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.
You also cannot even compare the food in Minneapolis with San Francisco. San Francisco is always in the top 3 of the great culinary cities of the U.S. - Minneapolis isn't even on the list. Put it this way - two friends were visiting me (from MPLS) in Seattle. We spent two hours walking around Capitol Hill looking for a place to eat. Capitol Hill is full of great, non-chain restuarants. Nothing looked good and one said, "Is there an Applebees around here?" I mean come on. And Capotle? What crap and it's so popular there. Try a burrito in the Mission and you'll never want Capotle again.
Sorry, but I have experienced living in both Minneapolis and San Francisco (you have not) - San Francisco offers the world, Minneapolis?
Your Minneapolis friends must be from the suburbs. Trust me, there are TONS of ethnic restaurants here now, however these restaurants are more in the inner city of Minneapolis. Applebees are suburban places. Great food here but ya got to venture to the diverse, colored part of the city to get most of it. Lots of white folk may be scared to leave their safe conservative suburbs.
We have burritos here just as good as what is in the Mission. If you lived here, you would remember Lake Street. Lake Street is now Latino central!!. Beautiful murals and killer Mexican food. The old Sears building on Lake Street now has a Global Market mall with incredible Arabic, African, Mexican etc food. It actually reminds me of being in a market in LA. The whole length of Nicollet from Lake St to downtown is now Eat Street with food from ALL over the world. Incredible stuff. None of this stuff was here 5 or 6 years ago. It all came recently.
You haven't lived here in almost 10 years.........See, this was before all of the International stuff came to Minneapolis and is now here in a big way.
Regarding your last paragraph - no. While I definitely think planning for retirement is very important, you cannot live your life today solely focused on tomorrow - tomorrow may never come. I doubt I'll retire here, and I don't know if I'll ever own here, but I am young and there's no better place for me.
-which explains why we as a country are pretty much screwed: nobody saves for retirement. Let's put it into perspective: nationally, by the time you are 30, you should have a minimum of 10k saved for retirement, 20k in a city like SF if you plan on retiring there. Realistically, you should have at least double that, so 20k nationally, 40k in SF.
Quote:
It's not arrogant. It's the truth. Once again, I spent 7 years in Minneapolis, 5 in Seattle, and now 3 here. The culture, identity and character of Minneapolis are gravely less than those of San Francisco (and to some extent...
It isn't the truth. It's merely your personal opinion regarding what YOU like. If it were true, then everyone in Tennessee would be clamoring to get the hell out of there and go to San Francisco. When I visit, do you think I run into people who say something like: "Boy, life sure sucks here in TN... I can't stand it here because we have a lack of culture, food, etc etc..." No, and as a matter of fact, I'll put money down that the sort of attachment to the land and culture in my home town is actually much greater than it is in SF. People back home LOVE their area and when I mention I live in SF, they'll say something like: " I was there once... it was ok, but I was sure glad to get home!" Either that or they simply think I'm stupid for leaving. Some might say that they simply don't know any better. But that would be stupid. They love where they live, and guess what? So do most other people. I've never lived anywhere that had so many people from somewhere else trash and badmouth other parts of the country, many of which they've never even been to.
So no- I don't buy your argument. Not for a second. Besides- even though I live in the Bay Area, I actually hate SF the city and rarely go because for one, the place is overcrowded, dirty, and you just about trip all over the homeless people which you claim is the result of SF being such a marvelous, liberal city. Do you ever think that perhaps having so many homeless people is more about a failed system that is incapable of dealing with rampant social stratification or is it really all that great to have such a population of destitute people?
How does demand lead to unnecessary taxes and fee's? How does demand lead to higher bridge tolls? What does demand have to do with CA's worst public policy ever, prop 13? It's not just that simple at all. Other places have high job growth and high demand but aren't as expensive b/c they don't have as many regulations, ordinances, fees, taxes, ect.... And that is on top of the national problem of lax lending that more than doubled the price of homes here. Did demand double too during that time? I guess you just can't understand things beyond the simple supply and demand equation and realize that there is more than just demand for housing that drive up costs for everything.
For the last time - people WANT to live here and they will pay whatever they need to in order to do so, whether it's rent, clothes, groceries, gas, or taxes.
Your Minneapolis friends must be from the suburbs. Trust me, there are TONS of ethnic restaurants here now, however these restaurants are more in the inner city of Minneapolis. Applebees are suburban places. Great food here but ya got to venture to the diverse, colored part of the city to get most of it. Lots of white folk may be scared to leave their safe conservative suburbs.
We have burritos here just as good as what is in the Mission. If you lived here, you would remember Lake Street. Lake Street is now Latino central!!. Beautiful murals and killer Mexican food. The old Sears building on Lake Street now has a Global Market mall with incredible Arabic, African, Mexican etc food. It actually reminds me of being in a market in LA. Nicollet mall is now Eat Street with food from ALL over the world. Incredible stuff. None of this stuff was here 5 or 6 years ago. It all came recently.
No, he's actually in Uptown. I know there's a few good restaurants there, but I seem to remember eating at Chapotle on Lake Calhoun and it was packed. My friends say it's very popular.
Trust me - the Mexican found in Minneapolis is not even close to being on par with the Mexican in San Francisco. You may have one or two great Mexican eateries - we have hundreds. I'm sorry, you will not even come close to winning an argument saying the food in Minneapolis is on par with San Francisco (or a handful of other U.S. cities for that matter).
