Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It probably does somewhere on the outskirts. It definitely has rich neighborhoods, obviously. But what is so special about that neighborhood? Oh, the diversity stats. So, a rich non-white area? It's a bit hard to racial diversity between an American and British context, very different historical context. But if anything, that link is an example of racial segregation [not imposed, voluntary but still]. It's a high-income neighborhood, so you'd expect it's demographics to reflect the general population of anyone who could afford it. 60% black in a metro area that's only 8.4% suggest a strong sorting. London has a higher black % (13% in Greater London, maybe down to 9% if you include commuter belt towns) but no neighborhood that would be 60% black, that's way concentrated over the city average.
Okay great so someone share with us the rich black neighborhoods that London obviously must have en masse.
Walking experience and activity buzz: They both have that, no?
San Francisco is an absolute joy to walk around. The streetscape of SF is quite stunning and vibrant. London is larger, but better? Not really. Its just different.
Public spaces. San Francisco, being located on a rugged ocean coastline and surrounded by water on three sides and dominated by hills and far greater biodiversity in plant life, flora and fauna provides an experience that*sets it apart from anything in London, which may have better planned urban plazas and city parks, I suppose, so once again to say London is 'better' is really not accurate. Its just different.
Infrastructure/ Public Transit. London has a larger system, sure. I rejoice with you. LOL
Cleanliness. Both cities are clean or not so clean depending on what part of town we're talking about.
Architecture: I find London's new skyline to be hideous and amusement park like. SF has a better skyline.
London has older architecture, although at street level SF is actually more memorable.
As far as residential I love London's townhouses and SF has fabulous homes in town, but they both get major strikes. London's public housing blocks are just ghastly while SFs semidetached homes with garages right at the front turn me off.
So now that Ive indulged your little request, which I rarely do, please compare the following:
Racial diversity, race relations, racial minority affluence and Educational attainment.
Quality of local recreational amenities.
Quality of area housing inventory.
Quality of Education at all Levels.
Quality of Health Care.
Unemployment and Job growth.
If you want to convince a large majority opinion of the truth of a proposition that, to them, seems indefensible, you need to do a lot more than this. Not one point you raise here is substantive; most of them appeal to the vagueness of subjective preference.
You need to be much more descriptive, and you need to undergird it with evidence beyond simple preference and anecdote.
As for your request, I'm afraid you're the only one out of the two of us making a positive comparative claim between London and San Francisco. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, so the burden of proof here is unilateral.
Okay great so someone share with us the rich black neighborhoods that London obviously must have en masse.
The OP's question was " Which do you prefer in terms of living if you didn't have cost constraints? Lifestyle, entertainment, etc?"
So in those terms I couldn't care less about most of the things you have posted about SF compared to London.
London simply offers for me MORE of everything compared to S.F. Remember the OP is asking us to imagine NO cost constraints.
If their were cost constraints, that might change my answer.
San Francisco is an absolute joy to walk around. The streetscape of SF is quite stunning and vibrant. London is larger, but better? Not really. Its just different.
The streetscape in London is much better, don't be silly. Especially if you compare the cities' equivalents of downtown areas - central london is spruced up, streetscaped and beautiful in a way that san francisco (or in fact any us city) can only dream of.
If you want to convince a large majority opinion of the truth of a proposition that, to them, seems indefensible, you need to do a lot more than this. Not one point you raise here is substantive; most of them appeal to the vagueness of subjective preference.
You need to be much more descriptive, and you need to undergird it with evidence beyond simple preference and anecdote.
As for your request, I'm afraid you're the only one out of the two of us making a positive comparative claim between London and San Francisco. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, so the burden of proof here is unilateral.
Yawns.
Sorry but this dreary response which reminds me of London's horrific weather, is what we call a COP OUT.
But I'm not surprised.
San Francisco has close to a PERFECT mix of the qualities that are very difficult for any city to compare to, London on the other hand is really big and is seen as some alpha power which is cute I suppose, but really superficial at the end of the day.
Neither London nor New York are anywhere near catching up to San Francisco as far as driving global innovation and to mention 'low density' is hilarious because Apple, Facebook, Google etc are all located in suburban office parks.
Top 5 Sites in India, 22 May 2014 1 Google.co.in 2 Google.com 3 Facebook.com 4 Youtube.com 5 Yahoo.com Alexa - Top Sites in India
Top 5 sites in Germany, 22 May 2014 1 Google.de 2 Facebook.com 3 Google.com 4 Youtube.com 5 Ebay.de Alexa - Top Sites in Germany
Top 5 Sites in Japan, 22 May 2014 1 Yahoo.co.jp 2 Google.co.jp 3 Google.com
4 Amazon.com 5 Youtube.com Alexa - Top Sites in Japan
Top 5 sites in Brazil, 22 May 2014 1 Google.com.br 2 Facebook.com 3 Google.com 4 Youtube.com
5 Uol.com.br Alexa - Top Sites in Brazil
Top 5 sites in South Africa, 22 May 2014 1 Google.co.za 2 Google.com 3 Facebook.com 4 Youtube.com 5 Yahoo.com Alexa - Top Sites in South Africa
Top 5 sites in Saudi Arabia, 22 May 2014 1 Google.com.sa 2 Youtube.com 3 Google.com 4 Facebook.com 5 Yahoo.com Alexa - Top Sites in Saudi Arabia
Top 5 sites in Australia, 22 May 2014 1 Google.com.au 2 Google.com 3 Facebook.com 4 Youtube.com 5 Ebay.com.au Alexa - Top Sites in Australia
And so forth...
So I really don't think anywhere in the world has much influence in the global free flow of information at this particular point in time as the Bay Area. We provide a platform for anyone to express themselves and give them the biggest possible audience. London, how can you compete with that? I'd like to know.
Still waiting for a response from the power+alpha+global crowd to this as well. Wont hold my breath.
Still waiting for a response from the power+alpha+global crowd to this as well. Wont hold my breath.
LOL
Oh dear. Honey, London is the financial capital. In the real world, finance is more important than games like Facebook. How embarrassing that you think they're equal. Money makes the world spin, not Facebook. LMAO.
At the end of the day this is silly. London receives more visitors than San Francisco (the comparison is a complete blow out) because London is a more appealing city. London has more billionaires because London is more desirable. Inner London has higher real estate values than San Francisco because the land is more valuable. London is several classes above San Francisco as evidenced by the shops and restaurants lacing the streets of London vs grimy, downmarket, homeless infested San Francisco with their pitiful assortment of amenities and shops. One city is electric and the other is dull. It's you against the world hon. Look at the results of this poll, and if you took any other survey London would of course still blow that silly little city of San Francisco to shreds. Everyone knows that, except for you.
Google and Facebook really have nothing to do with the original question asked in the first post ..which is a more desirable city....that's London by several miles. Money talks, my dear. Which is why people from all over the world come to London to buy homes while no one gives San Francisco any thought. You San Franciscan cheerleaders sure love your city but the rest of the world couldn't care less about it.
Get over it.
Last edited by duke of windsor; 05-22-2014 at 01:04 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
