New York or Los Angeles?

I know the two cities are expensive to live by. But that's exactly why I selected them. I know that both cities are wonderful, emblematic and beautiful. I also know that they are great American financial centers and offer all kinds of cultural diversity.

I want to know in which of the two cities would you rather live? And for what reasons you choose one. Or you may prefer to talk about their problems.

Imagine that you can have a good job and a good salary in one of the two.

does it have to be a large city?

I would say NYC.

main reason being its completely realistic in NYC to not own a car.

If I was young I would target a city around the size of Austin.

if I was old (which I am) I would select the country close to a 'micropolitan' sized city, which I am

for reference I lived in Houston for 30 years

OP has a hard-on for the US, go live your moderate American dream there with your 2009 camry.

I rather live in LA for these reasons.

• No freezing temperatures
• Legal Marijuana
• Beaches
• Palm tree's sounds weird but I always find them calming don't know why.
• Beautiful Westcoast sunsets

I would never live inside a city. I prefer having property and a nice big house. However, I'd probably choose New York City, as that is where most of my family stopped when they got off the boat from the Deutsches Reich.

Neither. You couldn't pay me enough to live in either one.

Come live in Atlanta Georgia! We have lots of girls, not too much expensive and we Southern Know how to party!!!

Also screw both NY & LA.

@davillain-: Are you guys illerate as Well?

Lol jkjk

I wouldn't live at either city. The states of California and New York have a lot more to offer than LA and NYC.

If I was to live in California, I'd pick South Lake Tahoe. I'd be 2 hours away from relatives in Nevada.

If I was to live in NY, I'd live at Alexandria Bay. I loved Alexandria Bay and the Lake Ontario area. A lot of the locals there have relatives at both sides of the border. We often got invited for pot lucks/parties with friends in Canada.

The places I mentioned both have great summer outdoor activities. Both have very snowy winters. But, the Lake Tahoe area would be better for those who like to ski.

NYC, probably. I like that it’s walkable.

San Francisco

My step-bro went to LA a few years ago and said it was an absolute dive. I have been to NYC when I was younger and that was busy AF but all right I guess. I would rather live in the suburbs.

For reference, I live in Worcester, UK, a small city :)

A rock or a hard place?

Better live in a good country.

San Diego - I have families in La Jolla, gorgeous place. Beautiful beaches and the temperature is the closest thing to heaven.

This coming from a New Yorker, who's lived for 34 years.

Name some.

LA

Not a fan of big cities in general but I'd say L.A. being a Californian already. Can't beat the weather and I can't see living anywhere I'd have to shovel snow. It's hard enough for me to work up the will to mow my lawn once a month.

Out of those two I’d say LA. The weather is insanely nice here, to the point where you’ll start to feel bad reading news of the rest of the country freezing their asses off as you are packing your car for a trip to the beach. Even winters are even keel.

On the other hand, they’ll be laughing as we get wrecked with high taxes, traffic and gas prices. I would choose San Diego over LA though.

I went to NYC last year and planning to go to L.A this year.

LA and it’s not close for me.

ny by FAAAR.

the few times i've been to LA the traffic has been a goddam nightmare. it felt like a sprawling mess of shit.

at least in NYC you can get by w/o a car quite easily.

though LA has much better weather, except when it decides to catch fire.

Both are in plastic america so I choose Bangkok

Detroit. It build character.

LA, mainly because it's on the west coast and in California there are awesome places like Lake Tahoe and Mammoth Lakes where I can shred during the winter :)

@littleangrydog: New York by a long shot.

If I ever had to live in a major city it would be New York, LA is fine and all but it´s not a city like NY.

NY. You get all seasons, a host of transit options (no car needed = more money in your pocket), and better social services.

I was born in Queens and I've spent time in LA. I wouldn't want to live in either, but if I had to choose I'd go with New York. There's so much in that city, as mentioned you can get around without a car, the pizza is great, you can find anything you want. The only downside compared to LA is if you -want- to own a car, the price of ownership is crazy high in the city. Having your own parking space could cost you $800 a month alone.

