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)
 
Old 04-19-2015, 10:47 AM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 12,624,653 times
Reputation: 3941

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist View Post
The vitriol between LA and SF is actually a bit understandable. The two cities are so completely different, that totally different sets of people live in either. It impacts political ideas and persuasions as well. Both cities are filled with liberals, but two completely different types of liberals.

The CA drought is widely publicized. The latest reports out are that NorCal, and particularly SF are doing wayyy more than their fair share to save and conserve water whereas LA actually used more water in March YoY and is heading in the opposite direction. It's things like that that get under the skin of the San Francisco set and add to the overall negative opinion of SoCal.

I can tell you from my perspective, flying into LAX, Burbank, or OC is the pits, particularly LAX. It's the little things. That is probably my least favorite airport in the country, and yet it is the flagship airport for the country's 2nd largest city! I'd consider it an overall embarrassment. And yes, the smog when you fly in is still very very visible, and the cityscape is always interesting and huge, but I can see where liberal city types up in SF are literally offended that there is a city built like LA, period, let alone where it is built.

I don't know why Houston and Dallas hate each other - perhaps it's more of a rivalry thing since they are very close in size, scope, and influence and have the same overall upbringing. I am absolutely positive it's not a "rivalry" thing between LA and SF, but literally a one-way hatred of LA by SF for reasons of principle (and it doesn't help that SF is probably the "smartest" and nerdiest city and LA possibly one of the most vapid - that kind of opposing personal touch doesn't help relations).

One thing is true, though, and that is that LA people know how to throw better parties and have a better time than SF people, and I think SF people (quite a few of which are from SoCal originally), acknowledge that and go down to LA, SD, Carlsbad, Palm Springs, etc etc to party/vacation.

I don't think San Franciscans inherently view themselves as living in the state's #2 city. I think if they could have their way, they'd be in a separate state called North California. LA would still be 5-6 hours south on the 5 or 1 hour by flight and there would still be the same sort of relationship that exists now, but there would be a line of demarcation and a legal separation making it clear that LA is SoCal and SF is NorCal and they are two complementary but separate things/states/ideas/people.

The only other state where this total psychological and clear separation (without legal separation) that I can think of that exists like this is Florida - North and South FL are very very different, and Central Florida is the glue that binds them. California doesn't have an equivalent "Central FL" - it's either north or south and a vastness in between.
Northern Californians who think most of Southern CA is not doing their part to conserve are just looking for reasons to dislike us, because it is very clear that we (most of LA County and City) have been taking drastic measures for almost a decade leading up to this drought.

And I doubt there are any sane Northern CA residents who want to split the state in half. If anything it would be hot dog style along the 5 instead of hamburger style along the Monterey County line.

And there are no two cities more different than The Bay and Southern California? Sorry but i think you got that completely wrong, there are no two cities more similar. Obviously there are some regional differences but they are quintessential CA metros.

It really rubs me the wrong way to see a recent transplant from the SOuth act like he/she knows anything about the cultural dynamic between Northern and Southern CA. You probably just hang out with a bunch of similar Midwest/Southern transplants and spread these silly, outdated ideas.

 
Old 04-19-2015, 11:24 AM
 
Location: The Dirty South.
1,567 posts, read 1,320,243 times
Reputation: 1087
Quote:
Originally Posted by UKWildcat1981 View Post
Chicago is known as the Second City because it could never beat NYC in anything.
Isn't Chicago second to LA as well.
 
Old 04-19-2015, 12:41 PM
 
Location: Mishawaka, Indiana
6,267 posts, read 8,430,874 times
Reputation: 4693
Quote:
Originally Posted by UKWildcat1981 View Post
Chicago is known as the Second City because it could never beat NYC in anything.


Not sure if you're trying to be funny or what. Chicago received its name as "Second City" when they rebuilt Chicago from the ashes of the Great Chicago Fire in 1871, which gave way to its plethora of steel high rises, making it a mecca for skyscraper architects and the like to relocate to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrfoe View Post
Isn't Chicago second to LA as well.
Its name "Second City" has nothing to do with it being 2nd to L.A. or NYC.
 
Old 04-19-2015, 03:26 PM
 
Location: Buena Park, Orange County, California
1,421 posts, read 1,770,784 times
Reputation: 1471
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment View Post
Not sure if you're trying to be funny or what. Chicago received its name as "Second City" when they rebuilt Chicago from the ashes of the Great Chicago Fire in 1871, which gave way to its plethora of steel high rises, making it a mecca for skyscraper architects and the like to relocate to.



Its name "Second City" has nothing to do with it being 2nd to L.A. or NYC.
Yeah, people misconstrue what it means. It was also Americas second city because it was essentially NYCs only real competitor within the US on almost every level, but especially in architecture and skycrapers. Chicago is where the first real skycraper was built and has quite an impressive history.

Los Angeles, on the other hand is the anti-thesis to NYC. We arent competitors as much as different worlds and each other's worst.nightmare is to become each other. There is a reason why 'manhattanization' is a rather derogatory term when discussing development in Los Angeles. Nonetheless, despite this, I think the two cities (and Chicago) share much more with each other than they care to admit.
 
Old 04-19-2015, 04:25 PM
 
Location: Tokyo, Japan
6,496 posts, read 7,777,221 times
Reputation: 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Youre right. In 2015, LA and SF are actually TIED if we are being honest.
Tied?

I am looking at Los Angeles and it has a $1 Trillion dollar economy. I don't even know what the exact number for San Francisco Bay Area is off the top of my head, I think like $600 Billion range or something like that (in that range). How is that close?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Southern California for sure.
Southern California is not a state, it a part of a state.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
North of the Kern County line however, LA is NOT the premier city.
Los Angeles is the premier city of California. It is the face of California. It is the driving force of California. It is the epicenter of California. That doesn't mean it is the only place contributing to California, by the way, but it is "the" top city in that state. If people had to envision ONE of California's two powerhouses, it would be Los Angeles first.

