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.
Set what "trend"? More leaders, politicians, CEO's, and major figures in the world, graduated from NYC Universities such as Columbia and NYU. When LA was founded, NY was all ready a thriving city. When LA was incorporated in 1850, NYC (Manhattan at the time) was all ready the largest city in America. Face it. LA is second rate to New York.
well jusdt 2 be founded in 1850 means that is amazing to become the 2nd most largest city in america, and means if discovered early it would have been more populated than new york
well jusdt 2 be founded in 1850 means that is amazing to become the 2nd most largest city in america, and means if discovered early it would have been more populated than new york
yeah, being close to Mexico really helped. Also, LA was "discovered" at around the same time as NYC. (Manhattan in 1524 by Giovanni da Verrazzano to LA's 1542 discovery by Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo) like I stated before, LA was just a desert outpost when Manhattan was all ready a world class city. Hell, that was decades before NY became the 5 Boroughs. LA is more diverse than NYC? PLEASE!!! If you count nationalities from Latin America, than yeah; LA has NYC beat. Then only thing I have to say about LA's diversity is just one borough: Queens.
Also, for future reference.. Stanford University or CIT isn't Ivy League. The Ivy League schools are not even west of the Mississippi. They're all in the Northeast. I hope this helps
Also, for future reference.. Stanford University or CIT isn't Ivy League. The Ivy League schools are not even west of the Mississippi. They're all in the Northeast. I hope this helps
"ivy" definitely doesn't connote school quality, if that's what's being suggested. non-ivy schools like stanford and university of chicago are at least as good in many academic areas as the ivies.
The shallowness of LA is not a stereotype but a reality. It's all a big stage there: where you won't see people in the streets because they're all in their cars, Miracle Mile is a strip of cheap stores and parking lots and you know you're in Hollywood when you hit this corner that says "you're in Hollywood" and there's not much around other than chain stores .
While I'm still hanging out in the NY forum for a few I'll comment on this.
While it's true that of course 100% of people in any place don't fall into a stereotype, yep, it's true, you do find "clusters" of certain types of people in some cities, and L.A. definately has those clusters of plastic people. I had to spend some time there a while back and it's certainly a very "image conscious" city (on many levels, not just physical).
I'm roughly 30lbs overweight. Not sloppy by any means - I carry it well, but you would have thought I was from freakin' MARS walking around in L.A. I walked into a couple of clothing stores and actually had the sales people do the, "I'm not sure we have anything in your size" bit (geez, so I wear a 2XL shirt - sue me!!). But to be honest, it really isn't THAT different than where I am now (Atlanta). Atlanta's is lately referred to as the "L.A. of the East" because of the way it sprawls out, everyone drives their cars to their mailboxes, there's few unique places but tons of cookie-cutter stucco shopping centers with chain stores, and the pretty people rule. The only difference is the twang here and possibly a few more chunky folks compared to L.A., 'cause they fry just about everything they eat.
On the flip-side when I visited New York I found the people very "real". Ok, once or twice maybe a bit TOO real and gritty, but overall I related much more on their level and found them much more down-to-earth. With the exception of the financial and fashion districts where you tended to see people groomed and decked out in their best, the average person there just tossed on some clothes and headed out for the day and had no worries about being an anorexic supermodel or trying to impress anyone.
I know it isn't a contest, but if I had to leave Atlanta and had to pick either L.A. or NYC, sorry L.A., New York would be "my kinda town".
I wouldn't live in New York no matter how much someone paid me. Don't get me wrong, it's a great city to visit. Home will always be Southern California, though. I've lived here all my life, and while I may complain about the traffic, etc. like everyone else, I sometimes wonder if I could put down roots elsewhere.
It's funny to hear people say that Angelenos are so plastic and fake. Well, sure, if you're hanging around the "industry" types, the wanna-be actors, producers, and so on. But with the millions of people here, the entertainment industry is only one presence. Dig a little deeper and get to know some of the real people in L.A. You might be pleasantly surprised.
I've lived in NYC and LA. Both are good--NYC probably better in your 20s, LA better if you have kids--but let me propose a list of advantages to each:
NEW YORK
-The restaurants
-The parks
-The public transport
-The newspapers
-The cultural scene
-The cops (Really. If you don't like them try the LAPD)
-The looks on the faces of people in the flyover states when you tell them where you live
LOS ANGELES
-The weather
-The beaches
-The freeways (Angelenos love to moan about them. They should try driving in New York)
-The less-crazy rental market
-The blue-collar jobs
-The beautiful people (Yes, more beautiful than in NYC. Sorry)
-The looks on the faces of people in the flyover states when you tell them where you live
I've lived in NYC and LA. Both are good--NYC probably better in your 20s, LA better if you have kids--but let me propose a list of advantages to each:
NEW YORK
-The restaurants
-The parks
-The public transport
-The newspapers
-The cultural scene
-The cops (Really. If you don't like them try the LAPD)
-The looks on the faces of people in the flyover states when you tell them where you live
LOS ANGELES
-The weather
-The beaches
-The freeways (Angelenos love to moan about them. They should try driving in New York)
-The less-crazy rental market
-The blue-collar jobs
-The beautiful people (Yes, more beautiful than in NYC. Sorry)
-The looks on the faces of people in the flyover states when you tell them where you live
I love LA, but that pretty much proves NY is a greater city than LA. Beaches are great, but they're not a must have and we could live without them. Besides, NYC's waterfront is being cleaned and you couldn't pay me to stick a toe in LA's water. The weather is nice, but not important in determining a city's "greatness."
The "beautiful people" comment was ridiculous. So NYC, the model and fashion capital of the world, doesn't have beautiful people? Give me a break, it's all about personal taste.
The freeways, both a bad thing and a good thing. New York can do without good freeways because of our public transportation system. But LA could never do without them.
I wouldn't live in New York no matter how much someone paid me. Don't get me wrong, it's a great city to visit. Home will always be Southern California, though. I've lived here all my life, and while I may complain about the traffic, etc. like everyone else, I sometimes wonder if I could put down roots elsewhere.
It's funny to hear people say that Angelenos are so plastic and fake. Well, sure, if you're hanging around the "industry" types, the wanna-be actors, producers, and so on. But with the millions of people here, the entertainment industry is only one presence. Dig a little deeper and get to know some of the real people in L.A. You might be pleasantly surprised.
That's how many New Yorkers feel about LA. Great place to visit, wouldn't want to live there. We're the complete opposite of each other. I also know many Angelenos. Great people, but hard to talk to. I don't know, whenever out that way I get the feeling Angelenos are less outgoing than New Yorkers. New Yorkers love to talk.
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.
Also, LA was "discovered" at around the same time as NYC. (Manhattan in 1524 by Giovanni da Verrazzano to LA's 1542 discovery by Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo) like I stated before, LA was just a desert outpost when Manhattan was all ready a world class city. Hell, that was decades before NY became the 5 Boroughs. LA is more diverse than NYC? PLEASE!!! If you count nationalities from Latin America, than yeah; LA has NYC beat. 
Then only thing I have to say about LA's diversity is just one borough: Queens. 
