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.
absolutely dc isn't inferior to rich, and that isn't what i think he meant...
@port, many people who like rich have moved to dc, and vice versa. I've grown up with a bunch of people who either now live in the city or in a md or va suburb. It isn't uncommon...
When people choose to move to rich from dc, often they have a job that they took in rich where col is cheaper. Some people from dc are retirees and yes, find richmond to be the right "pace" to live out their golden years. There are people who enjoy rich because while there are eras or circumstances that may remind of dc, it's far enough out that it possesses its own culture and personality. A lot of dc natives find rich too "small", but there are those who do love that smaller, more "serene" setting as opposed to city life...
As far as things to do and location, richmond is smack in the middle nearly an equal distance from the district, the mountains, and the beaches. That location is pretty much unrivaled amongst smaller cities on the east coast (mountains/big city/beaches). There is so much history in virginia, driving through any rural county or small town is almost like a step back in time, in a positive way. As mentioned, there is no shortage of festivals and museums and events in richmond city--quite a lot actually, considering richmond's size...
As far as race and integration is concerned, sac is more diverse and more integrated, but rich isn't wholly segregated, that's a lie. There is a sizable hispanic population in greater richmond, but it's a different kind of hispanic. The biggest difference in race is that california (and sac, i'm assuming?) has always had a mexican or latino population, while richmond has always had a black population. In cali hispanic culture permeates the overall state culture, it's hard to live in california without seeing the hispanic influence in food, speech, politics, on and on...
Likewise in richmond, you see the black influence in the city. Nowhere in california, and i'm including sac here, is a better place for blacks, blacks are basically an afterthought out there, which is saying something because we're an afterthought in the country at large. There are only a few areas where it is relatively comfortable overall for blacks, and most of those are in the south or on the east...i'd imagine this is probably how mexicans or other hispanics might view richmond, though, so i think it is relatable...
So regarding diversity, richmond has indians and asians and arabs too, just in lesser quantity. I don't think it is any more racist in richmond than it is in sac....
Try visiting a library. Sac metro has a LARGER GDP than the Richmond metro, as well as many of the metros you have listed (Vegas, Raleigh, Nashville, Las Vegas). This is what I mean about you guys being short on facts.
The total value of goods and services procured in the Sac metro blows Richmond metro out of the water by tens of millions of dollars. The gap between Pittsburgh metro and Sac metro in GDP is smaller than the gap between Sac and Richmond. Again, facts.
If Sacramento is not good for blacks, why is the black population growing? If Richmond is so much better for blacks, why is the % of black population decreasing in Richmond County/City? And why are so many segregated there. Why is the crime rate so high there, and why are there more black murder vicitims there? Again, facts.
Like I said, facts do not matter to boosters such as yourself.
Don't get me wrong, we get that Sac is often bagged on by more prominent coastal CA metros, which causes people from metros like yours to be emboldend with attacks. But here's a news flash. You ain't LA or SF.
And believe me, I have no bone in this fight. I'm an El Segundo native, living in Santa Cruz. But I lived and worked in Sac for several years, which is longer than the two years you spent in Sac as a young child (according to your profile). So you are not as much of an expert on Sac as you fancy yourself to be. Next time address my questions with factual data, please.
You are unbelievably dense...
For all of this talk of how Sacramento has a larger economy--so what? It's a larger city. The black population in Richmond is decreasing in percentage only (not unlike Sacramento, which you carelessly forgot to point out), not in raw number, because gentrification in just the last decade has brought back thousands of white residents who essentially left the city during white flight.....
Don't like that fact? Here's some more: Sacramento is the same size, generally, as: Charlotte, Pittsburgh, Portland, San Antonio, Orlando, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Las Vegas, and Cleveland. With the exception of 'maybe' SA, Sacramento trails ALL of these cities in esteem, popularity, and importance. It does not have the same cache as either of the rest, and does not match any of the other cities in sophistication nor is it as cosmopolitan. In short, Sacramento indeed underwhelms in comparison to cities of similar size. There isn't a reputable organization that even ranks Sac as equal to any city in its size range, except maybe SA...
In contrast, Richmond is the same general size as: Jacksonville, Memphis, Oklahoma City, Louisville, New Orleans, Raleigh, Hartford, Salt Lake, Birmingham, and Buffalo. With the exception of 'maybe' New Orleans, Richmond is generally seen as a stronger and better city than any other city in its size field, and certainly not behind any....
My underlining point is that you blow a lot of smoke about GDP and diversity, and yet for as large as Sacramento is, in no real sense is it viewed as a stronger overall city, pound for pound, than Richmond, and GaWC and the poll results seem to agree with that...
