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.
Depends what you want. I have lived in Philadelphia for 4 years and I love the grit/blue collar environment it provides. I prefer "gritty" blue collar cities over cities that are sunny all the time with great weather like SF.
Wow, you really cherry picked the 6 good photos you can get of Philadelphia. I moved there seven years ago because of my job and I can tell you that the city is truly a dump. It has the size and population but manages to excel in all of the worst aspects of a city with very few benefits. There are blocks and blocks of the most striking ghettos that look like third world countries and they are not all contained in one place but scattered throughout the city. Even the ghettos you see in movies don't quite capture how depressing and ugly the neighborhoods are. Even the middle class areas are ugly and depressing, go on realtor.com, look up an average affordable house then look at the neighborhood on google maps. Also, one of the most striking things I noticed when I first moved to Philadelphia was how loud and rude the people are.... in a way that you just don't experience anywhere else. Not aloof or very direct like you can get in NY, but just a total lack of class altogether. The rest of the East coast refers to Philadelphians as "the garbage people". ... it' justified. Ugly city, Ugly people, moderate to low career opportunity for a city of that size (you end up having to commute an hour TO the suburbs). Run!
Depends what you want. I have lived in Philadelphia for 4 years and I love the grit/blue collar environment it provides. I prefer "gritty" blue collar cities over cities that are sunny all the time with great weather like SF.
It all depends on the personality of the person.
SF is far from being sunny all the time--it is a gray place that is almost always chilly.
Even the middle class areas are ugly and depressing, go on realtor.com, look up an average affordable house then look at the neighborhood on google maps.
OK Done. Exposed and everything else in your tirade should come off as pure rubbish.
^^^And it's actually quite gritty; definitely one of the grittier cities in the country.
For instance, in DC you'll spend $2500/mo on rent to live in a studio in a new amenitized building. Yes, that is expensive, but you often/generally get newer/nicer for the money, and more space. In SF, there is an astonishing lack of new. For being a much "newer" city than Philly, SF is darn right old (not to mention significantly more crowded). You'll pay $3500/mo to live in a studio in an older walkup or an old apartment building. It's got the same sort of thing New York has - an arm and a leg to live in a wonderful, old, falling apart dump.
There's really nothing Philly "beats" SF on in my mind, including grittiness. SF offers the grittiness combined with amazing old urban density without the downright ghetto-ness (and I won't go into detail on what I'm referring to when I say that because I don't want to open a can of worms).
Also - "gray" all year is not true. You probably came as a tourist in July or August when the fog was out. While not San Diego weather by any means, the winters are mild and most would take them over a Philly winter (yes it rains a lot and is very windy, but rarely ever drops below 40 degrees, if ever). Our "summer" doesn't get to 90+ degrees (which we can do without because nobody has or needs AC), but a perfect 70-75 and sunny day is frequent in April/May and September/October, and random days like that throughout the year. Drought years are actually great for weather and do produce San Diego like weather.
And for good "hot" weather, one only needs to cross the Bay. Napa/Sonoma offer hot escapes that can't be matched in Philly. The East Bay also can get quite hot (100+). So it's not too difficult to find that warmth if after a year your body still somehow hasn't adjusted to a constant 50-70 degrees, which is by most accounts the most mild temperature range available.
I'd take them over a Philly winter, but the rest of the year, Philly has better weather. And I'm not talking about the rest of the Bay Area in terms of weather--I'm talking just San Francisco. Even in summer, many of those inland suburbs still aren't very warm, particularly at night. Philly in summers has balmy nights in the 70sF and sometimes 80sF. Perfect for night swims.
Drought years aren't great at all--that's why CA sees so many wildfires that kill or hurt people, destroy ecosystems (like Big Sur), and burn down homes. Who cares if the weather is good when there is smoke in the air and so much damage done?
I agree that Philly has very ghetto areas with rude and trashy people, but not the majority of the city, and let's not act like SF people are perfect. They're sandal-wearing White Auber-liberals who get offended at anything and everything and try to ban eating salt on Tuesdays and male circumcision. And then there are also your own type of ghetto folks--the homeless who take a dump in the street, and people don't care because that type of hyper-liberalism breeds the "everyone should do what they want" mentality.
And Philly is way more gritty, old, historic, and urban than the Bay Area. Sure, SF has grit, but it's no comparison.
You may be right but I wouldn't have thought so, since SF is such an artsy fartsy city and I always thought of Philly as more gritty, working class..industrial.
SF used to be an artsy/musical city, but ultra high income techies have priced the artists / musicians out of the city. The yuppie phase of gentrification on a city scale. Some would say it's completely lost it's soul. Similar to what's happened in NYC, not just Manhattan (playground for the rich) but it's lower cost boroughs - now completely unaffordable. Philly seems to be taking up the mantle of the arts / music.. becoming a magnet for artists, musicians and creatives that can't afford NY anymore. Maybe Portland (where I used to live) is serving a similar purpose for San Francisco's displaced creatives.
The most prominent museum in SF is closed until early 2016. I like SF, and do think it's overall superior to Philly, but on arts? No. Just like Philly has the superior skyline, I think this is a clear win here. Yuppification is not a clear indicator of culture...
If anything yuppification is the phase after a place is cool. When I lived in Chicago I watched the Wicker Park / Bucktown area transition: dangerous seedy area -> artists and musicians start buying up cheap industrial spaces open galleries -> becomes in demand artsy area -> some yuppies start moving in because they want to live in the happening area -> high end restaurants, etc start opening to cater to the yuppies -> area becomes too expensive for the creatives, they move on to the next area -> area becomes just another area of condos, high paid professionals with a disney-fication of it's creative past.
When you mean culture, do you mean creatives actually creating culture, or do you mean an expensive place curating culture, like the current city I live in DC... places where the rich go to operas and museums to be "exposed to culture"? A place where, even though it's huge, there's a dearth of musicians for me to collaborate with?
^^^And it's actually quite gritty; definitely one of the grittier cities in the country.
Okay, I'll give you that but you must also acknowledge that Philly is one of the best cities in the country when it comes to urbanity, walkability, authentic culture, cuisine, and overall amenities. Not too many cities can offer what Philly already has. It's really one of the unique gems in the country. By the way, NYC is also one of the most grittiest cities in the country.
Quote:
For instance, in DC you'll spend $2500/mo on rent to live in a studio in a new amenitized building. Yes, that is expensive, but you often/generally get newer/nicer for the money, and more space. In SF, there is an astonishing lack of new. For being a much "newer" city than Philly, SF is darn right old (not to mention significantly more crowded). You'll pay $3500/mo to live in a studio in an older walkup or an old apartment building. It's got the same sort of thing New York has - an arm and a leg to live in a wonderful, old, falling apart dump.
There's really nothing Philly "beats" SF on in my mind, including grittiness. SF offers the grittiness combined with amazing old urban density without the downright ghetto-ness (and I won't go into detail on what I'm referring to when I say that because I don't want to open a can of worms).
I'm sure we all know what group you are referring to.
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.
WHAT'S THE SITUATION PEOPLE!!??
SF not artsy anymore
