U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: LA or NYC
NYC 28 50.91%
LA 27 49.09%
Voters: 55. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-09-2019, 01:34 PM
 
Location: SoCal
1,029 posts, read 1,384,934 times
Reputation: 1011

Advertisements

Projecting the trajectory over a long span is difficult. Who would have predicted the mass movement of people in Sun Belt cities decades ago? Yeah Florida was the retirement area but from California to Arizona and Texas to Georgia.

A lot of cities in these states, including LA, will have to deal with issues with massive growth in a car centered world. How to deal with sprawl? how to deal with increasing traffic? But at the same time not having the typical public transit infrastructure found in older cities of urban rail lines, series of commuter rail lines.

In terms of urbanity, walkable areas, public transit, Los Angeles Metro is not desired among many. You can read any of the threads why people prefer certain cities over LA. LA is changing dramatically. It is out of necessity with no more space to sprawl without huge commutes and increasing traffic congestion. People are starting to embrace that the Metro is growing bigger, denser and more walkable with public transit access. This isn't just regulated to Downtown or the core. Happening in Pasadena, Glendale, Long Beach, Santa Ana, Burbank, parts of the San Fernando Valley, San Gabriel Valley, South LA, Westside, Gate Way cities and some orange county cities. Many areas with Metro rail access are trying to figure out how to make a city function and work best in this changing world. Culver City is doing a great jobs creating lots of mixed use residential projects and currently building offices, hotel and residential with commercial in the huge parking lot. Eventually it will need to deal with how to connect seamlessly its Downtown area to the Metro station about 1/3 mile away.

Im not saying LA is going to be better than NYC. It isn't going to have the biggest skyline, nor the most extensive public transit system. It isn't going to have the most walkable city. BUt LA Metro is doing its own thing. It has never tried to compete with NYC. It was never trying to create the biggest skyline. It was never competing with the most rail. IT was never trying to get the most density per square mile. So it isn't a competition. A lot of people want to come to the LA area for many reasons. I feel the weather and geography (beaches/mountains) is a huge draw for many. If LA Metro created more housing and become somewhat more affordable, I think more people would try and move here for that alone.

For all these reasons I think this is why I think LA Metro has the brightest future. But overall it comes down to preference. I think many people will prefer the big city, tall buildings, vibrancy of NYC with its public transportation. LA will just have to deal with its beach culture and mountains/hills and kale culture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 10:13 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn, New York
3,487 posts, read 3,647,967 times
Reputation: 3160
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler View Post
Hudson Yards is the largest development in the entire US, but that by no means makes it the only major development in the city or metropolitan area.

The tall buildings arenít going soley to Manhattan but to downtown Brooklyn, Long Island City (Queens), and Jersey City in New Jersey as they now have massive growing skylines as well as development throughout other parts of the metropolitan area.

There are cities in the Tri-State Area that have been seeing growth and infill in the last decade or two that have went through a half century of loss and that is a strong fundamental difference.

Thereís currently one of the single most (excessively) expensive mass transit project happening right now in NYC (East Side Acces) which is happening in already packed Midtown Manhattan, but its greatest benefit will be to allow for far greater commuter train frequencies and new services which is great for even those outside of Manhattan.

The Hudson River and New York Harbor are cleaner than theyíve been in decades and the city has built many parks around what was a pretty derelict waterfront and has also introduced several frequent public ferry services.

Also, it was not electric vehicles that cleaned up the air in LA, though they will likely help greatly in the future. It was much more stringent emissions standards which California passed that are above and beyond what federal emissions standards stipulate and which some states have wisely adopted.

Consider that NYC is actually adding more people than LA is on the city, MSA and CSA level since the last census and think about the changes that have to come to accomodate more people.

NYC has changed quite a bit in recent years as has LA. However, 31 years is very long time and the fortunes of US cities have in the past dramatically changed within such a timespan for better or worse, so these new developments are interesting but their importance to the overall trajectory over such a timeline is difficult.
I think the biggest construction is the new NYC water tunnel from upstate. I am sure there will be a National Geographic documentary in a few years about that one once it opens, since they have been digging it for 50 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:03 AM
 
Location: In the heights
20,981 posts, read 22,563,879 times
Reputation: 10939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gantz View Post
I think the biggest construction is the new NYC water tunnel from upstate. I am sure there will be a National Geographic documentary in a few years about that one once it opens, since they have been digging it for 50 years.
Yea, that thing is massive. It's supposed to cost less than how much the East Side Access is ending up costing, but given how these massive projects in New York seem to go way over budget, maybe it'll "win."

