tacoito t1_is2eu26 wrote

See above 👆

I haven't lived in Charlotte or Nashville. Visiting a city for weeks doesn't give me enough experience to talk about living there.

Of the cities I mentioned above, I've enjoyed SF and SD the most, by a wide margin, for the reasons I stated.

Personally, since I have no kids and I'm under 50, the pros of living in SF with higher cost of living is worth it to me.

Another thing to consider. Buying and renting in SF are 2 different scenarios. I can rent an apartment in SF for 50% or what the mortgage would be. In Chicago, rent is 125% of what a mortgage would be.

I'm not prepared to purchase a condo/house in SF, burlt renting is worth it to me.


tacoito t1_is22uf4 wrote

I'm from a small town in FL

I've lived in:

  • Portsmouth, NH (2yrs)
  • Boston (2 yrs)
  • San Diego (4 yrs)
  • Chicago (4 yrs)
  • Tampa (5 yes)
  • SF (currently)

I understand the value of the small towns/cities. You can find happiness and a niche virtually anywhere. Also, city livability is shaped by a wealth of subjective preferences.

I find that the majority of people I've interacted with that hate on a particular city, don't live in the city at all. They haven't immersed themselves in the neighborhoods, don't explore, and can't deal with a particular element (cost of living, crime, politics, race, traffic, etc.).

To say SF isn't that great because it's unaffordable is missing the plot. If you removed "affordability" from the equation, a majority of people would chose to live somewhere like San Francisco due to it's intrinsic value.

  • Temperate weather
  • Breathtaking topography
  • Excellent public transit
  • Proximity to Wine Country
  • Diversity of culture (visitors from near/far)
  • Successful major sports markets (not exactly intrinsic)
  • Proximity to Ski/snowboarding (Tahoe)
  • Watersports/Sailing/Golf/Hiking/Biking

Those "best/brightest" have the mobility (through scholarships, salary, or generational wealth) that allows them to move to a place that has more intrinsic (albiet subjective) value.

Those smaller markets like Cincinnati, that don't have those same intrinsic qualities that make a coastal city more valuable to the majority of people, compete with markers like SF with lower cost of living, less traffic, up and coming food scenes, etc.

Earlier in my 20's I wasn't able to afford to live in SF. Now that I am able, I have found that SF does not suck.