3322 Market Views
Ranked by leisure attributes (the number of restaurants, bars, libraries, museums, professional sports teams, and park acres by population); educational attributes (public school performance, the number of colleges, and graduate degree holders), economic factors (2011 income and June and July 2012 unemployment), crime and air quality, Businessweek.com has named San Francisco America’s Best City in 2012.
San Francisco’s number one ranking is up from number nine in 2011, displacing Raleigh, N.C. atop last year’s list. That being said, “as the methodology has changed since the 2011 ranking, a city’s rise or fall compared with last year does not suggest that it has gotten “better” or “worse.” Whatever.
Oakland was ranked 31st out of the 100 cities evaluated while San Jose ranked 33rd. The rest of the top ten cities and San Francisco’s winning metrics by Businessweek’s counts:


Population: 808,854
Bars: 394
Restaurants: 3,430
Museums: 70
Libraries: 52
Pro sports teams: 2
Park acres per 1,000 residents: 7
Colleges: 17
Percent with graduate degree: 16
Median household income: $90,640
Percent unemployed: 7.8
Rounding out the top ten below San Francisco on Businessweek’s Best American Cities list: Seattle (2); Washington, D.C. (3); Boston (4); Portland, Oregon (5); Denver (6); New York (7); Austin (8); San Diego (9); and St. Paul, Minnesota at number ten.
America’s 50 Best Cities [businessweek.com]

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Oakland Chap

    8:14 PM and not one comment. Either those “plugged in” are out celebrating over this news or laughing so hard they can’t comment?

  2. Posted by BobN

    “Whatever.”
    I wonder if that bit of spin appears on previous realignments. Not that changing parameters doesn’t basically guarantee changes in outcome, it’s just that publications rarely mention it.

  3. Posted by luis

    san francisco is a great city , sure it has its hobos but it still has lots of things to see and do. It has several diverse and growing neighborhoods; SOMA, Union Sqaure, chinatown, mission, civic, and the outlying more chill areas. there are several job opportunities and prestigious universities only 20/35 mins away! The weather isnt extreme like NYC which has severe winters and scorching summers. its is somewhat small but hey good things come in small packages !

  4. Posted by Jim T

    Expected to see a lot of Smug emanating from the comment section of this post. Refreshing to see I was wrong.

  5. Posted by AnonInLincolnPark

    But what if you are single and make 165K a year like myself?
    I was able to keep my salary by moving to another branch of our firm in a much larger American city (Chicago), BUT, my cost of living is 1/3 what it was in San Francisco. I miss Northern California, especially regional trips to Sea Ranch, Big Sur and Napa, but I stil do this every couple of months, but can now afford to stay in hotels like the Ventana Inn and the Auberge so am I better off or not?
    I have recently been offered a position by another firm in San Francisco with 15% higher salary, but would it be worth it? What would you do if you owned a 3bd plus den victorian flat with garage in a neighborhood like Pacific Heights (Lincoln Park) and would have to go back to renting a 1bd in the Marina for the same cost?

  6. Posted by Dan

    AnoninLincolnPark:
    Sounds like you have two great choices . Of course you can live just fine as a single person on $190k a year in SF or on $165k/year in Chicago. Best of luck deciding what makes the most sense for you.

  7. Posted by anon

    I was waiting for the Chicago envy to break out as it always does (which is just completely bizarre to me – great city for sure, but absolutely unlivable weather).

  8. Posted by PN

    @AnonInLincolnPark: You’ve got it rough, man! I can’t imagine having to make that kind of decision… But having given it a little thought, I’d say the Marina is perfect for you.

  9. Posted by lyqwyd

    Overall San Francisco is a great city, but articles like these are completely meaningless to me. The number 1 city is a personal choice and these rankings really have no bearing on what anybody is going think about a place.
    There are tons of great things about San Francisco, but the weather isn’t one of them. The lack of any real summer is very bothersome to me. On the other hand I know some people who love the weather here, but I’ll take a nice hot summer over the wind and fog any day.
    That and the bums (combined with the overall filth & crime they bring) are my only two real complaints about this city. For me the other advantages of SF outweigh the disadvantages.

