San Francisco Quality Of Life Among Best In World, New Survey Reveals (Los Angeles: low income, to rent)
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.
Seven vacations per year? Nice work, if you can get it. SF is beautiful and all, but it is only 7x7, and there are so many great places to visit in this state alone. Venture out - The City will still be there (barring another 1906).
I did venture out, but when I was having so much fun it was just better to stay home instead or go out for some extended walks in the city, do some exploring and sightseeing . You know I never did finish seeing all of San Francisco, I always figured there would be plenty of time to catch up, then one day time ran out, but I'll go back and visit friends and stay a while someday I hope.
San Francisco does have an incredible quality of life. I many categories, SF definitely takes the cake. Here are some of the pro's:
1.) Scenery- SF often ranks as the most beautiful city in America and one of the most beautiful cities in the world. The city is a photographer's dream home. Not even NYC is as awe-inspiring as the scenery in SF, in my opinion, as well as millions the world over.
2.) Food- Hands down, SF has the best Asian cuisine in North America. Many delicious dishes you can get in Chinatown or the Sunset, you can't find anywhere else in America. SF has so much good food.
3.) Weed- No big city in America is more weed friendly than SF. It is no secret Norther California has some of the dankest weed on the planet. Unlike many other big cities, you probably won't be arrested for simply smoking a j in SF. There are many cannibus clubs in The City and a medical card is fairly easy to obtain. You can buy some of the best weed in North America from a homeless person in Golden Gate Park or the Tenderloin for God's sake.
4.) Weather- Although it is debatable, SF has some of the best weather in the world. All year round, it never gets too hot or too cold. Despite the rolling fog, SF is also one of the statistically sunniest cities in America.
However, SF is not perfect and there are cons about The City:
1.) Gentrification- Middle class people are being priced out of SF. Natives of SF are a minority. In SF, a household making 50K a year can be considered lower class. All of this gentrification leads to...
2.) Declining diversity- Although the percentage of Asians has grown in SF over the years, SF has lost its Black population faster than any big city in America. There are only a few thousand Black people left in SF mostly living in crime-ridden run-down project complexes in the southern part of The City. It would be no surprise if SF decided to knock down these complexes in the coming years and we would effectively see SF's Black population drop to less than 1%. SF is mainly a White and Asian city. You don't even see that many Latinos outside of the Mission.
3.) Lack of attractive and available women- This is not a shot at SF. SF is my hometown and there are a lot of beautiful women in SF. But SF does not hold a candle to cities like New York or Miami or Los Angeles when it comes to women. Gentrification has made SF a magnet for only the brainiest most successful women. Many of these women often are not lookers. Unlike NYC and LA, SF does not attract pretty young things starving to start their acting or modeling careers. SF attracts people who are rich enough not to work from hipsters to faux hippies to various millionaires or highly educated folks with advanced high demand skills and that is all.
Let it go - they're just trying to rile you up (like a good number of people in these forums).
One tends to find that many of the stuck up braggarts in SF are recent transplants who figure that's how they're supposed to act. Same thing happens in L.A.
Not always. I just had lunch with a friend and my friend's friend. The friend of my friend lives in Oakland and he also had this "We're progressive in the Bay Area and therefore we're superior to everyone else" kind of attitude.
3.) Weed- No big city in America is more weed friendly than SF. It is no secret Norther California has some of the dankest weed on the planet. Unlike many other big cities, you probably won't be arrested for simply smoking a j in SF. There are many cannibus clubs in The City and a medical card is fairly easy to obtain. You can buy some of the best weed in North America from a homeless person in Golden Gate Park or the Tenderloin for God's sake.
I, for one, do not see this as a plus. I don't like it when people smoke that crap in public and I have to inhale it. I also don't like it when I'm assaulted by second hand weed smoke wafting into the hallway when I walk into my apartment building. It's disgusting.
2.) Declining diversity- Although the percentage of Asians has grown in SF over the years, SF has lost its Black population faster than any big city in America. There are only a few thousand Black people left in SF mostly living in crime-ridden run-down project complexes in the southern part of The City. It would be no surprise if SF decided to knock down these complexes in the coming years and we would effectively see SF's Black population drop to less than 1%. SF is mainly a White and Asian city. You don't even see that many Latinos outside of the Mission.
