San Francisco Quality Of Life Among Best In World, New Survey Reveals (Brea: neighborhoods, buy)

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by majoun

Plenty of crime and poverty in suburbs nowadays....never heard of Fairfield or Vallejo?

Sounds like a problem in California...... In many other suburbs around the U.S it's not a 3rd world filled w/ the people who serve those by the coast...
One of the many reasons why California's inland-suburbs aren't an option for me . Already commented about the night/day situation between the California's coastal cities and the ones inland.. In many ways, it's not even the California that people like to rant/rave about.. might as well remark about it like the many ways snotty California's talk about Nevada.. I fail to see the differences anyway.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

Sounds like a problem in California...... In many other suburbs around the U.S it's not a 3rd world filled w/ illegals and farm workers making minimum wage.

Ghetto suburbs are not solely confined to California. I could mention some examples in other parts of the US but that would be off topic for this board.

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by majoun

Ghetto suburbs are not solely confined to California. I could mention some examples in other parts of the US but that would be off topic for this board.

They aren't .. agreed. But when you have a COL / concentration situation that only pushes lower income people inland and into inland suburbs then you have a 'unique' problem. Unless of course you think the scaled crime issues/etc found in places like sacramento, richmond, vallejo, etc are just coincidence.

[checkup]

Apparently the survey ignores cost of living. I'd trade mild weather and mountains for 70% off rent/mortgage payments...i.e., close the national average

[gone down south]

Originally Posted by checkup

Apparently the survey ignores cost of living. I'd trade mild weather and mountains for 70% off rent/mortgage payments...i.e., close the national average

I wonder if the high COL and the wonderful climate/natural beauty of the area are in some way linked.....

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by gone down south

I wonder if the high COL and the wonderful climate/natural beauty of the area are in some way linked.....

Obviously a coincidence. People just don't understand the grandeur that awaits one in Bakersfield. To say nothing of Needles.

[BoringOldMike4554]

If I were to post the same article, I would actually be posting it as a negative and not as a positive. I love San Francisco, but it just goes to show how far behind the U.S. is in quality of life when the top 2 cities are #29 and #30. I've lived in both Melbourne and Toronto, two cities that regularly place high on these lists and while I prefer San Francisco to both, the social problems of San Francisco is far far worse than either city.

[Texas User]

If you have the money then yes it is.

[SunDevil1212]

Originally Posted by Texas User

If you have the money then yes it is.

First of all, most of the cities that made the list are expensive to live in.

Second, you don't have to be rich to enjoy SF. You just have to shuffle your priorities a bit. I know plenty of people that make around $40k a year, and are quite happy living in great neighborhoods like Nob Hill, North Beach, Russian Hill, etc....Now, do they have HD TV's with 400 channels of cable, massive SUV's, backyards with pools or BBQ's, huge living rooms, walk in closets? No. If you need those things to be happy in life, and you're not a millionaire, then SF is not for you. But if you like getting out of the house, being active, walking instead of driving, attending cultural and social events, etc...then it doesn't get much better. You can live quite the awesome life here on a lot less money than you might think. Don't believe me? Check this out: Free & Cheap Events & Things to Do in the San Francisco Bay Area | FunCheapSF

I live in a tiny room, but I consider the Cafe on my street to be my living room, the dive bar down the alley to be my basement, and the park by my apartment to be my backyard. And if you look at it that way, I have a pretty sweet place.

[Texas User]

So why should I have to shuffle my priorities? It defeats the purpose for quality of life.

Originally Posted by SunDevil1212

First of all, most of the cities that made the list are expensive to live in.

Second, you don't have to be rich to enjoy SF. You just have to shuffle your priorities a bit. I know plenty of people that make around $40k a year, and are quite happy living in great neighborhoods like Nob Hill, North Beach, Russian Hill, etc....Now, do they have HD TV's with 400 channels of cable, massive SUV's, backyards with pools or BBQ's, huge living rooms, walk in closets? No. If you need those things to be happy in life, and you're not a millionaire, then SF is not for you. But if you like getting out of the house, being active, walking instead of driving, attending cultural and social events, etc...then it doesn't get much better. You can live quite the awesome life here on a lot less money than you might think. Don't believe me? Check this out: Free & Cheap Events & Things to Do in the San Francisco Bay Area | FunCheapSF

I live in a tiny room, but I consider the Cafe on my street to be my living room, the dive bar down the alley to be my basement, and the park by my apartment to be my backyard. And if you look at it that way, I have a pretty sweet place.