Already tired of San Francisco (San Jose, Marina: appointed, condos, high crime)

[peninsular]

Sounds like a classic case of unrealistic expectations. Life is hard and then you die.

Get over it and rather than complaining, figure out what you want and do something about it.

[lrmsd]

Obviously, different strokes....
However, SFO was definitely a pioneer for so many 'things', lifestyles, trends, etc. that have now become almost mainstream....SFO needs a new schtick. But it's not just SFO. PDX needs one, too. In fact, in many once vital and progressive cities, all of the 'lifestyle' stuff everyone touts, has become diluted and packaged to meet the masses needs. You are either a 'foodie', a 'visionary artist', a 'healer', a 'techie' or perhaps an 'ecoposeur'....ya know?

I love SFO; it is geographically beautiful. But yes, it is now overrated. It will possibly reinvent itself, and be cutting edge again. But many of the trends and issues/movements it was famous for, have taken root in other cities, making SFO less edgy or innovative in that regard.

I will add: Homelessness has increased up and down the CA coast, as well as in small towns inland. This is not unique to SFO, but it does hamper the enjoyment of life in SFO, depending upon where you live.

To the OP: SFO has 750k inhabitants. Are you REALLY comparing this to NYC? LA? Really? That's just silly. SFO is a world class city based on the various criteria used for said definition, for it's size. Obviously, each person can have their own definition, as well. Same goes for weather. And enjoyment of the outdoors. Some people love living in proximity to redwoods, trails and world class wine country, while also having the vitality of a city.

Personally, I've had just as good, and sometimes better, food in marin and sonoma counties. Again, it's relative to today, not when SFO/the bay area as a whole was a trendsetter in said lifestyles (such as local food, organics, epicurian, fusion, etc.), decades ago.....

Trendsetters, whether people or cities or movements, eventually see that their offspring has learned to fly, and they are no longer needed as much. Or, too many of those offspring relocated to their city and are now offering up a packaged 'image', without any real substance, of what said city once truly 'lived'. ahem.poseurs.cough. Artifice is high, and not just in SFO, these days, in my experience.
So, I think you are seeing part of a larger trend.

Again, the numbers in NYC and LA will provide you with diversity of experiences and options that, true, you will not find in a city of SFO's size.

Obviously, if the lifestyle doesn't suit you, it does not make the city overrated. However, if you heard you could hike, see wine country, enjoy good food, in a beautiful location, on the coast, with moderate temps, and find that the cost is not worth said amenities, you've probably chosen the wrong city.

I love SFO, as mentioned already.(: And I too think these days it's not worth the premium to live there. But that might change for me; SFO needs to reinvent itself; so many cities are resting on their laurels/reputations these days. People moved to these places based on perception. The people who relocated CHANGED these cities. The cities did not change themselves.

You are fortunate to be in such a position to make alot of money, and live a high quality of life, relative to 99% of the planet. Good thing you have choices. I personally don't even enjoy vacationing in NYC, let alone live there, and I'm from the east coast originally. It's all in the perspective-personal tastes. I'm glad to have the bay area=a manageable (size wise), beautiful urban location, close to marin and sonoma. To me, that's the perfect combination. To each his own.

[lrmsd]

I really can't believe you are comparing NYC to SFO. For anyone reading this, SFO is not and has never been, NYC. Or LA.

Please research population demographics, geography, etc. before moving somewhere. Boston is a better east coast comparison to SFO, if you must. But generally, east and west coast are completely different. If you are looking for the 'place most like NYC, or boston, or miami, etc' on the west coast, well, pick NYC, Boston or Miami, please! Do us all a favor-lol-and do your homework.

I would never say I'm looking for the east coast version of san diego. That's ridiculous. And when I left the Boston area, I did not look for a Boston west of the Mississippi.

