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.
^^^^^ is that a thing? I’ve never once heard anyone call SF a mini Manhattan. I don’t think SF is anything like Manhattan at all
Plenty of people in SF will tell you it's literally the Manhattan of the West Coast and, therefore, the better Manhattan because it's West Coast and summers are cooler and winters are warmer. They actually think Manhattan and SF are the same thing, and SF is possibly better to them. It's insanity.
Boston gladly accepts they're not NYC and don't try to be. SF tries to be so badly, but everyone outside of SF knows Manhattan is better. Just don't tell someone in SF that. They'll shun you for life.
Bingo! The gym, and nature are huge in SoCal. I can guarantee if the OP wants to find "energy" they can definitely find it in the gym at all hours of the day. It's called LA fitness for a reason.
Lived in cities on both coasts, and can't say SF is any lower energy than Boston or DC. Have noticed that we don't stay up late for sports due to time zone, but Boston is hardly a late night city. Also, Atlanta is not a high energy city.
Since when was Boston high energy? Boston is pretty low energy too compared to places like NYC and Chicago. DC on the other hand though I don't find low energy in some places - depends on where you go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent_Adultman
I don’t know, Tokyo and Hong Kong might have NYC beat. The energy in those two cities is pretty astounding. But in North America, there’s nowhere even remotely close.
Yeah, for North America NYC is on another level from everyone else. For the world though for places I've been to - Hong Kong, Istanbul, and Chengdu (China) all are even above NYC in energy level which is pretty crazy to think about. I also experience Beijing during a high travel time - pretty crazy too. I haven't been to Tokyo but I have friends from NYC or who spend a lot of time in NYC who have and some felt overwhelmed there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jessemh431
You see more people jogging or sitting in outdoor cafes in LA than NYC, Philly, DC, or Chicago. Please tell me you're joking!
There are a lot of people jogging in LA along some areas near the ocean, but to diminish this for Chicago basically shows me that you don't know how the summers are in Chicago especially. The entire mentality of the city is that each and every single person got screwed over by every winter, so they maximize the time outside during the summer months. That is why you hear about how great the summers in Chicago are and how much there is to do. When I lived there, the summers were absolutely amazing and I would spend all day outside eating, drinking, walking, etc (when not at work of course). It's just an incredible vibe and everyone comes outside. As a result, there's outdoor patios, rooftops, etc open all over the entire city and extremely common. The lakeshore is constantly full of people jogging, biking, walking, etc especially in the summer. I think anybody who has spent at least one full summer in Chicago, especially in the last 10 or 15 years would understand this.
Last edited by marothisu; 02-08-2019 at 10:17 AM..
There are a lot of people jogging in LA along some areas near the ocean, but to diminish this for Chicago basically shows me that you don't know how the summers are in Chicago especially. The entire mentality of the city is that each and every single person got screwed over by every winter, so they maximize the time outside during the summer months. That is why you hear about how great the summers in Chicago are and how much there is to do. When I lived there, the summers were absolutely amazing and I would spend all day outside eating, drinking, walking, etc (when not at work of course). It's just an incredible vibe and everyone comes outside. As a result, there's outdoor patios, rooftops, etc open all over the entire city and extremely common. The lakeshore is constantly full of people jogging, biking, walking, etc especially in the summer. I think anybody who has spent at least one full summer in Chicago, especially in the last 10 or 15 years would understand this.
You read my post wrong. I know Chicago is completely full of energy in summer and there are few places like it. I was saying to the poster that I quoted that he was flat out wrong. What he said was not an opinion. It was flat out wrong because Chicago and the others are far more vibrant at street level than LA will ever be.
You read my post wrong. I know Chicago is completely full of energy in summer and there are few places like it. I was saying to the poster that I quoted that he was flat out wrong. What he said was not an opinion. It was flat out wrong because Chicago and the others are far more vibrant at street level than LA will ever be.
