Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Sacramento
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-09-2016, 10:45 PM
 
Location: SW King County, WA
6,418 posts, read 8,292,105 times
Reputation: 6613

Advertisements

that sounds more like it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-09-2016, 10:49 PM
 
Location: Northern California
979 posts, read 2,097,339 times
Reputation: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04kL4nD View Post
These population figures sound correct. But I can guarantee there's not a single sign in SF that says the population is 900K +.
Those signs are being made as I write. Give it two years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2016, 09:22 AM
 
1,148 posts, read 1,575,664 times
Reputation: 1311
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04kL4nD View Post
It absolutely does NOT. You are exaggerating by quite a bit.
LOL wow. Ok, I misremembered and it's 839,000 or whatever it reads. The point is it's a 49 sq mi city and its population increased by roughly 25% in the time frame I referenced. That's the ENTIRE point. Ir's crowded. Extremely crowded. You can divert the argument to a debate over signs, but no one cares.

When I read a post like this I always wonder what the person was trying to accomplish. Even if I had intentionally exaggerated the figures, is a 60,000 overstatement significant? No, it's not. 900,000, 820,00, 847,000 what's the FN difference. The point is that it's always been an extermely dense city with nowhere to grow but up (notice the increase in high condos)....and it's crowded.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2016, 06:12 PM
 
2,003 posts, read 2,886,549 times
Reputation: 3605
The "overstatement" is significant because you wrote "Now the sign reads over 900,000", which it does not.

Falsehoods do no one any good here, and just mislead newbies who are reading this forum looking for a new place in which to live.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2016, 01:53 PM
 
Location: California USA
1,714 posts, read 1,152,446 times
Reputation: 474
Yes, the people are friendlier, there are plenty of good restaurants, abundant shopping and nearby suburbs which are affordable, safe havens for families who want good schools. Downside is the summer heat and SF has awesome scenery (but then again SF would beat out plenty of much larger cities in terms of natural scenery).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2016, 04:19 PM
 
Location: State of Denial
505 posts, read 369,593 times
Reputation: 885
Since my job is talking about relocating to the central valley (Stockton/Lathrop area) I would put up with the commute down 99 if that means I could afford a 2-bedroom place for the same of very slightly more than I'm paying for a room here in the south bay.

My folks moved from San Francisco to Sacramento late last year and they have zero regrets.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2016, 10:01 AM
 
661 posts, read 693,259 times
Reputation: 879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mordin View Post
Since my job is talking about relocating to the central valley (Stockton/Lathrop area) I would put up with the commute down 99 if that means I could afford a 2-bedroom place for the same of very slightly more than I'm paying for a room here in the south bay.

My folks moved from San Francisco to Sacramento late last year and they have zero regrets.
You'd probably want to be closer to 5, like Pocket/Greenhaven or the west side of Elk Grove. I'd even check out Lodi, it's a small town but you could get something nice right in the heart of it and the commute wouldn't be as bad as coming from the Sac area.

If my job was in Stockton/Lathrop though, I'd probably just live in the delta or the hills to the east and deal with an hour commute. But that can be too rural for some people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2016, 01:01 PM
 
Location: State of Denial
505 posts, read 369,593 times
Reputation: 885
Don't wish to be too rural, I need things to do lol.

Stockton is definitely off the table. My friend gor her place ransacked not 3 months after moving there from Livermore.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2016, 01:57 PM
 
Location: where the good looking people are
3,814 posts, read 4,020,125 times
Reputation: 3284
Try Elk Grove
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2022 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Sacramento
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top