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.
I use to live near Miami. When I was young clubbing with friends we would sometimes head over to one of the mom and pop places in Little Havana for a late night eat. I miss having Cuban food.
Small things can go a long way, something as basic as attitude, trees, or food can change decisions and they should, we all prefer different looks and vibes. LA, it's one of those cities that I've always wanted to live in, even though I cant.
Miami's a gift for Cuban culture in the US. No where else like it IMO. Miami has it's plus sides but I tried it once for a few months after I graduated college and it wasn't to my liking but it's a nice place with plenty going on.
So why don't you live in one of those neighborhoods if you like them so much? Surely you would get much more bang for your buck there. Is it because, despite all the rhetoric, you still prefer the more polished urbanity of Hollywood?
In fact all the LA boosters over here keep trumpeting the fabulous urbanity of central LA but none of you actually lives there! What does that say?
Hollywood is a big district and large parts of it still has a lot of grit, it changes from neighborhood to neighborhood.
I used to live in LA, but I like NYC a lot better. I don't claim LA is fabulous urbanity. It's a lot of really ugly parts and for its size it doesn't do so well. In terms of the amount of walkable, urban areas, LA is a big step down from NYC and competes more with the tier below it (Chicago, DC, Philly, SF, Boston) and wins in some ways and loses in others. Even in that pack it's probably towards the end of it, but it's built differently so it's hard to make the call unless you have very strict criteria with which no one else is likely to fully agree.
So why don't you live in one of those neighborhoods if you like them so much? Surely you would get much more bang for your buck there. Is it because, despite all the rhetoric, you still prefer the more polished urbanity of Hollywood?
In fact all the LA boosters over here keep trumpeting the fabulous urbanity of central LA but none of you actually lives there! What does that say?
LOL polished good one...
Randomly picked Hollywood honestly, knew little to nothing about LA really before moving here. Looked urban and had a good walkscore. BTW moved into a fairly famous/infamous building with a reputation for crackheads and prostitution that was in the middle of a huge renovation, and on the bad side of it (terrible paint job, no flooring in the lobbies, etc.). Paid off, the place is gorgeous (and featured in one of Pwright's photos), low rent for the area keeps us here, am looking into less-gentrified (but also less touristy) East Hollywood.
Oh and I live in Central LA.
Last edited by munchitup; 11-30-2012 at 10:19 PM..
Problem is, the hypothetical guy in your bar is actually hiding in the bushes across the street, perving into the bar with binoculars.
What if you wanted to know the mental, emotional, spiritual, educational status and medical history of that girl? You know, how that girl acts on a daily basis. Her mom or Beergogle Yankee?
Why do I care about her educational status or medical history? I am not planning to take her blood or discuss the theory of relativity with her. We are talking primarily about aesthetics here. And even if I was interested in those things I would hesitate to trust her mom. Because she's biased. You should know a thing or two about bias since you like to play the CvC in-house counsel so much.
Hollywood is a big district and large parts of it still has a lot of grit, it changes from neighborhood to neighborhood.
I used to live in LA, but I like NYC a lot better. I don't claim LA is fabulous urbanity. It's a lot of really ugly parts and for its size it doesn't do so well. In terms of the amount of walkable, urban areas, LA is a big step down from NYC and competes more with the tier below it (Chicago, DC, Philly, SF, Boston) and wins in some ways and loses in others. Even in that pack it's probably towards the end of it, but it's built differently so it's hard to make the call unless you have very strict criteria with which no one else is likely to fully agree.
How does it compete with Chicago et al when most of its "walkable, urban areas" are basically ghettos? You are not trying to suggest that a ghetto can compete with a fully gentrified neighborhood in urban quality just because it has comparable population density? Or are you talking only about quantity and not quality?
How does it compete with Chicago et al when most of its "walkable, urban areas" are basically ghettos? You are not trying to suggest that a ghetto can compete with a fully gentrified neighborhood in urban quality just because it has comparable population density? Or are you talking only about quantity and not quality?
Why can't a ghetto compete, especially if it's vibrant?
Why can't a ghetto compete, especially if it's vibrant?
Well isn't that like asking "why can't a Brazillian favela or an Indian slum compete with the Upper West Side?". Those slums are plenty vibrant but you are unlikely to find them particularly pleasant.
Well isn't that like asking "why can't a Brazillian favela or an Indian slum compete with the Upper West Side?". Those slums are plenty vibrant but you are unlikely to find them particularly pleasant.
There aren't many places in America as impoverished as those areas. Most ghetto parts of America's largest cities aren't that bad looking.
How does it compete with Chicago et al when most of its "walkable, urban areas" are basically ghettos? You are not trying to suggest that a ghetto can compete with a fully gentrified neighborhood in urban quality just because it has comparable population density? Or are you talking only about quantity and not quality?
Ghetto in what sense? Working class immigrant is fine as long as there's actually people working and the violence is pretty average. I also didn't say anything about most of its walkable, urban areas are ghettos. I don't know where that's from. LA's definitely a pretty working-class place overall, but a lot of the walkable/urban areas aren't exactly the hood either. LA's large size is partially why you'll have a decent amount of quality or decent amount of anything compared to cities a tier down in metro size from LA and NYC, but often means you'll also get a lot of the bad in decent amounts.
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.
