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.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,035,535 times
Reputation: 4047
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
Okay that was entirely too nice.
.
I wanted to say the same thing like 20 minutes ago, but I didn't want to be the only one saying it. I thought the same exact thing given the history all of us (you, me, Killakoolaide, and a few others) have had with SF/Philly before.
Actually a cities only comparison would the most embarrassing of all for Philadelphia. Getting spanked by a city with only 46 sq miles would be the death of them.
LOL
"Getting spanked?" You mean that in a figurative sense, I presume, right?
At any rate, this ultimately depends on what you think makes one city better than another. If San Francisco had a GDP 19 times that of Philadelphia's, had more than 16 times the office space of Philadelphia, and had 17 times more cargo arrive in its ports than Philadelphia, I still don't see how that would make the city any better than Philadelphia, or even how that would make much difference to everyday people. Maybe you would consider San Francisco better for those reasons, but personally, I would not enjoy living in a city where there are few if any families with children beyond the age of two. And that's because San Francisco, as beautiful as it is, is simply not a place to be for people who aren't rich. This gives the city a very transient and superficial quality. It's like one big, giant and plasticky adult urban playground.
Philadelphia, in contrast, is a city full of poor people, rich people, not so rich people, some doing-okay people, wealthy families, working families, single-mother families and beyond. Many have been there their entire lives and can recall memories of Connie Mack Stadium, the early Frank Rizzo days, and North Philadelphia as a completely integrated and thriving area. The city is artsy, energetic, lethargic, creative, provincial, f*cked up, bombed out, eclectic, aggressive, warm, depressed, tough, rude, laid back, loud, progressive, conservative, corrupt, violent, beautiful, stressful, peaceful and proud all at the same time. If anything, Philadelphia's a city of contrasts, contradictions and oddities, and that's what has always made it so appealing to me (and many others as well) for so long.
I was born and raised within the city limits of Philadelphia. My mother and stepfather were both employees of the city, yet they could afford to buy homes in two solid middle class neighborhoods. In the Bay Area, they would not have been able to afford the types of houses we lived in, especially anywhere near the city. And it's not like we were deprived of cultural offerings because we lived in Philadelphia. It was quite the contrary. My sister was able to take free horseback riding lessons through a city-sponsored program at Fairmount Park, and still rides horses to this day. Had we not lived in Philadelphia, the program probably would not have been available to her, and it certainly would not have been free. That's the great thing about living in the city.
So, at the end of the day, it's about what you value. I think San Francisco is a lovely town, but the fact that the city, and a good number of its suburbs, are so exclusive really irks me. You may consider "vibrancy" as clubs, bars, and coffee houses, and that's certainly part of it (and Philadelphia has a good bit of that). But I consider the small shop owners along Ogontz opening up in the morning, hustlers setting up their mix tapes to sell on Market Street underneath the El, and kids slap boxing on every other corner to be equally vibrant (and you will see this). Having a city where people grow up, go to school, and later live and work, adds a different flavor to it. It engenders a fierce allegiance and pride that many other cities lack. And that's why I prefer it to San Francisco.
P.S. GO PHILLIES!!!!!!
Last edited by BajanYankee; 07-19-2010 at 01:26 PM..
SanFran is a nicer city overall. That does not mean its a better city.
Take someone from SanFran and drop them off in Philly, and they would have to deal with brutal culture shock. Take someone from Philly and drop them off in SanFran and they would think they died and went to heaven, albeit a very expensive heaven.
The biggest difference between Philly and SanFran is the people. SanFran while nice, cannot compete with Philly when it comes to local character and culture, and thats what gives Philly the slight edge overall IMO.
As an SF native who has been to Philly many times, this comparison isn't really true at all. The cities are certainly different, but not that different, honestly. I don't know what "brutal" culture shock you think us SF residents would go through...
The main differences i noticed between the two towns was that Philly has more black people, and SF has more Asian and Latino people. Both have nice and bad neighborhoods...some of Philly's bad hoods are way more run-down looking than anywhere in SF, though SF's downtown is more gritty than center city Philly, and some parts of SF would be anything but "heaven" anyways, even to someone from say, North Philly... Both have plenty of nice affluent areas too, maybe SF has the edge there, I dunno. Also, if you think there's no "local character and culture" in SF, you're definitely wrong.
On the low alot of girls prefer guys like Philadelphia.
LOL. Yeah, that nice guy stuff doesn't work. If you haven't figured that out by high school, you're pretty much hopeless...LOL.
That is, until she's finished having fun with the badboy, and then offers herself to you as an older, less hot version of her former self who then wants to enjoy your six-figure bank account.
"Getting spanked?" You mean that in a figurative sense, I presume, right?
At any rate, this ultimately depends on what you think makes one city better than another. If San Francisco had a GDP 19 times that of Philadelphia's, had more than 16 times the office space of Philadelphia, and had 17 times more cargo arrive in its ports than Philadelphia, I still don't see how that would make the city any better than Philadelphia, or even how that would make much difference to everyday people. Maybe you would consider San Francisco better for those reasons, but personally, I would not enjoy living in a city where there are few if any families with children beyond the age of two. And that's because San Francisco, as beautiful as it is, is simply not a place to be for people who aren't rich. This gives the city a very transient and superficial quality. It's like one big, giant and plasticky adult urban playground.
Philadelphia, in contrast, is a city full of poor people, rich people, not so rich people, some doing-okay people, wealthy families, working families, single-mother families and beyond. Many have been there their entire lives and can recall memories of Connie Mack Stadium, the early Frank Rizzo days, and North Philadelphia as a completely intergrated and thriving area. The city is artsy, energetic, lethargic, creative, provincial, f*cked up, bombed out, eclectic, aggressive, warm, depressed, tough, rude, laid back, loud, progressive, conservative, corrupt, violent, beautiful, stressful, peaceful and proud all at the same time. If anything, Philadelphia's a city of contrasts, contradictions and oddities, and that's what has always made it so appealing to me (and many others as well) for so long.
I was born and raised within the city limits of Philadelphia. My mother and stepfather were both employees of the city, yet they could afford to buy homes in two solid middle class neighborhoods. In the Bay Area, they would not have been able to afford the types of houses we lived in, especially anywhere near the city. And it's not like we were deprived of cultural offerings because we lived in Philadelphia. It was quite the contrary. My sister was able to take free horseback riding lessons through a city-sponsored program at Fairmount Park, and still rides horses to this day. Had we not lived in Philadelphia, the program probably would not have been available to her, and it certainly would not have been free. That's the great thing about living in the city.
So, at the end of the day, it's about what you value. I think San Francisco is a lovely town, but the fact that the city, and a good number of its suburbs, are so exclusive really irks me. You may consider "vibrancy" as clubs, bars, and coffee houses, and that's certainly part of it (and Philadelphia has a good bit of that). But I consider the small shop owners along Ogontz opening up in the morning, hustlers setting up their mix tapes to sell on Market Street underneath the El, and kids slap boxing on every other corner to be equally vibrant (and you will see this). Having a city where people grow up, go to school, and later live and work, adds a different flavor to it. It engenders a fierce allegiance and pride that many other cities lack. And that's why I prefer it to San Francisco.
P.S. GO PHILLIES!!!!!!
Even though I have little love for Philly ( mainly due to the deplorable condition of many of its neighborhoods), this is a good post.
Well, after a brief interlude....the guy with the six-figure bank account..
Basically.
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.
