Someone once told me that some consider Sacramento a part of the Bay Area. Would you agree? (San Francisco: big house, purchase)

[countryway]

That's absurd. Absolutely Not.

[wburg]

The traditional pattern was that if you got rich in Sacramento, you moved to San Francisco--whether it was during the Gold Rush or the tech boom. It also drew artists and musicians in the same way, because there was more money in the Bay Area to support art and music scenes. It's not as true as it used to be, and if you're not rich, an artist or a musician, then the Bay Area doesn't have much cultural pull. San Francisco is close enough to Sacramento for a day trip (heck, I once drove to Berkeley for dinner then drove home, but that was when gas was $1.50 a gallon) or a nightclub/concert run but not exactly convenient, and getting more expensive recently.

[xpxexaxcxex]

Originally Posted by wburg

The traditional pattern was that if you got rich in Sacramento, you moved to San Francisco--whether it was during the Gold Rush or the tech boom. It also drew artists and musicians in the same way, because there was more money in the Bay Area to support art and music scenes. It's not as true as it used to be, and if you're not rich, an artist or a musician, then the Bay Area doesn't have much cultural pull. San Francisco is close enough to Sacramento for a day trip (heck, I once drove to Berkeley for dinner then drove home, but that was when gas was $1.50 a gallon) or a nightclub/concert run but not exactly convenient, and getting more expensive recently.

I don't understand the anti-Sacramentoism from the Bay Area.
Sacramento isn't that bad of a place. I've been there a couple of times and I enjoyed. The weather was nice too. I don't mind sunny 90º heat. A good change from the foggy cold summers of the Bay. Now the Sacramento-area, beyond those borders it can get pretty "redneck" And I mean like Kern County redneck!!

However the Bay Area share the cultural aspects of SF. With the exception of parts of San Mateo. I recall hanging out in Half Moon Bay and seeing John McCain posters everywhere. Not to stereotype anyone, but Republican usually means "focusing and being obsessed with issues that don't really involve."

[wburg]

A lot of folks in the Bay Area aren't familiar enough with the Sacramento region to differentiate between Sacramento and its suburbs--I have heard from people who moved to Colfax for a while and based their entire opinion of the region on their experiences there--they just figured the entire Sacramento region was a bunch of little mountain towns. I have also heard from people who take I-80 to go skiing and assumed that the Wal-Mart in Natomas was downtown Sacramento, and based their assumptions about Sacramento on that. And there's a phenomenon I call "Inverse Franciscanism," the assumption that the worldliness, style, desirability and livability of a place are inversely proportionate to its distance to San Francisco--all things desirable, liberal, artistic and cultural spring from San Francisco, and the farther away you are, the more horrible things get. To this mindset, Sacramento simply can't be anything other than a one-horse suburban satellite.

This being said, in some ways I can't really blame them. San Francisco is an amazing city that draws creative people from all over the world, and particularly from other parts of northern California, and the scenic beauty of the region adds even more appeal. The high rents and property values reflect that desirability, but it comes with a certain tension and willingness to deal with the negative consequences of the place too--thus the mindset. From my perspective, it's a nice place to visit, and a fine asset to have just down the street, but I'd rather live here.

[xpxexaxcxex]

Originally Posted by wburg

A lot of folks in the Bay Area aren't familiar enough with the Sacramento region to differentiate between Sacramento and its suburbs--I have heard from people who moved to Colfax for a while and based their entire opinion of the region on their experiences there--they just figured the entire Sacramento region was a bunch of little mountain towns. I have also heard from people who take I-80 to go skiing and assumed that the Wal-Mart in Natomas was downtown Sacramento, and based their assumptions about Sacramento on that. And there's a phenomenon I call "Inverse Franciscanism," the assumption that the worldliness, style, desirability and livability of a place are inversely proportionate to its distance to San Francisco--all things desirable, liberal, artistic and cultural spring from San Francisco, and the farther away you are, the more horrible things get. To this mindset, Sacramento simply can't be anything other than a one-horse suburban satellite.

This being said, in some ways I can't really blame them. San Francisco is an amazing city that draws creative people from all over the world, and particularly from other parts of northern California, and the scenic beauty of the region adds even more appeal. The high rents and property values reflect that desirability, but it comes with a certain tension and willingness to deal with the negative consequences of the place too--thus the mindset. From my perspective, it's a nice place to visit, and a fine asset to have just down the street, but I'd rather live here.

