Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Is Philly-San Francisco A Reasonable Comparison?
Yes 65 49.24%
No 67 50.76%
Voters: 132. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-20-2012, 03:26 PM
 
230 posts, read 284,198 times
Reputation: 364

Advertisements

It's been done to death. I know.

I wasn't going revisit this topic, but then I saw a few exchanges in recent threads about the subject and started wondering again. Still, I figured, why not just leave well enough alone. Apples & Oranges, Tomato/Tomahto. Whatever. Agree to disagree.

BUT:

The tipping point came a coupla weeks ago when I sitting on a bench on the Ben Franklin Parkway, eating my lunch and leisurely taking in an absolutely perfect late spring afternoon. There were a lot of tourists out from all over the world, as there tend to be this time of year. Minding my own business, enjoying the weather, people watching and catching snatches of conversation in maybe half a dozen different languages I overhead the following snippet of dialogue in English (paraphrasing):

Tourist A: (sighing) "Well, if wasn't for work, I'd still be back there. At least the weather is OK, today. I guess. That sorta reminds me of San Francisco a bit."

Tourist B (wearing SF Giants cap): (condescending sniff) "That is ALL that Philadelphia and San Francisco have in common."

Dude? Seriously? WTF?



I almost hesitate to do this, because these threads tend to devolve into insult contests. That it is NOT my
intention and if that's where this goes I WILL delete this thread (if I can figure out how, that is. If not, I will certainly encourage the Mods to do so.) But; having said that, I have noticed a tendency among some (I repeat "SOME.") Bay Area posters to sort of dismiss any comparisons between Philadelphia and San
Francisco as almost unworthy. To me, they seem like natural cities to compare; pretty evenly matched, and a case could easily be made for one or the other....both are home to any number of world class cultural institutions, universities, major corporations and industries, etc. Whichever one feels is more prestigious or important would seem to be almost purely subjective.

(In the interest of fairness, there also seems to be a contingent of Philly boosters who attack any mention of San Francisco with juvenile homophobic slurs, which serve only re-inforce the stereotypical image of the
Neanderthal Philly sports fan. I disavow these imbeciles.)

San Francisco seems like an amazing city. Never been there, but it is definitely on my must see list. Of course as a Philly guy I'm going to boost my hometown, but if someone makes a case for SF as more worldly or prestigious, I don't dismiss them out of hand; whether I agree or not, the argument has merit. Like I said it's just that I've noticed a tendency on the part of some (again, I repeat; "S-O-M-E.") Bay Area posters to just sort of recoil at the suggestion that Philly is even in their league. The attitude seems to be that SF's peers are NYC/CHI/LA, etc. and Philly just doesn't rate. Personally, I think that NYC/CHI/LA are an order of magnitude above every other American city, and SF/Philly/Boston/Atlanta/Houston, etc all duke it out for the lead spot in the next tier (Washington D.C, is a special case, of course.). And I would actually concede that San Fran probably has the inside track....I would wager that it's prominence and name recognition are almost certainly higher than Philly on the world stage. I just don't think it's a blowout.

I've also noticed that the definition of "San Francisco" seems to be kind of elastic; sometimes, when the
numbers don't favor SF proper, the definition seems to stretch to include all of the Bay Area including
Oakland and San Jose. But in the next breath the same poster will disown Oakland or some of the other
poorer communities in the Bay Area, while deriding all of Philly as "Ghetto." (And maybe toss in Camden/Chester/Wilmington for good measure.)

(Again in the interest of fairness; there is also a contingent of Philly boosters who make ridiculous claims that Philly is more prestigous than NYC/CHI/LA, ("Manhattan is NOTHING compared to Center City!!!" "Philly's Skyline leaves Chicago in the dust!!!"etc. Yeah, Philly is Great....but lets Be Real. I disavow these yo-yo's as well.)

So what do you think City-Data? Is Philly/San Fran a legitimate comparison? NOT which one do you think is
better; homers on either side will invariably choose their own city, and cherry pick the stats which back them up.

Just....is it a reasonable comparison?

Let's try to keep this civil. I try to check in on threads that I start, but sometimes I get busy with work and don't log in for awhile. If this gets childish and nasty, Mods, by all means please shut it down, and my
apologies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-20-2012, 03:43 PM
 
Location: London, U.K.
886 posts, read 1,556,930 times
Reputation: 828
Yes they are a legit comparison. If your city isn't NYC, LA, or Chicago then chances are they can be compared to one another.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2012, 03:44 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
18,962 posts, read 32,430,624 times
Reputation: 13604
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiveFrom215 View Post
Tourist A: (sighing) "Well, if wasn't for work, I'd still be back there. At least the weather is OK, today. I guess. That sorta reminds me of San Francisco a bit."

Tourist B (wearing SF Giants cap): (condescending sniff) "That is ALL that Philadelphia and San Francisco have in common."

Dude? Seriously? WTF?
If they're sporting SF Giants gear then they're more likely to act like an arrogant douche, so that should have been your first clue there.

