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.
Man, it'd be nice if money was of no concern, wouldn't it?
Yeah, right? For me Los Angeles doesn't match up to SF for the things SF excels at, like the highly compact urban bustle. But I find now that I don't crave that anyway. And L.A. reaches a good enough level of it, and offers a lot more of the things I do care about in the arts, music, entertainment, interactions with different types of people.
It's not a zero sum game though. There's no absolute lack of such things in the one compared to the other, of course. I've lived in both and I just find for me there's more of a mosaic to explore in Los Angeles.
I notice for how much SF gets talked up here, LA wins a lot of polls you wouldn't think it would on city-data. It used to lose a lot more.
Seriously. When I first came across this site, people treated LA like it was some third world, cultureless, materialistic, homeless camp with little more than movie stars and Mexicans.
L.A all the way; a much larger array of areas to choose from (including places like Hollywood Hills you were uber wealthy), much more variety of things to do, better entertainment venues, and much better weather with usable beaches. San Francisco is way overrated being foggy and chilly all summer, and very small and compact in area.
If this poll includes metro areas (Bay Area vs. L.A-metro area), Orange County's Laguna Beach is the best place to live in California.
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.