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.
Not really. All of those regions are much smaller, with way lower Gdp's than Sac, in way harsher climates, with much more conservative leanings, and more segregation.
Honolulu is so economically irrelevant that they are not even in the top 50 metros for gdp. It's an economy based off tourism, military, and wealthy retirees. At least with Florida, there is a low cost of living to go along with low wages. In Honolulu you get Manhattan/Sf cost of living, with Florida wages. Never mind the cultural/physical isolation from the rest of the world.
Nice place to visit, but unless you're Asian and love the beach...wouldn't want to live there.
As far as amenities, things to do, built environment, etc.. they're comparable. Kind of speaks to how Sac underwhelms for it's size. Not sure why you put so much stock on all the generic, suburban sprawl that makes up the majority of the Sacramento area.
Downtown: Push, once Golden 1 Center opens, Sacramento
Urban Core: Push, only because Richmond is 112 to 200 years older than Sacramento.
Diversity: Not only is Sacramento more diverse it is more integrated as well.
Weather: Sacramento, summers are more comfortable not only evening, night and morning, but daytime temps slight edge to Sacramento. Richmond way too humid, and doesn't cool enough on a daily summer basis.
Sacramento winters are milder, no snow, less chance for very cold streaks.
Nightlife: Push, but only because of Richmonds significant student pop, otherswise Sacramento.
Education: Push, Sacramento area has some great districts mostly in suburbs, and some good charter schools in the city, along with very good private schools. No University in Richmond as well rounded as UC Davis.
Economy: Push, but only because Richmond's cost of living is cheaper.
Geography: Hands down Sacramento area including Sacramento's wonderfully flat biking riding terrain in grid and surrounding neighborhoods, no brainer regarding the other geographical attributes within 1 to 2 hours by car.
So basically you disagree with any category that favors Richmond?
As far as amenities, things to do, built environment, etc.. they're comparable. Kind of speaks to how Sac underwhelms for it's size. Not sure why you put so much stock on all the generic, suburban sprawl that makes up the majority of the Sacramento area.
You could say the same thing about San Jose. I guess that makes Richmond better than both.
You could say the same thing about San Jose. I guess that makes Richmond better than both.
Yeah SJ is very underwhelming for a city its size too. Not sure what I said that indicated that Richmond is better than any city underwhelming for its size though....
We live in the Sac suburbs (Citrus Heights) and actually like an "underwhelming" safe environment to raise our daughter in. We can always visit SF, NY, LA or whatever for big city fun. However, Midtown Sacramento is very underrated for restaurants, bars, and entertainment.
Being a native Californian I have been to Sacto quite a bit, some natives probably don't even bother.
I have spent a great deal of time camping in her neighboring Delta and Gold Country. I have partied on houseboats in Rio Vista. I have skied at Heavenly, I have watched a 4th of July parade in Nevada City on the summer after 9/11 and there was not a dry eye on the street. I have very good friends in Penn Valley and Grass Valley (do you know where they are?) and we have watched fireworks on the lake in Penn Valley and walked back up to the house and had spit roasted lamb with lots of good ass NorCal vino.
I love it all but NOT Sacramento itself. She is uber underwhelming for being the capital of CALIFORNIA! ESPECIALLY the burbs, ahh Roseville, enchanting, Short Pump not quite realized.
There is no there there in Sacto.
Richmond HAS a there there and it has much more personality, soul and vibrancy.
Sacramento has a lot of flood historic markers and Gold Rush historic markers and there is really nothing to make one feel that they are not in anywhere USA.......
Peace out citizen.....
Sorry disagree, you obviously have not been to Sacramento in awhile. Indeed, Sacramento has soul and personality. There is a there there in Sacramento, even this recreational video is in the heart of where the American River runs through Sacramento City and County.
Rafting down the American River in Sacramento is huge day to day past time. Obviously, these folks in the video are having a good time.
Your issues with Roseville or any other suburban area apply to all the other suburbans areas across the united states including the Richmond metro area. Besides, I have a great time in suburban backyards with pools, parties, and bbq's, who doesn't like that, jeez.
Exactly, you can tell by their posts that they haven't actually been to Sac.
They bring up a tent city, that was taken down in 2009, during the recession?
Even when they clearly lose the density arguement and transit, they still try to claim they are more urban. "Buh, buh, buh, Richmonds building are brick like NYC".
LOL it's like, give it up, sac is more dense AND does it with considerably more land mass.
Did someone really try to compare NASCAR to the NBA? Which Sac metro has too, btw.
Bragging about nightlife because of college kids? LOL you can tell we are dealing with 1990's babies. Sorry, Sac nightlife is for grown ups. College kids stay in college towns, and that's the way. Sac likes it.
Just remember, Virginia is a welfare state. For every dollar they give the feds, they get 1.25 back in federal spending. California gets 75 cents for everydollar they give. Think about the billions of dollars CA cities lose out on because of this.
The only reason Richmond can throw a punch at all, is because tax payers in California, New York, Illinois, etc are willing to pay for the steroids, so to speak. Of course like southerners, they boast and think they did it on their own. NOOOOOOPE.
They should be thanking us for the Federal grants to fix their roads, that go to their universities, and police forces.
And lets's be real, Sac has the second most drinking establishments per capita in California, behind only SF. SAC is not short on nightlife. But they haven't actually been to Sac, so they use googlemaps......
And I have yet to see one stat proves Richmond residents are more wealthy. Unless you are using net worth, don't bother. Only a college freshman would be dumb enough to use per capita income. But yes, land does cost more in Sacramento. I wonder why real estate is more valuable in Sac vs Richmond. Hmmmmmmmmm Could it be supply and demand????
.
Hey guess which city was ranked the most dangerous city in Virginia recently? Clue: It wasn't Sacramento
This is the most intelligent non-booster post I've ever seen on C-D ever!!!!!!!
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.
Could it be supply and demand????