Interesting. Thanks for the comment.
And for the sake of conversation. Why should a San Franciscan live in Sacramento?

[robertpolyglot]

Originally Posted by coldPlay

omg, no.

H.N. = hell no!

[robertpolyglot]

Originally Posted by Chimérique

NO, Sacramento is more like the Denver, Portland, Austin, Kansas City, San Antonio of California.

Only to the bold ones. Denver is a regional hub and Portland is a part of fictitious Ecotopia.

[KC6ZLV]

Originally Posted by fresnofresno

Because of what you said. Sacramento's media market goes as far west as fairfield, when Fairfield is actually a bay area suburb. Is fairfield greater sac or greater bay? To the casual observer not familiar with either area, driving up I-80, Sacramento seems like it's part of the bay area kinda. But even if it's not the bay area, it's influenced heavily by it.

Fairfield is actually in a different msa and traditionally was not considered part of the Bay Area until all the people from other parts of the country started referring to it as part of the Bay Area because people rented and bought homes there when they couldn't afford to live closer to San Francisco.

I don't see Sacramento as heavily influenced by the Bay Area. Certainly there are some similarities and a fair share of people move to and from both regions all the time, but your experiences in Sacramento are going to be very different from those in the Bay Area. Unless, of course, you are spending time in some of the suburbs.

[wburg]

Originally Posted by jspyder136

Interesting. Thanks for the comment.
And for the sake of conversation. Why should a San Franciscan live in Sacramento?

Perhaps it might be better to ask a San Franciscan who moved here. I think a lot moved because of the economic fallout of the past couple of boom/bust cycles, it just became too hard to sustain a place in San Francisco and even with high incomes they were priced out of the housing market. Some folks might just like the warmer weather (as odd as it seems, some people do like heat.) It's not for the glitz or the glamour--people don't move to California to wear flowers in their hair or become famous, but they have often moved here to get a job and to do business, and that still happens today. State government gets a bad rep because it's The Government, and so anything bad that the state government as a whole is doing gets described as "Sacramento." But you can't run a state of 40 million people and a $2 trillion economy without an administrative center, and for good or ill, we're it. That doesn't mean that is all Sacramento can ever be, or ever was (state government used to be a much, much smaller portion of Sacramento's employment sector.)

It's a good place to break into markets--a lot of the businesses that started here in Sacramento, from the Central Pacific Railroad to Tower Records to KlickNation, made good in our small market and went national, in part because we're such a diverse demographic that if you make it here, you're likely to do well on a national scale (to the point where a lot of marketing firms used Sacramento as a test market for new products.) Lately it has been harder for small firms to compete, and everyone wants to draw existing big business firms here instead of encouraging local entrepeneurs.

Economies are based on actually doing stuff and making stuff, and while that's kind of boring, it's something that Sacramento has traditionally been really good at--trains, riverboats, canned goods, stone, bricks, beer, wine. One San Francisco native I know moved here and recently started a beer brewing company whose name is based on an old brand of beer that was brewed here in Sacramento in the late 19th century, and is marketing it based on its connection with local history. That's the kind of San Franciscan that would move here, I uess.

[Chimérique]

Originally Posted by wburg

A lot of folks in the Bay Area aren't familiar enough with the Sacramento region to differentiate between Sacramento and its suburbs--I have heard from people who moved to Colfax for a while and based their entire opinion of the region on their experiences there--they just figured the entire Sacramento region was a bunch of little mountain towns. I have also heard from people who take I-80 to go skiing and assumed that the Wal-Mart in Natomas was downtown Sacramento, and based their assumptions about Sacramento on that. And there's a phenomenon I call "Inverse Franciscanism," the assumption that the worldliness, style, desirability and livability of a place are inversely proportionate to its distance to San Francisco--all things desirable, liberal, artistic and cultural spring from San Francisco, and the farther away you are, the more horrible things get. To this mindset, Sacramento simply can't be anything other than a one-horse suburban satellite.

This being said, in some ways I can't really blame them. San Francisco is an amazing city that draws creative people from all over the world, and particularly from other parts of northern California, and the scenic beauty of the region adds even more appeal. The high rents and property values reflect that desirability, but it comes with a certain tension and willingness to deal with the negative consequences of the place too--thus the mindset. From my perspective, it's a nice place to visit, and a fine asset to have just down the street, but I'd rather live here.

wburg, Good observations and explanations. I was going to say the same.