It still boggles the mind how myopic and inefficient the East Side Access plan is. That thing should have always been a tunnel to downtown Manhattan and over to downtown Brooklyn with small stations along the way to make a through-running system for LIRR rather than the gargantuan two-tunnel, double-decked behemoth underneath an already over-impacted station. Ugh.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:41 AM
 
6,114 posts, read 13,606,302 times
Reputation: 3518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logicist027 View Post
I still think the difference is obvious that its LA. New York has the Hudson Yard as the only serious transformation. More tall buildings don't fundamentally change NYC, that's what it is already. Unless there are others that I missed, enlighten me since I only heard that one.

Think about it like this, in ~30 years you will be able to tell children

- Yeah the USC area used to be considered the hood, but it's nice now
- The Inglewood area was not a place that people wanted to live, but now its expensive and has the Ram's stadium along with the Clippers stadium there
- The public transportation was nothing, but then the Olympics came and they about doubled the size of the train lines
- The LA river was paved over, but they took out the concrete in some of the sections so you can go have a walk down there now
- The downtown area used to be underwhelming, but it's gotten much nicer now
- The air quality was way worse, but then electric vehicles came along and really helped clean up the air
- Now with driverless cars, you don't NEED to buy a car in LA anymore, you can just catch an Uber or Lyft because its cheap and easy; before this was unthinkable


By the way these aren't things LA is talking about, these are things that LA is doing.


Obviously LA
I mean basically all of this can be said about NYC too.

-Large swaths of NYC outside of a select few neighborhoods in Manhattan, BK and outer Queens were considered the hood, but there are very few truly bad neighborhoods left in the city.
-The Mets and Yankees both got new stadiums. MetLife stadium is new.
-I'll give you this, LA has made huge strides in public transit while NYC has remained just about stagnant in terms of expanding its rail coverage.
-The Hudson and the East River, as OyCrumbler stated, are both much cleaner now and the Gowanus Canal is in the process of being cleaned up as well. Basically, all the waterways throughout NYC are much better off now than they were 30 years ago.
-DTLA has gotten nicer, but it's the only truly urban part of LA and it still doesn't match anything NYC can offer. LA spruced up one single urban neighborhood. NYC has, for better or for worse, cleaned up countless neighborhoods.
-Air quality, yes, I'll give you that. But it's still some of the dirtiest air in the country.
- I mean driverless cars are cool, I guess. I think they're ridiculous and dangerous and the money was wasted on what could have been public transit investment so that everyone could benefit regardless of income bracket. Also, great. You can order a Lyft or Uber that's cheaper than potentially owning a car now. NYC still has the most robust public transit system in the country and car ownership is more of a burden than a necessity here. Also, serious question, is it still illegal to hail a cab in LA? In NYC, you can call a Lyft or Uber or hail a cab from anywhere or take a subway 24/7.

As for what OyCrumbler stated about development, as well, Hudson Yards is more impressive than anything LA is doing. Long Island City, Downtown BK, Chelsea/Midtown West, Flushing and probably some other neighborhoods I'm forgetting are going through massive building booms right now. Even the South Bronx is getting some heavy investment now. Across the river, the NJ cities along the Hudson are unrecognizable from Jersey City, through Hoboken, Weehawken and Edgewater are all experiencing huge building booms. Even inland, Harrison was basically nothing even just 5 years ago, but is full of life and apartments now. Newark is even finally getting in on the action. Idk enough about LI and Westchester County, but I'm sure there's stuff going on there too.

A lot of people voting for LA seem to be making the assumption that NYC is stagnant possibly, and LA is transforming itself way more. I don't see how they're that different. Both had worse areas that are now desirable. I'll cede that LA is making bigger strides with public transit. But both are building big projects, though NYC's are probably even bigger but show less impact on the skyline and mobility and vibe of the city since one project would have less impact on a much larger denser city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 03:57 PM
 
486 posts, read 350,750 times
Reputation: 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by jessemh431 View Post
I mean basically all of this can be said about NYC too.

