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.
So true.You are also more like to get HIV in Atlanta yet more people and jobs growth is in Atlanta not SF so what does that mean?
Maybe being able to afford your own home is a better indicator of wheat more people view as important
You are way more likely to be a homeowner in Atlanta than SF
Metros with the lowest homeownership rates
Fresno, CA at 48.5%
Los Angeles, CA at 49.1%
New York, NY at 49.9%
San Jose, CA at 50.4%
Urban Honolulu, HI at 53.8%
Las Vegas, NV at 54.4%
Austin, TX at 55.6%
San Francisco, CA at 55.7%
San Diego, CA at 56%
Columbus, OH at 57.9%
Exactly my point... I was responding to the ridiculous posts about turds and needles...I was being facetious.
SF is very unique, but it caters to people your ethnic background. The lone remaining black-themed museum in SF is holding on by a thread, it'll be gone soon...
Watch "Last Black Man in San Francisco". Should be at least somewhat informative if your questions persist, because you'll never be able to experience SF as a black man or with the intimacy of roots in Black SF history. I've explained how SF has intently eradicated its blackness decade-by-decade before, only to be scoffed at by non-blacks who don't have the emotional investment to care anyway. Not doing it again, its not one of those things I'm sure I can explain an understanding into people...
I just watched last black man in San Francisco and it brought me to tears because it reminded me in some ways of Boston. Fantastic movie.
While both cities are unfriendly to blacks overall. Boston is trending in a better direction than San Francisco and the actual city is much blacker and so is the lived environment on the streets in heavily residential areas. In the public/governmental, buildings, etc.. also in Boston blacks fill many schools, neighborhoods, nights clubs, multiple black museum and a historically black community college(Roxbury Community College) etc. My cousin lives in San Francisco and for me it just felt like there really were no black people in that city. I know it has had a solid black history and culture in the past by at just 5% black it really really feels gone which is a shame.
Lol@the above comments. You're also more likely to be a victim of violent crime in Atlanta so........ I've lived in SF and have never stepped on turd or said needle.
Have you ever been to San Francisco?
Btw. I’m not even going to mention the negative stereotypes that Atlanta receives. I wouldn’t perpetuate false narratives
I dont know the answer why.I honestly dont. Do you?
All I know is many cities on that list were the same or higher than Atlanta. Many of them growing much faster than SF like Atlanta is in spite of your list which tells me its really an irrelevant metric in peoples day to day lives. Its something you can brag about on CD and there is nothing wrong with that. As a nation we need SF and we all should hope it continues to be what it is but like NYC,not everyone can or will be able to afford to live there so they move away.Not because its not a great place but its not worth the cost for most.
Some on here emphasize that people move to Atlanta because its "cheap". No.Its not cheap.Its cheaper but even thats not always clear as Atlanta is STILL one of the fastest growing cities with the 2nd largest job growth market regardless of how much housing is or isnt.
I dont know how else I can make it clearer.Now can you answer my question?
No offense but Atlanta is dirt cheap compared to SF and also most other major cities. Its like 25% of the cost of San Francisco in terms of housing, in that respect it is definitely cheap. You can leave SF and buy almost 4 homes comparably for the 1 home you sold in SF. The days of $150k homes are over. $300k is the new $200k and $300k is not expensive by todays standards. In that respect. Atlanta is very affordable. In terms of desirability however, if SF and Atlanta costed the same, I would be willing to bet most people would not leave SF.
As for second largest job growth, have any sources? I've looked everywhere and I can't find anything specifying Atlanta or its metro having the highest job growth in even the top ten let alone 2nd. Even midtown is lagging compared to other cities:
Edit: I did find it on one top ten list - but its by no means 2nd: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/12/glas...-openings.html If you look at the actual job openings, they are measured in relation to itself year over year rather than other metro's in national perspective. D.C., Boston, New York, Los Angeles, -and guess what- even San Francisco - have more job openings that Atlanta currently does.
For Salaries you lose about 2/3rd of your pay as Atlanta metro's average household income is only $55k a year, despite homes being much cheaper, you're still going to be grinding for pennies.
As for the homeless issue, its definitely an issue in SF and the cal-politics do not make it better, especially in the aspect of catering to minorities while taxing out the middle class and tax-payers. I personally understand and see that as an issue, but Atlanta isn't exactly sitting here with a halo over its head either respectively. Atlanta has some of the worst crime in the nation:
and whats worse is the crime is not restricted only to certain areas, but is also happening fairly rampantly through upperclass prestigious districts like Buckhead, and these two literally happened just this month alone:
Also lets not forget that despite Atlanta's far less constrictive geographical barriers compared to SF, that it has failed to construct a new highway since the late 80's / early 90's, or even conceived a new rail transit line since the early 90's despite nearly doubling in size.
My opinion, you get what you pay for.
Atlanta is an okay city for what it is, but it is not in SF's league, despite all of the issues SF is undergoing...and for the record, most people leaving California are moving to places like Pheonix, Boise, DFW, Seattle, and Austin. Atlanta is attracting people mainly from the Northeast.
NYC, Chicago, LA, Boston, have been known to be extremely expensive metro's to reside in but have not dropped in economic importance over the last two decades, SF won't either.
Last edited by Need4Camaro; 12-30-2019 at 07:13 PM..
The fact is San Francisco is facing almost an almost existential crisis with regards to homelessness and the lack of housing. The Bay Area faces quality of life problems almost nowhere else outside of California.
Sure, post some Atlanta crime figures. Those are trending down, unlike SF's quality of life problems.
This discussion is not a discussion.Its a popularity context of people who dont want an honest and fair commentary but those who wish to tout their city.
One poster was absolutely right when he said San Francisco people dont live in reality and thats whats sold to the world until people get there and they see the very ugly reality of a city that has bad problems just like other cities around the country with less prominence.
Rather than address said problems they only want to focus on the positives.We know Atlanta got some glaring issues.
Its the South with a large black population and deep traditional problems that plague the entire country to this day but somehow manages to deal with that better than many other major cities have.
I have a preference but dont live in either city.I think Ive been more impartial than many of the people on here as it pertains to Atlanta
The fact is San Francisco is facing almost an almost existential crisis with regards to homelessness and the lack of housing. The Bay Area faces quality of life problems almost nowhere else outside of California.
Sure, post some Atlanta crime figures. Those are going down, unlike SF's quality of life problems.
This discussion is not a discussion.Its a popularity context of people who dont want an honest and fair commentary but those who wish to tout their city.
One poster was absolutely right when he said San Francisco people dont live in reality and thats whats sold to the world until people get there and they see the very ugly reality of a city that has bad problems just like other cities around the country with less prominence.
Rather than address said problems they only want to focus on the positives.We know Atlanta got some glaring issues.
Its the South with a large black population and deep traditional problems that plague the entire country to this day but somehow manages to deal with that better than many other major cities have.
I have a preference but dont live in either city.I think Ive been more impartial than many of the people on here as it pertains to Atlanta
At first you said it's reasonable that Atlantans think it's on SF's level, then you agree that Atlanta doesn't measure up to SF... now you seem to just be placating the thread by justifying why Atlanta measures below SF......
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.
