Myth or Reality: Is Northern California really more laid-back than Southern California? (Los Angeles: fit in, layoffs)

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by sav858

That's pretty debatable and subjective, unless you're really into nature I personally don't think there are more interesting places to visit in Northern CA at all. Between LA and San Diego there is far more to do and see IMO than the Bay Area and Sacramento EXCEPT for nature related places as the forests and mountains are better up here.

Put it this way: How many different cities and distinct regions does the Bay Area present vs. SoCal, in addition to the obvious natural wonders? The usual complaint from L.A. is that one has the distinct feeling that one done everything there...now what? Not something you hear in the Bay Area.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by bigdumbgod

Put it this way: How many different cities and distinct regions does the Bay Area present vs. SoCal, in addition to the obvious natural wonders? The usual complaint from L.A. is that one has the distinct feeling that one done everything there...now what? Not something you hear in the Bay Area.

I guess you feel cities and regions are more "distinct" here than I do. I personally dont think I'm missing a whole by not spending time in the South Bay or Penninsula. What honestly is so "distinct" about them from the East Bay?

People might go to Sausalito, Tiburon, or Santa Cruz for the day here. In SoCal people do the same thing with places like Laguna Beach, La Jolla, Santa Barbara, etc..

I guess more people realize there isn't much more to see here so they just go out town. I never knew anyone in SoCal that had trouble deciding what to do for a weekend, I sure as hell didn't. During summer I never wanted to leave or go anywhere because I loved going to the beach and actually going in the water, something not possible up here. Vegas isn't really that much farther than Tahoe, which everyone in the Bay Area goes to.

Again, I don't see how anyone could think a regions of 10 or so million has more to do than a region of 20 million. There are so many more entertainment options in SoCal than here. But you manage to find plenty of people in the Bay Area that delude themselves into thinking there is more to do here.

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by sav858

I guess you feel cities and regions are more "distinct" here than I do. I personally dont think I'm missing a whole by not spending time in the South Bay or Penninsula. What honestly is so "distinct" about them from the East Bay?

Wait a minute...you don't see any difference between Berkeley, Hillsborough, and San Jose? I see some rather glaring distinctions here.

[nslander]

Originally Posted by sav858

That's pretty debatable and subjective

How about flat-out wrong?

[sav858]

Originally Posted by bigdumbgod

Wait a minute...you don't see any difference between Berkeley, Hillsborough, and San Jose? I see some rather glaring distinctions here.

And you don't see a difference between Venice Beach, Beverly Hills, and Anaheim? Really?

Also you said distinct "REGIONS", I never claimed all the cities were the same. So I'll ask it again, what honestly is so "distinct" about the Penninsula, North Bay, and South Bay from the East Bay? Outside of work and family I don't see too many people going between these regions as people tend to stay in their own area like LA. Also how could anyone logically think a region of 10 million would have more to do than 20 million? I'm honestly curious to see your reasoning behind that. Just way more stuff like shows and events going on in SoCal.

[Fontucky]

Originally Posted by 04kL4nD

LA is just as stressful as the Bay Area.

I'll take LA crime rate vs OAK for 200 Alex.

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by sav858

And you don't see a difference between Venice Beach, Beverly Hills, and Anaheim? Really?

Also you said distinct "REGIONS", I never claimed all the cities were the same. So I'll ask it again, what honestly is so "distinct" about the Penninsula, North Bay, and South Bay from the East Bay? Outside of work and family I don't see too many people going between these regions as people tend to stay in their own area like LA. Also how could anyone logically think a region of 10 million would have more to do than 20 million? I'm honestly curious to see your reasoning behind that. Just way more stuff like shows and events going on in SoCal.

Doesn't matter how many shows or events are going on if just trying to get to them proves to be a significant barrier to deciding to do so. People in L.A. tend to know less about what their region offers due to the fact that so many grew up there resigned to staying put in their own domicile (many of the people I grew up with are still there, and don't get out much), due to prohibitive traffic and having no money to go out anyway.

"Distinct"? Here are a few distinctions, for starters:
The Peninsula has mostly rich residential communities, with a few exceptions
North Bay has wine and more rich people, Sears Point
South Bay has tech, sprawl, diversity, Sharks, Earthquakes, 49ers (soon)
East Bay has a burgeoning city, rich and not rich suburbs, Raiders/A's/Warriors

[sav858]

Originally Posted by bigdumbgod

Doesn't matter how many shows or events are going on if just trying to get to them proves to be a significant barrier to deciding to do so. People in L.A. tend to know less about what their region offers due to the fact that so many grew up there resigned to staying put in their own domicile (many of the people I grew up with are still there, and don't get out much), due to prohibitive traffic and having no money to go out anyway.