-Large swaths of NYC outside of a select few neighborhoods in Manhattan, BK and outer Queens were considered the hood, but there are very few truly bad neighborhoods left in the city.
-The Mets and Yankees both got new stadiums. MetLife stadium is new.
-I'll give you this, LA has made huge strides in public transit while NYC has remained just about stagnant in terms of expanding its rail coverage.
-The Hudson and the East River, as OyCrumbler stated, are both much cleaner now and the Gowanus Canal is in the process of being cleaned up as well. Basically, all the waterways throughout NYC are much better off now than they were 30 years ago.
-DTLA has gotten nicer, but it's the only truly urban part of LA and it still doesn't match anything NYC can offer. LA spruced up one single urban neighborhood. NYC has, for better or for worse, cleaned up countless neighborhoods.
-Air quality, yes, I'll give you that. But it's still some of the dirtiest air in the country.
- I mean driverless cars are cool, I guess. I think they're ridiculous and dangerous and the money was wasted on what could have been public transit investment so that everyone could benefit regardless of income bracket. Also, great. You can order a Lyft or Uber that's cheaper than potentially owning a car now. NYC still has the most robust public transit system in the country and car ownership is more of a burden than a necessity here. Also, serious question, is it still illegal to hail a cab in LA? In NYC, you can call a Lyft or Uber or hail a cab from anywhere or take a subway 24/7.

As for what OyCrumbler stated about development, as well, Hudson Yards is more impressive than anything LA is doing. Long Island City, Downtown BK, Chelsea/Midtown West, Flushing and probably some other neighborhoods I'm forgetting are going through massive building booms right now. Even the South Bronx is getting some heavy investment now. Across the river, the NJ cities along the Hudson are unrecognizable from Jersey City, through Hoboken, Weehawken and Edgewater are all experiencing huge building booms. Even inland, Harrison was basically nothing even just 5 years ago, but is full of life and apartments now. Newark is even finally getting in on the action. Idk enough about LI and Westchester County, but I'm sure there's stuff going on there too.

A lot of people voting for LA seem to be making the assumption that NYC is stagnant possibly, and LA is transforming itself way more. I don't see how they're that different. Both had worse areas that are now desirable. I'll cede that LA is making bigger strides with public transit. But both are building big projects, though NYC's are probably even bigger but show less impact on the skyline and mobility and vibe of the city since one project would have less impact on a much larger denser city.
As for DTLA, it is the only truly vertical part of LA, but that is what makes LA LA so I don't mind it. We like our sun-drenched cities out here.

As for driverless cars, I think this is a bigger deal than people realize. Of course in NYC this isn't such a big thing because you guys don't use cars so much. When I visited, I used the subway too, but for LA this is a game-changer. Not only will it make commuting cheaper because you don't have to pay a driver, but it will also be more convenient and holds the potential for getting electric cars on the road en-masse.

As for neighborhoods, I'll call it even, a lot of neighborhoods in LA have gotten better, the two I mentioned are just the obvious next areas as someone who lives here can tell. Apparently Culver City where Amazon & Apple want to be now used to be the hood. So it happens everywhere. Even Riverside is getting nicer now.


When it boils down I think LA is solving more transformational problems. LA's biggest problems as stated by most are

1. High housing prices
2. Traffic
3. Urban design (aka ugliness, bike friendly etc.)
4. Bad neighborhoods

I'll call it a tie between LA & NYC for #1, both are ridiculously expensive and that probably won't change.
For us the driverless cars & transit system are really huge so it makes a bigger dent to the average person's quality of life. For the 3rd issue - I think the removal of concrete from the LA river is a big step. New & nice neighborhoods are a good thing as well. I think we are making some progress on this one, though not as large as on #2. As for #4 we are definitely making headway on that as we are seeing new good neighborhoods like the USC area & Inglewood.

So what is NYC doing that will be transformational? I think that it is adding new things, they just don't seem to be in the same vein as a major jump in some important metric.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 04:23 PM
 
6,114 posts, read 13,606,302 times
Reputation: 3518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logicist027 View Post
As for DTLA, it is the only truly vertical part of LA, but that is what makes LA LA so I don't mind it. We like our sun-drenched cities out here.

As for driverless cars, I think this is a bigger deal than people realize. Of course in NYC this isn't such a big thing because you guys don't use cars so much. When I visited, I used the subway too, but for LA this is a game-changer. Not only will it make commuting cheaper because you don't have to pay a driver, but it will also be more convenient and holds the potential for getting electric cars on the road en-masse.
I mean I guess? But why not just invest more in public transit. This whole driverless car thing is absolutely stupid to me. But that's just me I guess. It's still cars on the road. It still doesn't solve the problem of traffic by volume. The only way for LA to survive is to build vertical. But it refuses to do so. Look at the fights happening by the rich people in the Hollywood Hills over Hollywood urbanizing and the NIMBYs in Santa Monica fighting everything and Beverly Hills suing incessantly over the Purple Line. LA does not have the willpower to urbanize, even though it needs to.

