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.
Sorry but only a true Texas homer can find Houston beautiful.
As you've said yourself, it's all in the eyes of the beholder. Sorry to invalidate your conclusion, but that poster is Southern Californian, born and raised:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJester
I am currently a third-year Electrical Engineering major at UC Davis, and a lifelong Southern Californian. Very eager to move to Houston or Florida after graduation.
Food: Texas. California has no local food of its own except for some hipster snacks like Avocado Toast. Texas cuisine actually got tradition and character--BBQ, Tex-Mex, and even Houston cajun food. Even for ethnic cuisines (Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, Mexican) Houston and Dallas can easily compete with Los Angeles and San Francisco.
Quality of Life: Austin feature the most expensive real estate in Texas, but it's still just as cheap if not cheaper than Sacramento, one of the cheapest areas in California. Weather? Sure, California doesn't have hurricanes or tornadoes or ice storms, and Dallas has tornadoes and ice storms, while Houston has hurricanes, but other than these natural disasters, Texas has much better climate than California. Summers in Houston are perfect--very warm nights, and just when it gets too hot an afternoon rainstorm cools everything off. Much of California features 110+ heat waves with no breezes and not even a cloud in the sky, much less rain. And even when it's 110 by day, it's freezing (55 or so) at night. Then in the Fall and Winter there's these hot dry winds gust up to 80+ mph, cause wildfires and knocking out trees and powerlines. So Texas, of course.
Friendliness: Texas. California can be very fast-paced and cliquish; people are reserved and stick only to family and close friends.
Scenery: Texas. Don't get me wrong, Orange County has both mile-high mountains and coastal hills overlooking the beach, but Austin's hills remind me of South Orange County hills, only much greener in the summer and with rivers and lakes. All creeks are bone dry most of the year in Southern California, and everything's brown and dead during the summer in Los Angeles. Though pancake-flat, Houston is nonetheless beautiful--New Orleans-style bayous, swamps, and pine forests, along with sugar-fine, white-sand Gulf Coast beaches, featuring crystal clear, 85 degree water. That warm water is all the envy here in California; even far South in San Diego the summer water temperature never exceeds 65-70 degrees.
Infrastructure: Texas. California is ill-prepared. We spend 100+ billion in building a high speed rail when our reservoirs, aqueducts are in disrepair in the middle of a drought. Sacramento and Stockton are just as flood-prone as Houston, what with its flat topography and location at the confluence of two rivers, but still many levees there in serious disrepair. Texas roads are much smoother and durable (thanks to them being paved in concrete), and despite Harvey, Houston has perhaps the most robust flood control infrastructure in the country (think about the flooding Manhattan suffered after Sandy, which delivered not even one-tenth of the rainfall in Harvey). Of course, Los Angeles traffic is worse than Houston or DFW. Public transportation? Sure, you've got the BART in SF that is actually heavily used, on par with subways in the Northeast, but it's beat-up, overcrowded, and has scanty coverage of the city. LA light rail is new and nice, but slow and once again, not much coverage. It is a fact that suburbs like Plano or Richardson near Dallas have light rail and Los Angeles suburbs like Irvine do NOT. Los Angeles also does not have a subway to the airport, although in all fairness, the BART does provide very quick service to SFO. Dallas features light rail to the airport. Texas airports are also much nicer, although LAX did rennovate their international terminal.
Infrastructure: Texas. California is ill-prepared. We spend 100+ billion in building a high speed rail when our reservoirs, aqueducts are in disrepair in the middle of a drought. Sacramento and Stockton are just as flood-prone as Houston, what with its flat topography and location at the confluence of two rivers, but still many levees there in serious disrepair. Texas roads are much smoother and durable (thanks to them being paved in concrete), and despite Harvey, Houston has perhaps the most robust flood control infrastructure in the country (think about the flooding Manhattan suffered after Sandy, which delivered not even one-tenth of the rainfall in Harvey). Of course, Los Angeles traffic is worse than Houston or DFW. Public transportation? Sure, you've got the BART in SF that is actually heavily used, on par with subways in the Northeast, but it's beat-up, overcrowded, and has scanty coverage of the city. LA light rail is new and nice, but slow and once again, not much coverage. It is a fact that suburbs like Plano or Richardson near Dallas have light rail and Los Angeles suburbs like Irvine do NOT. Los Angeles also does not have a subway to the airport, although in all fairness, the BART does provide very quick service to SFO. Dallas features light rail to the airport. Texas airports are also much nicer, although LAX did rennovate their international terminal.
But in all fairness, if you look at the light rail lines in Dallas and LA -
The Red Line in Dallas, going from Union Station to Parker Road Station in Plano is a 45 minute ride with 17 stops.
The Gold Line in LA, going from Union Station to APU/Citrus College Station in Azusa is a 50 minute ride with 18 stops.
Irvine is nearly double that distance, so it would be better suited by commuter rail - which it is via the Pacific Surfliner.
Those are nearly identical ride times and stops, and mileage is also very similar to each other (I couldn't find information on the rail mileage, but both lines more or less follow the road network and they each run about 21.5 and 24.5 miles, respectively).
Also, the Green Line in LA stopped near LAX (though not at the central terminals) but with the new People Mover being constructed and the Green Line being extended to Aviation/Century, the Metro link to LAX isn't far off.
But on a different note, I had no idea Dallas had such an extensive light rail system, it was really awesome to read about online
Food? California. Houston is understandable excited about their ethnic food, but it’s still relatively new and no where near the scope of Korean in LA, Chinese in San Gabriel (LA) or San Francisco, and Vietnamese is still phenomonally better in Little Saigon in Orange County. I’ll give Texas BBQ, but farm-to-table California cuisine was the last major food movement that took over the country, and multiethnic fusion cuisine (like korean tacos, ) is a California artform. Avocado toast is Australian. But seafood in Texas? Nothing beyond crawfish compares to the seafood jewels that you can get from the Pacific Ocean. Plus, you guys are proud of Tex-Mex, so that’s a downvote in terms of Mexican.
As for rail in LA, it isn’t big now, but with a 150 BILLION investment it will be. And light rail is in construction to LAX and should be available in about 5 years. And really, it’s all about rail in big cities, where all the huge cultural institutions are. If Houston and Dallas aren’t epicenters for it, it’s a non-issue. Suburbs can use cars.
I dont disagree with a lot of what you wrote, except for one thing: the Vietnamese food in Houston can go toe-to-toe with anywhere on earth outside of Vietnam. Having grown up in Torrance, I used to eat Vietnamese food in Westminster all the time. Its obviously exceptional there, but living here its pretty on par with that.
He's right about the ego thing. And I'm okay with living in a "glorified Alabama". I like Alabama.
Texas isnt anything like Alabama except for the Eastern 8th of Texas. Sure it has a big ego, but all the big states do. California, New York, etc do too.
Saying Texas is a glorified Alabama is like saying California is a glorified Arizona. I think it should be pretty obvious that Texas offers way more, is way more diverse, is way more cultural, etc. than Alabama.
Besides the poster in question is from Ohio. Dont throw stones in glass houses.
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.