San Francisco is currently more diverse than it's ever been in the past (well, technically it was 0.1% more diverse in 2000, but that's not much of a difference). The Asian and Latino populations are higher than then they've ever been before. SF's white population has been declining since the 50s, and the black population has been declining since the 70s, but even so the total diversity of the city is higher than it was in the 1990s, 1980s, 1970s, 1960, 1950s, 1940s, etc, etc, etc ("maximum diversity" would be an equal share of all racial groups).
And you definitely see latino people outside of the Mission, what are you talking about? There's the Excelsior, Bernal Heights, Portola, Lakeview (to you non-natives, Lakeview = Ingleside+Oceanview) Visitacion valley, Bayview, Mission Terrace, Cayuga Terrace, and Crocker Amazon all have decent sized to large latino populations. Even the Tenderloin has a decent latino population, and there of course latinos scattered around in smaller numbers all over the city.
Also SF has way more than a "few thousand" black people. More like 50,000. Many of them do live in the projects, but not all of them. SF is currently about 6% black (7% when counting mixed race), so it's not going to be dropping all the way to under 1% anytime soon, if ever, even if all the projects were to be demolished.
I just came back from a 4 day vacation in SF. I'm from TX and a group of us have always wanted to visit. I really packed in a lot of stuff for us to do on the itinerary, and it proved to be one of the most enjoyable vacations in terms of what I feel a classic city should look and feel like. The restored Victorian homes, the rolling hills, the packed in retail areas at every corner, the cultures, the most beautiful bay vistas that I've ever seen...and of course, the friggin weather. It's seriously unbelievable. I was in awe the first couple days at how wonderful it felt out there...I mean, it's as if God took a 10 mile long refrigerator, and opened it's doors over the bay area. I still can't get over how cool and crisp the air felt...I've never had that experience anywhere else. Seriously. And the food....I don't know exactly why, but everything just tastes so much darn fresher. From the street vendors up on up, everything just tasted better. I told my fiance this and I still feel the same about it, if I ever win the lottery, I'm buying property in SF and living there during the hot TX summers.
I've traveled the world, have lived in some great places and pretty much experienced almost every climate and city atmosphere there is...SF is up there with the best IMO.
San Francisco does have an incredible quality of life. I many categories, SF definitely takes the cake. Here are some of the pro's:
1.) Scenery- SF often ranks as the most beautiful city in America and one of the most beautiful cities in the world. The city is a photographer's dream home. Not even NYC is as awe-inspiring as the scenery in SF, in my opinion, as well as millions the world over.
2.) Food- Hands down, SF has the best Asian cuisine in North America. Many delicious dishes you can get in Chinatown or the Sunset, you can't find anywhere else in America. SF has so much good food.
3.) Weed- No big city in America is more weed friendly than SF. It is no secret Norther California has some of the dankest weed on the planet. Unlike many other big cities, you probably won't be arrested for simply smoking a j in SF. There are many cannibus clubs in The City and a medical card is fairly easy to obtain. You can buy some of the best weed in North America from a homeless person in Golden Gate Park or the Tenderloin for God's sake.
4.) Weather- Although it is debatable, SF has some of the best weather in the world. All year round, it never gets too hot or too cold. Despite the rolling fog, SF is also one of the statistically sunniest cities in America.
However, SF is not perfect and there are cons about The City:
1.) Gentrification- Middle class people are being priced out of SF. Natives of SF are a minority. In SF, a household making 50K a year can be considered lower class. All of this gentrification leads to...
2.) Declining diversity- Although the percentage of Asians has grown in SF over the years, SF has lost its Black population faster than any big city in America. There are only a few thousand Black people left in SF mostly living in crime-ridden run-down project complexes in the southern part of The City. It would be no surprise if SF decided to knock down these complexes in the coming years and we would effectively see SF's Black population drop to less than 1%. SF is mainly a White and Asian city. You don't even see that many Latinos outside of the Mission.