As I said above, I'll always have a special place in my heart for Minneapolis. I'm just glad I've been able to experience bigger and better things.
You obviously are clueless on more than just economics. Most other American cities do not have the same homeless problem because:
1). Climate - San Francisco has mild winters and mild summers - both are welcoming to the homeless - no harsh winters or brutually hot summers to survive.
2). San Francisco is very liberal and tolerant of the homeless. As a friend from NYC said while she was here, "The difference between NYC and SF is that we give pennies, you give dollars."
3). The police do nothing.
Three huge factors that contribute to the problem. There are more, of course, but climate and tolerance go a long way.
Stop talking about things you know nothing about. I am saying that it needs to be illegal to panhandle or sleep on the streets - to do so, you need to have enough programs in place to take care of the homeless as well as police them. It would make for a more pleasant and safe city. Something has to be done, and unfortunately, the homeless problem is just not going to go away on its own.
And other cities with even better climates than SF don't have as big of a problem with the homeless such as San Diego.
Many San Franciscans are getting fed up with the homeless and are becoming less tolerant and want something finally done.
How many more programs do you need? Go look at Mendocino County, a largely rural county, and see the big problem with homeless up there b/c of their bountiful assistance available. All it does is enable many of these people and it's a waste of money. Where does all that money SF already spends on the homeless go and what does it do? Just b/c programs aren't working doesn't mean it's because of a lack of funds.
Define "sustainable." I tried to chase a $1220 1-bd apartment on Forest Hill, which is a good but rather nondescript neighborhood. They had over 200 applicants in two days of open house, including an attorney who pulled some strings behind the scenes, and the place was an utter disaster. I just walked away in disbelief. The competition for affordable housing in San Francisco is something you have to experience to believe.
so, if you wanted to move to sf say from Texas...how the hell would you get a living space...I don't wanna sleep in my truck when I get there?!?!
For the last time - people WANT to live here and they will pay whatever they need to in order to do so, whether it's rent, clothes, groceries, gas, or taxes.
that doesn't even answer the question at all, but okay....gotta keep the answers simple I guess. So we should just sit back and let bureaucrats jack up our cost of living b/c there is demand and people willing to take it up the rear.
-which explains why we as a country are pretty much screwed: nobody saves for retirement. Let's put it into perspective: nationally, by the time you are 30, you should have a minimum of 10k saved for retirement, 20k in a city like SF if you plan on retiring there. Realistically, you should have at least double that, so 20k nationally, 40k in SF.
It isn't the truth. It's merely your personal opinion regarding what YOU like. If it were true, then everyone in Tennessee would be clamoring to get the hell out of there and go to San Francisco. When I visit, do you think I run into people who say something like: "Boy, life sure sucks here in TN... I can't stand it here because we have a lack of culture, food, etc etc..." No, and as a matter of fact, I'll put money down that the sort of attachment to the land and culture in my home town is actually much greater than it is in SF. People back home LOVE their area and when I mention I live in SF, they'll say something like: " I was there once... it was ok, but I was sure glad to get home!" Either that or they simply think I'm stupid for leaving. Some might say that they simply don't know any better. But that would be stupid. They love where they live, and guess what? So do most other people. I've never lived anywhere that had so many people from somewhere else trash and badmouth other parts of the country, many of which they've never even been to.
So no- I don't buy your argument. Not for a second. Besides- even though I live in the Bay Area, I actually hate SF the city and rarely go because for one, the place is overcrowded, dirty, and you just about trip all over the homeless people which you claim is the result of SF being such a marvelous, liberal city. Do you ever think that perhaps having so many homeless people is more about a failed system that is incapable of dealing with rampant social stratification or is it really all that great to have such a population of destitute people?
Did I ever say I wasn't saving towards retirement? No.
You obviously have a negative bias towards this place. Almost everyone that's visited me loves it - some don't. I love how you make it sound like everyone hates it.
If you hate it, then why the heck are you posting on this thread? I mean really? TN was never brought up until you brought it up. I happen to like TN. I don't care for country music, but I sure enjoyed Nashville.
To each his own - some people (like my parents) like the quiet small town life. There is nothing wrong with it. I see the beautiful 10-fold in their town when I go home. I am merely defending the city I love against all you haters.
The homeless problem is far more complex than what you've mentioned.
Sorry, but I have experienced living in both Minneapolis and San Francisco (you have not) - San Francisco offers the world, Minneapolis?
Have no desire to live in San Francisco. Extremely overrated and expensive.
Oh, I almost forgot. I am a lesbian and my girlfriend grew up in SF. She used to hate Mpls too when she moved here over 20 years ago. She loves all the ethnic stuff just like me. But now she LOVES the ethnic restaurants here and we go to a new one every Saturday. She will stay in Minneapolis because she owns a house here and has a nice yard for flowers etc. She could never afford that in SF and she makes almost $100,000 a year.
We have a killer lesbian club in Mpls owned by former SF women. See they brought their westcoast culture here and we can enjoy it a fraction of westcoast prices.
that doesn't even answer the question at all, but okay....gotta keep the answers simple I guess. So we should just sit back and let bureaucrats jack up our cost of living b/c there is demand and people willing to take it up the rear.
Bottom line - if a person has done their research while contemplating a move to SF - they'd know what to expect. You don't like it, leave. It's that simple. I love this place, and right now I'm willing to pay the price to be here.
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.
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.