  10. Posted by lol

    lyqwyd,
    Agreed on your 2 complaints.
    The first one mitigates the second in more ways than 1 ;)

  11. Posted by anon

    Agreed on the meaninglessness of the article, lyqwyd. I’m like you in that there are two issues that drive me crazy about SF – the bums and the horrendous state of transportation infrastructure (too few taxis, too slow improvement of Muni, too much stuff reserved for cars at the expense of peds/transit/bikes/etc).
    The weather is the number one advantage of SF for me (aside from the “urbanness”) I can’t stand weather outside of the 50-75 range, and we’re pretty much the only urban city in the US that mostly stays within that zone of awesomeness. Seattle is close I guess, but a tad colder and quite a bit less urban.

  12. Posted by anon

    If I could have SF without bums and with San Diego weather it would be perfect for me. Oh and maybe a bit more politically balanced.

  13. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    “The number 1 city is a personal choice…”
    True, especially if you’re skilled in a profession that is location specific. The only people who can easily pick up and move to “the best” city are those with portable skills. Or people who have no job at all, which SF has plenty of.
    “The lack of any real summer is very bothersome to me.”
    Summer is just a 45 minute ride away east or south :-)

  14. Posted by Steve

    AnoninLincolnPark: Is your last name Romney? Get a clue. I make about the same as you and live very nicely in SF. Own a flat, eat out a lot, travel… and know that I’m far better off than most even here who still live good lives on much less $. Get out of your bubble and meet a few people who aren’t lawyers, investment bankers or techwads.

  15. Posted by jack

    I think AnoninLincolnPark may have different timing than Steve. Need to factor in when Steve’s flat was purchased, as well as how far each is away from retirement?

  16. Posted by etslee

    The sad thing is, from a global point of view, SF wouldn’t even hit the top 20.

  17. Posted by AnoninLincolnPark

    @Steve, I am a VERY liberal Democrat and was in Grant Park in Chicago the night Obama was elected. Being single, my taxes would be very easy for any “plugged in” person to figure out as well as my “take home” pay, and unless I am mistaken, 1 bd apartments in Cow Hollow and Marina with parking are renting for about $3,400 a month which is slightly more than my mortgage back here. From what my friends who still live in the city tell me, a studio in the Mission (with parking) recently rented for $3,300 A MONTH! BTW- for the record, San Francisco is my favorite city in the U.S. though my question still is, has this survey taken into account the cost of living there?

  18. Posted by anon

    The sad thing is, from a global point of view, SF wouldn’t even hit the top 20.
    Why is that sad? It’s a tiny city from a global point of view, though I’m not entirely sure that it wouldn’t hit the top 20. You may not travel much, but I guarantee that foreigners have a substantially higher opinion of SF than I think is warranted (and I’m pretty big pro-SF guy on most things). The city has a fairy tale quality among many Europeans and (especially) Asians that I can’t really explain.

  19. Posted by Anon1

    From a global perspective SF is an alpha city. Whether or not it is higher or lower than others at its level, and top 20 or top 30 orcdi, is subjective.

  20. Posted by anon

    has this survey taken into account the cost of living there?
    Why would it? The survey is about the “best”, not the “best on a per dollar basis”. Most things that are the best at one thing or another are priced at levels that may seem absurd for folks that don’t care to have the best of whatever that thing may be.
    For example, I like cycling casually, but I can’t understand why someone would pay $5000 for a bike when my $800 is pretty nice. But…many folks can see that difference and think that it’s worth it. Likewise, SF has the rare combo of urbanism and what I consider good weather. Many other folks agree, hence the high price. However, sounds like you don’t care about weather, so it seems absurd to pay a premium for SF over Chicago, a city that also has great urbanism.
    Sounds to me like you’re happier in Chicago, I’d stay there if I were you.