Purely arbitrary and subjective. No one can say New Orleans, Memphis, Las Vegas, Nashville, San Antonio and even Sacramento are less important and significant than Richmond. If people want to claim Richmond is far more notable than any of those cities then they are delusional.
The only appeal I will give Richmond over Sacramento is architecture and cost of living.
How is this statement any less arbitrary? The only appeal 'I' give Sacramento over Richmond is in diversity....
Those cities that you listed are all "niche" cities, wherein there may be a field or two where they outweigh Richmond, but the overall city comparison tells a different story:
-New Orleans has a port and is more important to its region (Gulf Coast vs Mid Atlantic) than Richmond is to its. New Orleans probably blasts all but 2-3 cities in the country in regards to culture and cultural amenities, so no shame there. Besides that, it is less important and/or trails Richmond in more than a few ways. There's actually a thread from earlier this year between these two cities...
-Memphis is more important than Richmond in what regards? Again, more important to its region (Mid-South) and definitely a larger and more important force in music history. Besides that, not so much...
-Las Vegas is more important to its region but is also far larger than Richmond. The entertainment and fashion industries are more significant than those in Rich by a mile. Otherwise, Vegas trails Richmond in other areas...
-Nashville has a much larger music significance. They are essentially equal in some areas and Richmond beats Nashville in others. There is also a thread devoted to this matchup...
-San Antonio is more notable than Richmond for what, military presence and tourism?
-Sacramento is more notable than Richmond for diversity, and what else? Otherwise it is far larger without offering far more amenities...
The fact that Richmond can be compared to any of these cities says something about Richmond. Way out in California, I'm sure you hear about Richmond just as rarely as we hear Sacramento spoken of out here. So, we can go category by category, as we have been. Or you can check out the "Richmond vs New Orleans" or "Richmond vs Memphis vs Nashville" threads. You may not know anything about Richmond or what it offers (many people don't), but enough people do, and when a fair, objective, comparison is given, Richmond holds up well with every city you named, including Sacramento...
@port, all I meant was that about half of Latinos in Richmond are Puerto Rican descended. That culture is very different from Mexican and California Mexican culture...
Interesting...
Your typical NYC Rican or migrant Rican?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tcave360
There actually is a good number of Richmonders living in DC and some of the 'burbs.
Well, like I said it was a guess. It's not really about amenities, but rather the tone/feel/vibe/people of the cities. I would think most people can make a distinction between Northern Virginia and Richmond so why try to sit there and claim DC and Richmond are basically the same (with only differences seen in the size of the two)?
If I was interested in paying DC prices I'd just move to Boston and be done with it.
@WizardOfRadical I don't understand what you're trying to say. I'm going to assume you're trolling for now. Sorry.
-Sacramento is more notable than Richmond for diversity, and what else? Otherwise it is far larger without offering far more amenities...
The fact that Richmond can be compared to any of these cities says something about Richmond. Way out in California, I'm sure you hear about Richmond just as rarely as we hear Sacramento spoken of out here. So, we can go category by category, as we have been. Or you can check out the "Richmond vs New Orleans" or "Richmond vs Memphis vs Nashville" threads. You may not know anything about Richmond or what it offers (many people don't), but enough people do, and when a fair, objective, comparison is given, Richmond holds up well with every city you named, including Sacramento...
You're wrong. Besides diversity, Sacramento clearly outweighs Richmond in transportation network and perhaps professional sports.
Transportation network: Sac has a light rail system with 3 networks totaling over 45 miles of track; Sacramento's Amtrak is the 7th busiest in the country. A proposed streetcar system is in the works.
Airport: Sac Intl carries nearly 10 million passengers per year, with nonstop flights to all West and East Coast hubs including international to Mexico. Richmond carries 3.5 million per year. No nonstop flights to the West Coast/no international flights.
Sports: NBA's Sacramento Kings. Triple A baseball RiverCats (Giants afflilate), USL Pro soccer Republic (mentioned as a candidate for MLS expansion). Richmond likes its NASCAR, has collegiate and minor league sports.
You're right about one thing though, I've never been to Richmond, so there's no point in discussing food culture, nightlife, attractions and landmarks since its all again subjective. If you want to believe that the 57th largest media market (Richmond) beats out the 20th (Sacramento)...
be my guest.
Last edited by pistola916; 08-31-2015 at 01:03 AM..
You're right about one thing though, I've never been to Richmond, so there's no point in discussing food culture, nightlife, attractions and landmarks since its all again subjective.
It may be subjective, but it's kind of the point of the post.
In case you've forgotten:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Port Pitt Ash
1. Nightlife/Dating
2. People/Everyday Living
3. Food (with specific types that are good in each)
4. Walkability within the intercity and close neighborhoods
5. Weather/Nature Activities mixed with city life
Even if you've never been to Richmond you can still make the Sacramento offerings known and/or compare them to other areas I might be familiar with.
