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.
Uh, SF is not close to any of these cities. Take a look at a map. That's like saying Chicago is close to NYC.
SF is probably a bigger tourist destination because it's more famous as a tourist-oriented city. Things like Golden Gate, Fisherman's Wharf, Chinatown, the rolling hills, cable cars, and Alcatraz are all probably more globally iconic than any landmark or neighborhood in Chicago. Nearby redwoods, wine country and (further afield but not super far) Yosemite don't hurt either.
Yeah, they are. Lots of people I know group all three together when visiting the WC from another country group Vegas, LA and SF together as one trip because they are in the same region.
SF to LA on a flight is 1 hour and fifteen minutes, nonstop.
LA to SF on a flight is 1 hour and five minutes, nonstop.
Both flights are extremely cheap too at around 100 bucks. Several of my friends from western Europe, Australia, Brazil group the cities like this because they are coming from so far away. They will come for around 2 weeks and see all cities in one trip.
There is nothing to group with Chicago, the rest of the Midwest is a bore. Cleveland? Indy? Detroit? What international tourists cares about the Midwest outside of Chicago? I think this is ONE of the reasons as to why Chicago has lower tourists numbers than SF.
Good points. SF is more international while Chicago is a national powerhouse.
Well as far as being cosmopolitan, the Bay Area is more racially diverse than either the NY or Chicago areas, has a higher percentage of foreign born residents than either the NY or Chicago areas, has a higher percentage of foreign language speakers than either the NY or Chicago areas, has a level of minority diaspora that extends from the city to the borders of the entire region to the East and South and even BEYOND--to illustrate this point, just look at these 2-scale maps of just the Bay Area vs NY-Philly.
Well as far as being cosmopolitan, the Bay Area is more racially diverse than either the NY or Chicago areas, has a higher percentage of foreign born residents than either the NY or Chicago areas, has a higher percentage of foreign language speakers than either the NY or Chicago areas, has a level of minority diaspora that extends from the city to the borders of the entire region to the East and South and even BEYOND--to illustrate this point, just look at these 2-scale maps of just the Bay Area vs NY-Philly.
All I see are more Asians. Those are sized to scale, yeah? The NY-Philly region extends much wider and I'd bet there are more people. Also, you're including 2 metro regions for NY/Philly with a large space of uninhabited land in between - the Pine Barrens of NJ. A good portion of that "white" area to the extreme southeast is actually pines with very very few people living within them.
ALSO, that map doesn't seem to include Passaic County, which has Paterson one of NJ's biggest cities. It's missing a good portion of the metro region including Long Island for one. It doesn't even contain all of Brooklyn or Queens or the Bronx. This is looking worse and worse for you. Can't speak for the SF area but what gives?
Give me an accurate map of both the NY and Philly metro regions which includes almost all of NJ and more instead of just a map of a random strip of land cutting off half of NYC then we'll talk.
Last edited by JerseyGirl415; 12-24-2013 at 11:54 AM..
Everyone knows NY is the most/top 3 cities in the world for diversity - stop skewing stats and worry about the Chinese being in slavery and oppressed and blacks leaving the Bay Area before posting ridiculous claims.
Yeah, they are. Lots of people I know group all three together when visiting the WC from another country group Vegas, LA and SF together as one trip because they are in the same region.
No they aren't. These cities are extremely far apart. In fact, Chicago is closer to far more major cities than SF.
And why are you showing flight times? Obviously if you are flying between cities they aren't close. Your point was that SF gets lots of foreign tourists because it is close to other touristy cities, then you show flight times.
So is NYC next to London, because the two are a short plane ride away? There are flights between the cities basically every few minutes, all day. It's the busiest route on earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CMAN83
Both flights are extremely cheap too at around 100 bucks. Several of my friends from western Europe, Australia, Brazil group the cities like this because they are coming from so far away. They will come for around 2 weeks and see all cities in one trip.
No, this is wrong too. The flights are not $100. And you make no sense, because there's barely any time difference between taking a flight from SF to Vegas as there is from SF to Chicago. In the first, maybe you spend 5 hours overall, in the second example, maybe you spend 6 hours overall. The incremental difference is slight.
A foreign tourist visiting SF, and traveling only by plane, can visit Chicago just as easily as they can visit Vegas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CMAN83
There is nothing to group with Chicago, the rest of the Midwest is a bore. Cleveland? Indy? Detroit? What international tourists cares about the Midwest outside of Chicago? I think this is ONE of the reasons as to why Chicago has lower tourists numbers than SF.
That doesn't make any sense. There are far more cities surrounding Chicago, and all kinds of famous attractions within the same distance as Vegas or San Diego or LA is from SF. You can visit Niagara Falls, Toronto, the Great Lakes, lots of places. And the Eastern Seaboard is just a few hours further.
Well as far as being cosmopolitan, the Bay Area is more racially diverse than either the NY or Chicago areas, has a higher percentage of foreign born residents than either the NY or Chicago areas, has a higher percentage of foreign language speakers than either the NY or Chicago areas, has a level of minority diaspora that extends from the city to the borders of the entire region to the East and South and even BEYOND--to illustrate this point, just look at these 2-scale maps of just the Bay Area vs NY-Philly.
This is a pretty stupid map, BTW. You tried gerrymandering the map to claim greater diversity, and then falsely use race as a proxy for diversity.
And sprawl is sprawl. The map you posted just shows a bunch of tract home areas in the East Bay. An area isn't inherently more interesting just because the people are Californians of Mexican descent from generations ago as opposed to New Jerseyans of Italian descent from generations ago.
And, if you are so obsessed with race, there are far more whites, blacks, Asians and Latinos in the NYC area, and NYC area destroys SF area as an immigration hub. Even for the inherent strengths of the SF area, like Chinese, NYC area destroys SF.
I have no idea what discussion you're referring to, but again, regardless of what weird, gerrymandered maps you use, NYC area has far more people of every racial category, and absolutely destroys SF area in immigration numbers.
I have no idea what discussion you're referring to, but again, regardless of what weird, gerrymandered maps you use, NYC area has far more people of every racial category, and absolutely destroys SF area in immigration numbers.
I appreciate your dismay, but the below are undisputable, statistical facts:
1. The San Francisco Bay Area is more racially diverse than the New York and Chicago areas.
2. The San Francisco Bay Area has a higher percentage of foreign born residents than the New York and Chicago areas.
3. The San Francisco Bay Area has a higher percentage of foreign language speakers than New York and Chicago areas.
4. The San Francisco Bay Area has a far higher regional level of minority diaspora than the New York and Chicago areas.
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.
