SF vs NYC - please help (San Francisco, Santa Cruz: casinos, to live in, club)

[tkindred]

Originally Posted by popalnet

You kind of summed up the SF NYC comparison in a misleading way - I agree with you that SF is dead compared to NYC. SF is so damn boring compare to NYC.

Have you been to NYC in recent years? It has been cleaned up. Yes, before, places like time square had a lot of porn, trash, and other dirty things, but not anymore.

NYC is for those people who like fast paced excitement, shopping, theater, and endless things to do and see. NYC is not for those people who want to relocate from Kansas, or other boonies. But SF is compatible for people from hicksville places like Kansas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Wyoming, and so on. People from hicksville like a dead and boring place like SF. NYC has too much excitement for them to handle.

What is really funny, having both grown up in Kansas my brother (who also lives here in SF) and I frequently try to figure out who has more quirks, the people in Kansas (the heartland) are those in SF. We have concluded the people in SF do but SF is a much nicer place to live than Kansas, obviously.

[tkindred]

Originally Posted by popalnet

You kind of summed up the SF NYC comparison in a misleading way - I agree with you that SF is dead compared to NYC. SF is so damn boring compare to NYC.

Have you been to NYC in recent years? It has been cleaned up. Yes, before, places like time square had a lot of porn, trash, and other dirty things, but not anymore.

NYC is for those people who like fast paced excitement, shopping, theater, and endless things to do and see. NYC is not for those people who want to relocate from Kansas, or other boonies. But SF is compatible for people from hicksville places like Kansas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Wyoming, and so on. People from hicksville like a dead and boring place like SF. NYC has too much excitement for them to handle.

Actually, I think SF is compatible for dope heads, wannabe hippies, homosexuals, people who want to say they live in the "city" (big city) but can't really fit into a place like NYC, a REAL big city. They even refer to it as the "city" locally. Funny because people in big cities do not do that. Or people who like the natural environment and climate it provides. Again, I have nothing against homosexuality. But just saying what I have observed.

But that does not make SF bad, it is actually a nice place to live if you do not mind feeling isolated and bored. Or if you grew up here and have your own little social niche or network.

[Palmer Eldritch]

You have to admit that post 9/11 nyc is boring when compared to the pre Rudy New York. He kicked out all of the interesting people. The best neighborhoods that nyc had are presently crawling with rubber stamped hipster fundies from hell. Take a walk down Clinton St. It's full of pricey bistros, pretentious fundie galleries and $200.00 a pair shoe boutiques. I used to love to cruise around the the Lower East Side, Alphabet City, the Bowery but look what has become of those places. NYC has lost it's edge and it's just not exciting anymore. Sure, to an Arkansaw transplant it might seem interesting but anyone who has spent any time in big cities knows that nyc is dead. Dead, unless your idea of fun is to sit in a yuppie bar all night sipping mojitos.

[tkindred]

Originally Posted by Palmer Eldritch

You have to admit that post 9/11 nyc is boring when compared to the pre Rudy New York. He kicked out all of the interesting people. The best neighborhoods that nyc had are presently crawling with rubber stamped hipster fundies from hell. Take a walk down Clinton St. It's full of pricey bistros, pretentious fundie galleries and $200.00 a pair shoe boutiques. I used to love to cruise around the the Lower East Side, Alphabet City, the Bowery but look what has become of those places. NYC has lost it's edge and it's just not exciting anymore. Sure, to an Arkansaw transplant it might seem interesting but anyone who has spent any time in big cities knows that nyc is dead. Dead, unless your idea of fun is to sit in a yuppie bar all night sipping mojitos.

So, are you saying SF is interesting and NYC is not? Or can one infer from what you said that SF is also not interesting because SF has less going on there than NYC? Or do you believe otherwise? And explain to me why people from London, Paris, Tokyo, Dubai, Seoul, Shanghai, Hong Kong (cities bigger than SF) etc. frequent New York City and love it?