3.) Lack of attractive and available women- This is not a shot at SF. SF is my hometown and there are a lot of beautiful women in SF. But SF does not hold a candle to cities like New York or Miami or Los Angeles when it comes to women. Gentrification has made SF a magnet for only the brainiest most successful women. Many of these women often are not lookers. Unlike NYC and LA, SF does not attract pretty young things starving to start their acting or modeling careers. SF attracts people who are rich enough not to work from hipsters to faux hippies to various millionaires or highly educated folks with advanced high demand skills and that is all.
i agree with you about the negatives of sf. the census bureau projected that in the year 2020, sf will be only 0.5% black. its supposed to be this liberal mecca and yet upholds racist policies that keep blacks out. and you're right sf has no real women. sadly, they are mostly men in drag. one thing i disagree with you about is the weather. the truth is, sf has the worst weather in the united states. it has the coldest summers of any major city.
[color="Red"]mod edit [/COLOR
]my source is the official census website www.census.gov/sanfrancisco. click on the top right, where it says "sf black population declining at fastest rate in u.s." there's a special report the govt wrote because sf is slated to be the first u.s. city to have a mass exodus of its black population on par with the ethnic cleansings that took place during ww2, or south african apartheid. the new policies that were put in place make it practically illegal to be a black property owner in sf. as for sf having no women, well the facts speak for themselves. the male to female ratio is 100,000 to 1. the lgbt association filed a lawsuit that put a permanent injunction on women in sf, if a woman is seen with a group of more than 2 other women they can be arrested under the new law. real women are considered culturally insensitive and offensive to the men in drag. its similar to sharia law,only the aim is to ban women from the city altogether.
Last edited by Sam I Am; 09-20-2012 at 06:15 PM..
Reason: orphaned - the post you refer to has been deleted
my source is the official census website www.census.gov/sanfrancisco. click on the top right, where it says "sf black population declining at fastest rate in u.s." there's a special report the govt wrote because sf is slated to be the first u.s. city to have a mass exodus of its black population on par with the ethnic cleansings that took place during ww2, or south african apartheid.
Can't find this article. The link doesn't work, and searching on Google or the census site for "sf black population declining at fastest rate in u.s." (or variations of this) didn't yield any articles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dculross
the new policies that were put in place make it practically illegal to be a black property owner in sf.
What policies exactly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dculross
as for sf having no women, well the facts speak for themselves. the male to female ratio is 100,000 to 1. the lgbt association filed a lawsuit that put a permanent injunction on women in sf, if a woman is seen with a group of more than 2 other women they can be arrested under the new law. real women are considered culturally insensitive and offensive to the men in drag. its similar to sharia law,only the aim is to ban women from the city altogether.
This argument gets thrown out a lot, and of course you're using hyperbole (100,000 to 1?), but it's simply not true.
Per the 2010 census report: "For every 100 females there were 102.9 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 102.8 males." Or, in other words, roughly 51:49 (M:F) (San Francisco - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).
I've always felt that with the large amount of homosexual males in SF, the ratio pretty much equals itself out. As a straight male, I've never had problems meeting smart, successful and attractive females in SF. Just because every girl walking down the street isn't a supermodel doesn't mean there aren't a lot of attractive girls in SF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dculross
the lgbt association filed a lawsuit that put a permanent injunction on women in sf, if a woman is seen with a group of more than 2 other women they can be arrested under the new law. real women are considered culturally insensitive and offensive to the men in drag. its similar to sharia law,only the aim is to ban women from the city altogether.
Can't find this article. The link doesn't work, and searching on Google or the census site for "sf black population declining at fastest rate in u.s." (or variations of this) didn't yield any articles.
What policies exactly?
This argument gets thrown out a lot, and of course you're using hyperbole (100,000 to 1?), but it's simply not true.
Per the 2010 census report: "For every 100 females there were 102.9 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 102.8 males." Or, in other words, roughly 51:49 (M:F) (San Francisco - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).
I've always felt that with the large amount of homosexual males in SF, the ratio pretty much equals itself out. As a straight male, I've never had problems meeting smart, successful and attractive females in SF. Just because every girl walking down the street isn't a supermodel doesn't mean there aren't a lot of attractive girls in SF.
"San Francisco has the unfortunate distinction of being the first U.S. city in the 21st century to prohibit African Americans from buying or owning property within city limits"
mod edit
Last edited by Sam I Am; 09-21-2012 at 06:17 PM..
Reason: No. Your argument is at odds with the U.S. Census and is based on personal opinion - and you're close to gay/trans bashing
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.