So you think people in the Bay Area like going out of their way to cross toll bridges to visit other suburbs that offer the same things their own areas do? Maybe the South Bay is different but I don't see anyone in the East Bay heading to the South Bay, North Bay, or Peninsula except for mainly jobs and family/friends as those areas don't offer anything that can't be found in their own region. Plenty of people in the Bay Area know NOTHING about other sub-regions, my old roommate who has never lived outside the Bay Area had never even heard of Foster City. How is that any different from LA? I don't know where you get this idea that Bay Area natives are anymore knowledgeable or visit other sub-regions here more so than LA, the city of SF being the only exception. If it wasn't for a 2 day work event last year it would have easily been 15+ years since I set foot in San Mateo and almost all of the Penninsula. I honestly can't remember the last time I was even in the South Bay, certainly not within the last 3+ years.

It does matter how many shows and events are going on as it gives you more options. For example, back in 2009 when my favorite band canceled their SD show I drove up to Anaheim after work to catch the show there, took me about an hour from Carlsbad. They also canceled their ONLY Bay Area show. Now if I was living up here at the time I would have been SOL as that was the only Northern CA performance. If so many people didn't go to these shows and events because of traffic as you claim then why does LA have so many more events and concerts? It's not like they are doing 5 shows in 5 different places in the region. Clearly attendance at sporting events, concerts, etc..show that traffic isn't much of an impediment to enjoying all the entertainment options in SoCal.

It's not like traffic up here is exactly "great" either or world's better than LA now.

"Distinct"? Here are a few distinctions, for starters:
The Peninsula has mostly rich residential communities, with a few exceptions
North Bay has wine and more rich people, Sears Point
South Bay has tech, sprawl, diversity, Sharks, Earthquakes, 49ers (soon)
East Bay has a burgeoning city, rich and not rich suburbs, Raiders/A's/Warriors

East and South Bay also have rich residential communities. East Bay has wineries. Sprawl and diversity is everywhere here. Those "distinctions" can be found in every region therefor not really making them "distinct" at all.

What's the difference between sports teams playing in the City of LA or Orange County than one's here playing in the East Bay or South Bay? You could do the same thing with LA that you just did but it doesn't matter because their trivial, irrelevant "distinctions" because none of these things with maybe the exception of wine country make these things worth visiting for many people. And even wine country really isn't the metropolitan Bay Area either. Either way SoCal has two wine country areas (SB and Temecula).

Do you think people from the East Bay and North Bay are driving all the way to the Penninsula to check out rich residential communities? Do your friends from the South Bay go out and check the East Bay's "rich and no so rich" suburbs often? Is Concord and Hercules that fascinating to people down there?

There are twice as many people with so many more urban/suburban amenities in Southern CA than there are here I don't get how anyone could possibly think outside of nature there is more to do and see here. And you haven't really explained how at all except for some generic "there's so much traffic so nobody goes anywhere" argument that is pretty weak.

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by sav858

And you haven't really explained how at all except for some generic "there's so much traffic so nobody goes anywhere" argument that is pretty weak.

We grew up there. It ain't weak at all - it's truth. Visiting the beach cities several times per year, nothing's changed in that regard.
Goin' back down to OC again this weekend. 405 dictates what you do and don't do, day and night.

And there is no sprawl anywhere near that of L.A. metro in the Bay Area, not even the South Bay. People that are stuck in that SoCal sprawl want to get out once in a while, but it's a grueling effort to do so, so they most often opt for swinging on the hammock or a stroll to the local park. OTOH, the folks I know up here are constantly proposing planned or spontaneous trips far and wide across the Bay Area, even on weeknights. Maybe different for those who are too burnt from work to go out, but that's not everybody.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by bigdumbgod

We grew up there. It ain't weak at all - it's truth. Visiting the beach cities several times per year, nothing's changed in that regard.
Goin' back down to OC again this weekend. 405 dictates what you do and don't do, day and night.

And there is no sprawl anywhere near that of L.A. metro in the Bay Area, not even the South Bay. People that are stuck in that SoCal sprawl want to get out once in a while, but it's a grueling effort to do so, so they most often opt for swinging on the hammock or a stroll to the local park. OTOH, the folks I know up here are constantly proposing planned or spontaneous trips far and wide across the Bay Area, even on weeknights. Maybe different for those who are too burnt from work to go out, but that's not everybody.

I'm not saying it's not true but it's also true up here as well, the Bay Area isn't exactly a small or easy area to traverse at all. You must know people that like to put up with a lot of traffic or find the South Bay that boring because outside of work and family/friends I rarely see anyone head to the Peninsula for anything or South Bay for anything other than a Sharks game. North Bay for wine and possibly the frigid coast.

You say you visited the beach cities several times a year, how many times a year do you think most people are heading down to Santa Cruz from the East Bay? I guarantee you it's probably even less than you visiting the beach cities. And you can't even get in the water anywhere here. Since I've moved back here in 2010 I still haven't been to Santa Cruz and have been to the beach a grand total of two or three times.

Still at a complete loss to see how there is more to do up here despite whatever small advantage Bay Area has in the traffic department. Everything you mentioned can be matched in Southern CA and then some.