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.
Quality of life and overall vibe will be subjective.
In nightlife, restaurants, events, shopping and entertainment, you can expect Chicago to have a big leg up due to its huge size advantage.
QoL will depend on a lot of things. You will need a bigger income to live comfortably in most of Boston / the Boston metro. Chicago you get much more "bang for your buck." Boston does have the advantage (imo an advantage) of having New England scenery and outdoor recreation at its door step. Boston and Massachusetts at large kill it in all things education, which I think has major quality of life advantages.
Transit I think goes to Chicago, but Boston does really well in this category for its size, and it is honestly close enough where it wouldn't push either city/metro over the edge.
If you are weighing each one of these categories evenly, then Chicago wins out handily.
For vibe, it is a huge generalization, but Chicago is known for slightly edgier, yet still "Midwest nice" types. Boston is known for its mix of white collars and blue collars and the force of higher education in the city. More "blue bloods," but plenty of gritty Bostonians with the old accent.
Which I prefer is actually really hard. Considering just city limits, I will take Chicago. It is a truly outstanding city. But for its regional advantages (I love New England and living in the East in general), and that the city itself is no slouch, I'd actually prefer to live in Boston.
Quality of life and overall vibe will be subjective.
In nightlife, restaurants, events, shopping and entertainment, you can expect Chicago to have a big leg up due to its huge size advantage.
QoL will depend on a lot of things. You will need a bigger income to live comfortably in most of Boston / the Boston metro. Chicago you get much more "bang for your buck." Boston does have the advantage (imo an advantage) of having New England scenery and outdoor recreation at its door step. Boston and Massachusetts at large kill it in all things education, which I think has major quality of life advantages.
Transit I think goes to Chicago, but Boston does really well in this category for its size, and it is honestly close enough where it wouldn't push either city/metro over the edge.
If you are weighing each one of these categories evenly, then Chicago wins out handily.
For vibe, it is a huge generalization, but Chicago is known for slightly edgier, yet still "Midwest nice" types. Boston is known for its mix of white collars and blue collars and the force of higher education in the city. More "blue bloods," but plenty of gritty Bostonians with the old accent.
Which I prefer is actually really hard. Considering just city limits, I will take Chicago. It is a truly outstanding city. But for its regional advantages (I love New England and living in the East in general), and that the city itself is no slouch, I'd actually prefer to live in Boston.
Nightlife I would expect Chicago to have a huge lead because Boston's nightlife is particularly bad (and Chicago's is great), but in terms of shopping, events, and other entertainment I would think they'd be pretty competitive because the metro area sizes aren't that different.
Nightlife I would expect Chicago to have a huge lead because Boston's nightlife is particularly bad (and Chicago's is great), but in terms of shopping, events, and other entertainment I would think they'd be pretty competitive because the metro area sizes aren't that different.
You don’t think the difference between 9.5M and 4.6M is “that different”?
You don’t think the difference between 9.5M and 4.6M is “that different”?
Boston is one of those cities where I feel like the CSA is a better representation of the metro area and in this case is in some ways a better comparison to the sprawling Chicago MSA.
Chicago is a much bigger city. It has more urban amenities, nightlife, etc. Transit imo is better. But it's not like Boston is all that far behind. I'd say it comes down more to which culture you prefer: midwestern/Great Lakes vs New England vibes.
Chicago is a much bigger city. It has more urban amenities, nightlife, etc. Transit imo is better. But it's not like Boston is all that far behind. I'd say it comes down more to which culture you prefer: midwestern/Great Lakes vs New England vibes.
That’s kind of what I was getting at - aside from nightlife, is it really that far behind Chicago in most urban amenities?
Boston is one of those cities where I feel like the CSA is a better representation of the metro area and in this case is in some ways a better comparison to the sprawling Chicago MSA.
I’m not sure if we should get into msa vs csa right now, but suffice to say Chicago is a much bigger city than Boston.
For shopping- Mag Mile is nationally recognized.
Entertainment: The Chicago theatre, Lollapalooza, etc all come to mind, but I honestly can’t think of too much for Boston.
Restaurants: sometimes I think this category can cause an endless debate, but Chicago is much more well known as a foodie city than Boston.
I honestly think part of what sets Chicago far apart in this poll from Boston is the categories. Boston pulls ahead in many, such as education, safety, location/regional getaways, growth/future outlook, etc
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.
