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.
Haha what a joke. Being more famous does not mean more prestigious.
Status is not defined by being more well known, it's defined by being more respected.
Beverly Hills is not more respected than Palo Alto, in fact, no LA suburb can even come close. Palo Alto is home to the most prestigious American university outside of the Northeast, which makes it an intellectual hotbed, Palo Alto is home to Fortune 500 companies and some of the innovative companies in the world, like Tesla Motors, Palo Alto is home to the richest venture capitalists in the world, Palo Alto frequently ranks all by itself in some GAWC reports, is a major hub of finance, science, engineering, etc, and the town is also filthy rich and is has what is widely regarded as the best school district in the state, and so forth.
Beverly Hills is a vapid diversion for brainless people who dont know anything, Palo Alto is a world power by comparison.
Dont talk to me about high status because you are not really knowledgable.
A Beverly Hills address is more status than Palo Alto. There's songs about people wanting a Beverly Hills address. You can state you stupid opinons about BH all you want, but the general public will take
BH over any Bay Area suburb. Many of them would take BH over most of SF.
Go to most of America and ask about those Bay area burbs.
I dont care what stupid people think, I only wonder what smart people think:
Quote:
See what happens
This is what's happened love:
Quote:
The most obvious takeaway is that LA is underrepresented on each of the above tables. As the nation’s second largest city, with more than 5 percent of the nation’s population in its greater metropolitan area (18 million people) and as a highly desirable place to live, one would expect better representation among alumni of these top universities. LA ranks first as the destination for alumni of only one of the 16 “top universities” listed above: CalTech, which is which is located in its backyard.
The city attracts a disproportionate amount of talent, relative to the rest of the nation from Northern California stalwarts Berkeley and Stanford (barely), at 10 percent and 6 percent respectively, and is proportionately represented for Harvard and Yale at 5 percent. But notably, LA doesn’t rank in the Top 3 destination cities for alumni of any non-California school. By contrast, SF and NYC respectively rank in the Top 3 for all but four and three of the 16 universities listed.
So what though? That's an argument for not being as well known. Being well known doesn't exactly equate to higher quality of life. Wealth on the other is not a bad argument for that and therefore prestige, apart from a mental and philosophical standpoint of course.
It hurts me to use even the same concept as Montclair for a debate, but he has a point in this, in his own little ways of course which is the problem.
Prestigous doesn't mean wealth though.
Any how many 10 million dollar homes are in Palo Alto vs BH if you're talking about real wealth?
I dont care what stupid people think, I only wonder what smart people think:
This is what's happened love:
So you don't care what you think then.
People are stupid because they dont know random Bay area suburbs? Are you stupid if you don't know what Chicago or NYC's wealthier suburbs are? Or Dcs"?
You dont have to answer that. We know what you are.
Any how many 10 million dollar homes are in Palo Alto vs BH if you're talking about real wealth?
Yes it's all painfully clear to all of us that FOR YOU, fame means prestigious.
And the disagreement on that tells us that this, like a whole lot of things on city vs. city, is just subjective personal opinions.
Anyways, I'm staying out of this. I'll just sit back and enjoy the amusement of some of guys posting like you wanna beat each other up pretty much over who gets liked by the general population more lol.
Like I said: Beverly Hills is not more respected than Palo Alto, in fact, no LA suburb can even come close. Palo Alto is home to the most prestigious American university outside of the Northeast, which makes it an intellectual hotbed, Palo Alto is home to Fortune 500 companies and some of the innovative companies in the world, like Tesla Motors, Palo Alto is home to the richest venture capitalists in the world, Palo Alto frequently ranks all by itself in some GAWC reports, is a major hub of finance, science, engineering, etc, and the town is also filthy rich and is has what is widely regarded as the best school district in the state, and so forth.
You cant even write down 1 sentence talking up Beverly Hills and how it's more prestigious than Palo Alto, that's because it's NOT, and you can't refute anything.
As I already stated, Beverly Hills is a vapid diversion for brainless people who dont know anything, Palo Alto is a world power by comparison.
You are completely out of your league. The Bay Area owns you.
The standard of living in the Palo Alto scores so highly that it occupies it's own category called The Top 1% of California. LMAO.
In fact, the top 4 areas in the state are all in the Bay Area and they totally coincide with that Washington Post report about the most elite clusters of zip codes. 2 subregions of the San Jose Area and 2 subregions of the Oakland Area.
^That. Is. Prestige.
Not Kim K walking down Robertson with paparazzi taking pics.
Sorry.
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.