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.
I voted for London, a far better city. I spent considerable time there a few years back while working on a multi billion dollar Arbitration. LA used to be great but now is just a sad armpit.
I chose LA based on weather, alone. The rich will live extremely well in either of those cities, but if I was rich I'd choose LA for the reason listed.
As one who is not rich, I have enjoyed my time in London more than in Los Angeles, for what that is worth.
Probably London if obscenely wealthy (25-50M+ net worth). I can buy myself a villa in Malta or Marbella, or travel to the Caribbean in the winter months. The wealth would afford me the highest tier of luxury goods, experiences and dining in London over what is offered in LA. I think it's just a higher "tier" of a city for the upper crust and jetset that can be fairly mobile year round.
LA I would choose if I was very well off (5-10M+ net worth) if I generally will be staying put on site for most of the year.
London, way better city in my opinion and since money is no problem if the rain bother's you, capri, Nice, Greece are all within a short comfortable flight
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.
