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.
ok, I know this could be a no brainier for many but both areas have pros and cons:
Sacramento pros:
Good weather
Good suburban schools
Close to many places via car
Cheaper California living
Good wages
Sacramento cons
No arts or culture
Suburbs to cookie cutter
Not much to do near by
Chicago pros
Abundance of arts and culture
Good schools in suburbs
Always something to do
Easy to fly out from there to anywhere
Chicago cons
Low wages
Expensive housing in city and suburbs with good schools
Weather
Both are areas my wife and I considered moving to. Sacramento's proximity to so many ideal destinations(SF, Lake Tahoe, Napa Valley) is very appealing. Just as Chicago is with its urbanity, culture, history...etc. Ultimately we chose to move to New Orleans, but I think it would come down to weather preference if we had to choose between the 2 again.
ok, I know this could be a no brainier for many but both areas have pros and cons:
Sacramento pros:
Good weather
Good suburban schools
Close to many places via car
Cheaper California living
Good wages
Sacramento cons
No arts or culture
Suburbs to cookie cutter
Not much to do near by
Chicago pros
Abundance of arts and culture
Good schools in suburbs
Always something to do
Easy to fly out from there to anywhere
Chicago cons
Low wages
Expensive housing in city and suburbs with good schools
Weather
Cannot decide were to move. Your take?
Good pros and cons list. My only question is on the ages, are you sure Sacto is better, because I would have guessed the other way around. For me, Sacto would be a no brainer but I don't like the cold weather and crime rates of Chicago and love the Sacto vibe actually.
That's a very ignorant thing to say. So Sac has no art museums, symphonies, ballets, sports teams, fine dining, etc. Yeah, you're right, we're a bunch of urban hillbilly's.
That's a very ignorant thing to say. So Sac has no art museums, symphonies, ballets, sports teams, fine dining, etc. Yeah, you're right, we're a bunch of urban hillbilly's.
I agree with your point, but why be so defensive? You could just as easily and simply correct the misinformation.
Didn't mean to offen anybody with no art or culture, but compared to Chicago it's pretty llow, like many other cities in US. Also I guess wages part is only applicable for lower income. I make much more then minimum wage but my mother is min wage worker. So for her it is hard to go to 8.25$ per hour. I visited Sacramento twice and going back again in September. And still cannot make up my mind. Weather is the biggest pro for me, just like big con for Chicago is horrible winter.
Depends on what you value.really. If you value arts/culture in an urban culture with great food (and also nightlife), then Chicago easily wins. However, I think what people also don't realize is that Chicago has many quiet areas - many. There are areas of high activity but not like what you might think of (i.e. a picture of parts of Manhattan) everywhere.
I think that lifestyle should be the key consideration in your decision because these are 2 very different cities/areas. If you enjoy more greenery, nature, warmer weather, and car environment, then I would lean towards Sacramento. If you want a more traditional, big city/urban environment (including public transportation options, neighborhoods, etc.), then I would lean towards Chicago.
You mentioned Chicagoland and the Chicago suburbs. Note that the traffic in Chicago is terrible, so if you live in most suburbs you would only be able to really experience the city on the weekends. The public schools for the most part are bad in the city, so if that's important you would want to look at the suburbs. To be honest with you, the Chicagoland suburbs are just pretty ordinary suburbs for the most part (there are some cool, unique ones like Evanston and Oak Park, others). Also, the winter here is no joke. Not necessarily in terms of being overly cold....it just lasts so long. We've had several brisk days throughout June, and when the weather does warm up, it's been rainy and overcast a good proportion of days.
There are several great aspects about Chicago, but if you're looking at the suburbs, Sacramento may be the better choice since you can probably more easily enjoy what the city and suburbs have to offer there. Again, it really comes down to lifestyle. If you're a more big city person than Chicago is likely a better fit. If you like some city, with other outdoor options and warmer weather, then Sacramento is probably best.
so if you live in most suburbs you would only be able to really experience the city on the weekends.
Not true - you could easily take the Metra into the city any day of the week. The weekends don't really offer any later schedule than the weekdays.
Most parts of Chicago are definitely more urban/dense than Sacramento but I think it's important to note that a lot of areas aren't the concrete jungle that most think.
Not true - you could easily take the Metra into the city any day of the week. The weekends don't really offer any later schedule than the weekdays.
Most parts of Chicago are definitely more urban/dense than Sacramento but I think it's important to note that a lot of areas aren't the concrete jungle that most think.
I know several people who live in the NW suburbs (some of the more desirable ones in terms of school districts) and none of them describe it as an "easy" commute. The other thing to consider is that in many of those suburbs you have to "commute" to get to the Metra, and depending on how demanding his job is Metra may not run late enough.
My bigger point though, was that if you live in the suburbs you really don't get a chance to fully enjoy all that Chicago has to offer, imo. There are exceptions (Oak Park/some other Western suburbs, Evanston, etc). That's why I mentioned the weekend in my earlier post.
You can definitely find non-urban, nature areas in Chicago, but I think you can find more of that in Sacramento. Especially given that with the weather, you'd have more time to enjoy it there. That's not to knock Chicago. I love living in Chicago, and if the OP wants an urban, big-city experience then I would recommend Chicago in a heartbeat.
Again, these cities are so different that I think his lifestyle should dictate the choice.
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.
