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 do you prefer?
Boston (Metropolitan area included) 259 46.92%
San Francisco (Bay Area/Metro) 293 53.08%
Voters: 552. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-27-2011, 01:13 PM
 
Location: Los Altos Hills, CA
36,623 posts, read 67,123,456 times
Reputation: 21154

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garfieldian View Post
Most of those are personal factors for you, I pointed out ones where it is MUCH more subject such as all the nature/weather stuff. The other ones are also entirely non factors such as hispanic/asian population...yeah so?
They are major factors on C-D as evidenced by the numerous threads and discussions(often heated) revolving around both subjects.

And they are definitely worth pointing out.

Quote:
Again, not an advantage, maybe you like it, but that wasn't the criteria it looked like you were setting out to do, especially put next to the education/econ features.
Point being, there is at least one place in the world that offers ALL of the ABOVE. Not just some of the above.

Quote:
Saying that stuff such as weather/nature I believe weakens the argument on a city to city basis.
From the standpoint of desirability, its an incredibly strong statement when you can be surrounded by quality amenities, make a lot of money and feel like you live in a resort area but close to a top tier urban environment.

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airforced View Post
Let ask a simple question?

What is San Franciscos level and what's required to be on that level?
Well, off the top of my head:

All of the following criteria at the exact same time:

Physical Features:
1. Incredible Climate that is neither too hot nor too cold year round.
2. Oceanfront, Hills and Mountains.
3. Extreme biodiversity of plants and vegetation.

Demographic Features:
1. Hyper racial, socio-economic and cultural diversity and diaspora throughout the region.
2. Highly cosmopolitan, educated and worldly population.
3. At least one quarter foreign born.
4. 1 Million+ persons of Asian & 1 Million+ perspons of Hispanic Descent.
5. No racial majority.

Urban Features:
1. Downtown is considered the de facto hub of culture, art, entertainment, shopping and dining for the surrounding 200-mile radius and closest 15 Million people.
2. Concentration of at least 500+ retailers & 1,000+ restaurants in Downtown area catering to all income groups.
3. A ratio of public transit usage per population close to 1:1
4. At least 50,000,000 square feet of office space in Downtown
5. At least 5 neighborhoods with more than 50,000+ persons per square mile

Economic Features:
1. At least 25 Fortune 500 Companies
2. At least 50 publically traded companies with revenue of $1 Billion+
3. Financial Companies headquartered there must have combined assets of at least $1 Trillion+
4. A metro region economy larger than $500 Billion
5. A Per Capita GDP(CSA) of $65,000+
6. At least one third of all households earn $100,000+ Annually
7. At least 1 of the Top 50 Universities in the World according to ARWU.

Lots of places meet many of these requirements and individually they arent that hard to come by, but I dont know of anywhere except the Bay Area that meets them all at the same time.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_1ZB5cjylx2...aven11_576.jpg

LOLjk

Last edited by JMT; 07-13-2012 at 12:34 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-27-2011, 07:26 PM
 
13,940 posts, read 14,806,353 times
Reputation: 10377
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Well, off the top of my head:

All of the following criteria at the exact same time:

Physical Features:
1. Incredible Climate that is neither too hot nor too cold year round.
2. Oceanfront, Hills and Mountains.
3. Extreme biodiversity of plants and vegetation.

Demographic Features:
1. Hyper racial, socio-economic and cultural diversity and diaspora throughout the region.
2. Highly cosmopolitan, educated and worldly population.
3. At least one quarter foreign born.
4. 1 Million+ persons of Asian & 1 Million+ perspons of Hispanic Descent.
5. No racial majority.

Urban Features:
1. Downtown is considered the de facto hub of culture, art, entertainment, shopping and dining for the surrounding 200-mile radius and closest 15 Million people.
2. Concentration of at least 500+ retailers & 1,000+ restaurants in Downtown area catering to all income groups.
3. A ratio of public transit usage per population close to 1:1
4. At least 50,000,000 square feet of office space in Downtown
5. At least 5 neighborhoods with more than 50,000+ persons per square mile

Economic Features:
1. At least 25 Fortune 500 Companies
2. At least 50 publically traded companies with revenue of $1 Billion+
3. Financial Companies headquartered there must have combined assets of at least $1 Trillion+
4. A metro region economy larger than $500 Billion
5. A Per Capita GDP(CSA) of $65,000+
6. At least one third of all households earn $100,000+ Annually
7. At least 1 of the Top 50 Universities in the World according to ARWU.

Lots of places meet many of these requirements and individually they arent that hard to come by, but I dont know of anywhere except the Bay Area that meets them all at the same time.


LOLjk
Boston has SF solidly beat in EDucation, and Bolded Boston meets,, Nova Scotia has Daily Ferries to Portsmouth NH, and Portland ME, which is a quick Train/Car ride from Boston so thats 15,000,000.
Boston has 3 of the top 50 in its MSA.
Also SF is only rich because without the high income you couldn't live there due to the lack of land.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2011, 08:36 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia,New Jersey, NYC!
6,963 posts, read 20,454,507 times
Reputation: 2737
i never felt the hustle in SF that i felt in Boston

call me crazy
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2011, 09:16 PM
 
Location: Los Altos Hills, CA
36,623 posts, read 67,123,456 times
Reputation: 21154
Quote:
Originally Posted by john_starks View Post
i never felt the hustle in SF that i felt in Boston

call me crazy
Yeah, your crazy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2011, 09:40 PM
 
Location: Los Altos Hills, CA
36,623 posts, read 67,123,456 times
Reputation: 21154
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4 View Post
Boston has SF solidly beat in EDucation, and Bolded Boston meets
Uh, No.

Yes, Boston does have a cosmopolitan, worldly and educated population.

Yes, Boston meets most of the requirements with respect to Urban Amenities although Im not sure about 500+ retailers,would like a source.

Yes, Boston most definitely has at least one of the Top 50 Universities according to ARWU.

But....

Boston does not have Mountains or Hills anywhere near as close to the City as SF does.

Boston does not have anywhere near the biodiversity of the Bay Area.

Boston does not have the level of racial diaspora that the Bay Area does.

I am not convinced that Boston is the de facto cultural hub for the surrounding 200 mile radius and 15 Million people the way SF most definitely is. I could be wrong, but could someone provide evidence?

Boston's CSA GDP is not over $500 Billion, its actually about 100 billion dollars less.

Also, I dont if its true that Boston has 50+ publically traded companies with $1 Billion+ in revenue, also asking for a source.

Furthermore, my answers are not really based on a SF vs Boston comparison but generally about all cities vs SF.

Why dont you post a comment listing criteria about what it takes to be on Boston's 'level'?


Quote:
Also SF is only rich because without the high income you couldn't live there due to the lack of land.
Your right, multiple generations of wealth since the gold rush, over a century as the banking and financial center of the west, highly skilled workers and Silicon Valley have nothing to do with it.


I think the question posed to me "What doe it take to be on your city's level" would be a great thread topic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2011, 10:38 PM
 
Location: Metro Phoenix
11,054 posts, read 16,747,040 times
Reputation: 12942
Quote:
Originally Posted by john_starks View Post
i never felt the hustle in SF that i felt in Boston

call me crazy
You also said it wasn't diverse and that it and CA as a whole has no Asian influence...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2011, 11:58 PM
 
Location: East Coast of the United States
27,213 posts, read 28,295,642 times
Reputation: 24743
Quote:
Originally Posted by john_starks View Post
i never felt the hustle in SF that i felt in Boston

call me crazy
You're not crazy at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2011, 07:19 AM
 
13,940 posts, read 14,806,353 times
Reputation: 10377
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Uh, No.

Yes, Boston does have a cosmopolitan, worldly and educated population.

Yes, Boston meets most of the requirements with respect to Urban Amenities although Im not sure about 500+ retailers,would like a source.

Yes, Boston most definitely has at least one of the Top 50 Universities according to ARWU.

But....

Boston does not have Mountains or Hills anywhere near as close to the City as SF does.

Boston does not have anywhere near the biodiversity of the Bay Area.

Boston does not have the level of racial diaspora that the Bay Area does.

I am not convinced that Boston is the de facto cultural hub for the surrounding 200 mile radius and 15 Million people the way SF most definitely is. I could be wrong, but could someone provide evidence?