Quote:
As for neighborhoods, I'll call it even, a lot of neighborhoods in LA have gotten better, the two I mentioned are just the obvious next areas as someone who lives here can tell. Apparently Culver City where Amazon & Apple want to be now used to be the hood. So it happens everywhere. Even Riverside is getting nicer now.
Are you from LA? I'm from LA. Near Culver City. You say "apparently Culvery City...used to the hood." I was born in 1992. I never remember it being hood. It might not have been as fancy as it is now, but it was never the hood. There have been talks about Inglewood much more desirable for a while. It's happening, though slowly.

Quote:
When it boils down I think LA is solving more transformational problems. LA's biggest problems as stated by most are

1. High housing prices
2. Traffic
3. Urban design (aka ugliness, bike friendly etc.)
4. Bad neighborhoods

I'll call it a tie between LA & NYC for #1, both are ridiculously expensive and that probably won't change.
For us the driverless cars & transit system are really huge so it makes a bigger dent to the average person's quality of life. For the 3rd issue - I think the removal of concrete from the LA river is a big step. New & nice neighborhoods are a good thing as well. I think we are making some progress on this one, though not as large as on #2. As for #4 we are definitely making headway on that as we are seeing new good neighborhoods like the USC area & Inglewood.

So what is NYC doing that will be transformational? I think that it is adding new things, they just don't seem to be in the same vein as a major jump in some important metric.
This is kinda the point I'm making. Something is more easily "transformational" in LA than NYC because NYC just is the more vibrant city. We're literally building an entirely new neighborhood (Hudson Yards). As the previous poster mentioned, we're getting the East Side Access for LIRR. The tallest residential building in the world is here. Like I said, a few projects combined allowed Harrison to actually become a place people think of when moving to, whereas a few years ago it was basically a nothing spot along PATH. Penn Station is being entirely redone.

Look at all the buildings listed here by the city of NYC.
https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/building...struction.html

https://www.dezeen.com/2018/06/21/se...new-york-city/

https://www.thrillist.com/lifestyle/...-nyc-this-year
^The most significant ones from this post would be the following. TBH, there's so much going on, I didn't even hear about most of these.
"The long-awaited Jackie Robinson Museum will open this December to honor the legacy, life, and career of a true American hero. Featuring memorabilia and artifacts, the museum will celebrate #42ís accomplishments both on the field and in the struggle for civil rights. Come February, The AKC Museum of the Dog will land smack-dab on Bark-ahem-Park Avenue. The new museum will feature doggo-related artwork and information about the 193 AKC-recognized breeds. Such museum. Very culture."

"June 2019 marks 50 years since the Stonewall uprising -- essentially the beginning of the modern Gay Rights movement. The anniversary coincides with WorldPride's US premiere, lending this yearís LGBTQIA+ celebration amplified significance. Festivities abound throughout June, including events, meals, concerts, parties, lectures, the worldís largest Pride march, and oodles of general rainbow-festooned revelry."

"More restaurants will open in 2019 than youíll find in some small cities
Last year we gained outstanding new French, Japanese, Oxocan, Italian, Sichuan, Korean, Persian, Indian, and American restaurants. And this year is off to a good start, too: In Midtown, Valerie is an antidote to the standard area Irish pubs; Violet brings grilled pizza to the East Village; Philippe is the latest loud, clubby, subterranean addition to Chelsea, and Krok -- dearly departed Pok Pokís nealy identical replacement -- is getting its sea legs in the Columbia Waterfront District."

"Atop the West Side rail-yards rises Hudson Yards, Manhattanís newest manufactured neighborhood -- the largest private real estate development, ever -- featuring gargantuan gleaming phalluses in which to live/work, wallet-draining luxe shops and restaurants, and an outdoor observation deck where one can stare into the abyss/horizon. 2019 will be an important year of openings for the development; this Spring cultural center, The Shed will open to the public. Think 21st-century fever-dream Lincoln Center."

"Tourist-magnet, rail-trail, and municipal green space trend-setter the High Line continues its northward expansion with the Spur at 30th Street, featuring the Plinth: a space dedicated to showcasing large-scale art. Side by side with the inaugural show (Simone Leighís Brick House), visitors will find commissioned site-specific mural and sculptural work, video art every day from dusk till close, and space for performance art and dance, and itís all free. Try being cynical about that."