  21. Posted by lyqwyd

    @Steve
    I doubt cost of living was a factor
    @anon
    I feel you, personally it’s not the cold that I dislike about the weather here, it’s the lack hot weather, plus the wind, which is much worse than cold alone, especially when combined with fog.
    @MoD
    “Summer is just a 45 minute ride away east or south”
    Very true, and throw in North as well! But that’s what drives me nuts about the weather here. In the summer SF is often the coldest place in the continental US.
    On the other hand we can get some beautiful 70+ days in the dead of winter, which takes off some of my gripes about the weather, but there’s nothing like a nice hot summer when you can be in shorts and a t-shirt at midnight.
    But I definitely understand those who like SF weather, there’s some very distinct advantages, it’s just my personal preference for hot summers.
    @etslee
    What cities would be in your top 5 globally? It’s always nice to have a few new places to visit.

  22. Posted by Invented

    SF is a bunch of tiny villages of quaint wooden bungalows — and as a city has no real center, tempo, or urban grandeur. Disconnection and isolation of neigborhoods – perhaps its sublime time-standing-still quality. Noe, Cole Valley, Marina, Castro, West Portal, Potrero, Bernal — all unrelated ‘hoods separated by improbable topography and waves of immigrants & movements. But we are supported by an unstoppable & feverish twitter-fed competitive marketing machine that remarkably equates us with London, Paris, Los Angeles and other great cities.

  23. Posted by Fishchum

    “unless I am mistaken, 1 bd apartments in Cow Hollow and Marina with parking are renting for about $3,400 a month”
    Maybe, but that doesn’t mean you need to spend that much to get a 1BDR with parking in either of those neighborhoods.

  24. Posted by lyqwyd

    Of course I didn’t write that, just a troll.
    Not the first time we’ve seen it applied to various different people on this site. I’m sure the ed will remove it shortly, please don’t feed the troll in the meantime.
    [Editor’s Note: Referenced comment and references to such since removed; thank you for your understanding and levelheaded response. A change in the way we handle commenting is in the works.]

  25. Posted by DCR

    It’s all about what is important to you. To the guy making $165K and is single, that sounds like a lot of money to me and how you spend it is just down to personal needs. We (my wife and I collectively) make a little more than that and we have two kids to support but it all seems to happen one way or another and we still enjoy what the city has to offer. Oh to be single and making $165K – I’d eat out every night and replace my old motorcycle with a Multistrada in a heartbeat.
    The only strange metric to the article is the school ratings. Sure we have exceptional public schools like UCSF, and it looks like it also takes degrees of residents into consideration, but after just fighting through the SF Public School kindergarten fiasco, I am definitely surprised was a category SF scored well in.

  26. Posted by Robert

    Agree with lyqwyd.
    Good jobs, nice neighborhoods, and a cosmopolitan city is hard to beat. But apparently it’s easy to piss all over.

  27. Posted by Willow

    @ lyqwd. Glad that wasn’t u! I thought I was on sfgate there for a while…
    Usual suspects on this list. Weather is important to me and the east coast temperatures are far too extreme for my liking. Love Chicago but again the weather is bearable for about 3 months every year. I would perhaps consider a short term stint in DC.
    That really leaves Los Angeles as my only other serious long term option in the United States.
    Globally, Sydney, Melbourne or Vancouver come to mind. Strong economies with a relatively moderate climate.

  28. Posted by lol

    Willow,
    Vancouver? That’s 12 degrees north!
    How to figure when a movie was shot in Vancouver:
    The wet asphalt feel.
    Invented,
    This “bunch of tiny villages” is what makes it so attractive. This is the core of a 7M people area and yet you get to enjoy the perks of a small town.
    In 1 hour you can walk from the Haight to Cole to Duboce to the Castro to Noe to Bernal.
    Try that in LA.

