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.
SF Bay Area: 14 of the Top 100
1 Google
2 Apple
7 Visa
13 Wells Fargo
21 Facebook
45 Oracle
49 HP
60 eBay
69 Yahoo
70 Twitter
71 Cisco
78 LinkedIn
86 Intel
97 Paypal
New York Area: 10 of the Top 100
3 IBM
11 Verizon
12 GE
18 Mastercard
24 American Express
43 Subway
57 Citi
78 JP Morgan
87 Chase
88 Pepsi
Is anyone even reading these boring stats anymore? There are dozens of these same ol' pages by now, and most of them prove the point that NYC is still ahead! It's just a waste of time to keep posting them! What about something SF is better at than NYC other than these stats, natural scenery, and (arguably) weather? I'll tell ya: it'll be very hard to find.
"The percentage of people living in poverty in the suburbs rose 56.1 percent in the San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont metro area from 2000 to 2011, compared to 64 percent nationwide. The San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara metropolitan region surged 53.1 percent. But Silicon Valley experienced a corresponding rise (49 percent) among its urban poor"
"The book actually opens with a description of the suburbs of East Contra Costa County -- places such as Oakley, Antioch and Brentwood -- where the number of people living below the poverty line grew by more than 70 percent in the past decade. Berube says the high cost of living in San Francisco simply pushed the urban poor who bus restaurant tables and drive cabs into a kind of blight flight."
"It's just a horrible situation because those people are just trying to live," Cook said. "Seeing that a 10-year-old was living in there just broke my heart. But the way the city has handle this has left us wondering if this is where we want to live. People are falling through the cracks and then are being blamed for it."
My point is, you want to knock NYC for the amount of poor living in its city limits and MSA, fine, it's embarrassing. But don't pretend SF/The Bay doesn't have severe issues with poverty, as well. To do so is simply the kettle calling the pot black
"The percentage of people living in poverty in the suburbs rose 56.1 percent in the San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont metro area from 2000 to 2011, compared to 64 percent nationwide. The San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara metropolitan region surged 53.1 percent. But Silicon Valley experienced a corresponding rise (49 percent) among its urban poor"
"The book actually opens with a description of the suburbs of East Contra Costa County -- places such as Oakley, Antioch and Brentwood -- where the number of people living below the poverty line grew by more than 70 percent in the past decade. Berube says the high cost of living in San Francisco simply pushed the urban poor who bus restaurant tables and drive cabs into a kind of blight flight."
"It's just a horrible situation because those people are just trying to live," Cook said. "Seeing that a 10-year-old was living in there just broke my heart. But the way the city has handle this has left us wondering if this is where we want to live. People are falling through the cracks and then are being blamed for it."
My point is, you want to knock NYC for the amount of poor living in its city limits and MSA, fine, it's embarrassing. But don't pretend SF/The Bay doesn't have severe issues with poverty, as well. To do so is simply the kettle calling the pot black
Sorry, but your source is NOT usable because they dont measure both cities. By that report's standard, half of New York would qualify as poor, so find us a stat that measures both, or its bunk.
You beat us by one point--awesome. Still doesn't take away the fact SF is a one trick pony town. And you must have a selective memory--you don't remember all those lists where NYC was on top? Here, let me help you:
Location: Watching half my country turn into Gilead
3,530 posts, read 4,172,934 times
Reputation: 2925
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
Sorry, but your source is NOT usable because they dont measure both cities. By that report's standard, half of New York would qualify as poor, so find us a stat that measures both, or its bunk.
Capisce?
Lol at the San Jose Mercury News not being usable. Awww, Montclair found something he didn't like? Your rationale reeks of desperation
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,133,609 times
Reputation: 3145
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei
I prefer Beacon.
That's just East Coast bias talking. Pathetic.
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.
