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.
Bay Area is somewhere at the top, but so are lots of other areas... but it's not #1. You said "if not, the wealthiest" implying that it was the wealthiest which is false.
I was saying it was at, or near the top...which is true. As far as average incomes go for major cities, I'm pretty sure the top 3 are DC, SF, and Boston. Either way, this is getting away from the point. The Bay Area is quite wealthy. Let's just leave it at that.
I clearly remember a racist police officer shooting an innocent black (?) guy and a riot breaking out. That was in Oakland if I remember.
Also, how about that story from a few weeks ago about that girl being gang raped in the Bay Area while everybody just stared, joined and laughed???
Bay Area is not safe. Especially Oakland! It's crime-ridden.
There was protest back in January over the killing of a man who got killed by a Bart Officer. No one died.
There were a couple hundred in the crowd , they lit a car on fire and broke a few windows. Big woop. I've seen worse riots after a sports event. Truth is protests are a daily thing in the Bay Area and sometimes people get out of hand when strong emotions are involved.
Yes a girl did get raped in Richmond and it is a horrible thing, just like people standing around and watching a young man get beat to death with a 2x4. Both areas have their problems with crime, no doubt about that.
Right. Salinas is over 100 miles from San Francisco and 2 counties removed from the Bay Area. Only the counties that actually touch the S.F. Bay should be considered the Bay Area
Salinas is in Monterey County. Monterey County borders San Benito County. San Benito county is a part of the Bay Area. Therefore, you are wrong.
I don't think it's even close, the Bay Area wins hands down.
Ditto. This is really a ridiculous question, even though I love Chicago. I just got back from visiting San Francisco over the holiday. The person I was staying with is from Chicago, but relocated to San Francisco about 10 years ago. He's employed now, but went through a very long period of unemployment and almost completely ran out of money. Even at his lowest point, he refused to move back to Chicago where he has relatives he could have moved in with and lived for free.
Two of the other people visiting him this weekend were old friends of his from Chicago. They both very badly want to relocate to San Francisco like our friend who hosted us. I personally don't know anyone from the Bay Area with a huge desire to relocate to Chicago.
Bay Area is somewhere at the top, but so are lots of other areas... but it's not #1.
Actually as far as Per Capita Income, The Bay Area is number 1.
Combined Statistical Areas by Per Capita Income, 2007
1 San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA $57,687
2 New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA $53,025
3 Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-VA-MD-WV $51,354
4 Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-NH-RI $48,211
5 Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA $47,360
And as far as Median Family Income, The Bay Area is again, number 1.
Combined Statistical Areas by Median Family Income, 2008
1 San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA $93,327
2 Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-VA-MD-WV $93,121
3 Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-NH-RI $82,680
4 Hartford-West Hartford-Willimantic, CT $81,693
5 Minneapolis-St Paul-St Cloud, MN-WI $80,651
^This one is particularly impressive because the Bay Area surpassed DC to become number 1 in 2008.
As far as Average Wage Per Job, The Bay Area also ranks 1st among all Combined Statistical Areas.
Combined Statistical Areas by Average Wage Per Job, 2007
1 San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA $65,687
2 New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA $63,487
3 Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia-DC-VA-MD-WV $56,224
4 Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-NH-RI $53,097
5 Hartford-West Hartford-Willimantic, CT $52,728
Quote:
You said "if not, the wealthiest" implying that it was the wealthiest which is false.
Actually by several measures, the Bay Area is the wealthiest. Its a fact.
And we don't even have to start talking about percentages but for fun, here's one.
Combined Statistical Areas, Number of Households Earning $200,000+ Annually, Percentage of all Households, 2008
New York 702,798...8.8%
Los Angeles 354,675...6.2%
San Francisco 293,755...11.1%
Washington DC 292,844...9.4%
Chicago 208,028...5.9%
Boston 194,115...6.8%
Philadelphia 134,491...5.5%
Dallas 118,259...5.1%
Houston 114,955...5.7%
Atlanta 111,500...5.5%
Miami* 98,757...4.9%
Seattle 90,927...5.5%
Minneapolis 74,414...5.3%
Detroit 72,642...3.5%
Phoenix* 59,146...4.0%
*Metropolitan figures as these areas are not part of Combined Statistical Areas but have very large populations.
No, that just means our homes aren't over-appraised. Stop trying to make us believe Oakland is what it's not...Oakland is a dump.
LOL...Oakland even with its crime, stomps effortlessly on any city in Chicagoland as far as sophistication, urbanity, diversity, culture, food, art, music, transit options and so on.
LOL...Oakland even with its crime, stomps effortlessly on any city in Chicagoland as far as sophistication, urbanity, diversity, culture, food, art, music, transit options and so on.
You wish you could.
You keep telling yourself that. Oakland is NOT more desirable than any city in Chicagoland (even with it's crime??).
LOL...Oakland even with its crime, stomps effortlessly on any city in Chicagoland as far as sophistication, urbanity, diversity, culture, food, art, music, transit options and so on.
You wish you could.
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 .
Oakland has a crime problem, yes..But it's also got some great areas. Like Rockridge, Grand Lake, etc.. not to mention the beautiful spots in the Oakland Hills. Given a chance, I'd take living in Oakland, over a Chicago suburb any day.(I've had many family members who lived in Oakland at one time or another)
Now if we're comparing the entire metro area of the Bay Area to the entire Chicago metro--you've got to include Gary, Indiana as well.. Technically it's the "Chicago-Naperville-Joliet-Gary, IL-IN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area." And as bad as some Oakland neighborhoods are, the city is a hundred times better than the giant stinking mess of Gary.
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.
.