comparing big cities (transplants, university, living in)

[oaa1982]

big cities have some good advantages: easy public transportation, more job opportunities, usually better education (university level), better medical services, and easiness for strangers to be a part of the society.

if we have Boston, Dallas, NY city, Philadelphia, los angeles, san fran., and chicago. which would be the winner? I think safety, affordability, cleanliness, and weather should be the criteria for selection and ranking.

[j33]

I know nothing of Dallas, but for affordability Philly and Chicago beat the other places mentioned hands down, however, I can't say much for the weather in either place. New York is probably one of the safest of the bunch.

Most big cities have a lot of transplants so it is fairly easy to get to 'get in with the people' if an effort is made. However, usually that effort has to be made by joining something, either a sports team, a social group, etc. It isn't going to just happen on the street like it might in smaller towns.

I've visited NYC several times and Boston a few times as well and think both are great cities (expensive though, thankfully I know people in both cities so I don't have to pay for lodging). In NYC my experience is that people were more laid back, friendly, and easier to talk with when I got off of Manhattan island and spent time in Brooklyn and Queens.

The only city I've been to on the west-coast is Seattle, so I'm no help there.

[Ankhharu]

Chicago would be my pick.

[dullnboring]

Let's give it a point system, where the city with the lowest score "wins". In my opinion, I would rank the cities as follows.

Safety

1. New York
2. Boston
3. San Francisco
4. Dallas
5. Los Angeles
6. Chicago
7. Philadelphia (I happened to see a chart of the 2006 murder rates and know for a fact that the city has the highest murder rate of all those listed)

Affordability

1. Dallas
2. Philadelphia
3. Chicago
4. Boston
5. Los Angeles
6. New York
7. San Francisco

Cleanliness

1. Dallas (the only city I'd really call "clean" on the list)
2. Boston
3. Chicago
4. Los Angeles
5. San Francisco
6. New York
7. Philadelphia

Weather

1. Los Angeles
2. San Francisco
3. Dallas
4. Philadelphia
5. New York
6. Boston
7. Chicago

So that means that overall, the score would be:

Philadelphia - 20
Chicago - 19
New York - 18
San Francisco - 17
Los Angeles - 15
Boston - 14

And the winner is DALLAS with nine!

Ironically, of all the cities listed, for me personally, Dallas would be my last choice. My first choice would be either New York or San Francisco.

[friendnc]

Originally Posted by dullnboring

Let's give it a point system, where the city with the lowest score "wins". In my opinion, I would rank the cities as follows.

Safety

1. New York
2. Boston
3. San Francisco
4. Dallas
5. Los Angeles
6. Chicago
7. Philadelphia (I happened to see a chart of the 2006 murder rates and know for a fact that the city has the highest murder rate of all those listed)

Affordability

1. Dallas
2. Philadelphia
3. Chicago
4. Boston
5. Los Angeles
6. New York
7. San Francisco

Cleanliness

1. Dallas (the only city I'd really call "clean" on the list)
2. Boston
3. Chicago
4. Los Angeles
5. San Francisco
6. New York
7. Philadelphia

Weather

1. Los Angeles
2. San Francisco
3. Dallas
4. Philadelphia
5. New York
6. Boston
7. Chicago

So that means that overall, the score would be:

Philadelphia - 20
Chicago - 19
New York - 18
San Francisco - 17
Los Angeles - 15
Boston - 14

And the winner is DALLAS with nine!

Ironically, of all the cities listed, for me personally, Dallas would be my last choice. My first choice would be either New York or San Francisco.

I completely agree with all of the rankings. But I wouldn't want to live in any of those areas. They're either too dirty, too hot, too cold, or too expensive. Personally, they're very important considerations for me. But if I had to pick one of those, I'd pick Dallas. My only problem with them would be the oppressive summer heat. Great post!

[Steve-o]

Originally Posted by friendnc

I completely agree with all of the rankings. But I wouldn't want to live in any of those areas. They're either too dirty, too hot, too cold, or too expensive. Personally, they're very important considerations for me. But if I had to pick one of those, I'd pick Dallas. My only problem with them would be the oppressive summer heat. Great post!

