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.
Yes, but that still makes Zurich more desirable. The "why" (economics, housing, monetary policies, etc.) are irrelevant.
To you and others here, it may be more desirable. Not necessarily to others, especially when considering the different cultures, topographies, etc. And the "why" is more in regard to the COL, not desirability.
So true. Lima is definitely not Zurich by almost any stretch of the imagination. I'd be doing very different things from one city to the other.
Living in Center City or a greater downtown of San Francisco, I can imagine doing pretty similar things on a day-to-day basis.
Exactly. So, the COL argument is a detriment in this scenario. The SF homers want to use it as an indicator for why it's better. Both downtowns would enable you to live a similar lifestyle, with some pros and cons between each, but in Philly, you could get much more for your money.
Exactly. So, the COL argument is a detriment in this scenario. The SF homers want to use it as an indicator for why it's better. Both downtowns would enable you to live a similar lifestyle, with some pros and cons between each, but in Philly, you could get much more for your money.
Sure I'll give you cost of living as a plus for Philly but on the flip side you get to acknowledge why that is. Far more robust economy with higher paying jobs and overall desireability.
Sure I'll give you cost of living as a plus for Philly but on the flip side you get to acknowledge why that is. Far more robust economy with higher paying jobs and overall desireability.
so limited to DT are the jobs or incomes that different? A serious question as incomes in the DT of Philly are actually very high even on SF or Bay standards. Philly also has the concentration of past graduate degree earners of any DT in the country. Also the highest concentration of Drs and Lawyers of any DT believe it or not. I feel like half of my street is Drs that walk to Jefferson hospital yet can have rowhouse with 2,000+ sq feet.
To Oys comments Philly actually added more residents DT then did SF over the last 10 years, there was a census report on that. Philly was #2 and believe SF was number 3 (or maybe were 3 and 4 as NYC and Chicago may have both added more and DC and Boston were right afer Philly and SF I believe and all added more then Seattle in the DT which would surprise many am sure) they were very close but again is so similar its not dramatic either way. Also that was from 2000-2010 so maybe that dynamic has changed but DT philly has sped up not slowed down and believe the dynamic is similar for SF.
On income etc Society Hill has almost identical mean and median incomes when compared to Bay Bay in Boston as an example but maybe they are higher in SF but there is no lacking of very high wage earners in Philly (DT) despite the reputation. Again moving further the incomes drop but not DT which is the criteria here.
I am pretty sure even with real data you wont believe how close they are. I just think you don't realize how similar they are and probably have little experience outside of few nights in the CBD as you believe SF is a hallowed place and is fine as you love it. I think SF is a great city and just find the DTs to be far more similar on these criteria then you do. Retail is the only difference significantl;y in SF's favor. Nightlife would be pretty significantly in Philly's favor these days.
Sure I'll give you cost of living as a plus for Philly but on the flip side you get to acknowledge why that is. Far more robust economy with higher paying jobs and overall desireability.
I generally stay away from these aggressive city vs city discussions. But why do SF homers, on this thread seem to ignore, and never address, the city's "elephant in the room": the significant homeless problem in San Francisco. And, yes, I've been to SF(more than once) so I've seen it with my own eyes.
I live in Philly(near Center City) and while our local homeless problem is a factor it's not as significant wrt to what I witnessed in SF.
Sure I'll give you cost of living as a plus for Philly but on the flip side you get to acknowledge why that is. Far more robust economy with higher paying jobs and overall desireability.
Yes, from a city-wide or metro perspective, but not when we're talking about downtowns.
To you and others here, it may be more desirable. Not necessarily to others, especially when considering the different cultures, topographies, etc. And the "why" is more in regard to the COL, not desirability.
Of course, but none of this matters. You are talking anecdotes, I am talking actual data.
It doesn't matter what you or I think of Zurich vs. Lima, it matters what the world, overall, thinks. Clearly Zurich is viewed as a much more desirable place to live.
I personally think Zurich is boring, the Swiss are somewhat annoying with all their rules, and would never live there. But that's entirely irrelevant.
Why constantly cycle back to personal wealth and cost of real estate in a topic where the criteria is laid out pretty clearly without any real reference to it?
Also, when it comes to income levels of people living in Center City or downtown San Francisco, again, this is a topic about downtown and not the city or metro, the difference between the two isn't striking. The only striking difference in income levels might be the presence in numbers of people living on the streets with virtually no income in San Francisco, but in terms of housed people, nope, not so much.
People who are strongly convinced that Philadelphia's downtown really is that far a distance away from downtown San Francisco might want to go through the criteria again (remember, again, downtown) and also think through when was the last time they had spent any length of time in Center City.
I generally stay away from these aggressive city vs city discussions. But why do SF homers, on this thread seem to ignore, and never address, the city's "elephant in the room": the significant homeless problem in San Francisco. And, yes, I've been to SF(more than once) so I've seen it with my own eyes.
I live in Philly(near Center City) and while our local homeless problem is a factor it's not as significant wrt to what I witnessed in SF.
thats been hashed out, there's no denying it.....the factor isnt the city, its west coast weather and other dynamics favorable to the homeless, whats the point? doesnt change anything else
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.