  29. Posted by grove_cole

    10-15 min takes me from home to a world-class symphony/opera/ballet!!! Try this in LA-London-Paris-Moscow, name others…

  30. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    OK, time to crack out this transcript of an old article from a 1969 issue of Time: What Makes a Great City?. Kinda dated but a nice read.
    My current top ten would be:
    SF (entire bay, not just the 7×7)
    NYC
    Amsterdam
    Berlin
    Portland,OR
    Tokyo
    Paris
    London
    Yogyakarta
    Chicago
    And at the bottom would be certain sprawling cesspools found in the developing world. But it doesn’t seem fair to knock them as they really don’t have the resources to easily become great. So replace that with certain sprawling cesspools in the USA.

  31. Posted by lyqwyd

    And of course there’s the food, which I think is some of the best in the U.S., both in variety and quality.
    I’ve been to a number of cities in the U.S. and have yet to find a place that has better food than SF, although I think NY is about equal, but different.

  32. Posted by Anon1

    @invented,
    If you’re gonna scoff then that’s fine but back it up with something other than opinion. Los Angeles doesn’t belong next to London or Paris, by most ways people measure cities, for one. And your criticism of sf is disparate villages? LA is disparate towns and cities itself, obviously.
    Anyway, here is a sociological measurement system. And sf is highly rated globally: http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_city

  33. Posted by dissent

    San Francisco is not just a bunch of villages, it’s a bunch of micro climates.
    Potrero Hill weather is perfect.
    Summers are sunny, sunny, and breezy.
    Actually I don’t think of San Francisco as villages but as a cluster of ‘island cultures’.
    The different hills have a mentality and community feeling that is really focused on the hill. Up here I feel I live on an island.

  34. Posted by Sabrina

    AnoninLincolnPark: I’ve been in your shoes. I was single, in the same income bracket and lived in both SF and Chicago. I’m currently in Chicago however.
    You really have to ask yourself where you’ll be in 5 years. Will you be married? Your salary will go a lot farther in Chicago once the kids arrive. You can live really, really good in Chicago on the upper middle class income. That means you can fully fund your retirement AND your kids college education, if you so choose, and still have plenty left over to travel etc. My friends who remained in the Bay Area with children struggle to save because of the housing costs.
    I too miss Napa, Tahoe and being able to see the ocean. But the positives of Chicago outweigh the negatives when you look at the costs. But that’s just me. Everyone has to make their own choices.
    Also- I think Americans are spoiled by the level of food choices we have. I was in Istanbul last year and everyone was raving about its great restaurant scene but I didn’t see it. Even Chicago blows it away (not to mention SF, LA and NY.)
    P.S. I also love Chicago summers. Nothing like a warm weather thunderstorm. ;)

  35. Posted by sf

    But the weather sucks. SoCal wins.

  36. Posted by sf

    ^^posted too quickly..
    nowhere in SF can you walk around in a tank top (or topless) and shorts all day and night. Sorry, SF, but your weather is very undesirable for young, attractive people.
    SoCal definitely wins there also.
    Heck, even Sacramentons are better looking and have healthier glows.

  37. Posted by PDXer

    I recently moved from SF to Portland, taking a paycut for the same work, and at least so far, feel like my money is going a lot further.
    Of course all things being equal, I’d rather stay in SF for many obvious reasons. But we were barely getting by in SF and feel like there is more of an opportunity to grow wealth in Oregon (although unlike SF, probably not through housing investments).
    If we were longtime homeowners in SF, the calculus might be different, but as renters, it was just getting hard to keep up.

  38. Posted by anon2

    I thought I was the only one that noticed the “healthier glow” issue! Whenever I would go down to Palo Alto I would wonder why do people look “healthier” down here. Same for Southern California as well. I do think the constant heavy overcast skies and cool temperatures tend to create a very grey population that does somehow not have that “healthy glow”.

  39. Posted by sf

    Yeah, I moved out of the city 3 months ago after living there for 11 years (or my whole adult life). I live in Sacramento now and plan to move to socal in 1-2 years. Best decision I could have made. Everybody has remarked how much healthier, happier, and tanner I look. Theres something about the weather that gives you more energy and motivates you to go to the beach and play volleyball, go swimming, dancing, etc. I am so much more happy now. San Franciscans idea of a good time is playing on the computer and getting drunk. And yes, everyone is quite pasty. Yuck!

