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.
Boston is pristine in the core (Beacon Hill / Back Bay / South End / Downtown), dirty and gritty in the inner-neighborhoods (Allston / Dorchester / Roxbury / JP / Cambridge / Somerville), and then clean but suburban in its outer neighborhoods / cities (Newton / West Roxbury / Roslindale / Chestnut Hill).
LA's dirty and gritty just about everywhere, even on most of the Westside.
But being spoiled by whats considered "Winter" weather in LA living here most of my life. A Boston winter would be an actual "cold and snowy" winter, with those freezing Noreasters that kick in from time to time.
Meh, I guess I can see why people like them. There seems to be a lot of natural beauty in southern CA, the picture with the mountains is especially spectacular. Still the beaches themselves were kind of narrow and rocky and had so many houses so close to them. I think whenever I've seen a "beaches" category in a Boston vs LA thread, LA's always one, but I haven't seen any pics of LA beaches that totally blow MA beaches out of the water.
For comparison, here are a few [lame] shots of mine...
Not lame at at all. But girth is not an issue is So Cal either.
Well, let's see, it'll be 71 degrees in LA on Friday according to weather.com, and 74 degrees in Boston.
Not to mention that 365 days of relatively unchanging weather that LA has. (no snow)
And did I mention that weather.com says LA will get up to 90 on Sunday. (90 degrees in May!?!)
And which is more prone to forest fires and earthquakes? (give me a good snowstorm over a forest fire any day)
In fewer words: I disagree.
You don't disagree, you're simply arguing.
You implied extremes in temperature are greater in Los Angeles than Boston, then immediately claimed Los Angeles has "365 days of relatively unchanging" weather.
And unlike freezing rain, earthquakes are not features of weather.
You implied extremes in temperature are greater in Los Angeles than Boston, then immediately claimed Los Angeles has "365 days of relatively unchanging" weather.
And unlike freezing rain, earthquakes are not features of weather.
I do disagree and I am also arguing.
Beaches and weather are the two things that people seem to ALWAYS give to LA, and I don't see how.
I never implied extremes are greater in Los Angeles. I pointed out first that Boston has nicer weather than LA this particular week, and then noted that LA doesn't have four seasons the same way Boston does.
Earthquakes aren't features of weather, they're natural disasters, which I associate with weather. My point there is that the worst natural occurences (to be politically correct) that could happen in LA are worse than those of Boston.
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.