"Following the example set by CVS in its bold 2014 move to discontinue cigarette sales, the deadly productsí sale is now prohibited at all pharmacies in the five boroughs, including any supermarket or retail store with a pharmacy section. Whether the move will make a difference in smoking rates remains to be seen, but itís one more move in the city governmentís ongoing bid to help New Yorkers kick the habit."

"Staten Island is making an ambitious play -- tons of new development, specifically in St. George (where the Staten Island Ferry Terminal conveniently lives), aims to attract visitors and new residents. Fraternal-twin projects are slated to open in 2019: Empire Outlets, a massive outlet mall, and Lighthouse Point, a schmancy new development featuring a waterfront, commercial and retail space, and both luxury and affordable housing. Yeah, yeah, yeah, but you canít argue with the view."

"Lots of grousing about Amazonís HQ2. A bunch of rezoning to make way for more development. Congestion pricing will be approved. The Brooklyn Heights Promenade will close to fix the BQE. Rent laws will undergo long overdue reform."

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...n_4182025.html

All of these are massive projects. But NYC is massive. And whether anyone in LA wants to admit it or not, NYC is more dynamic. Things change here more quickly (except the subway). So new things being built and arriving in the city are not as "transformational" here as they would be in other cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:25 PM
 
Location: SoCal
1,029 posts, read 1,384,934 times
Reputation: 1011
I dont really see how a bunch of new housing/office/commercial development is transformational.

A city metro like LA is making leaps forward. A huge leap is convincing millions of people that public transportation is as good mode of transit as a car. By building more public transit that gives more people access. Currently everyone has an excuse not to use public transit.

Another huge leap is high density/mid and high rise living. While in NYC is known for high rise living as well as miami, chicago, etc. Los Angeles it is all about the detached home with the yard. Your ultimate goal is move out of an apartment and into a "suburban"style house. But because of scarce land, almost 90% of all new units are in these midrise-high-rise buildings. The other 10% are townhomes where you have your own house but next to or maybe attached to another house with little space in between with little to no yard space.

Another huge leap is urban walkable neighborhoods. LA has lot of walkable neighborhoods but really just a few sections that are urban. You quickly lose the small bits of urbanity as you walk from one street to another. Often you pass by large parking lots or giant strip malls that take away from the sense of urbanity. Places like SF, Chicago, NYC, Philly dont lose this urbanity for quite a distance. Downtown LA is LA's most urban area but still has a lot of dead areas that are just lots of parking lots with no shops or residential or transit. Koreatown has better urbanity than Downtown but there are just way too many strip malls.

Right now so many people live in areas that are not walkable, dont use a lot of public transit even if it is available, and dont live in mid-rise/high rise buildings. The idea of not having a car and using public transit and living in taller buildings and doing lots of walking is so foreign to many people in the LA area.

LA's transformation is not just building a bunch of new things, but is going to be a total mindset change of those things. Embracing a new city where people actually use public transit rather than fear it. Living in taller denser walkable areas where they dont need a car even for families with kids. A transformational thing for NYC is changing from a public transit culture to a car culture. Transformational for NYC is to stop building taller and tear down and building single family homes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:44 PM
 
Location: In the heights
20,981 posts, read 22,563,879 times
Reputation: 10939
As far as I can tell, the original question was about which city will be preferable and not which one was going to have a more transformational change. I fully agree that LA will have a substantial qualitative change within the next decade and a half due to a series of ordinance changes greatly favoring mixed use and higher density development, a great expansion of its transit system that has an actual funding mechanism, and a likely general change in attitude of both natives and transplants coming in. NYC has larger quantitative changes in a lot of ways, but it’s true that it’s more of an expansion of things that the city already has and is known for.

That being said, the changes LA is undergoing and that I greatly appreciate are, for me, essentially changes towards having more of the attributes I like about New York and other urban cities. I certainly much prefer it to 90s and 00s Los Angeles, but there are simply much more and a greater diversity of those urban attributes I like in NYC than there is in LA and I don’t think a decade and a half will change that—however, the 31 year scope the topic is asking has a possibility of doing so, but that’s such a far projection that I simply don’t know.

I will say there is one potentially transformational change in NYC that is happening a bit and that’s the revitalization and dense development of places outside downtown and midtown. The sheer fact that Newark has shifted to population gains after a half century of decline is hopefully a sign of things to come. There are other such urban centers outside of Manhattan in the Tri-State area which also seemed to have turned a leaf and that’s a very positive sign. These strong urban nodes are actually a bit like LA with Culver City, Santa Monica, Long Beach, Pasadena, etc.