  40. Posted by Michael

    It’s not that hard to get a tan in SF, you just have to be dedicated to going to Dolores Park on the days it’s nice out. Everyone always asked if I went to a tanning salon and I was happy to inform them I never had.
    My tan was actually better in SF than it is here in LA because I wear shorts and tees most days now and end up with a bad farmer’s tan.

  41. Posted by lol

    There’s more than enough light/sunshine. Cycling 6 hours a week will give you a decent farmer’s tan.
    I do have that “healthy glow” all year long.

  42. Posted by patrick

    Why would you want to tan? It just gives you wrinkles and skin cancer.

  43. Posted by sf

    Maybe to those of you with poor genetics.

  44. Posted by REpornaddict

    “I live in Sacramento now and plan to move to socal in 1-2 years. Best decision I could have made. Everybody has remarked how much healthier, happier, and tanner I look. Theres something about the weather that gives you more energy and motivates you to go to the beach and play volleyball, go swimming”
    Beach?
    Sacramento??

  45. Posted by alex black

    If you folks in Chicago (my home town) are so enthralled with it over SF – why y’all readin’ a website about SF?

  46. Posted by anon

    The talk about tank tops and shorts and “healthy glows” is funny. I lived in San Diego in my 20s, and I certainly loved the cute girls in shorts and tanktops or less, and I loved surfing every morning. But as I reached about age 26, it got really old that the only thing anyone was interested in was the weather, and maybe sports. I just outgrew all the beach dimwits. Fun to look at and play with when I was 24, but really dull as I got just a bit older.
    I’ll take the SF crowd any day for their smarts and depth (sorry, the LA/San Diego crowd has little to nothing to offer on those fronts). And I’m a marathoner, so the SF weather is actually about as ideal for me as it could be. But it all depends what you value. If what’s really important to you is looking good in a tank top, then SF probably isn’t for you (Castro/Folsom crowd excepted, of course). That’s why things like “the best city” are pretty stupid.

  47. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    ^^^ I can’t speak about San Diego but if you’re not finding smart deep people in LA then you just haven’t met them yet. Despite its reputation as the capitol of superficiality LA attracts a lot of talented and interesting people.
    I do agree that “best city” is kind of silly though since not everyone wants the same.

  48. Posted by anon

    ^sure. The density of smart people is on a different scale here though. LA attracts a lot of smart people because it’s big. SF attracts a lot of smart people because lots of other smart people are already here. That’s a big difference and really makes for a wildly different social scene.

  49. Posted by sparky*b

    Whoa hold on there anon, I look really good in a tank top.

  50. Posted by hangemhi

    the shallowness of “sf’s” comment makes him perfect for SoCal. You apparently sat in your SF apt and sulked. Meanwhile this is the fittest city there is because people are so active – apparently not you. Driving from one end of the mall to the other end in Sacramento because it is too bloody hot to do anything else isn’t my idea of a great city.
    having lived most of my life in NYC i will never go back due to extreme weather, grime, traffic, access to snow/beaches/golf. and if you think SF is expensive you haven’t been to NYC in a while (or Sydney, Hong Kong and a slew of other more expensive cities)
    ps – summer is more like a 20 minute drive away, or a one hour sail, or a 20 min ferry, or 40 min on a bike. you can get to Sonoma is about 45 min and hardly need to go that far.

  51. Posted by moz

    If you want hot, sunny summers … move to Texas. You can get 100+ plus weather for 8 months straight. Plus electricity bills of $200 per month since you have to run the A/C 24 hours a day. You won’t be complaining about the fog anymore. You’ll be complaining about photochemical smog and your gas bills from having to drive everywhere.

  52. Posted by Don'tWorkInTech

    Agree with Milkshake, I find when attending parties in Los Angeles, especially the Westside, the diversity of people and what they do for a career is astonishing compared to S.F. There is a reason Los Angeles Airport says “Welcome to the Creative Capitol of the World”. The focus of San Francisco on Tech start ups is becoming rather boring to me as are the people. A little more arts, and a little less focus on money would do this city some good.

