San Francisco vs LA (Los Angeles: crime, school, universities)

[somedaynow]

I am loving this perspective. Mentioning that I'm thinking of moving to LA, my friends form Boston and NY look at me askance and say "really? you in LA? I can't see it. I hate LA." Which, in some ways, makes me want to try it all the more...maybe I'm just contrary too. (Then again, I have a couple of friends who live in and love LA, but they were born there...)

[hsw]

Need to look at where the economies of both regions are based...for SF, it's Silicon Valley where the high-income tech and finance careers are largely based and SF itself is a sleepy, foggy yuppie suburb of SV....and in LA its economy is BevHills-CentCity based

That said, know many Stanford or Wharton-educated guys who live in SF; work in SV or SF, but esp enjoy their free time on wkends on LA's Westside, where the "scenery", hedonistic culture and grub are far more interesting than anything on SF Peninsula when one seeks to relax...

SV (though not City of SF) has a far more powerful economy and intellectual ethos than LA, but LA is clearly one of world's favored wkend playgrounds and has a lot of very smart, wealthy guys who like to hang out on its Westside (but most made their money in SV or NYC or elsewhere...and aren't in entertainment industry)

[LA4sure]

LA is my pick.
My pick because their is so much more to do in LA than San Francisco.
I've heard and read so many bad things about LA like crime and Air Quality.
It's really not that bad.
San Francisco has higher crime rate than LA, people only mention LA as bad becuase of certain area's like Compton and East L.A. bubt forgot to mention Bev Hills, Bel-Air, West LA, Westwood, Palisades, Brentwood, and well yeah.

thats basically it

[stillfresh]

^
1. L.A has a higher crime rate than SF (12.4 vs 11.5)
2. u never gota worry about wearin the "wrong color" in any part of SF
3. no such thing as bloods or crips in SF. some wannabes, that's it
4. no real sureno vs norteno xiv illegal immigrant gangs. ms13 either.
5. my friend moved from the bay to sherman oaks, and he told me that in his first month or so 2 fools got out of a car on his walk home to check him askin him where he was from n why he was rockin a red shirt
6. L.A is not more diverse than SF. the public schools in L.A are like 80% hispanic, about 70% of which are mexicans.

SF > L.A

[Grandata]

SF's weather is so poor, that it boggles the mind why anyone would move all the way to California and live in a place with cold, horrible weather (SF).

[stillfresh]

weather preferences are subjective, genius

[Hollywood Inquirer]

Los Angeles is far more powerfull than sf. The economy is higher the GDP is 3rd largest in the world and LA is more influentail to the world and also more important. LA is safer more diverse more vibrant and ahead in media and culture than sf.

[Jay100]

LA is and always will be greater than sf. We have their number in just about every way and the best part is, we don't care. It drives them to insane jealousy but it's all understandable.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by stillfresh

^
1. L.A has a higher crime rate than SF (12.4 vs 11.5)

No it does not.

2007 C-D Crime Index (lower # = lower crime)
SF: 501.7
LA: 356.8

2007 Murder rate per 100,000 people
SF: 13.6
LA: 10.2

LA was also ranked the 3rd safest big city in America, SF did not even make the Top 10
RealClearPolitics - America's Top 10 Safest Cities - #3 Safest: Los Angeles

2. u never gota worry about wearin the "wrong color" in any part of SF
3. no such thing as bloods or crips in SF. some wannabes, that's it
4. no real sureno vs norteno xiv illegal immigrant gangs. ms13 either.

you should really watch or read the news more often:

Gang members shot men for wearing red, cops say

Judge orders Ramos tried on 3 murder counts

SF may not have the quite the gang culture LA does but there are plenty of dangerous gang members all over the Bay Area.

