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.
This thread is a train wreck, but I cannot look away. He keeps posting links where NYC>SF and then crowing that they somehow "prove" San Francisco is superior.
This is better than cartoons. Well almost as good.
Actually, it's very easy to eviscerate New York. 1 in 3 Bronx residents is poor and 66% of Bronx residents either have no health care or rely on govt health care. Painting NYC as a thirdworldish, subpar city vs a boutique city like SF would be all too easy.
The Bay Area's wealth and status are just as impressive as NY, if not more so, but the Bay has nowhere near the MILLIONS of poor and under educated to deal with that NYC has and the host of issues that entails.
The Bay Area is the Promised Land compared to New York. Everything is better there. Everything.
I allow the conversation to be about status and wealth because I dont want to ruin your christmas.
Now go in peace.
"There are lies, damn lies and statistics, as Mark Twain and others remind us."
"What to make of a new report that puts the number of Californians in poverty at 8.1 million, 25 percent higher than the official government estimate? Or the poverty rate in tech-rich San Francisco at 23 percent, almost double the official rate?
Short answer: A newly minted California Poverty Measure takes into account regional differences in the cost of living, which, as we know, is higher in California - and more so in San Francisco - but is not reflected in the calculations made by the federal government.
"It's a sobering picture."
"Definitely sobering in the Bay Area where, according to 2011 data, approximately 20 percent of the population - 1.3 million people - are considered below the poverty "threshold." That includes 184,000 out of San Francisco's population of 788,000"
"Were it not for the mitigating effect of the federal and state safety nets, California's poverty rate would be close to 30 percent, rather than the 16 percent reported by the U.S. Census Bureau."
Nope. San Francisco ranks so closely to New York that in the context of comparison, SF comes out smelling like a rose.
You people are too blind to see SF is up there not only with NY, but all the other cities you pray to. lmao.
How so? Even some of the things you've selectively just posted puts NYC in a separate tier and meanwhile there are plenty of others you chose not to post which also do the same. Regardless, even if you don't want to admit that, there's at least the bare proof that by the metrics you've posted, and I assume stand by, NYC is ahead of SF.
"What to make of a new report that puts the number of Californians in poverty at 8.1 million, 25 percent higher than the official government estimate? Or the poverty rate in tech-rich San Francisco at 23 percent, almost double the official rate?
Short answer: A newly minted California Poverty Measure takes into account regional differences in the cost of living, which, as we know, is higher in California - and more so in San Francisco - but is not reflected in the calculations made by the federal government.
"It's a sobering picture."
"Definitely sobering in the Bay Area where, according to 2011 data, approximately 20 percent of the population - 1.3 million people - are considered below the poverty "threshold." That includes 184,000 out of San Francisco's population of 788,000"
"Were it not for the mitigating effect of the federal and state safety nets, California's poverty rate would be close to 30 percent, rather than the 16 percent reported by the U.S. Census Bureau."
Peace be upon you.
Though this holds similarly for NYC as well as any other city/metro that is significantly above the US average in terms of cost of living.
"What to make of a new report that puts the number of Californians in poverty at 8.1 million, 25 percent higher than the official government estimate? Or the poverty rate in tech-rich San Francisco at 23 percent, almost double the official rate?
Short answer: A newly minted California Poverty Measure takes into account regional differences in the cost of living, which, as we know, is higher in California - and more so in San Francisco - but is not reflected in the calculations made by the federal government.
"It's a sobering picture."
"Definitely sobering in the Bay Area where, according to 2011 data, approximately 20 percent of the population - 1.3 million people - are considered below the poverty "threshold." That includes 184,000 out of San Francisco's population of 788,000"
"Were it not for the mitigating effect of the federal and state safety nets, California's poverty rate would be close to 30 percent, rather than the 16 percent reported by the U.S. Census Bureau."
Peace be upon you.
haha thats an already debunked, biased report by a group that advocates for increased govt spending on the poor.
Here are the govt's own stats:
Persons in Poverty 2013
New York MSA 2,912,627...14.6%
San Francisco MSA 510,329...11.5%
And there's nothing wrong with having poor, but nearly 3 million? and 1.7 million in 304 sq miles?
For all the talk about SF's wealth I don't think I have ever seen as many bums, anywhere in the first world, as I saw in SF. Walking into Golden Gate Park from the Haight was a truly uncomfortable experience -- I turned around and walked back after 2 mins. As for Downtown Oakland... Dear Lord. It's like a cross between Downtown Newark and Downtown Stamford -- as ghetto as the former and as dead as the latter.
But at least they have the billionaires to crow about. Apparently so does New Dheli.
Though this holds similarly for NYC as well as any other city/metro that is significantly above the US average in terms of cost of living.
Exactly. But Monty would have us believe that everyone in the Bay is driving Bentley's to work at McDonalds, and Outerborough NYC is a just a vast collection of polio-ravished shanty towns. The truth is that there is a pretty sharp divide between the haves and have-nots in both cities (as in most cities, really). And if anything that divide is even more stark and pronounced in the Bay.
Not that it matters to him. SF is always first in all things positive. Even when it isn't. As for the negatives....they don't exist for him. Out of sight, out of mind. "Hey, look, over there....there goes a billionaire under 40! Whoo-hoo! We're all rich by association!!!"
haha thats an already debunked, biased report by a group that advocates for increased govt spending on the poor.
Here are the govt's own stats:
Persons in Poverty 2013
New York MSA 2,912,627...14.6%
San Francisco MSA 510,329...11.5%
And there's nothing wrong with having poor, but nearly 3 million? and 1.7 million in 304 sq miles?
You can ignore it you want, but the fact is that poverty/income disparity is a serious and growing problem in the region. That's true nationwide but the process is accelerated in the Bay. But the poor are increasingly marginalized, largely voiceless and invisible. They've almost been priced out of SF proper, and increasingly, even Oakland. But they're still there. Closing your eyes to the problem doesn't make it cease to exist. It just means you can't see it.
"A new analysis from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco finds that during the past decade, poverty in the San Francisco Bay Area has shifted toward the suburbs. The report examines data from the 2000 census and the 2005-2009 American Community Survey and finds that, like many U.S. metro areas, the Bay Area has experienced a rise in poverty rates overall (1.1 percentage points from 2000 to 2009), but the population in poverty has risen faster in suburban areas.The number of people living in poverty in the Bay Area rose 16 percent in the suburbs, compared with 7 percent in urban areas, this analysis finds. And the greatest percentage growth in suburban poverty was among blacks and Latinos. The percentage of the poor living in the suburbs has increased across all racial groups, but the change is highest among blacks, increasing by more than 7 percentage points from 2000 to 2009."
You can ignore it you want, but the fact is that poverty/income disparity is a serious and growing problem in the region.
No, actually its not.
Persons Living in Poverty, San Francisco MSA
2013 11.5%
2012 11.9%
And it ebbs and flows with the economy, which is normal. I just cant fathom 3 million poor people in such close proximity to each other, and 1.7 million in 304 sq miles.
And I support your new found crusade to end poverty in America. Congrats Comrade.
lol
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.
