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 can sorta understand someone picking Chicago over L.A. for food, but Boston? Funny stuff. Nice touch, letting L.A. win one category. That'll hide how ridiculously biased you are.
I can sorta understand someone picking Chicago over L.A. for food, but Boston? Funny stuff. Nice touch, letting L.A. win one category. That'll hide how ridiculously biased you are.
Well this is somewhat based on preference...things like culture and lifestyle are 100% objective--even categories like architecture. However there's nothing subjective about saying Boston's economy is much healthier than LA's, and I think most would agree that Boston offers a much better urban living environment. There's no doubt that LA has some extremely dense areas, but I think from an urban standpoint, most are going to favor Boston. The transit coverage is much better and Boston has a wide array of beautiful, historic neighborhoods.
Not really. Most of the truly absurd, comically laughable opinions come from the Northeast posters. Your opinions would only make sense to someone in an insane asylum.
Location: NY-NJ-Philly looks down at SF and laughs at the hippies
1,144 posts, read 1,295,468 times
Reputation: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives
Not really. Most of the truly absurd, comically laughable opinions come from the Northeast posters. Your opinions would only make sense to someone in an insane asylum.
Let me know if you want to discuss Boston vs Los Angeles any further.
Well this is somewhat based on preference...things like culture and lifestyle are 100% objective--even categories like architecture. However there's nothing subjective about saying Boston's economy is much healthier than LA's, and I think most would agree that Boston offers a much better urban living environment. There's no doubt that LA has some extremely dense areas, but I think from an urban standpoint, most are going to favor Boston. The transit coverage is much better and Boston has a wide array of beautiful, historic neighborhoods.
True, Boston would probably win that poll. Of course, it's downright comical to spin a much smaller city as "more urban" than a much larger one--especially when the smaller city can't even beat the larger "sprawly" city for peak density. But what can you do?
Location: NY-NJ-Philly looks down at SF and laughs at the hippies
1,144 posts, read 1,295,468 times
Reputation: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives
True, Boston would probably win that poll. Of course, it's downright comical to spin a much smaller city as "more urban" than a much larger one--especially when the smaller city can't even beat the larger "sprawly" city for peak density. But what can you do?
Not when the smaller city of Boston is easily livable without a car while the bigger city of LA is not. I don't consider any city to be urban if a car is needed. IDC if 15M ppl live in the city limits, if a car is needed it's not urban in my opinion.
Not when the smaller city of Boston is easily livable without a car while the bigger city of LA is not. I don't consider any city to be urban if a car is needed. IDC if 15M ppl live in the city limits, if a car is needed it's not urban in my opinion.
Like I said, comically bad opinions.
Besides, we all know the mass transit argument against L.A. only exists because the "big suburb" argument was destroyed ages ago. Wasn't it great when you could spin BS stories about everyone living in a house with a swimming pool out here? Too bad the LA metro maintains a 10,000 psm average over 700 sq miles (for perspective, Chicago's psm is 10,800, but that's over 225 sq miles, at which point it peters out into un-dense suburbia). No other metro in the U.S. other than NY comes close to matching those numbers, so what to do? I know. Re-write the definition of "urban" in your subjective image. That way you can keep lying to yourself that much smaller cities like Boston, DC and Toronto are more urban than L.A.
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.
