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.
Are the grapes tasting a bit sour? Much has already been discussed comparing the two cities and in my opinion Los Angeles comes out ahead of Washington DC in almost every category. But, of-course, that is all individual preferences. If you want "substance" than it cannot be denied that LA is a much more exciting city than DC unless a person is a political junky and watches C-SPAN all day. Try comparing "Washington Today" to the numerous live television shows broadcast daily from Los Angeles. In-fact the bulk of entertainment on TV or film, music is from California not the Northeast. More substance? No doubt that our nation's capitol naturally has many very interesting museums paid for by the U.S. tax payer and only located in Washington because it is the center of government. But Los Angeles also has world-class museums free of cost but not funded by the government. The beautiful location of the Getty Museum, for example, overlooking the Pacific Ocean can not be matched by anything in topography-poor Washington DC. The Northeast is, for the most part, of man-made interest since the land isn't by any means spectacular. So there are impressive buildings in New York and bridges, historic sites all around. In California everything is secondary to the magnificent land of soaring mountains, wide beaches and trees that stay green all year long. There are no nearby ski resorts in DC because the closest mountain range is too low and worn down [what would be called foothills in California]. Los Angeles is a city of outdoor living and activity while Washington DC is restricted to claustrophobic indoors except during the late spring into early autumn and only when it isn't raining or so humid to make people faint. Los Angeles has more outdoor concerts than any major city and if a person doesn't have the money to sit in the amphitheater they can sit on the surrounding hillside, smoke a little bud and look at the night-lights of the city below. Can anyone do that in DC?
More substance anyone or is the chill in the air slowing down the cerebral activity?
Just stop, you clearly have never been to the East Coast, there's no point in spouting off your under-educated, and uninformed opinion. Did you go to a public school in greater Los Angeles?
Temperature is, of-course, relative to what each person considers comfortable. But I think most people would agree that outdoor temps above 70 are very easy to be out in. Or perhaps 60's with a light jacket or sweater unless a person is exercising and than even 50's can be somewhat comfortable. On the other hand, temperatures in the 80's can be a little warm for some people especially if the air is humid. Temps over 90 are basically considered hot and uncomfortable by most people.
So let's compare Washington DC to Los Angeles. Average winter temps in DC average in the 40's with night time temps below freezing. LA averages between 68-70 during winter with night temps in 48-50 [even warmer than the day temps for DC]. It doesn't average above 70 in Washington DC until May and is below 70 already in October. Only two months average below 70 in Los Angeles [Dec: 69F & Jan: 68F]. Summers are hotter and much more humid in DC compared to LA; both average in the 80's but night temps are cooler in Los Angeles.
if you have a jacket it's pretty easy to get over it. people have lived in much colder climates for thousands of years. dc is really not that bad and if it affects you that much that it's the determining factor in every argument on how great you think your city is then you're the definition of a wimp.
Are the grapes tasting a bit sour? Much has already been discussed comparing the two cities and in my opinion Los Angeles comes out ahead of Washington DC in almost every category. But, of-course, that is all individual preferences. If you want "substance" than it cannot be denied that LA is a much more exciting city than DC unless a person is a political junky and watches C-SPAN all day. Try comparing "Washington Today" to the numerous live television shows broadcast daily from Los Angeles. In-fact the bulk of entertainment on TV or film, music is from California not the Northeast. More substance? No doubt that our nation's capitol naturally has many very interesting museums paid for by the U.S. tax payer and only located in Washington because it is the center of government. But Los Angeles also has world-class museums free of cost but not funded by the government. The beautiful location of the Getty Museum, for example, overlooking the Pacific Ocean can not be matched by anything in topography-poor Washington DC. The Northeast is, for the most part, of man-made interest since the land isn't by any means spectacular. So there are impressive buildings in New York and bridges, historic sites all around. In California everything is secondary to the magnificent land of soaring mountains, wide beaches and trees that stay green all year long. There are no nearby ski resorts in DC because the closest mountain range is too low and worn down [what would be called foothills in California]. Los Angeles is a city of outdoor living and activity while Washington DC is restricted to claustrophobic indoors except during the late spring into early autumn and only when it isn't raining or so humid to make people faint. Los Angeles has more outdoor concerts than any major city and if a person doesn't have the money to sit in the amphitheater they can sit on the surrounding hillside, smoke a little bud and look at the night-lights of the city below. Can anyone do that in DC?
More substance anyone or is the chill in the air slowing down the cerebral activity?