-Byshop

Minnesota is the correct answer.

Los Angeles is a big place, so you really need to be more specific. For the sake of this argument, let's just say you mean downtown'ish LA or within 20 minutes of it.

My answer is generally "anywhere but LA", so really if it's "Where should I live: LA or ____________?" the answer is generally going to be "___________". Of course, some people are like "Derrrrrrr even Baghdad is better? Mosul?" and to that I say "Don't be a prick, of course I don't mean that".

I mean I guess you can get used to LA, but honestly I don't see why anyone would move there. New York just seems better, but not by much. Both have wayyyyyyyyy too much people and concrete

I'd find somewhere in Northern California, maybe norther Southern California (no further south than Santa Barbara).

what!?

If you live in Manhattan, yeah. But also bear in mind that's on top of the 3k a month you're probably already paying for a 1 bedroom apartment.

-Byshop

@Byshop: Old thread is old, old man. Ya slippin Byshop XD

New York. I generally don't like high temperatures, anything above 80 is too hot for me. And LA just seems kinda, I don't know the right word, but not great. NY has Central Park, great bike and transportation services, legendary jazz, extremely diverse neighborhoods, and it seems like you could spend a lifetime there and still not see it all. I could definitely see myself living in a place like Greenwich Village, if I could afford the rent.

NewYork is love <3

This.

New York by far. Given the choice, I'd ideally live somewhere like San Francisco or Seattle, but NY is amazing.

In case you couldn't tell, I'm definitely a city person. :)

@toonlonk:

What's special about San Fran and Seattle? Seattle rains a lot I hear.

San Francisco holds more sentimental value to me aside from being a cool place to visit, as I was born there. It's an amazing and beautiful city, if a ridiculously expensive one.

Seattle enthralled me, despite its weather, with its rich variety of food, culture, and things to to. The Museum of Pop Culture and Pike Place were among some of my favorite things to do there. Plus, when the fog lifts, it is one of the most beautiful cities I have ever been to, especially with Mt. Rainier in the background.

walking in LA is faster than driving..

I dislike both states but I would go with LA. I dislike the East Coast in general, best decision I ever made was to move far away from it.

Seattle or Portland both seem like places I'd like to live. Like you said, both have great, diverse offerings of culture, food, and stuff to do. Love those forests, too (despite the scary be bears and panthers).

@shellcase86: "Seattle or Portland both seem like places I'd like to live. Like you said, both have great, diverse offerings of culture, food, and stuff to do. Love those forests, too (despite the scary be bears and panthers)."

Bears and Panthers? Oh My!

Anyway, isn't Seattle/Portland mostly white? I wouldn't call that diverse.

Los Angeles is by the coast. So, it has generally mild temperatures all year, usually 60's and 70's Fahrenheit. There are other cities that form the Los Angeles metropolitan area and located far into the warmer interior. But, they're not Los Angeles.

Right now, NYC is 74 degrees while LA is 64. ;)

I've been to NYC plenty of times when I lived at Upstate NY (until 2014). I'd take LA anytime, esp during winter.

I guess I always had an idea of LA being absolutely sweltering in the summer. I guess I could get down with that, though I'd miss the fall weather. Plus I just don't know if I could handle the sprawl. I do think I've got a kind of oddball mentality that would fit in well in California.

There are certain conditions for Los Angeles to swelter. The winds would have to be strong enough to come in from the east during the hottest part of the year. That would prevent the sea breeze blowing in from the ocean. It has happened in the past and whenever it did, it made headlines because many homes there don't have air-conditioning (just like in NY). But, it doesn't happen often. It takes specific weather patterns (usually not the norm) for sweltering conditions to occur along the LA coast.

The interior metro areas to the east do get hot because they're located along the coastal mountains. There, it's more normal to have the arid climate you're thinking of.

Of course, when we think of LA, we think of the coastal areas. ;)