Minneapolis or Sandeigo? (San Diego: taxes, live, versus)

[j760]

Originally Posted by Akama

Heck, even shopping is better in Minneapolis.

I do most of my shopping online, so I'll stick with San Diego.

[esmith143]

One area where Minneapolis is FAR ahead of SD is outdoors. In San Diego, there are two kinds of outdoors:

- Rocky hills covered with short brown grass and occasional bushes
- Desert (sand, occasional joshua trees and cacti)

You can pretty much forget hunting, camping, fresh water fishing. There are no real rivers or lakes. The most likely kind of animal you can encounter is a rattlesnake. Areas that aren't irrigated turn green for 2 weeks a year in April, then turn brown again. There's a half-decent ski resort within a 3 hour drive that's open December through March (if you consider 50 F and artificial snow acceptable for skiing), but you won't find any "real" winter snow anywhere closer than Utah.

Yes, and don't forget about wildfires.

In SoCal, people tend to live as close to the coast as possible, and for a very good reason.

In Minneapolis, you have to suffer 4 months a year and then you can enjoy nature for the remaining 8.

If you just want to move someplace without a winter but you want an experience that's close to Minnesota, may I suggest Portland or Seattle?

[kcda]

You obviously don't know San Diego very well. We have a lot more varied landscape than you mentioned. Seems you are only talking about the extreme inland areas. Joshua trees and cacti? They aren't even in the general San Diego area, you have to go out towards the desert.

San Diego is known for it's outdoors. We do get snow "not artificial" in our mountain areas and they are a short drive within our county. Not enough to ski in but we have snowball fights and sled downhill and then drive back down the mountain and go to the beach where it's 70 degrees in December.

You didn't mention all the sports and outdoor activities associated with the ocean which is a MAJOR benefit to living in San Diego.

And what are you talking about? "you may only see a rattlesnake" I've seen coyotes, possums, skunks, mountain lion, rabbits, racoons, red tailed hawks, owls, sea lions, seals, whales, dolphins, I could go on and on.

I'm not sure about "hunting" but I know plenty of people that fish in the lakes here not to mention ocean fishing which plenty of people come down here just to experience. We have also camped all over the county.

You are giving a very limited view of San Diego, it's very misleading.

[esmith143]

Admit it, aside from the ocean, quality of San Diego outdoors does not even begin to compare with Portland or Minneapolis. That's why it's called coastal desert. There's not enough water to sustain biodiversity that people in other states expect as granted. First 20 miles from the coast are densely populated and there's no "outdoors" left, aside from artificial parks. For the next 50 miles, you have Cleveland National Forest. The problem is that it's mostly impassable mountains and you can't hike very far. Starting with Ocotillo and Victorville, you arrive at the desert proper.

There's a small number of "spots", e.g. Mount Laguna and San Gorgonio, which _may_ support an occasional skunk or a possum by the virtue of some glitch in rainfall patterns. For the most part, San Diego outdoors is boring and there's nothing there.

We have "lakes", but they are not real lakes, they are man-made reservoirs to buffer water. We don't have any year-round rivers.

Now compare it to Minnesota, which has the source of Mississippi and ten times as much land under state & national forests (real hikable forests!) as Cleveland National Forest and Anza-Borrego combined.

Minnesota: Picasa Web Albums - tom - Fall 2007 - N...
San Diego: Anza Borrego Desert Ca. and Organ Pipe National Monument AZ. pictures from california photos on webshots

Southern California is a great feat of human effort. It could not have been easy to transform an essentially non-habitable desert without any drinking water, populated by no more than 50 thousand natives, into the home of 25 million people.

[What!]

This is not a Minneapolis versus San Diego debate. The O.P. asked if there were any city Minneapolis as far as personality goes (he can't stand the winters); and he hopes San Diego fits the description. That's what he's asking.