Too hot? Just curious, besides Dallas of course, which of those cities is "hot"? LOL Most of the time up here in summer our streets are clogged with AZ plates, FL plates, etc from people coming up here to escape the heat. LOL

[Steve-o]

Originally Posted by dullnboring

Let's give it a point system, where the city with the lowest score "wins". In my opinion, I would rank the cities as follows.

Safety

1. New York
2. Boston
3. San Francisco
4. Dallas
5. Los Angeles
6. Chicago
7. Philadelphia (I happened to see a chart of the 2006 murder rates and know for a fact that the city has the highest murder rate of all those listed)

Affordability

1. Dallas
2. Philadelphia
3. Chicago
4. Boston
5. Los Angeles
6. New York
7. San Francisco

Cleanliness

1. Dallas (the only city I'd really call "clean" on the list)
2. Boston
3. Chicago
4. Los Angeles
5. San Francisco
6. New York
7. Philadelphia

Weather

1. Los Angeles
2. San Francisco
3. Dallas
4. Philadelphia
5. New York
6. Boston
7. Chicago

So that means that overall, the score would be:

Philadelphia - 20
Chicago - 19
New York - 18
San Francisco - 17
Los Angeles - 15
Boston - 14

And the winner is DALLAS with nine!

Ironically, of all the cities listed, for me personally, Dallas would be my last choice. My first choice would be either New York or San Francisco.

You hit the affordibility on the head, but the rest of the list Id have to argue against. I doubt Chicago is more dangerous than LA or Dallas. Cleanliness? Dallas seemed filthier to me than Chicago ever did. I remember sitting in traffic along one of the highways and talking to my friend about just how filthy it was (also graffitti'd up). Chicago has its nasty areas, but on a whole seems MUCH cleaner than Dallas, especially in the downtown areas. And LA is far dirtier than Philly from what Ive seen. Philly, NYC, Boston and Chicago all have similar climates. Just curious as to why you picked Chicago last? In fact I think we get less snow and rain than those cities and less humidity on average.

[Ankhharu]

Originally Posted by dullnboring

Let's give it a point system, where the city with the lowest score "wins". In my opinion, I would rank the cities as follows.

Safety

1. New York
2. Boston
3. San Francisco
4. Dallas
5. Los Angeles
6. Chicago
7. Philadelphia (I happened to see a chart of the 2006 murder rates and know for a fact that the city has the highest murder rate of all those listed)

Affordability

1. Dallas
2. Philadelphia
3. Chicago
4. Boston
5. Los Angeles
6. New York
7. San Francisco

Cleanliness

1. Dallas (the only city I'd really call "clean" on the list)
2. Boston
3. Chicago
4. Los Angeles
5. San Francisco
6. New York
7. Philadelphia

Weather

1. Los Angeles
2. San Francisco
3. Dallas
4. Philadelphia
5. New York
6. Boston
7. Chicago

So that means that overall, the score would be:

Philadelphia - 20
Chicago - 19
New York - 18
San Francisco - 17
Los Angeles - 15
Boston - 14

And the winner is DALLAS with nine!

Ironically, of all the cities listed, for me personally, Dallas would be my last choice. My first choice would be either New York or San Francisco.

I live in Dallas and for 4 straight years it has led the nation in crime.
Weather? I'd put it at the bottom of the list unless you enjoy 30 straight days of 100+ degree weather. This city is just a few droughts away from being a desert.

[Cosmic]

Originally Posted by oaa1982

big cities have some good advantages: easy public transportation, more job opportunities, usually better education (university level), better medical services, and easiness for strangers to be a part of the society.

if we have Boston, Dallas, NY city, Philadelphia, los angeles, san fran., and chicago. which would be the winner? I think safety, affordability, cleanliness, and weather should be the criteria for selection and ranking.

Well definitely take Boston off your list. I lived there for 34 years. It is not safe, it sure is not clean, forget the weather most days are miserable, it is sure not cheap if you are a real resident. Tourist see Boston totally different than it really is.

I would pick Dallas or San Fran.

[plaidmom]

If money were no object I'd keep a small apt. in both NY and San Fransisco(and a cabin in the mtns in NM in between).

Chicago is growing on me though(currently living in the Midwest).

Dallas...ick. Too hot. Too new.