Airports, sports, Amtrak, and other stuff is fine to add in after you've covered the basic questions. Just adding it to add it does nothing.
Maybe the VS part is throwing you off? If it helps replace that part of it with the words "compares to".
Not really asking which city is objectively better, but rather how one compares to the other in the (yes) subjective areas above. Although I'd prefer the fairest and most unbiased comparison you're able to make.
We're a diverse gay couple (Asian and Hispanic) from Sacramento with a daughter. We don't know anything about Richmond VA, but I'm sure it's a great city, and it looks really nice! We plan to visit DC and NYC soon. Maybe we'll check out Richmond too.
It may be subjective, but it's kind of the point of the post.
In case you've forgotten:
Even if you've never been to Richmond you can still make the Sacramento offerings known and/or compare them to other areas I might be familiar with.
Airports, sports, Amtrak, and other stuff is fine to add in after you've covered the basic questions. Just adding it to add it does nothing.
Maybe the VS part is throwing you off? If it helps replace that part of it with the words "compares to".
Not really asking which city is objectively better, but rather how one compares to the other in the (yes) subjective areas above. Although I'd prefer the fairest and most unbiased comparison you're able to make.
I was responding to the other poster's assertion that diversity is not the only positive trait that Sacramento has compared to Richmond. But to answer your questions:
1. Interracial relationships is a big thing in Sac, pretty much in California really. Dating scene is great too. There is a significant LGBT community in Midtown.
3. Food. Sacramento is known as the Farm-to-Fork Capital, which basically means we outsource our food within 200 miles of the city. Because we pride ourselves of our diversity, ethnic cuisine here is the best. Unlike Richmond, which is known for Southern, Sac wins out in Mexican, Japanese, Chinese, Korean, Filipino, Salvadorean.
Also, craft beer and coffee is huge in Sacramento. Some have called Sacramento's coffee scene as the most underrated in the world!
4. The central city (Downtown/Midtown/East Sacramento) are the premier neighborhoods for walkability. The central city is laid out on a grid, which like all of Sacramento, is flat. That makes it not only walkable but also bike friendly. In terms of bike friendliness, Sacramento was ranked eighth, behind DC but ahead of Philadelphia.
5. Sac gets a ton of sunshine. It can get very hot during the summer and mild during the winter. Recreational activities are big here, too. The city sits on the American and Sacramento rivers. The real gem of the city is the 32-mile American River Parkway, where one can kayak, raft, boat, bike, jog, whatever. In fact, Sac was listed as the fifth fittest city in America.
So there you have it. The food is superb, the weather is nice, our diversity is amazing. Plus our public transit and international airport are far more extensive than Richmond's.
Last edited by pistola916; 08-31-2015 at 02:08 AM..
According to this, it is Richmond that is in a higher weight class than Sacramento. While GaWC isn't gospel,it is reputable and they publish the largest, most extensive city rankings of any entity that profiles city rankings....
Face it, your antebellum image of Richmond is not based off of any factual knowledge you have of the city or Virginia. The fact is, though, while I have no doubt Sacramento can be a wonderful place to live for many (I was born there and still have much family there), it does kinda underwhelm given its size. Cities that are generally the same size, like Portland/Orlando/Las Vegas/Charlotte/Pittsburgh, are typically much more dynamic, influential, and important than Sacramento. Hell, cities that are smaller than Sac (Cleveland/Cincinnati/Columbus/Raleigh/Nashville) seem to be stronger overall. And one thing that ABSOLUTELY CANNOT be said about Richmond is that it "under"whelms for its size....
So you might want to reconsider this fantasy you have of Sacramento being in some higher realm than Richmond....and everybody knows Sac has a black mayor---he's a quasi-celebrity (ex-NBA) and a city native. This doesn't substantiate your insinuation that Sacramento is better for blacks. Nowhere in California is, but Sacramento certainly wouldn't be at the top of the list...
@port, all I meant was that about half of Latinos in Richmond are Puerto Rican descended. That culture is very different from Mexican and California Mexican culture...
@cave, I don't think @poquoson intended for his statement to be read as Rich is better than DC, because we all know that ain't true. You're right for calling out this poster though; plenty of people from Rich live in DC area, and plenty people from DC live in Greater Richmond. As I'm a native of both metros, I personally have known many people from both, in both. This guy clearly is speaking out of ignorance...
Correct, did not intend for my statement to be read as RVA is "better" than DC. . Please break down my "ignorance" for me,I would clearly love to hear it dude.
Last edited by Poquoson7; 08-31-2015 at 01:56 AM..
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.
