Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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: which one
bay area 54 52.43%
chicagoland 49 47.57%
Voters: 103. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 11-30-2009, 07:02 PM
 
Location: Denver
6,625 posts, read 14,387,205 times
Reputation: 4191

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dncr View Post
The Bay Area has better "suburbs" than Chicagoland, but Chicago makes up for everything its suburbs lack. With the exception of Evanston, Chicago suburbs are fairly "all American" which makes them fairly boring.

The Bay Area has a more exciting Metro, but its a lot more expensive. As for Oakland stomping on any city in Chicagoland, that's all opinion. I'd say Evanston, since they are somewhat similar, could beat Oakland .
Good call. The inner-part of Chicago is very nice, including some of the inner-suburbs...however once you get away from the center city, the Bay Area seems to outshine Chicagoland in most every category.

 
Old 11-30-2009, 07:02 PM
 
Location: Los Altos Hills, CA
36,625 posts, read 67,123,456 times
Reputation: 21154
Quote:
Originally Posted by NowInWI View Post
You keep telling yourself that. Oakland is NOT more desirable than any city in Chicagoland (even with it's crime??).
No city in Chicagoland has a better art scene, better restaurant scene(not even on the same planet), better urbanity, better natural setting(as if), better weather(not even a question), better diversity, better walkable neighborhoods etc.

I mean really, you guys want to make this about Oakland yet no city in Chicagoland is even worthy of comparing.

At all.
 
Old 11-30-2009, 07:04 PM
 
Location: Twilight zone
3,639 posts, read 8,269,028 times
Reputation: 1762
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dncr View Post
The Bay Area has better "suburbs" than Chicagoland, but Chicago makes up for everything its suburbs lack. With the exception of Evanston, Chicago suburbs are fairly "all American" which makes them fairly boring.

The Bay Area has a more exciting Metro, but its a lot more expensive. As for Oakland stomping on any city in Chicagoland, that's all opinion. I'd say Evanston, since they are somewhat similar, could beat Oakland .
true..but not all suburbs have that all american/midwest/boring feel. There are towns with people from all over the globe.

-mas23-
 
Old 11-30-2009, 07:05 PM
 
Location: Twilight zone
3,639 posts, read 8,269,028 times
Reputation: 1762
Quote:
Originally Posted by NowInWI View Post
You keep telling yourself that. Oakland is NOT more desirable than any city in Chicagoland (even with it's crime??).
i beg to differ....
 
Old 11-30-2009, 07:12 PM
 
2,598 posts, read 4,894,308 times
Reputation: 2275
Quote:
Originally Posted by mas23 View Post
i beg to differ....
Go right ahead - these are just opinions.
 
Old 11-30-2009, 07:13 PM
 
Location: The State Of California
10,399 posts, read 15,480,729 times
Reputation: 4283
Default So All Being Said!......................

Quote:
Originally Posted by NorCal Dude View Post
I was born and raised in the suburbs of Chicago. Mother lived in Wheaton, father in Glen Ellyn. Father took a job in California when I was 13 back in 1996 and I went with him, while my brother stayed. I know both places very well.

Naturally when I saw this poll I felt it was a draw. But as I thought this out, it is quite clear, it is not.


First and Foremost lets get a few things straight that some people seem to be cloudy on:

1)The bay area is more diverse than Chicago, but it is very segregated just like Chicago, maybe not as bad, but still very much so. As a black man I can say anyone who thinks otherwise, should probably consult an eye doctor, as well as a mental health doctor.

2) The bay area is a hot bead of wealth, due primarily to venture capitalists in silicon valley, which is really marginalized only by the plethora of money in Manhattan. In 2008 the bay area had nearly 50% of the nations venture capital. That is a pretty amazing feat for a metro area of 7 million scattered all over the place.

3) Both cities are pathetically corrupt, the only difference is Sfers will protest about it where as Chicagoans will just deal with it, either way nothing changes. As a result of political apathy Chicago politicos are a lot more in your face about it, where as in SF politicos are a lot more sleezy and behind the scenes.


That being said, lets get down to more facts:

in terms of weather and topography the bay area with out a doubt trumps chicago. Save the months of summer, on days when it is not humid, the coastal bay easily gives Chicago a run for its money.
And yes, this does factor in to the quality of life. Taking your kid to baseball practice in Feb, watching high schoolers grab their surf boards after school in Pacifica, going wine tasting in Livermore, or tacking your kids horse back riding along the hillside overlooking 280. The bay area is gods country.

Gods country that has gone sour that is. Outside of manhattan you will not see a level of income disparity any where as great in the country. The bay area is simply an area of haves and have nots, with the middle completely destroyed. Only in the bay area can you have places like Palo Alto(brain factory for silicon valley) sitting across the bay from OAKLAND AND Richmond, two of the most dangerous cities in the country. Further more the cost of living is astronomical. The bay area is the only place where I have seen people making 100k+ living in modest town homes because they simply have no option. It was either do that and have good schools, or live in a slum city or an out-skirt exurb. Or rent.