  53. Posted by Rillion

    I grew up in LA and much prefer the weather here. As for “healthy glow”, I know too many people that got skin cancer to look at someone with a tan and think “healthy” anymore.

  54. Posted by anon

    Perhaps it’s just my social circle, but I don’t see the overwhelming tech startup thing at all. I don’t really even know anyone who works in a startup, but I do know tons of biotech, finance, law, and education folks. And there’s just a much larger concentration of those jobs in SF than in any one area of LA or SD (probably more total jobs of at least some of those categories in each, but they’re spread out throughout the metros more than here).

  55. Posted by CSK

    For all you folks complaining about the weather here in SF…I just don’t get it.
    Its never (rarely) too hot, never too cold- certainly cool but NOT cold- never below freezing. Its a Mediterranean climate- its wonderful- you can grow things year round. Flowers bloom in February for gosh sakes…
    I guess perspective is everything…I have lived in MPLS, Buffalo, NY, Boston, Paris, Sacramento…-20f for weeks on end gets old…107f for weeks on end gets old…humidity in the 70-80% range for weeks on end gets old…mosquitoes for months on end get old…I have no screens in SF! Love it!
    Yes, the occasional “summer” day is nice…and easy to acquire- the temp practically rises 5 degrees for every 5 miles away from SF your drive…
    Go to San Rafael or East Bay Parks for the day- or for the best summer weather in the country go to Tahoe for the weekend…you might even get a thunderstorm.
    ..the first Christmas I was in SF it was 65 and sunny…I went to the beach…I was hooked.

  56. Posted by sf

    SF is a city of nerds. It use to be the cool capital decades ago. Long gone. I’ll take good loking, smart, AND socially capable over pasty, insecure, smarmy. And socially inept anyday.
    LA is a world class Alpha ++ city. It attracts EVERYBODY, not just co outer hobbyists.
    Of course, when I lived in SF, I was an arrogant *** too, because I had to keep justifying to myself why I spent so much money living in that dump.
    LA doesnt even think twice about SF. Heck, SF isnt even the dominant cityy in the BAY AREA.
    How was your beautiful summer weather today SF? Lol. Nuff said.

  57. Posted by sf

    So your response to the horrible SF weather is “SF weather is nit bad if you leave SF!”

  58. Posted by Anon1

    Sf isn’t the dominant city in the bay area, la is an alpha ++ city, it lost all its cool, blah blah blah. Bunch of silly nonsense. So you made a life decision. Good for you. People who go on and on comparing cities are precisely talking to themselves.

  59. Posted by sf

    On the subject of superficiality, SF is one of the most superficial cities on the planet. I read a while back that it has some of the highest concentrations of plastic surgery offices in the U.S. And the constant talk on this site about money, real estate, cars, jobs, etc. is extremely superficial.

  60. Posted by Anon1

    Oh yeah man. Sacramento and LA are real devoid of plastic surgery clinics. Ha. You’re funny.

  61. Posted by Macken

    @sf is on to something with wondering why everyone says the San Francisco climate is great because if they drive “only” 40 minutes north or south they can then experience sunshine and warmer temperatures.
    My favorite Bay Area weather is in Palo Alto, and when I lived down there I was always amazed driving north on 280 watching the temperature drop from 79 degrees to 59 degrees. As the sky grew dark near Daly City, I felt like I was literally driving from Summer into Winter whenever I visited “the city”.

  62. Posted by lol

    Traffic patterns on the 101 on week-ends just shows where people want to be. The SV is a boring stretch of suburbia. Sunny, but boring. I lived there 3 months. Never again.

  63. Posted by sf

    Only 15% of the Bay Area population choose to live in SF. most people do not want to “be” there.
    If you are going to make that justification, than LA is by far superior, just go look at their traffic.

  64. Posted by Pffft

    As for “healthy glow”, I know too many people that got skin cancer to look at someone with a tan and think “healthy” anymore.
    Yup!
    Of course, when I lived in SF, I was an arrogant *** too, because I had to keep justifying to myself why I spent so much money living in that dump.
    So now you’re an “arrogant ***” in another city. Good for you. We’re glad to be rid of you.

