What Makes SF so great? (to live in, costs, flight path)

[jeffredo]

I think rah pretty well summed it up.

[jade408]

The OPS mad that he can't get that Vanilla flavored frutopia drink anymore.

[415_s2k]

Originally Posted by mt971x

1. It's a Fruitopia - Gay capital of the Universe.

So?

2. It's extremely expensive

I can afford it.

3. The weather sucks, especially the fog

It's gorgeous and hot today. Welcome to summer time!

4. The say it's diverse, but the reality is that most of the population is either asian or white.

It is diverse, and it's also extremely accepting and open.

5. Everytime I think of SF the stupid "Full House" theme song pops in my head

What a shame. This is what pops into my head:

YouTube - ‪Faith No More - Last Cup Of Sorrow [video]‬‏

6. It's over-rated, it's always mentioned with New York, Chicago, and I don't believe it's no where near that level.

...and it seems that 95% of the rest of the world disagrees. But hey, to each his or her own.

7. The people think they are so "sophisticated" and "smarter" than everybody else, and have a snobbish attitude.

Do you come across like this to everyone when you're in town? If so, I can see why they would take that attitude with you. Either that, or you only spent time in SOMA.

Honestly, I've found people in SF to be generally quite approachable and agreeable.

8. IF you want REAL excitement you are gonna wanna go to Southern California, not northern.

I love socal, and will probably move back to the LA area eventually. LA has more clubs, but in terms of other "exciting" things, I don't see a huge difference.
9. You can't do anything except look at the bay, sure that's nice to look at[/quote]
...or take a ferry across it, have lunch next to it, etc.

[tstieber]

Outside of a few Westside pockets that are far apart, LA is one of the ugliest cities in America. Yeah, there are lots of nightclubs, but that's it. I don't think LA people are any less uppity about LA than SFers are about SF. LA people are obsessed with LA too. SF weather does suck, I agree. But it's a tiny little microclimate, and most of the Bay Area has great weather if you go 15 minutes or more out of the City. Santa Monica is always fogged in too; it's 62F and foggy right now at 1:45 in the afternoon in June. So I'd say SoCal beaches are 'less sucky,' but no west coast beaches are all that great. The food scene is way better in SF, and SF is visually stunning. It's like a living postcard at every turn. Much more colorful, vibrant, dense, beautiful. But some people don't care about beauty or food or access to wine country, daytrips, etc. Some prefer nightclubs. It's all about what you like to do. I'd take SF any day, as long as I live far enough outside of the City to enjoy the sun. Sun is important. And palm trees. For some reason, I really like looking at palm trees, and since SF has plenty of them, I don't have to go to LA to see them.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by tstieber

Outside of a few Westside pockets that are far apart, LA is one of the ugliest cities in America. Yeah, there are lots of nightclubs, but that's it. I don't think LA people are any less uppity about LA than SFers are about SF. LA people are obsessed with LA too. SF weather does suck, I agree. But it's a tiny little microclimate, and most of the Bay Area has great weather if you go 15 minutes or more out of the City. Santa Monica is always fogged in too; it's 62F and foggy right now at 1:45 in the afternoon in June. So I'd say SoCal beaches are 'less sucky,' but no west coast beaches are all that great. The food scene is way better in SF, and SF is visually stunning. It's like a living postcard at every turn. Much more colorful, vibrant, dense, beautiful. But some people don't care about beauty or food or access to wine country, daytrips, etc. Some prefer nightclubs. It's all about what you like to do. I'd take SF any day, as long as I live far enough outside of the City to enjoy the sun. Sun is important. And palm trees. For some reason, I really like looking at palm trees, and since SF has plenty of them, I don't have to go to LA to see them.

You had me agree until palm trees. I hate them.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Putting on my best Westchester / valley girl hybrid accent:

"The City is just ... so ... HIgh quality! So ... healthy! So ... diVERRRRRRssse. So ... proGRESSive. I can't imagine living in some place like ... ewwwww ... KANNNNsas (BTW, what IS wrong with Kansas?)!
As for NYC, Chigagoland ... TOOOOO cold .... TOOOOO old ... TOOOOO ethnic ...

Sorry, gotta go to my yogapilatesrumbazumbatumba ... !"

[mayorhaggar]

You really can't compare SF to Chicago and NYC, they are totally different. I shouldn't respond to this but I'll bite for a bit. NYC is a lot more crowded and aggressive than SF is, and the weather blows--cold winters and really hot summers. And housing stock there is terrible, a lot of people pay good money to live in vermin-infested shoeboxes. SF's housing stock isn't great but you can live pretty well without a huge income especially with no car and with roommates. Also it's full of New Yawkers.

I loved living in Chicago and moved out of it reluctantly but the weather really sucks there too, summers aren't as bad as NYC but it still gets HOT there, and the winters are brutal and long. Chicago just doesn't have the same hopping vibe that SF has, but I do find it more laid back in a nice but kind of sleepy way. Like NYC it's a huge city and takes a long time to get from one area to the next, also it's nowhere as walkable as SF is. Also Oakland really reminds me a LOT of Chicago, similar housing stock and similar layout and mix of walkable neighborhoods with more spread out areas.

Also SF is a lot more rugged and full of nature in a way you never see in big Eastern cities like Chi or NYC, go somewhere like Land's End or the Presidio and you're wandering around in a cool little forest with great views of Marin, you'd never get that in Chicago or NYC. And you have a lot more access to nature stuff all around the Bay Area whereas Chi or NYC are surrounded by suburban sprawl.

SF isn't the best place in the universe but it has a nice list of positives that people here tend to take for granted.

[tstieber]

Originally Posted by mayorhaggar

Also SF is a lot more rugged and full of nature in a way you never see in big Eastern cities like Chi or NYC, go somewhere like Land's End or the Presidio and you're wandering around in a cool little forest with great views of Marin, you'd never get that in Chicago or NYC. And you have a lot more access to nature stuff all around the Bay Area whereas Chi or NYC are surrounded by suburban sprawl.

I agree in general, but you should remember one little thing in NYC called Central Park! It's amazing and feels like you're in the middle of nowhere right in the middle of the city. The Presidio or Land's End are also basically parkland, as all those forests were planted and not native, so it's not really "nature" any more than Central Park.

[tstieber]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

You had me agree until palm trees. I hate them.

My family came here from central Europe when I was 2 years old. Everyone from that part of Europe dreams of palm trees. They make you feel like you're on vacation. Most of the country doesn't have them, so having them here makes them cool! Also, they are incredible low maintenance plants, have low watering needs, are noninvasive, and very environmentally friendly as a result.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by tstieber

My family came here from central Europe when I was 2 years old. Everyone from that part of Europe dreams of palm trees. They make you feel like you're on vacation. Most of the country doesn't have them, so having them here makes them cool! Also, they are incredible low maintenance plants, have low watering needs, are noninvasive, and very environmentally friendly as a result.

Native trees have even more of this