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.
this is very close but im gonna go with philly, because of the mix in old and new style buildings. Like that COMCAST CENTER looks beast fora new building, and the liberty towers look good for old buildings.
That is important to me, i would always be fearful of waking up trapped under fallen debris. I find the two cities very equal except San Francisco has too many yuppie types which is annoying and Philly has too many ghetto types which is equally annoying.
A plus for Philly is it proximity to the rest of the country (the parts that count) while SF is too isolated and also too expensive. I vote Philly by a quarter of a mile.
That is important to me, i would always be fearful of waking up trapped under fallen debris. I find the two cities very equal except San Francisco has too many yuppie types which is annoying and Philly has too many ghetto types which is equally annoying.
A plus for Philly is it proximity to the rest of the country (the parts that count) while SF is too isolated and also too expensive. I vote Philly by a quarter of a mile.
How is SF "too isolated"? The rest of the bay "does not count"? Sac doesn't either? What about Las Vegas? LA? Reno?
A plus for Philly is it proximity to the rest of the country (the parts that count) while SF is too isolated and also too expensive. I vote Philly by a quarter of a mile.
On the other hand, SF is closer to a variety of natural environments where it's easy to get away with people. There are also a few smaller cities that are kind of interesting in and of themselves that are close by such as Santa Cruz, Sacramento, and Monterey.
On the other hand, SF is closer to a variety of natural environments where it's easy to get away with people. There are also a few smaller cities that are kind of interesting in and of themselves that are close by such as Santa Cruz, Sacramento, and Monterey.
I have been to Sacramento and there is nothing interesting about it. Philly also has close "get away" places in addition to the large and important cities that are a few hours drive. Every time I go to SF it seems like a delightful place to live where people really enjoy themselves. I also get the feeling that if the whole place fell into the ocean no outsiders would notice because it is so isolated from the rest of the country. Of course from some perspectives that isn't a bad thing.
I have been to Sacramento and there is nothing interesting about it. Philly also has close "get away" places in addition to the large and important cities that are a few hours drive. Every time I go to SF it seems like a delightful place to live where people really enjoy themselves. I also get the feeling that if the whole place fell into the ocean no outsiders would notice because it is so isolated from the rest of the country. Of course from some perspectives that isn't a bad thing.
Sacramento's a bit better than most people give it credit for--some of it has to do with people from San Francisco moving there and sprucing things up a bit.
And yes, Philly has getaway places. I've been to a lot of them in the region (I live in NYC), but I think SF definitely has a larger variety and possibly more spectacular bits.
SF is also pretty far from isolated because it's really international. It's not driving distance, but I feel like taking a flight out of the Bay Area is far more common than in Philadelphia.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,041,021 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler
Sacramento's a bit better than most people give it credit for--some of it has to do with people from San Francisco moving there and sprucing things up a bit.
With a possible addition of San Joaquin County, CA in the next year or two that will push for Sacramento County, CA joining the Bay Area far faster. It's all going to be the same CSA once everything pans out.
With a possible addition of San Joaquin County, CA in the next year or two that will push for Sacramento County, CA joining the Bay Area far faster. It's all going to be the same CSA once everything pans out.
Even if Sacramento gets into the CSA (which I think is unlikely for some to come), the region will still be fairly separated from the Bay Area because of its distinctive industry away from the Bay Area and its sheer apart-ness from the Bay Area in identity.
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.
