only place I know that has cities which have developed similarly.
And LA's nightlife is bad as is most of the rest of the US--it's just a fact of life. Many places in the world have no last call, and LA has an especially early one at 2 am. Many places in the world allow for open containers of alcohol anywhere, and LA (and most of the US) does not. LA's nightlife is also spread out among many areas which isn't inherently a bad thing, but hailing a taxi or taking mass transit between these areas is ridiculously hard/time-consuming (for taxis, expensive too) and generally just not done--and of course, DWIs are no fun for the most part. There are some neighborhoods in LA where the bars are in dense enough neighborhoods where people just walk to them as their local neighborhood hangout, but it's definitely not everywhere. LA's nightlife is unique due to other factors though, but on the whole is a bit of a letdown compared to places in Europe and Latin America.
Granted, a lot of what restrictions are in LA hold for most of the US. Also, bars seem to have a much stronger hold on nightlife in the US than in most other places. Also, that wasn't really a sentence fitting for an oracle--nothing was prophesied, it was just a pretty plain statement of fact.
I agree that Chicago is an amazing city. I truly think that. I grew up in the suburbs, now live in LA, and I tell people that I think Chicago is still one of the best American cities for a short visit. However, its scenes like these less than 3 miles from the loop affects my view of Chicago. This is just how my perception is impacted. Others may not feel this way, and don't believe this takes away from their Chicago experience, however for me, its scenes like these this close to the loop, not seen in NYC, LA, or San Fran as far as I can tell, that makes me see Chicago away from the loop, Mag Mile, River North, Gold Coast as categorizing Chicago with its midwestern cousins.
Again, I'm seriously not trying to make Chicago look lame. It is a great city, but you have to understand that for some people, not all, that these scenes less than three miles from State and Madison, affect some peoples' perception of Chicago.
I have to agree with this. Last time I visited Chicago I also noticed that the quality of urban environment deteriorates very quickly as you move from downtown south, west and even northwest. The only direction where it holds up well is directly north towards Lincoln Park. I would say that Boston, Washington and SF are all superior in this respect. They don't have as many (or probably any) dead zones in the urban core, and it makes them feel more European-style intimate and cohesive.
PS: Tex?Il? -- I know we had a few battles in my early days, but just wanted to say that I have really enjoyed your posts lately. You are one of a few people on here who brings a balanced and knowledgeable perspective.
LA's development is very different from those cities and its urban form (especially when talking about the metro) is much more similar to just about any other major US metro than it is to the cities you've listed. Australia's the only place I know that has cities which have developed similarly.
While LA is definitely closer to US metros than those other cities you mentioned, the only US metros that are developed similarly to the LA area are the other CA metros, namely the Bay Area.
While LA is definitely closer to US metros than those other cities you mentioned, the only US metros that are developed similarly to the LA area are the other CA metros, namely the Bay Area.
SD and Phoenix also share development similarities with LA. However, we're agreed on the main point which is LA's form is definitely closer in form and layout to almost any major US metro than the international cities listed.
Also, generally I'm on the side of LA when it comes to urbanity--it's usually exaggerated in the US when it comes to how one absolutely must have a car in LA since things have changed a good deal in the last two decades. It's core area is definitely fit for living without your own car now and there's much more commerce and general vibrancy than there was before. However, compared to that list of cities such as Osaka, Hong Kong, Sao Paolo, and Mexico City, LA is really sleepy and its developed far differently from those cities.
They're practically mirror images of each other in their own east coast & west coast way. It's like what missRoxyhart posted earlier on.
Bay Area is 7.5 million people in the CSA & Boston is 7.6 million people in the CSA.
San Francisco/Oakland is 4.4 million people in the MSA & Boston is 4.5 million people in the MSA.
Bay Area has the 2nd highest ranking school in the nation with Stanford & Boston has the 1st. Then both have some of the most impressive collections of schools in the world but Boston has the lead here.
San Francisco has 800,000 people & Boston has 650,000. Even though San Francisco has more people both cities come in as the 2nd & 3rd most dense in the nation.
San Francisco is 49 square miles & Boston is 49 square miles.
San Francisco & Boston place side by side as world financial centers.
Bay Area & Boston place side by side in tech, they lead the country even though tech is a much stronger thing in the Bay Area.
San Francisco & Boston both have their downtowns on their own respective bays.
Boston has the edge in sports success & Bay Area has the edge in more professional teams.
Boston is arguably the most historic major metropolitan area on its side of the country & San Francisco holds the same distinction on the other side of the country. Boston has a huge role in American history & San Francisco has more history with the country's expansion westward (Manifest Destiny).
Boston has a strong lush green and heavily wooded atmosphere with hills within the area & San Francisco has mountains and more topography variety.
Both Bay Area & Boston will become CSA's of 9 (8.5-9.0) million people when the new definitions are released next year in 2013.
Now the difference is that the Bay Area has more wealth, a larger economy, is more integrated, more diverse overall, more known internationally, & is a bigger powerhouse on the global stage but on the national level they could pass off as sister metropolitan areas.
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.
