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.
If you had to pick cities on the 2 coasts that correspond to each other what would they be?
NY-LA?
NY-SF?
Boston-SF?
how about Philly?
Seattle?
Portland?
DC?
I'm really curious what people would say. Sure, it's not going to be exact. Just opinions for fun. Feel free to include midwest cities if you feel like it
Tough call, since so many cities on one coast are different from cities on the opposite coast. The main similarity between NYC and LA is their populations. I'd say NYC and San Francisco would be a closer comparison, since they're both older, more densely populated cities. Possibly the closest comparison would be Boston and SF, for the same reason NYC would compare to Frisco, with the added fact that SF and Boston are similar in population, in both the cities and the metros. I might also compare Providence and Portland. Both are smaller versions of cities a little to their north, though Portland is bigger than Providence.
It's a difficult comparison, since the cultures on these two coasts are somewhat different. The closest comparison may be Boston-Frisco, because of similar population, coastal locations, some degree of bohemian flair, etc., but still, Boston is east coast and SF is west coast. The two are different.
Strangely enough there are similarities between Chicago/L.A.
Lincoln Park/ Griffith Park, ma & pa businesses & huge corporations, traffic,
diverse, affluent & desolate on the same street. Both are economic
power houses, and great party towns ( Just ask Hugh Hefner )
I won't digress to which is better -that has been bantered to a pulp.
Suffices to say both are great cities ( that I wouldn't raise my kids in )
but love to visit.
New York=Los Angeles
Chicago=Houston
Boston or D.C.=San Francisco
Miami=San Diego
Atlanta=Seattle
New Orleans or Orlando=Las Vegas
Cincinnati=Portland, OR
Pittsburgh=Denver
Philly=Phoenix
Baltimore=Oakland
Minneapolis/St. Paul=Dallas/Ft. Worth
It's hard to match all cities because there are more large cities in the East.
These are the closest equivalents I'd say. Obviously there are such great cultural, geographical, etc. differences that, as stated, there's not going to be an exact match. But I think these match-ups fit pretty well.
San Francisco and Boston are both major cities, though both are, size-wise, second tier, but not by much. Both have lots of culture and heritage and so on.
Portland and Providence match up. Both have a very quirky vibe. I've never been to Providence, but that's the impression I get from it. Definitely true in Portland... I hope to be moving there soon!
LA and NYC would have to be linked, as different as they are, by their sheer size and importance in the world and that they are like the capitals of the coasts.
Other than that... Seattle and Baltimore, Phoenix and Philadelphia...
New York = San Francisco (large; dense; heavily cultured / very diverse; very liberal)
Chicago = Los Angeles (large; urban downtown, but the majority live in suburbs; more socially moderate the NYC and SF)
Boston = Seattle (big, but smaller than other major cities; very educated population; may seem aloof to some; may seem pretentious to some; proud-to-be-liberal)
Washington DC = Las Vegas (unique features make them completely different from surrounding cities; large tourism bases)
Im from the Providence area, but on the Mass side. I live in Portland and I see nothing ,absolutely nothing to compare Providence to Portland, other than this. A large immigrant and student population in both, and alot of crime. Portland is about as weird as it gets, where Providence is a much more diverse ethnic industrial area, where many families have lived for generations. You won't see the homeless, panhandling and drug usage in Prov like Portland. In Oregon you will see it on every street corner. Boston and San Fran are really the ones closer in comparison, definitely not the same complete atmostphere but very similiar. Large coastal cities, with a large influx of commuters everyday from surrounding suburbs. Densely packed innner city feel. Definitely mass transit and walking oriented. A large diverse and ethnic population. Very white collar business economy.
Other than that... Seattle and Baltimore, Phoenix and Philadelphia...
Not saying one city is better than the other, I'm not saying one is worse than the other. But I am saying that these two cities(Philadlephia + Phoenix) have virtually no comparable features whatsoever,none,nil, zilch.
Philadelphia is a 300 year old densely populated city with a street grid straight out of Europe. Meanwhile Phoenix is sunbelt sprawl on steroids.
Not saying one city is better than the other, I'm not saying one is worse than the other. But I am saying that these two cities(Philadlephia + Phoenix) have virtually no comparable features whatsoever,none,nil, zilch.
Philadelphia is a 300 year old densely populated city with a street grid straight out of Europe. Meanwhile Phoenix is sunbelt sprawl on steroids.
Seriously. Phoenix couldn't be any more removed from Philly in any sort of comparison. Being that Boston and Philadelphia are similar in many regards, its West Coast equivalent would either be Portland or Seattle.
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.