[pmac6270]

You are right. I have chosen the wrong city. That is why I am moving. SF should never be compared to NYC, maybe Denver or New Orleans. I visited SF about 4 times in the years prior to moving here. Unfortunately I stayed at hotels in Union Square all of those times. Union Square and areas near there feel like a bustling city. I have lived in 4 different east coast cities in my life and would gladly move back to any of them. Some people love the proximity to hiking or Tahoe. I just thought the city had more going for it. Come to Upper Haight after 10 p.m. and convince me that theres anything going on besides beer bars. Or Lower Haight for that matter. Western Addition anyone? So goodbye SF, you can keep your skyline, bad dressed people, and figs on a plate.

[18Montclair]

Yawn at the troll. LOL

[Lizz0rd]

Originally Posted by menlo88

What's so good about SF again? I've been living in the City for about a year and it sucks! I hate it and want out but I don't know if I can move?

World class prices for a non-World Class city. The people are standoffish, unattractive, sloppy, weird, nerdy or awkward, the homeless, the filth and the delusion that this city is world-class always makes me chuckle. I feel so ripped off when I'm writing my rent check for $3,000 at the first of the month for the privilege of living in this small dump. Whenever I'm in NYC or LA or London I feel so alive. This place seems so cold. Whenever I mention this it's "well the weather is great (looking forward to another AWESOME chilly summer!) and we have great access to hiking." BIG WHOOP. Hiking. Exciting!

But do I even have a choice? Being in the tech industry, it seems that there are less opportunities once you leave this area and there is no way in hell i'm moving down closer to work in suburban office park hell in the Valley. Especially at my young age and with my interests. Oh God, why did I have to be into computers why did I have to be into computers...

The only plus is with the money I make I can afford to high tail it out of here in the next 10 years or so, but 10 years..Ugh.

I can see you liking NYC or London better... but wait, complaining about the weather in SF? ...NYC and London weather are crappy compared to the Bay.... Has to be a joke.

And um, there are tech jobs in all major cities, just move?

Not sure why you thought SF would be NYC or London though...definitely not in that league but, it does have other perks? A much different culture, and yes the beauty/weather. SF doesn't want to be NYC or London.
I agree, NYC and London are great...better cities to explore... no doubt in my mind. I prefer the SF lifestyle though. You may not? Doesn't make SF a bad place, it's doing it's own thing.
You think somewhere like Barcelona or Buenos Aires is like London either? No...they have a much more laid back (yet sophisticated) lifestyle, much like SF.
Your complaining about suburban office park in the Bay, but you want to go to LA, wha??

I don't know any person from SF comparing it to NYC, except maybe when it comes to quality of cuisine or cocktail lounges...things like that, definitely on par.

[pmac6270]

Some of you posters just don't get it. San Francisco is compared to those cities because the real estate is so expensive. With a budget of 3,000 per month for a 1 bedroom I'll take London's fog over San Francisco any day of the week. A married couple that I know just got a 625 square foot junior 1bedroom near Delores Park for 2700. On the other end I know a bike messenger on my block that pays 650 for a rent stabilized 2br. He's been here for 15 years and is never leaving. I've lived in the south and the northeast. Millions of people have chosen the brutal winters and summers of Chicago, Boston, NYC, Philly, D.C., Nashville to name a few. Yes Nashville dips into the teens at times. They are called seasons.
The tradeoff is that you get to live a vibrant city of your choice. And honestly, what does SF have in 2012 that many other cities do not have. The way things are going SF will look more like Carmel and less like the funky SF I thought I knew from vacation visits. If you have to pay 3,000 a month for a for a 1br the city should have a few perks. OP is totally right, you pay that much just so you can get in a car and go hiking, or to wine country. That doesn't make sense.

[peninsular]

Originally Posted by pmac6270

...If you have to pay 3,000 a month for a for a 1br the city should have a few perks. OP is totally right, you pay that much just so you can get in a car and go hiking, or to wine country. That doesn't make sense.

What you mean to say is that it doesn't make sense to you. The way rents are going up it clearly makes sense for lots of other people.

[k.west]

I have a novel idea....how about moving?

[04kL4nD]

Don't let the door hit ya pal

It's crowded enough as it is...