  65. Posted by Pffft

    Oh, and, btw, many who WANT to live in the city, can’t afford to live in the city, which probably includes YOU, sf, and that must be why you’re so bitter and angry towards San Francisco. If you can’t afford to keep up with the Joneses here, how’s that going for you in LA? Well, in East LA, that’s not a problem, so I’m sure you’re doing just fine.

  66. Posted by sf

    So much for SF not being superficial, lol!
    SF is just a silly city with horrible weather, ugly third rate architecture, and insecure little lemmings who cant stand that they are constantly being looked over in favor of their prettier sister to the south.
    Pfffft

  67. Posted by sf

    And its just a city, a specific coordinate on the planet, lighten up bro.

  68. Posted by Anon1

    Yes la strip mall architecture makes the heart sing. Good point.
    Heh. I actually like L A very much and have considered relocating there several times. But “sf” is picking funny little spots for his/her trolling.

  69. Posted by futurist

    Interesting comments. I just completed a 2 week road trip to some amazing cities, much smaller than SF but great nonetheless, including Santa Fe, Taos, Palm Springs.
    These are also great places to live. SF is what you make of it, both the good and bad.
    It’s very subjective to have SF be called “America’s Best City”..depends on so many factors.

  70. Posted by lyqwyd

    @sf
    For somebody who doesn’t even yet live in SoCal it’s strange to claim to be the expert on the differences.
    I may not find much value in Business Weeks rankings, but I’ll easily give it more credibility than yours.

  71. Posted by lol

    sf,
    maybe I should clarify:
    Go on the 101 or 19th street on a Sunday and see traffic moving north until late afternoon, then switching back southward.
    In traffic patterns SF compares with Paris. People work there on weekdays, and many come back on WEs.

  72. Posted by CSK

    @SF “horrible weather”
    Let me clarify- I think the weather in SF is perfect! not too hot not too cold…year round.
    IF you are one of those who thinks 60 and fog is “cold” and you need warmer weather you can easily obtain this and still live in City…either drive a very short distance…
    or wait for days like today.
    To proclaim SF’s weather as “horrible” smacks of either a troll or a very limited perspective.
    or both.

  73. Posted by sf

    It’s not cold. It’s frigid.

  74. Posted by inniasu

    Agree with Milkshake, I find when attending parties in Los Angeles, especially the Westside, the diversity of people and what they do for a career is astonishing compared to S.F. There is a reason Los Angeles Airport says “Welcome to the Creative Capitol of the World”. The focus of San Francisco on Tech start ups is becoming rather boring to me as are the people. A little more arts, and a little less focus on money would do this city some good.

  75. Posted by anon

    There is a reason Los Angeles Airport says “Welcome to the Creative Capitol of the World”.
    You’re correct, there is a reason. It’s called “marketing”.

  76. Posted by jpick

    I’ve lived in San Francisco and Chicago. Chicago is a bigger city with arguably more going on, as is NYC… But, SF is quite a bit more laid back and liberal than both of those. The weather is mostly ideal with no winter whatsoever. SF is actually a bit more urban and walkable than Chicago despite a smaller skyline. There is also this thing called the ocean, nature (forests, mountains) excursions to Yosemite, Tahoe, Napa, Sonoma, Big Sur, Kings Canyon, 5-6 hours to Los Angeles. I definitely see why the premium is higher than Chicago, which to me had miserable weather for half the year Nov-April and HORRENDOUS, don’t go outside for more than 10 minutes type weather in Jan/Feb, surrounded by cornfields, boring suburbs, and no topography for 100′s of miles. But hey if you like that, and I know many people who do, Chicago is a good fit for you. The weather, middle of midwest location and lack of non city related stuff wasn’t for me. I’d rather live in sprawled out Atlanta or much smaller Austin than Chicago because the weather and lack of nature or any outdoor culture there really bothers me.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *