SF vs Chicago For Young Non-Tech Professional (2013, quality of life)
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.
Which city do you think offers more in terms of:
-Nightlife
-Entertainment
-Dining
-Public transportation
-Dating
-Quality of life
-Career opportunities in finance/investment
-Cost of living, I know housing is much cheaper in Chicago, but what about other expenses in comparison to SF.
Would be great to hear from people that have lived in both cities, especially from those that have lived in the SF of the tech boom 2.0 (2013+).
For what you've listed, everything is either in Chicago's favor or comparable. However, there are things that Chicago and San Francisco have in common when it comes to living in a large, dense city, so your dislike of San Francisco might still carry over to Chicago. Maybe list out the things you like about San Francisco and what you would like about it to be different?
-Nightlife: Chicago. It's a bigger city with better 24 hour transportation and last call is much later.
-Entertainment: Chicago
-Dining: Tie. Both are culinary destinations for the world. SF leans more toward higher-end and higher prices, as well as more toward the Asian cuisines. Chicago does lower priced food much better, as well as basically all European foods. You would be hard-pressed to find bad food in either city though.
-Public transportation: Chicago. Not even a comparison. SF is like 3rd world compared to Chicago.
-Dating: Chicago. I found dating in SF very difficult as it is a very transient city and there just honestly not that very many attractive people.
-Career opportunities in finance/investment: Tie, maybe lean toward SF just because the finance and investment sector there is so strongly tied to tech. If tech is booming in the Bay, finance will also. However, I would suspect that Chicago's financial market is more diverse and therefore better for long term, just not today probably.
-Cost of living: The housing prices in SF are so disgustingly high that it negates any savings you would make anywhere else. Whether food or transportation or taxes or anything are lower in SF, it will NOT make up for the difference in eating out. Also, restaurants are insanely expensive in SF for the most part (high rent=expensive meal/drink costs to make profit).
Seriously, if you're not in tech, there is basically no reason to move to SF right now. Maybe eight years ago they were comparable. But SF is so outrageously expensive that it's not worth it to move there unless you're trying to make it in tech.
-Nightlife: Chicago. It's a bigger city with better 24 hour transportation and last call is much later.
-Entertainment: Chicago
-Dining: Tie. Both are culinary destinations for the world. SF leans more toward higher-end and higher prices, as well as more toward the Asian cuisines. Chicago does lower priced food much better, as well as basically all European foods. You would be hard-pressed to find bad food in either city though. lowered price in SF doesn't exit anymore. $7 for slice of pizza, $10 for eggs and toast, $10 for gyro, $8 hot dogs.
-Public transportation: Chicago. Not even a comparison. SF is like 3rd world compared to Chicago. MUNI are BART are terrible. BART stops running at midnight and doesn't offer monthly passes. From Oakland to SF two-way BART ride is $6.90.
-Dating: Chicago. I found dating in SF very difficult as it is a very transient city and there just honestly not that very many attractive people. Agree! Now I know what 49ers mean (not the football team)
-Career opportunities in finance/investment: Tie, maybe lean toward SF just because the finance and investment sector there is so strongly tied to tech. If tech is booming in the Bay, finance will also. However, I would suspect that Chicago's financial market is more diverse and therefore better for long term, just not today probably.Pay in finance is still lower than tech on average. Plus a lot of techies look down on people that work in finance here.
-Cost of living: The housing prices in SF are so disgustingly high that it negates any savings you would make anywhere else. Whether food or transportation or taxes or anything are lower in SF, it will NOT make up for the difference in eating out. Also, restaurants are insanely expensive in SF for the most part (high rent=expensive meal/drink costs to make profit).I have been fooled many times by looking at restaurants menus on yelp from 2013 or before when everything was 40% cheaper. Also the housing stock here is terrible compared to Chicago.
Seriously, if you're not in tech, there is basically no reason to move to SF right now. Maybe eight years ago they were comparable. But SF is so outrageously expensive that it's not worth it to move there unless you're trying to make it in tech.
100%
I agree! I am currently living in San Francisco and Chicago is my first choice for relocation.
I agree! I am currently living in San Francisco and Chicago is my first choice for relocation.
Great choice! I love it there myself. I'm looking to move there or Philly. I lived in SF for 3 years and after several visits to Chicago and a short temporary few months in Philly, it baffles me why anyone would move to SF honestly.
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.
