Why didn't Los Angeles make the U.S. News top 100 places to live list? (San Francisco: buying, wages)

[sean1the1]

Originally Posted by Coseau

The problem is that if Ontario Ranch is being developed in which all those 46k households need automobiles for transportation to work and everyday needs such as shopping, then that is 46k to 92k plus more cars squeezed in a small geographical area of 8200 acres causing more traffic congestion on the roads and highways. From the look of it seems that the planners of this development realize that this cannot be an auto dependant city so they are planning to design this community with new urbanism in mind.

Car dependant or not they are expecting 162k residents thats over 12k ppsm that's an extreme efficiency in land use that you honestly won't find anywhere in the country.

[Losfrisco]

Originally Posted by Astral_Weeks

-The Los Angeles region in its early years did have widely scattered settlements but even those settlements were not particularly low in density and they were NOT the result of automobile driven sprawl. They were the result of the 1,000 mile plus inter-urban street car system which extended across the region.

-Since World War II, moreover, the density of the Los Angeles region has climbed dramatically, while that of some older cities in the North and East have declined. By some measures, it is one of the most dense metro areas in the nation.

You're barking up the wrong tree because you're using actual facts about the history of Los Angeles.

The stereotypes of L.A.-"car centric" and "sprawl" are so firmly drilled into people's heads that facts don't matter.

Want an example?

I went to a photo shoot near Chinatown last month-some of the models were from London. The first thing one said in his rant against Los Angeles was that "there were no skyscrapers", at least not like the Shard in London.

I sat and nodded, knowing it would be utterly useless to tell him that not only does L.A. have a much taller skyline than London (38 skyscrapers vs. 26), but also two buildings taller than the Shard-because the stereotypes are so powerful.

People are not able to mentally process that a city can be geographically large and also historically urban and rail-centric.

[Cinema Cat]

Originally Posted by kttam186290

You poor, put-upon, underprivileged white, "heterosexual" Republican, Christian-evangelical male...

It must be so terribly hard on you to share a huge metro area with brown people, black people, Asians, LGBTs, liberals, moderates, Pagans, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, Sikhs and atheists.

Your statement is racist.

You have no basis to assume he's a "white, heterosexual, Republican, Christian-evangelical male."

I've met Jewish women who've complained about Latinos moving into their neighborhood. I've read about Latinos who aren't happy about blacks in their neighborhoods. I've known of blacks who complain about whites moving into their neighborhoods (i.e., gentrification). And just about all of these people are, I assume, Democrats.

If you look at how people behave, rather than how they talk, most people prefer to live among their own. That's why we have Little Saigon, Little Ethiopia, etc. That's why Glendale is known for its Armenians, and Fairfax for its Orthodox Jews, and West Hollywood for its gays.

I've seen so many C.D. threads that ask, "Hi, I'm Indian (or Somali, or Jewish, or gay, or whatever), and I'm moving to X city. Where is the Indian (or ... etc.) community located?"

Most people prefer to be among their own. But only whites are condemned for feeling that way.

[kttam186290]

Originally Posted by Cinema Cat

Your statement is racist.

You have no basis to assume he's a "white, heterosexual, Republican, Christian-evangelical male."

I've met Jewish women who've complained about Latinos moving into their neighborhood. I've read about Latinos who aren't happy about blacks in their neighborhoods. I've known of blacks who complain about whites moving into their neighborhoods (i.e., gentrification). And just about all of these people are, I assume, Democrats.

If you look at how people behave, rather than how they talk, most people prefer to live among their own. That's why we have Little Saigon, Little Ethiopia, etc. That's why Glendale is known for its Armenians, and Fairfax for its Orthodox Jews, and West Hollywood for its gays.

I've seen so many C.D. threads that ask, "Hi, I'm Indian (or Somali, or Jewish, or gay, or whatever), and I'm moving to X city. Where is the Indian (or ... etc.) community located?"

Most people prefer to be among their own. But only whites are condemned for feeling that way.

Nothing "racist" about my statement. It did, apparently, strike a nerve with you though.

Birds of a feather?

[Cinema Cat]

Originally Posted by kttam186290

Nothing "racist" about my statement.

Without knowing anything about the poster's identity, you assumed he was white, because only whites can possibly wish to avoid people who are different. Your assumption is racist. And demonstrably false.

Originally Posted by kttam186290

It did, apparently, strike a nerve with you though.

Projection?

[MuscleCar]

Originally Posted by Cinema Cat

Without knowing anything about the poster's identity, you assumed he was white, because only whites can possibly wish to avoid people who are different. Your assumption is racist. And demonstrably false.





Projection?

Typical liberal hypocrisy. Just like it's ok for blacks and browns to be racist, but not whites.

[homenj]

Originally Posted by ryanst530

Homelessness, housing crisis, traffic, highly variable quality of schools, and cost are probably the main reasons. You have to remember, these rankings are largely based on objective attributes.

LA isn't a very appealing place to live on paper.

Ironically enough though, I think the demand to live here is enormous, in spite of its problems. The big draw to LA for many people, I believe, is the overall vibe and other subjective attributes, things that aren't really captured in these rankings lists.

I think the reputation of LA being a beacon of opportunity, whether it is real or imagined, is always going to attract people to live here.

Same thing applies to NYC.

[TrumpTard69]

Originally Posted by Burkmere

You keep forgetting that there's multiple times more Applebees in the LA metro per capita than there are in the Phoenix Metro. Nice try though. I guess you forgot our last discussion about this. Did you need the FACTS again????

You can't fool me. I've been do the LA metro a billion times. I lived in Ca for 35 years. I doubt you've even spent any time at all in the Scottsdale area. It's a million times nicer than LA.

Again, thanks for my huge pension. You folks are so nice.

Was here tonight. About a mile form me. Make most LA restaurants look like a poor boy's taco bell. Actually, ate at one near LAX last Nov when flying to Asia...cuz there ain't crap near the airport there....you do gots lotsa Applebees though...you'd actually do well to even have one of those near LAX....

https://kasaiscottsdale.com

Honestly cannot say I know anything first-hand about Phoenix area/Arizona...just from what I see in the news and hear from friends that are from there or have lived there.
My opinion is it's an absolute armpit! You really have to have given up on life to want to live there and/or are just an angry Trump Tard right-winger livnig in what is your people's version of paradise!

[MuscleCar]

Originally Posted by TrumpTard69

Honestly cannot say I know anything first-hand about Phoenix area/Arizona...just from what I see in the news and hear from friends that are from there or have lived there.
My opinion is it's an absolute armpit! You really have to have given up on life to want to live there and/or are just an angry Trump Tard right-winger livnig in what is your people's version of paradise!

You have TDS

[BGS91762]

Originally Posted by Coseau

The problem is that if Ontario Ranch is being developed in which all those 46k households need automobiles for transportation to work and everyday needs such as shopping, then that is 46k to 92k plus more cars squeezed in a small geographical area of 8200 acres causing more traffic congestion on the roads and highways. From the look of it seems that the planners of this development realize that this cannot be an auto dependant city so they are planning to design this community with new urbanism in mind.

One good thing is that Ontario Ranch has several Metrolink stations to LA and OC within 5 miles or so. So many of those residents may have other options than clogging the freeways.