Boston's CSA GDP is not over $500 Billion, its actually about 100 billion dollars less.

Also, I dont if its true that Boston has 50+ publically traded companies with $1 Billion+ in revenue, also asking for a source.

Furthermore, my answers are not really based on a SF vs Boston comparison but generally about all cities vs SF.

Why dont you post a comment listing criteria about what it takes to be on Boston's 'level'?



Your right, multiple generations of wealth since the gold rush, over a century as the banking and financial center of the west, highly skilled workers and Silicon Valley have nothing to do with it.


I think the question posed to me "What doe it take to be on your city's level" would be a great thread topic.
To be comparable to Boston it needs to have (only listing things SF doesn't have)
1)the Best higher education of any city in the world
2) The best medical care in the country
3) very Distint local Culture
4) Have Rail access to the largest cities in the country.

Also Blue hill has 600ft relif, just outside city limits, and Mountians of Central Mass, southern New Hamphire, are close too the city as close as 25 miles. and several larger than 5,000ft.

All of New England 6.5+3.5+1.5+1.1+1.5 =14.1 million plus southern Nova Scotia its around 15 million..
Boston is in a transition zone between the Evergreen, and Dicidious forest, as well as the marine right along the south coast/southshore, then several micro climates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2011, 08:59 AM
 
Location: Los Altos Hills, CA
36,623 posts, read 67,123,456 times
Reputation: 21154
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4 View Post
To be comparable to Boston it needs to have (only listing things SF doesn't have)
1)the Best higher education of any city in the world
2) The best medical care in the country
3) very Distint local Culture
4) Have Rail access to the largest cities in the country.
1 At graduate level, UC Berkeley & Stanford actually RIVAL Harvard & MIT and that is no small fete.
http://www.city-data.com/forum/calif...ions-best.html

Otherwise, I'll give you colleges & universities.

2 Boston & SF each have 2 hospitals in US News' honor roll of the top 17 hospitals
Best Hospitals 2011-12: the Honor Roll - US News and World Report

Yeah, I might be inclined to concede this topic as well.

3 The notion that Boston has a distinct culture while SF does not is rather a weak and extremely hard to justify. Especially since San Francisco has the 2nd most distinct image of any US City
Paris Tops Ranking in Global City Image Study; GfK Roper Public Affairs & Media and Simon Anholt Release 2009 City Brands Index

4 I'll concede rail to the biggest cities. However the Bay Area has 3 International Airports.

So you score 3 points for sure.

Quote:
Also Blue hill has 600ft relif, just outside city limits, and Mountians of Central Mass, southern New Hamphire, are close too the city as close as 25 miles. and several larger than 5,000ft.
That's not close enough. San Francisco has hills that are much steeper right in town and visibly so all over the Metro Area. I dont know why you are even continuing to argue this one?

Quote:
All of New England 6.5+3.5+1.5+1.1+1.5 =14.1 million plus southern Nova Scotia its around 15 million.
Most of Connecticut is far more oriented towards New York.

Quote:
Boston is in a transition zone between the Evergreen, and Dicidious forest, as well as the marine right along the south coast/southshore, then several micro climates.
We have ranges in summer time highs that are sometimes up to 40 degrees at the exact same time. It can be 100+ 30 miles away from the City and only 60 something in Downtown. That sort of variance does not exist outside of California.

Well, whatever your evergreen and decidious forest comment is supposed to prove, it doesnt compare at all to the Bay Area having more species of plants, flowers, trees growing here than pretty much anywhere else in the nation.
http://secpnc.files.wordpress.com/20...tspots-map.jpg

Last edited by JMT; 07-13-2012 at 12:35 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2011, 10:26 AM
 
Location: NY-NJ-Philly looks down at SF and laughs at the hippies
1,144 posts, read 1,286,525 times
Reputation: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Boston does not have Mountains or Hills anywhere near as close to the City as SF does.
I am thankful Boston does not have mountains or hills because they are prone to attract hippies from around the country bringing their organic granola eating culture. I do not want Boston to have a hippie movement like SF did in the 60's, which still has not died and lives on.
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
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

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
Similar Threads

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