Minneapolis is a place where there is little crime and in some areas kids walk around the several lakes w/o their parents. Teens often drive from the suburbs to visit Minneapolis. But it's also good for singles, married couples, and cosmopolitan adults. There are a lot of chain-stores but many cool local stores, since they about even out in number it gives it a weird vibe. Minneapolis is overrun by hippies, there are very few panhandlers, the skyscrapers are few, although it can be dead during the week---the nightlife can get hot during the weekends, particularly in the summer. There are some nice, walkable areas that are very quiet.

So, is San Diego like that. I've never been around it enough to know.

[HockeyFan]

One thing to account for -- MSP has 4-5 months of cold winter and another 1-2 months of summer that, for me anyway, is too hot and humid to be exercising outside. Add in allergies/mosquitos in fall, and it can be tough for many people to really enjoy those outdoor amenties in Minnesota. Still, the snowmobiling, fishing, and hunting can be great for many! Then again, I have a friend here who won't live anywhere else, because it's important to him to hike in comfortable weather 12 months of the year. It's all personal preference.

Crime -- I feel safer in San Diego than Minneapolis, and the numbers tend to support that feeling. It's been a few years since I lived in MSP, but parts of North Minneapolis or Chicago and Lake have a more violent feel than anything in San Diego. San Diego routinely is one of the top two or three safest 1 million+ (not including suburbs) cities in the nation. And that takes into account some suburban-style areas, but even in the worst areas, I feel safer than in most cities.

It's also good for singles -- especially downtown and beach areas. Married couples and cosmopolitan adults -- good for them as well. And if you need more culture, Los Angeles is nearby -- and it has more culture than people realize. Cool local stores... LA has more than San Diego, but they are around. Hippies -- San Diego is a mix of liberal and conservative, and generally, they live in relative harmony. Panhandlers are definitely more common in SD, a function of the weather. The nightlife downtown is strong year-round, largely a function of tourism. Walkable areas exist here too -- places like Hillcrest, North Park -- enjoyable, walkable areas.

[sdurbanite]

Originally Posted by Akama

Heck, even shopping is better in Minneapolis.

Are you referring to the Mall of America? Bleech!

Originally Posted by esmith143

You can pretty much forget hunting, camping, fresh water fishing.

How do you think the deep sea fishing, surfing, scuba diving and snorkelling is there?

Originally Posted by What!

Minneapolis is a place where there is little crime and in some areas kids walk around the several lakes w/o their parents. Teens often drive from the suburbs to visit Minneapolis. But it's also good for singles, married couples, and cosmopolitan adults. There are a lot of chain-stores but many cool local stores, since they about even out in number it gives it a weird vibe. Minneapolis is overrun by hippies, there are very few panhandlers, the skyscrapers are few, although it can be dead during the week---the nightlife can get hot during the weekends, particularly in the summer. There are some nice, walkable areas that are very quiet.

So, is San Diego like that. I've never been around it enough to know.

People flock to the lakes in Minneapolis, while here we flock to the ocean. Minne has Uptown and downtown for nightlife, and here we have OB, PB, Hillcrest/North Park, Downtown and other pockets. Walkable areas in SD? We've got plenty, there's Coronado, La Jolla, Downtown, PB, to name a few.

[HockeyFan]

I'd say there's definitely more walkable areas in San Diego than Minneapolis, but that's just my opinion.

But the Mall of America -- don't knock it until you've lived by it! I found better selection and better price there than anywhere else I've lived. I've yet to find anything in SoCal that I couldn't find there -- but the inverse is not true.

[sdurbanite]

^^I also think there are more walkable areas in San Diego than Minneapolis.

My comment on MOA was directed at the amusment park area of the mall. Just too crowded and chaotic for me. Given it's size, I wouldn't be surprised that you can find anything you want in that placel.

As a San Diegan, I just hate indoor malls, so that didn't help with my experience. Minneapolis is definitely a nice city, but the pace was a little slow for me (especially the drivers).

[What!]

I said it once and I'll say it again: I still don't think this is a Minneapolis vs. San Diego thread. The O.P. asked what city was like Minneapolis w/o the cold and he wondered if San Diego was that city. But it doesn't matter. He never came back. It's been two weeks since his last post.