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.
But that's just it. The original post asks about which city is better when LA's "expensiveness" is not factored in. I'm not a fan of LA, but the city has a lot to offer in the way of art, entertainment, weather, and outdoor activities. The biggest negative for LA (besides traffic, which Atlanta has plenty of too) is the high cost of living and obscene home prices. LA would be a much more desirable place if it was awash in a sea of nice, affordable (say, $200k) single family homes.
I should have added in factors such as education, crime, diversity, people, traffic and recreation, and walkability. I think there's definitely more to compare than just COL. this has been interesting thus far!
As for you other factors (education, crime, diversity, people, traffic and recreation, and walkability), I think it's a wash. Both cities have their fair share of crime, both are very diverse, both have less than perfect public schools (with exceptions), both have bad traffic and are not "walkable" cities (except in certain specific neighborhoods). I would give Atlanta a nod to generally having the nicer, friendlier people, while LA has by far the better recreation.
This is an interesting post because it has made me stop and think about how LA (a city despised by so many) would actually be a huge magnet for people (especially Californians) if they could buy a nice SFH for $200k there. Who would want to deal with a median home price of $600k in San Diego or $450k in Sacramento when they could move to LA and get the same house for a third the price.
Georgia's beaches are cleaner (much lower population density) and warmer than California's Pacific coast because of the Gulf Stream. Although not in the Atlanta area, you can get to the coast in about 4-5 hours.
Short drive from Florida. Orlando is maybe 8 hours drive.
3 hour drive to Smoky Mountains. They have the highest biodiversity in either the East or the continental U.S.
If you like country music Nashville TN is maybe 3-4 hours. Also there's "Dollywood" near Knoxville TN about 2-3 hours away.
Because of the mild-warm-hot and rainy climate, tree and overall plant growth is rapid, so people who like gardening might enjoy Atlanta more.
And last but certainly not least;
If you like grits (I do ) or any other Southern culinary specialties, there's much less variety and availability of those food items in California.
*If it was me and money was no object it still might be a tough to decide between Atlanta and L.A.
I'd likely tire of both eventually, like after a few years, but each city for different reasons.
My pick would be Atlanta, of course. I'm not saying that L.A. is a bad place, because it is an exciting city and I love to visit there, but Atlanta is home. Atlanta is basically a cleaner, greener version of L.A. Climate wise L.A. is preferrable, but I like the thunderstorms in the summers in Atlanta. Also, as other posters mentioned, L.A. has closer proximity to beaches and mountains, while Atlanta is 2 hrs. from the mountains and 4 hrs. from the nearest beach.
Definitely Atlanta. It's the city of the future while LA is not.
fDi North American Cities of the Future - USA
Major cities : over 2 million population
* Chicago, Illinois
* Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania * Atlanta, Georgia
* Baltimore, Maryland
* Boston, Massachusetts
* Miami, Florida
* New York City, New York
* Dallas, Texas
* Seattle, Washington
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.