Eh, you have a bad habit of forgetting other people's posting histories and jumping on them for no particular reason.
I've generally been "siding" with Los Angeles on this forum. That doesn't mean I can't find it ironic that there was a discussion about how Angelenos (which is what I am, because it's where I grew up and I have probably seen a lot more of the city and area than you have) constantly talk about the weather and little else that was followed by--talk about the weather and little else.
Well, it's certainly true that a lot more people live in greater LA and southern California overall than the DC area (even with the Baltimore area included).
Just stop, you clearly have never been to the East Coast, there's no point in spouting off your under-educated, and uninformed opinion. Did you go to a public school in greater Los Angeles?
I have been to the East Coast; in-fact this past September I was in NYC for the first time. But I have not visited Washington DC or anywhere else in the Northeast. I want to see the national capitol btw. But a person doesn't have to have personally visited a place to have an opinion. We all read and the Internet provides more information that most people can possibly digest. Just because you may not like what I have written doesn't mean it is not correct. I provided weather data and pointed out that Washington DC is in a relatively flat section of the Eastern Seaboard. Everyone knows that DC was build around low-lying river bottoms\ swamps near the Chesapeake bay. The closest mountains are the Appalachians and that is a very old range of mountains [much lower than the mountain ranges in the West and naturally not very scenic as a result]. A mountain range [Santa Monica] cuts right thru the middle of Los Angeles and the surrounding San Gabriel mountains tower over 8000 in elevation. There is nothing like that anywhere in the Northeast.
So what am I "spouting off" that isn't true? Care to elaborate or is it just so much easier to refute what others write when you have no information to contribute?
Eh, you have a bad habit of forgetting other people's posting histories and jumping on them for no particular reason.
I've generally been "siding" with Los Angeles on this forum. That doesn't mean I can't find it ironic that there was a discussion about how Angelenos (which is what I am, because it's where I grew up and I have probably seen a lot more of the city and area than you have) constantly talk about the weather and little else that was followed by--talk about the weather and little else.
What, you don't find that funny?
I've read your comments before on other posts and trust your opinion. This is a very long thread & I have not even posted anything to it in several weeks [plus I do not go back and read hundreds of previous posts]. My response to you was your assertion that only the climate is being cited for why Los Angeles is more interesting than Washington DC. I wanted to remind readers that the climate is just one among many reasons why, in my opionion, LA is a better place to live and visit than DC. But it can not be under-estimated how weather effects a person's outlook, life-style opportunities, industry-commerce, etc. Los Angeles has the largest port on the West Coast due, in part, to the huge amount of produce shipped out of California to the nation and world each day. As the most productive agricultural region in the world, California feeds the nation. So while a person is watching TV shows telecast from Los Angeles they are also having a meal of food produced in California while sipping a fine wine from, you guess it, California. Truly there is no place like Los Angeles and California anywhere in the U.S. especially Washington DC.
I know about you guys, but weather is pretty important. Just saying. Think of a HUGE snowstorm, or Heat-wave in FAMOUSLY walkable cities like NYC and Chicago. YIKES!!!
I've read your comments before on other posts and trust your opinion. This is a very long thread & I have not even posted anything to it in several weeks [plus I do not go back and read hundreds of previous posts]. My response to you was your assertion that only the climate is being cited for why Los Angeles is more interesting than Washington DC. I wanted to remind readers that the climate is just one among many reasons why, in my opionion, LA is a better place to live and visit than DC. But it can not be under-estimated how weather effects a person's outlook, life-style opportunities, industry-commerce, etc. Los Angeles has the largest port on the West Coast due, in part, to the huge amount of produce shipped out of California to the nation and world each day. As the most productive agricultural region in the world, California feeds the nation. So while a person is watching TV shows telecast from Los Angeles they are also having a meal of food produced in California while sipping a fine wine from, you guess it, California. Truly there is no place like Los Angeles and California anywhere in the U.S. especially Washington DC.
lmfao this is so retarded. you act as if this country lives and breathes california. its relevance is dwindling in the wind and your near bankrupt state decides to spend half a billion dollars to build a single public school. with that said, i doubt there's a state in this country as retarded as california. not even mississippi. so enjoy your weather, enjoy your mountains, enjoy your bankruptcy, enjoy your 46th place education system, enjoy your high taxes, enjoy the decentralizing entertainment industry, enjoy your soon to be 2nd place to texas, and learn to live with it.
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.
boredatwork