[andybuildz]

If anyones interested in the WORLD'S BEST deli and yer in NY check out Katz's which is all the way downtown http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide-11033465R-katzs_deli-i also read the reviews
and if your taste buds and lifestyle also go alongthe lines of mine which would be macrobiotic or vegitarian check out http://www.angelicakitchen.com/ and check out their philpsophy...they're down the village.
I also love taking in Wednesday nights in HArlem at the Apollo for Amature night and eat at Sylvia's http://www.sylviassoulfood.com/
I dunno...I need a break from this dialogue with a lil' snack...lol

[Palmer Eldritch]

Originally Posted by tkindred

So, are you saying SF is interesting and NYC is not? Or can one infer from what you said that SF is also not interesting because SF has less going on there than NYC? Or do you believe otherwise? And explain to me why people from London, Paris, Tokyo, Dubai, Seoul, Shanghai, Hong Kong (cities bigger than SF) etc. frequent New York City and love it?

There is more going on in nyc but that doesn't mean that nyc is interesting. The new breed of New Yorker is an artless, yuppie bore. 7 million artless, yuppie bores do not make for interesting times. Rudy made the city safe but at the same time he stripped it of its character by when he gentrified the last remaining neighborhoods that actually made nyc a great place to be. Classic example is the Lower East Side. Even back in 1993 the LES hadn't really changed in 30 years or so. It had flavor, sights, sounds, smells and real people....true New Yorkers. But look at it now. It is crawling with trust fund hipsters from suburbia and their and their quisessential rubber stamped bars, bistros, trendy clothing stores, pretentious galleries. It would seem that McDonald's is almost more original than the businesses that cater to these turds.

[tkindred]

Originally Posted by Palmer Eldritch

There is more going on in nyc but that doesn't mean that nyc is interesting. The new breed of New Yorker is an artless, yuppie bore. 7 million artless, yuppie bores do not make for interesting times. Rudy made the city safe but at the same time he stripped it of its character by when he gentrified the last remaining neighborhoods that actually made nyc a great place to be. Classic example is the Lower East Side. Even back in 1993 the LES hadn't really changed in 30 years or so. It had flavor, sights, sounds, smells and real people....true New Yorkers. But look at it now. It is crawling with trust fund hipsters from suburbia and their and their quisessential rubber stamped bars, bistros, trendy clothing stores, pretentious galleries. It would seem that McDonald's is almost more original than the businesses that cater to these turds.

OK, forget if I agree or disagree. But is it your opinion that SF is better or more interesting than NYC?

[andybuildz]

Originally Posted by Palmer Eldritch

It would seem that McDonald's is almost more original than the businesses that cater to these turds.

Turds? You call an entire city of people turds?
I suppose that shows your true colors.
Very creative too btw....turds....LOL

[Palmer Eldritch]

Originally Posted by tkindred

OK, forget if I agree or disagree. But is it your opinion that SF is better or more interesting than NYC?

Better and interesting are subjective terms and what is "better" or "interesting" depends on individual tastes and preferences. NYC is far more cosmopolitan than little San Francisco and you actually feel like you are somewhere when you are in NYC. But San Francisco is an entirely different experience with its own good and bad atributes. Both cities are interesting but in different ways. I would rather live in NYC but I'm permanently stuck in SF with kids, house, job, wife, family and friends. What I really need is a toggle in Manhattan but I'm kind of broke right now.

[tkindred]

Originally Posted by Palmer Eldritch

Better and interesting are subjective terms and what is "better" or "interesting" depends on individual tastes and preferences. NYC is far more cosmopolitan than little San Francisco and you actually feel like you are somewhere when you are in NYC. But San Francisco is an entirely different experience with its own good and bad atributes. Both cities are interesting but in different ways. I would rather live in NYC but I'm permanently stuck in SF with kids, house, job, wife, family and friends. What I really need is a toggle in Manhattan but I'm kind of broke right now.

OK, now you are starting to make sense to me :-) . At least from my vantage point. I am actually planning to leave SF this fall. Too bored here.