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.
LA over places like Chicago is just weird to me in this. Both places are mostly laid back, but Chicago definitely has a bigger chunk of "fast paced" over LA. This isn't a good or bad thing but it's just weird to think of LA as more fast paced than Chicago as a whole. I'd also say that about SF - a lot gets done there, and it's dense, but it's not necessarily as fast paced as NYC, Chicago, or DC.
Having a balance is good by the way, at least in my opinion. Too fast paced is not necessarily a good thing - balance is where it's at and to be honest, most places have a good balance (with the exception of Manhattan IMO).
LA over places like Chicago is just weird to me in this. Both places are mostly laid back, but Chicago definitely has a bigger chunk of "fast paced" over LA. This isn't a good or bad thing but it's just weird to think of LA as more fast paced than Chicago as a whole. I'd also say that about SF - a lot gets done there, and it's dense, but it's not necessarily as fast paced as NYC, Chicago, or DC.
Having a balance is good by the way, at least in my opinion. Too fast paced is not necessarily a good thing - balance is where it's at and to be honest, most places have a good balance (with the exception of Manhattan IMO).
Yeah, one can't claim LA is "laid back" and "fast paced/bustling" at the same time. I definitely would say LA is more laid back overall, but it doesn't have a single area that could compete with the fast paced nature of downtown Chicago. In fact, there really isn't anywhere in the U.S. that can compete except for DC and NYC.
DC, NYC, and Chicago are all on the high tier here. There's a pretty big gap to the next city IMO.
Yeah, one can't claim LA is "laid back" and "fast paced/bustling" at the same time. I definitely would say LA is more laid back overall, but it doesn't have a single area that could compete with the fast paced nature of downtown Chicago. In fact, there really isn't anywhere in the U.S. that can compete except for DC and NYC.
DC, NYC, and Chicago are all on the high tier here. There's a pretty big gap to the next city IMO.
Yeah pretty much agreed. I think outside of downtown Chicago, things get way less fast paced. Though I think in some of the dense areas you can get it here and there. LA is a big city obviously, but absolutely nothing there compares to the fast paced nature of downtown Chicago.
Totally agreed that NYC, Chicago, and DC are solid top 3 here. NYC is in a league of its own but mostly due to Manhattan (outside of that it's more even to Chicago and DC).
Yeah, one can't claim LA is "laid back" and "fast paced/bustling" at the same time. I definitely would say LA is more laid back overall, but it doesn't have a single area that could compete with the fast paced nature of downtown Chicago. In fact, there really isn't anywhere in the U.S. that can compete except for DC and NYC.
DC, NYC, and Chicago are all on the high tier here. There's a pretty big gap to the next city IMO.
NYC is on the high tier and the gap to the next city is enormous regardless of which definition of fast paced you use..not sure how Chicago and dc could be considered easily more fast paced than Boston or philly
It's a good question, and a lot of it is subjective because there is a certain "feel" to describe a city that is "fast paced." NYC is the obvious number 1. It is dense, and at the core there is just a fast-paced flow. If I had to go with two others, it would be Philly and Chicago (I may be biased because I live/have lived in both of these cities). Philly is narrow, and in Center City, there is a similar feel and pace to Manhattan. Chicago, in the Loop has a lot of density, and as people exit Union Station, and around the different CTA stops, there is definitely a hustle and pace that you don't find in most other cities. Boston and San Francisco get honorable mentions for me. They both have pockets of very fast paced areas.
I do not understand how DC has so many votes. There are so many pockets of slow moving tourists all around, and given how wide the streets are, and the large government worker-presence, it has never seemed very fast-paced to me. Both Philly and Boston should have more votes. They seem faster-paced to me than DC.
It's a good question, and a lot of it is subjective because there is a certain "feel" to describe a city that is "fast paced." NYC is the obvious number 1. It is dense, and at the core there is just a fast-paced flow. If I had to go with two others, it would be Philly and Chicago (I may be biased because I live/have lived in both of these cities). Philly is narrow, and in Center City, there is a similar feel and pace to Manhattan. Chicago, in the Loop has a lot of density, and as people exit Union Station, and around the different CTA stops, there is definitely a hustle and pace that you don't find in most other cities. Boston and San Francisco get honorable mentions for me. They both have pockets of very fast paced areas.
I do not understand how DC has so many votes. There are so many pockets of slow moving tourists all around, and given how wide the streets are, and the large government worker-presence, it has never seemed very fast-paced to me. Both Philly and Boston should have more votes. They seem faster-paced to me than DC.
I work in DC and I’ve noticed a lot of our interns from other areas who work with us and end up coming on full time have the same opinion of DC, especially the people who have only visited once as a tourist. Then they get here and realize it’s a lot more fast-paced than it appears and they typically don’t last long or ask to transfer.
DC is not NYC fast-paced but looking at this poll I’d say the results are pretty accurate.
It's a good question, and a lot of it is subjective because there is a certain "feel" to describe a city that is "fast paced." NYC is the obvious number 1. It is dense, and at the core there is just a fast-paced flow. If I had to go with two others, it would be Philly and Chicago (I may be biased because I live/have lived in both of these cities). Philly is narrow, and in Center City, there is a similar feel and pace to Manhattan. Chicago, in the Loop has a lot of density, and as people exit Union Station, and around the different CTA stops, there is definitely a hustle and pace that you don't find in most other cities. Boston and San Francisco get honorable mentions for me. They both have pockets of very fast paced areas.
I do not understand how DC has so many votes. There are so many pockets of slow moving tourists all around, and given how wide the streets are, and the large government worker-presence, it has never seemed very fast-paced to me. Both Philly and Boston should have more votes. They seem faster-paced to me than DC.
There's absolutely nothing fast paced about Boston. DC gets a lot of votes because it has the third largest downtown after NYC and Chicago. The daytime population swells by 78% and I don't have to mention the traffic and the Metro.
Yeah, one can't claim LA is "laid back" and "fast paced/bustling" at the same time. I definitely would say LA is more laid back overall, but it doesn't have a single area that could compete with the fast paced nature of downtown Chicago. In fact, there really isn't anywhere in the U.S. that can compete except for DC and NYC.
DC, NYC, and Chicago are all on the high tier here. There's a pretty big gap to the next city IMO.
NYC is 100% in a tier of its own, and I would put Philadelphia and Boston right with Chicago and DC. There is really no difference between all of them (less NYC).
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.
