Pittsburgh the San Francisco of the East? (Washington, Duquesne: dorms, to buy)

[BarqCider]

Originally Posted by charisb

Really? SF is being praised for having a large Asian population. Pittsburgh is criticized for not having one. So what? There is a different racial/ethnic mixture here. Don't bang your head on my account.

I don't think in that post they are specifically talking about Asians, but the concept of a Chinatown. and yes, SF > PGH. Hell, even DCs Chinatown > PGH. though NYC is perhaps the next biggest Chinatown.

IF you compare the diversity of PGH to SF then yes, PGH lacks a combined culture/racial diversity that SF has.

[Craziaskowboi]

The Pittsburgh metropolitan area has an Asian population that's pushing 50,000 now, and is on pace for over 60,000 by 2020, which is actually a decent amount considering there was little to no reason for any foreign immigrants to come to Pittsburgh when they first started coming to the United States in large numbers from Asia and Latin America in the 1970's and 1980's. (The cities that got those immigrants first are the ones that have the largest such populations today.) It's the same reason cities in the South barely have any ethnic European influence, because there was little to no reason for any Irish, Italian or Polish immigrants to settle in Atlanta, Memphis or Birmingham in the early 20th Century. Anyway, the economic malaise in Pittsburgh is over now, and the growth of both the Asian and Latino populations has accelerated as a result, so don't be surprised if the city and the metropolitan area make up for lost time in the next 10 to 20 years.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

Pittsburgh did an almost PERFECT job handling something like that. We did GREAT! Sure some idiots were upset that they couldn't do their protests and use our little city as their stage, but we snuffed them out as we should. Who the heck do they think they are to think they can come here and mess with our buildings to promote their cause? They can stick it and they ended up doing just that. Don't mess with da Burgh.

My end of the city was basically pandemonium.

[PreservationPioneer]

Why can't Pittsburgh just be Pittsburgh? Why does it need to be San Francisco, or Portland, or some other trendy place? The one thing I like about Pittsburgh is that it has a unique identity. It doesn't have to pretend to be something it's not. It's disctinctive on its own.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by PreservationPioneer

Why can't Pittsburgh just be Pittsburgh? Why does it need to be San Francisco, or Portland, or some other trendy place? The one thing I like about Pittsburgh is that it has a unique identity. It doesn't have to pretend to be something it's not. It's disctinctive on its own.

I couldn't agree more.

[Uptown kid]

Comparing crime. The size difference of San Fran and Pittsburgh is major so IMO there's no point into getting into statistics.

From what I've found San Fran has a couple rough areas: Tenderloin, Hunter's Point, Bayview, & parts of "the Mission", "SoMa" & Petrero Hill... "Sunnydale", and "the Towers" also seem to be bad.
San Fran's worst areas are worse than ours. Mainly because they're housing projects/large section 8 apartments.
However our projects & really bad parts of: Homewood, the Hill District, Lincoln-Lemington, Larimer, Beltzhoover, Northern Knoxville, Garfield, Hazelwood, and Perry Hilltop are probably worse than many of San Fran's non project ghetto's (ie. parts of Tenderloin, SoMa, Petrero Hill and Bayview).
San Fran averages more murders and crime than Pittsburgh. Although our crime rate/crime per capita is higher of course.
The gang scene in San Fran is a decade older, but is not much worse/more complex/different than Pittsburgh's current gang scene.

Yet because our city has more space I'd say we have more rough areas. Though San Fran is more populated and its rough areas are worse than ours due to the number of projects in San Fran. Though when compared to Oakland and other Cali cities we're more like San Fran in terms of crime, crime rate, and street gangs.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by BarqCider

I don't think in that post they are specifically talking about Asians, but the concept of a Chinatown. and yes, SF > PGH. Hell, even DCs Chinatown > PGH. though NYC is perhaps the next biggest Chinatown.

IF you compare the diversity of PGH to SF then yes, PGH lacks a combined culture/racial diversity that SF has.

Pittsburgh does not have a Chinatown. Sure, we used to have one, but it is no more. Two remaining buildings don't mean we have a Chinatown anymore than a couple of metal structures at The Waterfront mean that Homestead has a steel mill.

Besides, even if we did have a Chinatown, wouldn't it be in Oakland? Granted they aren't all specifically Chinese, but you have Sushi Boat, Szechuan, Oishii Bento, Taiwan Cafe and Sushi Fuku all on a single block of Oakland Avenue. A block over on Atwood there's an Asian hair salon. Then another block over on Meyran there is the Pittsburgh - NYC Chinatown bus stop.

[Goodjules]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

There you have it. Someone that moved from San Francisco to here. No one more qualified IMHO. Thanks for the post. I think we take CMU, Pitt and Duquesne for granted sometimes and forget that it helps our region quite a bit. Pittsburgh food is getting better, but it has a ways to go still.

Thanks h_curtis! I just got back from SF and I'm afraid I agree that Pittsburgh still has a ways to go, food wise. But it's getting better.

[slavicamerican]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

I am not a big Obama fan, BUT NO ONE can say he didn't do well for us. He brought some pretty darn good publicity here and you can't take that stuff away. I think he liked Pittsburgh, but he is a true politician, so there is that underlying feel. Still we held the G20 AND an environmental summit. Yes, Pittsburgh and environmental were used in the same sentence. Obama did well for us. I certainly laughed at the morons that were complaining about the G20. I was wondering what their IQ could possibly be.

+1 (With the caveat that I'm an Obama supporter as are 90%+ of DC's residents)

Hosting a global leaders' summit is a really big deal, because it means your city is worthy of it and it brings attention to your city. I'm certain that there are people in Europe who learned of Pittsburgh, visited Pittsburgh (and spent money there), and will invest in Pittsburgh because of these summits. Granted, I wasn't there when these summits took place so I don't know what the experience was like. But I do know that Pittsburgh got glowing reviews in the press for its handling of it, and I recall the really pretty pictures of the city splashed across the world's papers.

JimboPGH, for better or worse, attracting the corporate masters is the goal for city's that want to have jobs and be prosperous. Pittsburgh suffered horribly when the steel overlord left (ironically, for East Slovakia), and Pittsburgh is now competing (somewhat relatively well) with other cities to attract other corporate masters.

[Aqua Teen Carl]

Originally Posted by JimboPGH

Yeah, screw those idiots who don't like seeing their city turned into a police state for four days while the governments of the world's wealthiest countries gather downtown to strategize on how to better pleasure their corporate masters.

Out of rep, but this comment deserves it.

It's good to know that not all of us kiss the corporatist boot as it stomps our face. This forum really puts its love for the city to a bizarre level to where they don't care if students are tear gassed in their dorms because, "IT'S GOOD FOR DA CITY!!!!!111"