Greater Los Angeles is half of California's total population, 25% of the entire Western United States' population. With the larger population comes the larger political impact, since more representatives are required for the larger population center in the House of Representatives in Congress. By the way, larger population is the reason why the Los Angeles media market has two sports teams in EVERY single professional sports league there is except NFL (and if they have their way, Raiders AND Rams will be back in Los Angeles).

Last edited by Facts Kill Rhetoric; 04-19-2015 at 04:37 PM..
 
Old 04-19-2015, 04:27 PM
 
Location: Mishawaka, Indiana
6,267 posts, read 8,430,874 times
Reputation: 4693
Quote:
Originally Posted by RudyOD View Post
Yeah, people misconstrue what it means. It was also Americas second city because it was essentially NYCs only real competitor within the US on almost every level, but especially in architecture and skycrapers. Chicago is where the first real skycraper was built and has quite an impressive history.

Los Angeles, on the other hand is the anti-thesis to NYC. We arent competitors as much as different worlds and each other's worst.nightmare is to become each other. There is a reason why 'manhattanization' is a rather derogatory term when discussing development in Los Angeles. Nonetheless, despite this, I think the two cities (and Chicago) share much more with each other than they care to admit.
This is a common misconception. However, it's common enough that many people are beginning to believe it. The rebuilding of the city after the Chicago fire is the actual set of events that gave the city its nickname. It's true Chicago was the 2nd largest and 2nd most important city in the country, only to NYC for many decades, but that is not how it derived the nickname, especially since in the 1870's Chicago wasn't anywhere close to the 2nd largest city.
 
Old 04-19-2015, 04:31 PM
 
Location: Tokyo, Japan
6,496 posts, read 7,777,221 times
Reputation: 7316
Also 18Montclair, your statistics are probably skewed.

You are trying to depict San Francisco as this sort of economical employment force or whatever by using statistics that show that more people OUTSIDE the Bay Area in California commute to it than people OUTSIDE of Greater Los Angeles in California commuting to Los Angeles.

This is skewed because all interaction with Greater Los Angeles to areas outside of it are more limited in California, essentially all the areas that were supposed to be in it's CSA are in it's CSA. That is NOT the case with the Bay Area, which stands to add two, maybe three or four more counties in within the next decade or two (so obviously a HUGE commuter interchange from outside the Bay Area in a situation like that). The Bay Area numbers you're posting are probably people from Modesto or Salinas or Ukiah or something (or probably all those combined) commuting to the Bay Area. Lets not kid ourselves here, those areas that send a mass of commuters to the Bay Area are poised to eventually join the Bay Area CSA anyways.

Last edited by Facts Kill Rhetoric; 04-19-2015 at 04:59 PM..
 
Old 04-19-2015, 04:38 PM
 
Location: The City
21,973 posts, read 30,945,482 times
Reputation: 7498
For CA guess SJ as second and SF as 3 LA is the clear number 1 for CA
 
Old 04-19-2015, 04:55 PM
 
Location: Mishawaka, Indiana
6,267 posts, read 8,430,874 times
Reputation: 4693
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly View Post
For CA guess SJ as second and SF as 3 LA is the clear number 1 for CA
Wait, You put San Jose over San Francisco...?
 
Old 04-19-2015, 05:16 PM
 
Location: Tokyo, Japan
6,496 posts, read 7,777,221 times
Reputation: 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaelectro View Post
I think Houston is #1 in Texas. Not by a lot, but due to it having a larger economy and a seaport/close access to the ocean, makes it pull ahead of DFW imo. Isn't Houston more diverse and more cosmopolitan as well?
Agreed.

http://www.portofhouston.com/static/..._Stats2014.pdf

Houston directly connects its state with the world. Dallas-Fort Worth does not, well, it does by the airport but Houston also ships and trades from the airport too even if to a lessor extent than Dallas-Fort Worth in that regard. Either way, the total tonnage from airports is a lightweight to the total from seaports. That is what Dallas-Fort Worth does not have an answer for.

Also yes, it is more diverse than Dallas-Fort Worth too, although Dallas-Fort Worth itself is just slightly behind and easily top ten in the country in that regard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJdekc View Post
LA is far superior to San Francisco. Growing up all I knew of LA was that it was a cool city, with cool beaches, cool people, and cool lifestyle. Growing up all I heard of San Francisco was that it has a cool bridge, Full house was set there, the 49ers and Rice-A-Roni. But now I am more knowledgeable of what these cities really have to offer, and I believe LA is still ahead of San Francisco. I don't need to say why, because they have already been listed, In fact I'm Planning my third trip to LA right now, SF, I will go to sometime in the future.

Hey at least you live in California and not in Oklahoma or KS because no city is cool over here, none.
The 800 pound gorilla for Los Angeles is the Port of Los Angeles + Port of Long Beach. It is one of the absolute main reasons why Greater Los Angeles has 18 million people today (those people aren't all there to be actors and directors, you know). It is a force of nature and one of the infrastructural mechanisms that allow the United States to be an economical force on the world stage.

https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/usa/

Here (above) is what the United States' imports and exports look like, here is Los Angeles (below);

This port allowed Los Angeles to surge past San Francisco in the early 1900s and this port has clinched the status of premier city in California (probably permanently) for Los Angeles, huge driving factor for the region at-large.

http://www.portoflosangeles.org/pdf/...mbers-2013.pdf

Take a look at their trading partners, beast, no?

Last edited by Facts Kill Rhetoric; 04-19-2015 at 05:24 PM..
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.


Closed Thread

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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top