Like SF, the weather, the hills, the architecture, and the culture but hate the insane COL?

[bodyforlife99]

Dodge and deflect all you want. All you're doing is top posting by saying the exact same thing in a different thread. Again, you're not standing up for anyone and have very little credibility living rent free. As Ruth said, you're the man behind the curtain.

[Shooting Stars]

Originally Posted by bentobox34

Cultural diversity is way lower. Cultural institutions, e.g. museums, art, music, etc. are about 1% as interesting/vibrant as this Bay Area.

I always laugh when a Californian complains that (insert city name) is not culturally diverse. I don't think native Californians are aware that MOST PLACES are not culturally diverse.

San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New York are the most culturally diverse cities in America and in the TOP 10 OF THE WORLD. So if you want to stay at the same level of cultural diversity, you have to stay right where you are in the Bay Area, or move ONLY to Los Angeles or New York.

Absolutely EVERY other place will be less diverse.

http://theculturetrip.com/north-amer...-in-the-world/

You wouldn't go on vacation to Europe or Asia and complain that the locale wasn't "culturally diverse" enough, so why is this considered a negative thing here?

[Luke9686]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

Or maybe, and this is a stretch, I'm standing up for the little guy who's getting shafted by the big robber baron tech companies.

You're doing nothing of the sort. If you were, you'd start a successful business and give all your wealth away to those who need it. Those supposed "robber barons", much like the barons of old, are providing a product people want and paying good salaries. The suggestion that the robber barons somehow gained wealth on the backs of others speaks to your foolery... Do a tiny, and I mean a tiny bit of research on these guys and you'll realize how wrong you are. Vanderbilt amassed great fortune even though his competitor used government monopolies to attempt to drive him out of business.

But I wouldn't expect you to know any of that... I'm sure you'll focus on the terrible working conditions of 18th century factories. The alternative (starvation in many cases) would have been much better.

[Oakformonday]

Originally Posted by bodyforlife99

Dodge and deflect all you want. All you're doing is top posting by saying the exact same thing in a different thread. Again, you're not standing up for anyone and have very little credibility living rent free. As Ruth said, you're the man behind the curtain.

You are encouraging him. I believe it is called, "Feeding the troll." As am I by posting this so I am out!

[bodyforlife99]

Originally Posted by Oakformonday

You are encouraging him. I believe it is called, "Feeding the troll." As am I by posting this so I am out!

Agree, but I figured it was about time to call him out on this, since clearly his violating of the rules of the forum is permitted.

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by bodyforlife99

Agree, but I figured it was about time to call him out on this, since clearly his violating of the rules of the forum is permitted.

You're going off topic, that's breaking the rules unless you have something to say about eureka being sf's equal

[Luke9686]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

Or maybe, and this is a stretch, I'm standing up for the little guy who's getting shafted by the big robber baron tech companies.

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

You're going off topic, that's breaking the rules unless you have something to say about eureka being sf's equal

You're post about standing up for the little guy was off topic...

[bentobox34]

The premise of the thread was that Eureka has ALL the pros of the Bay Area without the con of high housing prices. I pointed out that it lacks a characteristic that is often cited as a significant pro for the area. Just because it is relatively rare doesn't mean it isn't important to many people. The premise of the thread wasn't to point out a place that has all the pros of the Bay Area - except the pros that aren't commonly found in average cities all over the country. That criteria would by definition be satisfied by almost any city, and wouldn't be very interesting to talk about.

Originally Posted by Shooting Stars

I always laugh when a Californian complains that (insert city name) is not culturally diverse. I don't think native Californians are aware that MOST PLACES are not culturally diverse.

I think most native Californians are aware of that. It's one of the reasons they continue to live in California's major metros, despite the absurd housing costs.

San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New York

are the most culturally diverse cities in America and in the TOP 10 OF THE WORLD. So if you want to stay at the same level of cultural diversity, you have to stay right where you are in the Bay Area, or move ONLY to Los Angeles or New York.

Absolutely EVERY other place will be less diverse.

You could live in Toronto, London, Houston, etc.

http://theculturetrip.com/north-amer...-in-the-world/

You wouldn't go on vacation to Europe or Asia and complain that the locale wasn't "culturally diverse" enough, so why is this considered a negative thing here?

Ever heard the phrase, "Nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there"? Going on vacation and living somewhere are two completely separate things, so I'm not sure why you're even bringing it up.

Aside from that, there are some pretty diverse cities in Europe and Asia.

[Shooting Stars]

Originally Posted by bentobox34

I think most native Californians are aware of that. It's one of the reasons they continue to live in California's major metros, despite the absurd housing costs.

If they were aware, they would know how rare it is and thus would not constantly bemoan how much less culturally diverse other places are. They seem to have an expectation that every place is supposed to be as culturally diverse.

Originally Posted by bentobox34

You could live in Toronto, London, Houston, etc.

The thread wasn't talking about moving out of the country, but instead finding a comparable place within the country. Also, Houston is not as diverse as San Francisco.

Originally Posted by bentobox34

Ever heard the phrase, "Nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there"? Going on vacation and living somewhere are two completely separate things, so I'm not sure why you're even bringing it up.

I'm bringing it up because I wonder just when cultural diversity became the measure of a "quality" place to live. There are lots of places in the world considered very high quality places to live that don't have as much cultural diversity. There are many other things that contribute to the quality of life.

[ssmaster]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

What if I told you there was a city with nearly all the pros of SF without the cons? Yes I'm talking about the Eureka Metropolitan area. It's even got a college which means there are young innovative minds ready to mend the world. Get in before it's too late and people realize it has the same climate of the Bay Area, closeness to the ocean, but houses that only cost 200k.

What college in eureka compares to Stanford and Berkeley? These schools are ranked with Harvard ,Cambridge Oxford,u of Chicago ,etf Zurich etc. I don't see it.