The segregation very pronounced. It is racial and it is economic. Whites and asians in SF. Poor and coloreds in south east SF. Whites and asians in San Mateo and Santa Clara county. With little poverty pockets of browns and blacks(Redwood City, EPA, East San Jo). Lots of asians and indian subcontinent folks in the Tri cities (Fremont, newark, union city) with some lower income mexican areas. East bay, whites in the hills coloreds in the flats, with a few intermingled in places Like Berkeley, San Leandro, etc. A few stand outs like Alameda and the trendy areas around lake merritt. The whole 680 corridor=white and asian until you hit Concord(more browns). South San Jose to morgan hill is white and asian with mexicans in poor areas. All bay area Out skirt towns a lot more diverse.

The fact of the matter is the bay area has a lot of different types of people but they rarely intermingle, albeit more so than Chicagoland. But now where near the level of sacramento, or NYC.


Chicago by and large has crappy weather. I am here right now visiting and it is 30 something maybe colder. I donno but it is terrible and gray and it stinks. From Mid november to about early march you can count on the weather being cold, weather or not is gray is irrelevant to me, when the sun shines it sure is not helping. And yea its flat. Yea there is some crime but it is no where near the worst in the country (Like Oakland or richmond).

In terms of amenities all things urban, I have five words to describe what Chicago does to all three of the bay areas main cities combined (SF, San Jose, Oakland) Blows them outta the water. The only thing the bay area (sf specifically) has is density, and thats it. Bay area transit is laughable. CTA>Muni and metra>BART, CALTRAIN,VTA, ACE, CAPITOL CORRIDOR, COMBINED. Arts, museums, sports, ethnic hoods, architecture, fine dining to hole in the wall joints,the city of Chicago takes that cake no contest.

And chicagoland simply blows the bay area out of the water in terms of cost of living, quality of life (ie crime rates and schools) and housing stock. This is what people mean in Chicago when they say "we have everything AND MORE, when compared to the bay area".

Chicago has BLUE BLOOD neighborhoods. North shore. Nough said. People there who can trace anscestory back to the royal family. Money that is literally in some cases a thousand years old. A few of the Marin old vanguard comes close, but not really. We have new money, plenty of suburban mansion usa suburbs like Los Altos hills.

Chicagoland has a plethora of upper middle class suburbs(with good schools). A plethora of solid baseline middle class suburbs(with good schools). Chicagoland has a plethora of lower middle class suburbs(with good schools). Chicagoland has suburbs where these various levels of middle class intermingle and mix some times going from the former to the latter in less then a suburban block. The bay area has nothing like this. Its either upscale or downscale. With the latter having bad schools and more crime.

Chicago even has lower class suburbs. Chicago land in this sense blows the bay area out of the water. Part of this is due to Chicagolands geographical advantage. Thats right, the fact that chicagoland is flat, has created millions of square miles of flat land, prime for development. Plenty of room to build up AND out. You do not see suburbs squeezed into tiny valleys (like the 680 corridor) or some 60 miles from the central city core (like Tracy, Brentwood, Fairfield, Gilroy). You do not see **** poor transit where the freeway is the only commute option, like you do in California.

Which brings me to my conclusion. As nice as the bay is, and as much as it has going for it, the fact of the matter is the BAY AREA is part of the myopic disfunction that is the state of California. And in that sense, it will never measure up to Chicagoland and other places that still resemble the United States.

I thank god that I was born in the Midwest.
So all being said "The Bay Area" is superior to Chicagoland...agreed!..
 
Old 11-30-2009, 07:27 PM
 
Location: Texas
1,365 posts, read 2,819,160 times
Reputation: 483
Chicago.

San Francisco doesn't have the sports life, the architecture, the large black culture, and it doesn't have The Loop.

To me, comparing SF and CHI is like comparing a city that tries to be cool to a city that actually is.
 
Old 11-30-2009, 07:35 PM
 
Location: Twilight zone
3,639 posts, read 8,269,028 times
Reputation: 1762
Quote:
Originally Posted by NowInWI View Post
Go right ahead - these are just opinions.
im just sayin, id choose oakland over...gary ind. no dis to gary but just my preference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMcCoySays View Post
Chicago.

San Francisco doesn't have the sports life, the architecture, the large black culture, and it doesn't have The Loop.

To me, comparing SF and CHI is like comparing a city that tries to be cool to a city that actually is.
lol, +1
 
Old 11-30-2009, 07:43 PM
 
Location: yeah
5,717 posts, read 16,288,527 times
Reputation: 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMcCoySays View Post
To me, comparing SF and CHI is like comparing a city that tries to be cool to a city that actually is.
To me, people that reply without reading the thread title are not very bright.
 
Old 11-30-2009, 07:57 PM
 
Location: Texas
1,365 posts, read 2,819,160 times
Reputation: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by krudmonk View Post
To me, people that reply without reading the thread title are not very bright.
And people that try to insult me simply because I said something negative about their area can kiss my ass...really.

I read the thread title as well as the original post and I responded how I felt. Get over it.
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.


Closed Thread


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

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top