As for the thread subject, I think it's a pefectly fine comparison but there are several homers on each side that just get out of hand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2012, 04:01 PM
 
Location: Nob Hill, San Francisco, CA
2,346 posts, read 3,971,518 times
Reputation: 1088
Phily has one thing on San Francisco and only one thing, thats dirt cheap real estate. I would probably be jealous of Philadelphians paying a fraction of what we have to pay but its Phily so that's not happening. Don't compare them because Phily is not in San Francisco's league.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2012, 04:03 PM
 
Location: Shaw.
2,226 posts, read 3,832,966 times
Reputation: 846
I voted "No" before I read the opening post. After reading it, I think it is probably a reasonable comparison, in the sense that you can compare most major, large cities.

Originally, I voted no because they both have different areas of strength, so it's a bit like apples and oranges. But they're both fruit, so compare away.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2012, 04:16 PM
 
123 posts, read 288,811 times
Reputation: 85
Philadelphia has a history that crushes SF. No matter where you live in this country, if your learning about American history Philly comes into play. So to say the only thing Philly has over SF is real estate is ridiculous. I'm sure one of these places has something over the other. But seriously don't compare these two anymore. Just enjoy what place you like more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2012, 04:33 PM
 
Location: Nob Hill, San Francisco, CA
2,346 posts, read 3,971,518 times
Reputation: 1088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antdawg1 View Post
Philadelphia has a history that crushes SF. No matter where you live in this country, if your learning about American history Philly comes into play. So to say the only thing Philly has over SF is real estate is ridiculous. I'm sure one of these places has something over the other. But seriously don't compare these two anymore. Just enjoy what place you like more.
Lets stop pretending that the only history this country has is back east and that California has no history. I find California's history better because it touches up on indigenous settlement of over 70 different Native American tribes, British settlement, Russian, Spaniards, Mexican, and then the manifestation settlement from "America".

I hate America and that includes its history, its a terrible country but that's just my opinion. History aside why don't you show us what Phily has over San Francisco. Use pictures, links, what you can to prove it because I'm not buying it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2012, 04:40 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
18,962 posts, read 32,430,624 times
Reputation: 13604
I alread pointed this out in another thread but imo Philly has a better location. It would be nice to not have to drive 5+ hours or hop on a place in order to visit another large, interesting city. Or hell just to be able to take an actual train to one. Also to be able to go to a beach where the water is actually swimmable during the summer would be a big plus to me, againt without having to drive 5+ hours or take a flight to do so. SF is isolated, if all you care about is nature then it works I suppose.

Each place has some good and about them and if you really can't see that then then you're pretty narrow minded imo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2012, 04:45 PM
 
Location: Villanova Pa.
4,927 posts, read 14,159,739 times
Reputation: 2714
I was in Vegas recently talking to a couple who had just visited Philly and they raved about it, especially Rittenhouse Square. Everybody has there own personal taste and perhaps the dudes you overheard-Philly wasnt their thing.

i wouldnt get too worked up over it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2012, 04:53 PM
 
Location: Nob Hill, San Francisco, CA
2,346 posts, read 3,971,518 times
Reputation: 1088
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
I alread pointed this out in another thread but imo Philly has a better location.
I guess. But if you really like NYC or DC that much to visit them all the time then why not just live in one of them? San Jose has a good location 40 minutes north you're in San Francisco and go the other way then you're in Oakland. Add another 2 hours and then you will be in Sacramento. Go south and you will be in Monterrey and stay around for a bit then you can see big sur.
Quote:
It would be nice to not have to drive 5+ hours or hop on a place in order to visit another large, interesting city. Or hell just to be able to take an actual train to one.
I know I want HSR to happen to and it will. Then what?
Quote:
Also to be able to go to a beach where the water is actually swimmable during the summer would be a big plus to me, againt without having to drive 5+ hours or take a flight to do so.
I can see that if you like to swim this might not be the best shore for you. I like to take folding chairs and just sit and watch the sunset, rarely ever go in the water but do enjoy walking along the beach.
Quote:
SF is isolated, if all you care about is nature then it works I suppose.
Good because that's all I care about. Everything else the bay has, if not Sacramento east to the Sierras have.

http://farm1.staticflickr.com/37/855...fd7_z.jpg?zz=1


Look how beautiful that is, there is nothing like it anywhere close to Phily.
Quote:
Each place has some good and about them and if you really can't see that then then you're pretty narrow minded imo.
Some places are just plain better than others and San Francisco is better than Phily. I am from Albany so I know how the "good location" thing works, when I lived there my family would rave on about being 150 miles west of Boston, 200 miles south of Montreal, 250 miles east of the scenic upstate Finger Lakes, Niagara falls, old historical river cities, and 150 miles north of NYC. Cheap real estate and location is the only thing Albany has going for it and the same is true about Phily.

Last edited by scrantiX; 06-20-2012 at 05:01 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top