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.
Politics-DC>
Entertainment - LA>
Architecture-Chi>
There's more to SF, personal Wealth, tech capital of the world, beauty, hills, weather, food, better bridge, better park, best Chinatown, best wine, produce/food supply, union square, microclimates, charm, so much more, packs a big punch in a relatively small area.
Yea, NYC isn't going to be number one in everything, but it is in a lot of categories and is almost always a solid two or three. NYC is number two in politics, number two in entertainment (but one in media and journalism which are somewhat related), and the architecture placing is debatable. Now are you implying being first in different categories/fields is actually important by listing those? Because that's basically the entire argument for NYC is a tier above others--it is the first in more categories/fields than any and has a strong showing in almost all categories it isn't. And there's a pretty strong category that in the three categories you mentioned, NYC is substantially better than SF.
Again, what is the rubric you're trying to set? Is there a consistency to it? Does it have anything to do with what other people are discussing?
For the second paragraph--yea, SF has those things, but whether or not those are actually better for most of those is subjective. Personal wealth--depends on what stats you're using, beauty standards are different, food I flatout disagree with, better bridge versus better bridges, best Chinatown I really disagree with, union square is here too and the one here is far more interesting, charm I get pretty little out of from SF and I certainly prefer the tree-lined brownstone/rowhouses or turn of the century estates in NYC. It also leaves out a lot of things that are better for NYC, but you might not come to value because they aren't so great for SF.
Yea, NYC isn't going to be number one in everything, but it is in a lot of categories and is almost always a solid two or three. NYC is number two in politics, number two in entertainment (but one in media and journalism which are somewhat related), and the architecture placing is debatable. Now are you implying being first in different categories/fields is actually important by listing those? Because that's basically the entire argument for NYC is a tier above others--it is the first in more categories/fields than any and has a strong showing in almost all categories it isn't. And there's a pretty strong category that in the three categories you mentioned, NYC is substantially better than SF.
Again, what is the rubric you're trying to set? Is there a consistency to it? Does it have anything to do with what other people are discussing?
For the second paragraph--yea, SF has those things, but whether or not those are actually better for most of those is subjective. Personal wealth--depends on what stats you're using, beauty standards are different, food I flatout disagree with, better bridge versus better bridges, best Chinatown I really disagree with, union square is here too and the one here is far more interesting, charm I get pretty little out of from SF and I certainly prefer the tree-lined brownstone/rowhouses or turn of the century estates in NYC. It also leaves out a lot of things that are better for NYC, but you might not come to value because they aren't so great for SF.
You are right San Francisco does all those things better than NY. San Francisco wins in one important metric to me, a place I'd want to actually live.... Chow
Rationality has long been sucked out of this thread. Now, it's just subjective opinion and hyperbole from their side. I count three objective metrics SF has over NYC. That's it. But I doubt they'd have the fortitude to admit what you just posted. Almost admirable their resolve is, in a way. Almost.
Quote:
Though it is exceptionally easy to put someone from San Francisco in a good mood, there are some caveats. When talking to a white person who lives in San Francisco, it is best not to bring up New York City. Though they live in a world class city, San Franciscans have a crippling inferiority complex about New York and even hinting at that will make them very sad or very defensive.
Right about what? That it's arguable that SF doesn't do a lot of those things better? Yea, I know!
Quote:
Originally Posted by slo1318
San Francisco wins in one important metric to me, a place I'd want to actually live.... Chow
Yea, I understand that if your rubric is which one you prefer to live in, then that's great. There's not argument here, so what's the point of interjecting at all? Ciao!
Funniest link I have ever read off of C-D... I haven't ever lived there so I can't comment on how true all of those statements are but I will say everyone I know that has migrated to that area of the country love to brag on social media about it.
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.