6. L.A is not more diverse than SF.

They both are about equal in this department:

SF
White: 44.7%
Black: 6.7%
Asian: 31.5%
Hispanic: 14.0%
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=16000US0667000&-qr_name=ACS_2007_3YR_G00_DP3YR5&-ds_name=ACS_2007_3YR_G00_&-_lang=en&-redoLog=false&-_sse=on

LA
White: 29.3%
Black: 9.7%
Asian: 10.4%
Hispanic: 48.5%
Los Angeles city, California - ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates: 2005-2007

[pbergen]

Originally Posted by Bunjee

Intelligent people aren't supposed to like LA. Cultured people are supposed to hate LA and adore SF.

well stated. to many people with whom i grew up and went to school on the east coast, LA is a vapid cultural wasteland filled with paris hilton wannabes and american idol rejects. never mind the fact that the aforementioned friends and acquaintances don't really have any substantial firsthand experience with LA. when i tell them how diverse, dynamic, and interesting the city and region are, they dismiss my comments out of hand like i'm some misguided rube with stars in my eyes.

basically, they believe only what they want to believe. after all, they're "cultured" and "hip" new yorkers, so they must know better than anyone what's "real" (i.e. nyc and sf) and what's fake/plastic/tacky (i.e. LA).

i've come to the realization that LA is everyone's favorite whipping boy, while SF and NYC are viewed as the gold standard for modern urban living on the west and east coasts, respectively. this is true on the city-data forums as well as in everyday life.

don't get me wrong, i have a great deal of love and respect for SF and NYC too. i just have to shake my head at all the pretentious, misinformed bashing of LA based on stereotypes and generalities. there's a perception out there that LA is simply a big suburb that can't match up to those "hip", "real" cities.

it's one thing for a native angeleno to hate on LA because he/she is sick of the high cost of living, traffic, air pollution, or change in demographics. while i may not always agree with such views, at least these individuals have come to their own conclusions based on real, firsthand experiences. and you know, sometimes people outgrow a city, and so they've got to move on to a place that offers, for example, a more affordable standard of living for their family. or perhaps they didn't like how the city changed around them, and so they seek to escape to a place that offers what LA did "back in the day" (fewer people, less congestion/traffic/density, cheaper housing, etc).

but it's quite another thing for someone with little to no LA experience to bash the city simply because it's the trendy thing to do. the fact that more than a few of the haters are urbane, highly educated folks who fancy themselves as sophisticated and open-minded makes it all the more perplexing.

Originally Posted by Bunjee

I also tend more to the left myself but I found the liberalism almost stifling, like living in a ditto-head bubble that did not serve my aforementioned contrary nature, even as I substantially agreed on many issues. And with that I have to say finally that although I do love San Francisco, the one thing I despise about it is that preening sense of itself. I love you San Francisco, but that's just so distasteful, enough that it by itself makes me prefer Los Angeles, actually, with all its flaws.

Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist

Bunjee, I agree with you. I love San Francisco, but the smug attitude so often found there can be annoying. I found that in LA people were usually more than willing to admit that they really enjoyed both cities, while in SF it's so often the trendy thing to hate LA. People are certainly entitled to their opinions, and can hate LA all they want, but it drives me batty when it's for bogus reasons like "there's no public transportation" or "there's no culture" or "everyone is so materialistic" (and SF's not?!?). I love both cities, but am rather shocked to find that I, a dedicated "city" person, prefer LA. It's bigger, does seem like it has more vitality, and takes itself less seriously.

Both cities are pretty fabulous, though, which is why I never can understand why so many people (or at least those in SF) think you are somehow required to hate LA if you love SF. There's no rule saying you can't like both.

i feel the same way. i never understood why the appeal of SF vs. LA is supposed to be mutually exclusive. and i agree that people in SF can be pretty sanctimonious about their beliefs. i mean, i thought LA and NYC were liberal, but SF is on a whole different level. and like bunjee, i probably agree with the great majority of the social and political causes that the folks up in SF are so passionate about, so it's not about having a different worldview.

a friend of mine who has lived in SF for several years said it best:
"i love the city and all that it offers, but i wish everyone would get off their soapboxes every once in a while."