San Francisco vs. Chicago (cost, better, compared, places) - City vs. City - City-Data Forum

grapico · 03-06-2009, 09:57 AM

Me and my girlfriend are debating which to move to...

Personally I think there is more to do in Chicago and better to make money there...

Also wondering about car culture vs. non car culture. I am thinking to not have a car in San Fran might be more difficult.

Personally I am in middle of a career change and plan to do an MPA (I am thinking Chicago is better in that aspects with better schools I can actually get into.) Then plan on working in the NFP sector.

Also wondering about the culture differences... Chicago seems more real and down to earth, San Fran seems a bit more kooky and elitist. While out there many people I talked to seemed kina "spacy"

That being said, her parents have 2 houses out in the north bay area and it is beautiful out there, so could always go there for the weekends...

What are some other pros and cons of how living in the cities are?

Personally I think Chicago has a lot more going on and will be able to have a better quality of life for less money, more career growth, more "big city" feel.

Anybody? I haven't really spent much time in San Fran, but lived in Sonoma County for 3 months... so not really sure whats "goin down" in SF.

LucasS6 · 03-06-2009, 10:02 AM

You're not going to go wrong with either, and not having a car in SF won't be a big problem- BART is nice. But if you want to live IN SF, it's going to be expensive- think Loop of River North in Chicago, because San Francisco is really not that big, land area-wise. And if you're not in that small area, yeah, having a car is going to be a bigger issue.

grapico · 03-06-2009, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LucasS6

You're not going to go wrong with either, and not having a car in SF won't be a big problem- BART is nice. But if you want to live IN SF, it's going to be expensive- think Loop of River North in Chicago, because San Francisco is really not that big, land area-wise. And if you're not in that small area, yeah, having a car is going to be a bigger issue.

Thats kina what I'm thinking, to no have a car in SF and actually live comfortably, I'll need to be making 6 figures or something... which isn't too likely. Just looked at the median incomes...

Family incomes $46,748 in chicago... and $81,136 in SF, almost double ... ouch. What I want to do in the NFP sector just doesn't pay those type of salaries typically.

LucasS6 · 03-06-2009, 10:06 AM

Yeah, that's the thing. Realistically speaking, you're looking at living in like Daly City or further down the peninsula, or across the Bay, as opposed to like Bucktown or Bridgeport in Chicago. It's not going to be downtown SF or the South Loop or LSE in Chicago. With that in mind, I'd lean towards Chicago.

Not like you'd be upset about SF, though.

Drover · 03-07-2009, 08:42 PM

If you plan on working in the NPF sector, I'd suggest Chicago simply because your modest income will go a lot further.

uptown_urbanist · 03-07-2009, 09:27 PM

It is easy to live a car-free life if you actually live in San Francisco. But, as others have said, it's also more expensive to live in the city. I think both offer a big city feel and lots to do. As for the SF "elitist and kook" stereotype, that totally depends on where you live and who you hang out with. That hasn't been my experience at all.

I love SF, but I agree that you're probably better off in Chicago - not because of the car thing or the personalities of the residents, but because you probably will have a better variety of affordable but still very convenient urban living options. On the other hand, living near a weekend vacation home would certainly be nice....

coldwine · 03-08-2009, 12:01 AM

I'm pretty vocal about my dislike of San Francisco, and for reasons I don't want to have to go into here. For me,any discussion loses veracity when it has to turn into a "city vs city" discussion. My dislike of San Fran was never a matter of "but in Chicago..."

All other reasons aside, grapico, your initial post seems obviously tilted towards Chicago. I think you've made up your mind, and it doesn't seem fair to ask about SF.

Now with that said, Chicago is simply a vastly larger city. The opportunities are better (but no less competitive, don't make that mistake). For your Masters of Public Policy, Chicago can offer you a lot more than San Fran; again, it's simply a matter of a vast city with very intimate ties to Washington and very important policy institutions. San Fran is much smaller and policy isn't really its focus. I'm sure that if we were discussing biotech, my opinion would be sharply slanted the other direction.

So, that's that. Chicago simply offers you significantly more for what you are looking for.

CubsGiantsIndiansfan2008 · 03-08-2009, 09:37 AM

my 2 favorite cities

bronx_kidd · 03-08-2009, 09:51 AM

San Francisco/Bay Area

-Pacific Ocean, beautiful coastline, mountains/snow within drivin distance, 2nd most dense city in U.S,a good mix of towering skyscrapers and victorians, diversity(including outer bay cities),WAY BETTER WEATHER,higher salaries,fresher produce...and its in Cali not the midwest

grapico · 03-18-2009, 06:35 PM

coldwine and others, yeahhhh that is MY view though, you won't get to see my girlfriends view

shes obviously pro SF. I've visited the area enough, and shes visited Chicago enough, but we have both lived in the opposite.... oh relationships!

Thanks for the "what level of competition" view... I got along just fine in Chicago and didn't think it was rat race... I think that when I think NYC Boston LA SF and DC though, do I just have the wrong view of these cities because I've lived in Chicago and not the others and Chicago just the same? This is for people that have lived or spent signficant time in these... I am the type of person that likes to do my job well, then spend my time doing extracurriculur stuff and not think about what is going to happen next at the job, or who I need to get ahead of or perform so much better than.

the getaways when I think about it to Wine country in Sonoma county are seeming more tempting to me lately, and I think my gf is homesick.. lol,, one 4 bedroom, the other one a 10 bedroom converted former bed and breakfast. They are both family use type places between Bodega Bay and Sebastopol. This might be the thing that pushes me over that edge that way if anything did.

very tempting, and she is going to have sway. If I had to truly guess ... I'm probably 60/40 pro Chicago, she is probably 70/30 pro San Fran.

Still, up to debate.

From what she is telling me, it is actually not that bad living in the city and says right outside the city will be about just as expensive... not sure though.

Also I am thinking you will have no heating bills or a/c bills there...

Obviously I still think the *job* situation might be better in Chicago, but I also have an IT background which forgot to mention, so bay area could still offer comparable if I were to use those skills still.

I am really still kind of on the fence, some more comments?

I am not really into the "hippy or stoner or surfer" culture though, I'm Democrat, but not super liberal, more of a realist. Are these types OK out there? Or is that just a Berkeley thing and some scattered hippy towns? The Bohemian culture stuff that isn't daily tokers is pretty cool, nothing wrong with it but again, the drug culture just isn't my thing, nor the extremist left stuff, they are just as bad as the extremist right. I think all this might be the minority out there though?

Myself, I'm just a level headed laid back normal guy who likes to have fun, most things in moderation. No real MUST HAVES or trends I follow. Not into fashion. Not a "simpleton" though, I'm pretty educated and still enjoy good stuff a city can offer, as well as basics in the outdoors.

I honestly thought public trans was easier getting around in Chicago, but maybe I was in the wrong places in San Fran. How good is it, honestly?

Are salaries more out there compared to Chicago to compensate for cost of living at all?

uptown * I didn't realize SF was so dense, I think the HEIGHT of Chicago might make you think it is more dense and guess that what happened to my views.

Thanks for all those so far, definitely giving me some other ideas.

CubsGiantsIndiansfan, you are killin me smalls!!! jk

Whichever move I want to be the right one though and not have to move again for that age 30-50 year old range of my life.