Yeah - I probably read it wrong then. LA can be vibrant in some areas. I really enjoy the areas along the ocean - some of which aren't technically part of the city of LA. Some neighborhoods aren't bad but yeah, I mean definitely not compared to the likes of NYC or even Chicago on average IMO.
Plenty of people in SF will tell you it's literally the Manhattan of the West Coast and, therefore, the better Manhattan because it's West Coast and summers are cooler and winters are warmer. They actually think Manhattan and SF are the same thing, and SF is possibly better to them. It's insanity.
Boston gladly accepts they're not NYC and don't try to be. SF tries to be so badly, but everyone outside of SF knows Manhattan is better. Just don't tell someone in SF that. They'll shun you for life.
Thats pretty lame.
The only two US downtowns that even remotely offer a Manhattan type vibe are Center City Philadelphia and downtown Chicago, and neither of them claim to be equal to Manhattan.
Maybe because San Fran is so far, people are more out of touch with reality?
Plenty of people in SF will tell you it's literally the Manhattan of the West Coast and, therefore, the better Manhattan because it's West Coast and summers are cooler and winters are warmer. They actually think Manhattan and SF are the same thing, and SF is possibly better to them. It's insanity.
Boston gladly accepts they're not NYC and don't try to be. SF tries to be so badly, but everyone outside of SF knows Manhattan is better. Just don't tell someone in SF that. They'll shun you for life.
I mean come on now... I've lived in SF and have never heard anyone compare it to Manhattan. SF folks don't even aspire to be anything like NYC, they already think SF is the best at what it is and that's perfectly fine.
I mean come on now... I've lived in SF and have never heard anyone compare it to Manhattan. SF folks don't even aspire to be anything like NYC, they already think SF is the best at what it is and that's perfectly fine.
Your experience and mine must be totally different then. I was constantly told how SF is literally the Manhattan of the west coast and better because the weather is "better" and the Mexican food is "better." I don't think either have good weather, but I prefer NYC's. And both have bad Mexican food, though SF just benefits from being in CA so it's a bit better.
I was constantly reminded of how similar SF is. Like anything remotely Manhattan-esque was instantly equated to Manhattan and I was told how it's actually the better version of it. That was my experience.
Maybe because San Fran is so far, people are more out of touch with reality?
I think it's a lot of people who haven't actually lived in NYC. They can come off as having similar vibes unless you spend enough time in both. Both are urban and have good shopping. But until you experience both equally, you can't fully appreciate how much better the social scene in NYC is (dining/bar hopping/clubs/etc.), how much later everything stays open, how much better the public transit is, etc. Then the ones who have lived in NYC and move to SF, in my experience, were the ones who couldn't handle NYC. It was too much for them, but they failed in NYC, so they have to make it sound like SF is actually the better version so they don't come off as losers.
Again, this is my experience. I know tons of people who moved out of SF because they realized it sucks, and now love living in NYC. The ones who moved back to SF? Their excuse is almost always that SF is just so much cooler and there was more to do in SF. It's fine to admit NYC was too much for you. I wouldn't judge anyone who admits it. It can be too much. But don't play it off like you're too good for NYC. My friends that moved back to LA from NYC gladly admit they just couldn't handle NYC anymore. It wore them down and they wanted more living space. Totally acceptable. None sat there and tried to make it out that LA was just so much better and they disliked NYC.
I mean come on now... I've lived in SF and have never heard anyone compare it to Manhattan. SF folks don't even aspire to be anything like NYC, they already think SF is the best at what it is and that's perfectly fine.
I have actually personally heard it. A few years ago here in NYC, I overheard a conversation of some lady visiting from SF talking to a cop about how "SF is like a mini Manhattan" trying to get him to move there. Also I have a friend who is originally from SF who had moved away, only to move back to SF a handful of years later. When I saw him in SF, he was complaining to me about how everyone there thought they were NYC all of a sudden and that he longed for the "old days" of his city.
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.