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.
How not? The only advantage NYC has is that its more walkable with a better skyline and better public transit.
LA offers more museums than NYC, and they're all good
LA is more affordable
LA has better weather and natural beauty
LA has better beaches
LA is more laid-back
LA has better cuisine from certain places (Thailand, Vietnam, Japan, Mexico) and cheaper food that is still really good.
LA has theatre, symphony, opera, concerts and sports games just like NYC does.
LA is still a huge, powerful and influential city.
NYC was rated the "unhappiest city in the US" this year for a reason. LA wasn't even on the list.
For the museums stats, is that LA County or LA city proper? And compared to all of NYC or just Manhattan?
You posted recently I believe on the "which city has the best museums?" thread this same "fact," and it turned out that was comparing LA COUNTY to Manhattan (ONE NYC borough) so I'm curious if you're using the same source. If so, you are incorrect.
5 of them are in the Northeast. 3 are out west, none of which are on the coast. Obviously, the South would be a deal breaker though.
Yeah two of those states (NH/VT) have a combined population less than the metro Portland area. Anyway, we were discussing attractive men right? I'll trust this source.
4 out of 10 cities are on the West Coast, with two others in the mountain west, though I only see one city back east. All the western cities have great fitness scores. But realistically, these sorts of things can be spun in favorable terms either way, the South notwithstanding.
How not? The only advantage NYC has is that its more walkable with a better skyline and better public transit.
LA offers more museums than NYC, and they're all good
LA is more affordable
LA has better weather and natural beauty
LA has better beaches
LA is more laid-back
LA has better cuisine from certain places (Thailand, Vietnam, Japan, Mexico) and cheaper food that is still really good.
LA has theatre, symphony, opera, concerts and sports games just like NYC does.
LA is still a huge, powerful and influential city.
NYC was rated the "unhappiest city in the US" this year for a reason. LA wasn't even on the list.
Those are pretty good advantages since being more walkable and having better transit lead to other things.
I believe the more museums thing offered for LA is generally citing a study of more museums based on a county by county level (though perhaps you are citing something different) where it's using LA county which is the majority of the metropolitan area and New York county whose sole constituent is Manhattan. Regardless, there is no comparison on museums or galleries--NYC is definitely on top on a city or a metro level.
LA is more affordable, though there's the issue of how car ownership counts towards affordability.
LA definitely has better weather for most people. Some people like four seasons, but I doubt that's the majority. Natural beauty-wise, I'm less inclined to agree with you.
Better beaches is tricky. LA's beaches are pretty good in the summer, but so are NYC area beaches. I think what takes away from LA beaches is the coldness of the Pacific even at that latitude, but it does have much better surf and there is a far greater focus on it.
LA is more laid-back for sure. I certainly don't prefer it, but I can see why other people do.
Both places have better cuisine for certain places, though NYC has better cuisine from a larger number of certain places. Cheaper food is somewhat true.
LA definitely has theatre, symphony, opera, concerts, and sports games and is a huge and powerful city.
I can't judge the unhappiest city thing. I haven't noticed much of a difference among people I've known, but I certainly am happier in NYC overall than LA.
Yeah two of those states (NH/VT) have a combined population less than the metro Portland area. Anyway, we were discussing attractive men right? I'll trust this source.
4 out of 10 cities are on the West Coast, with two others in the mountain west, though I only see one city back east. All the western cities have great fitness scores. But realistically, these sorts of things can be spun in favorable terms either way, the South notwithstanding.
Whatever. There are attractive and ugly people EVERYWHERE.
well that just contradicts your original point.....
It's not a contradiction. I said, "there are attractive people everywhere." That means some places will have more attractive people than others, but the places with less quantity of attractive people still have attractive people. Jeez.
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.