Last edited by OyCrumbler; Yesterday at 06:05 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:20 PM
 
15 posts, read 2,521 times
Reputation: 40
For me itís NYC and to be honest itís probably not that close. Even though Los Angeles isnít my type of city I do still like it a lot. Itís a fantastic city to be in and from reading all these posts about it, it seems as though it will be taking giant leaps forward in the next coming decades. Itís something to be proud about. But all of these developments that itís doing is at the end of the day only serving to catch up to NYC. Currently NYC is the premier US city and it has no equal in this country.. LA, Chicago, etc rival it in some ways but overall no city matches NYC with everything that it offers. To say that LA has usurped NYC as the ďmain cityĒ is near crazy and that is now or in 2050. The best LA could do would be to equal NYC by 2050 (as I said I donít think LA rivals NYC at the moment). The problem with that is people would be assuming that there would be no development going on in Nre York. As if NYC is just gonna sit there and let all this future development and progress pass it by! New York has always been at the forefront of development in the country and always will be. LA is striving to achieve by 2050 what NYC has now in 2019-2020. Iím not tryna to say that LA is 30 years or so behind NYC but LAís plan for development (as well as most cities in the US) are to become more urban. New York does that the best - itís the model city for that kind of growth. Los Angeles will be a formidable metropolis by 2050 but it will never reach the level that NYC will be at in most metrics that it wishes to achieve: growth development, population, urbanity, density, mass transit, downtown core, economy, wealth, international recognition, etc...New York would always be the top city. LA at best would be the distant second. That doesnít make it a bad city and a failure of a city. People will always be attracted to live a LA. It just means that the city ahead of it is so far ahead that itís just not fair to ask it to over take it.

Los Angeles also has a lot more ďunforeseenĒ issues that can arise at any moments notice that New York just doesnít have to deal with. Earthquakes, wildfires, droughts, etc are much bigger problems that what NYC has to deal with (hurricanes and blizzards). Itís economy is good but itís no NYC - NYC is overalls much more robust economy with higher wages and lower unemployment and also attracts the best and brightest from all different industries. LA is also a bit further out from the rest of America than NYC is (NYC is in the middle of the northeast corridor and has quick connections to the Midwest, the South, Canada, the Caribbean and Central America, Europe and Africa). LA is a city of the future but so too is San Francisco. Or Seattle. Or Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, Phoenix, Denver....they all have bright futures. But itís telling that they all wish to develop into urban, dense, cosmopolitan cities like NYC rather that keep the sunbelt/sprawl model that LA has used for decades. And there isnít much denying it...LA is building high rises and skyscrapers at a rapid pace, itís enacting more pedestrian friendly development, it trying to build a world class public transit system, itís investment disproportionately more into its downtown and immediate surrounding area compared to the rest of the city. This is whatís trending today. Itís the cityscape that young professional and empty nesters alike want and thatís not going anywhere anytime soon. And itís what NYC already offers to the highest level. It is the best for this kind of growth and it will continue well past 2050.

Los Angeles is fine for what it offers right now. And it will be okay in 2050. But it pales in comparison to what NYC offers and I dont see it changing in the future. Honestly Iíd pick niether city if I could. Both cities are too expensive and over time I donít think that their benefits will continue to outweigh the costs of living there. However between NYC and LA, itís just hard to look at LA and find what it has that NYC doesnít have and that isnít going to change in the next coming decades so itís NYC for me
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 07:50 AM
 
7 posts, read 795 times
Reputation: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by jessemh431 View Post
I wouldn't go that far, but it is losing its status. Many studios are opening satellite locations that rival LA's capability. Movies are being filmed in many more locations now. Off the top of my head, I know Atlanta, NC, and Vancouver are stealing a lot of LA's filming. It'll never die in LA, it'll always be the center of it all, but Hollywood is going to continue facing stiff competition from other cities and studios opening in other cities.
I've never heard of North Carolina giving Hollywood competition. Interesting. I know that Connecticut, Fairfield County in particular, is up there with Atlanta in this respect, with countless movies filmed there. Stamford is also home to the Jerry Springer show, Maury, the Steve Wilkos show, and the Trisha Goddard show. ESPN and WWE are headquartered in the area. Deal Or No Deal, One Life to Live, and All My Children have also been filmed there as well.

Last edited by Bbobsully94; Today at 07:51 AM.. Reason: Lacking important info
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top