San Francisco vs LA (San Diego, Orange: crime rates, neighborhood, to live)

[Wendy97]

Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist

in SF it's so often the trendy thing to hate LA

Couldn't agree more. When I came up here, I met a guy, and we've been dating for 4 years as of now. Seriously he and all of his friends had the most negative perceptions of LA. Someone even tried to tell me that LA is so smoggy you can't even see the Hollywood sign... LOLOLOLOLOLOL, YES. Funny thing is I've never had ANY kind of perception of SF other than a neutral one until I moved up here and have been going to SF semi-regularly. Oh, I had heard the STEREOTYPE but I had only HEARD it, so no judgment had been made.

[Wendy97]

Originally Posted by stillfresh

2. u never gota worry about wearin the "wrong color" in any part of SF

No, you just have to worry about WHITE people judging you and thinking you're racist because you're WHITE. So if you're going to wear a color to SF, just make sure it isn't WHITE.

*gag*

[Wendy97]

Originally Posted by pbergen

well stated. to many people with whom i grew up and went to school on the east coast, LA is a vapid cultural wasteland filled with paris hilton wannabes and american idol rejects. never mind the fact that the aforementioned friends and acquaintances don't really have any substantial firsthand experience with LA. when i tell them how diverse, dynamic, and interesting the city and region are, they dismiss my comments out of hand like i'm some misguided rube with stars in my eyes.

Yea, agreed. WTF?

[phillyzoo]

I have to admit, sans stillfresh, this has mostly been a tame discussion.

In any event, if I had to choose between the two it would be LA. Although, if I were somehow assigned to SF I would not fret.

I'm an ex-New Yorker that moved to Philadelphia and had to get over the stigma of moving to an -OMG!- less sophisticated, less intellectual, less cultural center like Philadelphia. Comparing Phila and NY to SF and LA is not my point, nor is it a good comparison. However, NY and SF can, at times, seem somewhat bland when there is less economic and class based diversity. LA gives me that. I am able to mix it up with the intellectuals via universities, foundations, philanthropies and government and still be connected to regular working class folk, i.e., the bus driver, the cable man and the meter reader. I never knew anyone in NY like that and SF feels similar, in that sense, to me. I don't think I would ever be bored in SF and never was when I lived in LA but I still think LA just has more to do and is more ideally located to other parts of CA and other western states.

Politically, I see LA and SF as being similar, at least in who they vote into office. So that's a tie yet very important when deciding where you want to live.

[Chava61]

Originally Posted by Spiderwebs95

Couldn't agree more. When I came up here, I met a guy, and we've been dating for 4 years as of now. Seriously he and all of his friends had the most negative perceptions of LA. Someone even tried to tell me that LA is so smoggy you can't even see the Hollywood sign... LOLOLOLOLOLOL, YES. Funny thing is I've never had ANY kind of perception of SF other than a neutral one until I moved up here and have been going to SF semi-regularly. Oh, I had heard the STEREOTYPE but I had only HEARD it, so no judgment had been made.

There are stereotypes about every place from outsiders. I personally like SF better has a place to live over L.A. with the exception of the weather. I think L.A. weather is better than SF. But overall I prefer SF over L.A. as it is much more convenient place to get around by public transportation. (I don't like driving.)

[Wendy97]

Originally Posted by Chava61

There are stereotypes about every place from outsiders. I personally like SF better has a place to live over L.A. with the exception of the weather. I think L.A. weather is better than SF. But overall I prefer SF over L.A. as it is much more convenient place to get around by public transportation. (I don't like driving.)

My point wasn't that there weren't stereotypes of other places but simply that while I learn about stereotypes, I don't use them against people which I feel is done to LA on a regular basis.

And I don't like driving either... but that's only because I live in the bay area where everyone sucks so hard at driving.

[Bruin5]

Both cities have their good and bad qualities. I prefer Los Angeles but don't mind visiting SF. I've found that more people in SF have a higher opinion of themselves as opposed to Los Angeles. We have world class cultural institutions that in my opinion rival and at times beat what one would find in the Bay Area.

[Bunjee]

Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist

in SF it's so often the trendy thing to hate LA.

What's odd is it's not even trendy anymore and hasn't been for a while. In fact, that '70s attitude can be kind of a measuring stick. If don't know how esteemed the LA Symphony is, then chances are you don't know Cleveland's reputation either. If you've never heard of Ed Ruscha then you probably think Texas has never produced good art. If you've never heard of any literature out of Los Angeles then you probably don't know the most prestigious writing program in the country is in Iowa. It's ironic that anyone who bemoans the "cultural wasteland" is very likely not that involved or exposed to a lot of culture in the first place. I for one am happy that San Francisco has produced a Richard Serra and that the SF Symphony is usually also ranked among the top 10 in the world (BTW, behind LA's though it's not a horse race). Anyone who really does love the arts should be grateful they exist, wherever, and should put away the childish notions.

Of course, we're talking about what's called "high" culture here. Culture and history exist everywhere anyway. BTW, I've never heard anyone express the opinion that CalTech is becoming irrelevant.

[stillfresh]

Originally Posted by sav858

No it does not.

2007 C-D Crime Index (lower # = lower crime)
SF: 501.7
LA: 356.8

2007 Murder rate per 100,000 people
SF: 13.6
LA: 10.2

l.a has almost 4 million ppl vs 800,000 for SF. obviously "per 100k" the numbers are going to be higher. do u know how that works.. wtf

Originally Posted by sav858

Gang members shot men for wearing red, cops say

Judge orders Ramos tried on 3 murder counts

SF may not have the quite the gang culture LA does but there are plenty of dangerous gang members all over the Bay Area.

ur really going to argue SF gangs vs L.A gangs.... seriously? and we're talking SF vs LA, not LA vs bay area. there is no such thing as crips vs bloods in san francisco OR the bay area. theres no real ms13 presence either. or the proximity to mexican drug cartels. what is wrong with you

Originally Posted by sav858

They both are about equal in this department:

SF
White: 44.7%
Black: 6.7%
Asian: 31.5%
Hispanic: 14.0%
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=16000US0667000&-qr_name=ACS_2007_3YR_G00_DP3YR5&-ds_name=ACS_2007_3YR_G00_&-_lang=en&-redoLog=false&-_sse=on

LA
White: 29.3%
Black: 9.7%
Asian: 10.4%
Hispanic: 48.5%
Los Angeles city, California - ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates: 2005-2007

there are different statistics even within the government census site and los angeles/san francisco government sites. nevermind ur comparing a city with almost 4 million residents vs one with barely 800,000
and still sf > la
non football team havin ass city

[jbunniii]

Originally Posted by stillfresh

l.a has almost 4 million ppl vs 800,000 for SF. obviously "per 100k" the numbers are going to be higher. do u know how that works.. wtf

You have to be joking. Did you pass 5th grade math?