London vs. San Francisco (best, state, better, compared)

[jjjamie]

Which would you rather live in? Not necessarily which is the best since San Francisco clearly can't match up to London.

[machiavelli1]

London by a mile....

SF has its merits but London is at a much higher level

[Widowmaker2k]

Which would I rather live in? SF. It's in the U.S.A., my native state of California, near my family and friends, and it's not too shabby itself. That being said, I think London should win this one, as just everybody outside of California is going to vote for it.

[kcee510]

London is great but I perfer the California life style....and the sun.

[LexusNexus]

San Francisco is home. London great to visit.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by jjjamie

Which would you rather live in? Not necessarily which is the best since San Francisco clearly can't match up to London.

Can't match up? LOLOLOL

San Francisco as a place to visit, beats London in most surveys.

And as far as quality of life, The Bay Area stomps on Greater London quite easily. This is the United States. Middle Class people have 3-4 cars, swimming pools, big detached houses and big yards. In Greater London you'd be considered rich.

[Iconographer]

San Francisco. Much more laid back than London. Plus the London weather would make me crazy after a while.

[Boston14]

London

[Rhymes with Best Coast]

SF for many reasons.

However, I can see a few reasons why people might think London is better. But for my money, it's SF hands down. The people are too cool, the weather's too nice, and the natural beauty is straight up spectacular.

[alzeranglais]

Can't stand "laid back" unless I'm on vacation, so I'm going to have to go with London - although San Francisco isn't really laid back when compared to other California cities.

I just prefer the more upscale urban "chic" or fashionable Belgravia/Kensington/Chelsea/Knightsbridge lifestle that cannot be matched in SF.