bceagles182 wrote:englawyer wrote:wadeny wrote:bceagles182 wrote:New York, Boston and Ithaca are all extremely different aside from the weather.
1. Ithaca is in the middle of nowhere. Aside from that, I don't know much about it other than the fact that I would be miserable there.
2. New York is the center of entire U.S. in terms of population, culture, the economy. It has a bit of everything. On one hand, you'll never be bored. On the other, it's very easy to get lost in the rat race. It's also very expensive but I can't imagine that bothering you too much if you're from Cali.
3. Boston is by and large a blue colar town. It's much smaller, cheaper, and less flashy than NYC and has a more homely feel.
Uh, Boston itself may be much smaller than NYC, but its metro area has 4.5+ million people, so I would say that's pretty big. It also can be fairly pricy (more so than NYC) and upscale in some areas, including parts of Newton, Wellesley, etc. Some of the more immediate suburbs in South Boston are "blue collar," but every city has those types of areas. From the way I see it, the big differences between Boston and most other cities is: its unusually large educated population (there are dozens of universities in the area beyond Harvard, MIT, BC/BU, etc) and its historical feel (being close to Plymouth and other towns with colonial history).
Also, Ithaca has much worse weather than either NYC/Boston. It is much farther inland and can get lake effect snow like Syracuse and Rochester. NYC/Boston are along the coast, so unless a Noreaster hits as it might in the next couple days, the winters are a little more mild (relatively speaking).
Boston is not more pricey than NYC; that is absurd. the ritzier areas of Boston are still nothing like Manhattan price-wise. i think our (Boston) premium housing is much cheaper, and so is our normal housing. you can get a decent condo in Cambridge convenient to the T for 300-400k; that would be impossible to find in brooklyn or really any of the desirable areas of NYC. Rent-wise they are actually pretty comparable but it is much cheaper to buy in Boston.
Boston is also way smaller than NYC; after all, even the entire metro area is less than half the population of NYC proper. Boston proper has a population of around 1/2 million.
Boston proper is significantly smaller population-wise than each of the five borroughs of NYC with the exception of Staten Island which doesn't really count.
It is also significantly cheaper. This is true for litlerally every demographic. You can't find a decent appartment in NYC for under 1k a month. You can (pretty easily) in Boston. The most expensive areas of Boston don't even remotely approach the cost of an appartment with a view of Central Park. Furthermore, rent aside, the COL in New York is through the roof in comparison to Boston.
No need to get feisty. If you look more closely at my initial post, I just said that "some areas" of Boston can be more pricey than NYC; obviously, if you're looking to rent a large apartment in Manhattan, the price will usually be much higher. But correct me if I'm wrong, BC's law campus, for example, is located in a really expensive area - so for the purposes of a law student, it "could" be more expensive in some cases.
Also, I don't disagree that Boston itself is much smaller than NYC (again, I said this in my initial post). I simply disagreed with bceagles' interpretation that Boston is largely a "blue collar town." While some parts of the city might resemble this, (having lived in the Boston metro for nearly 10 years) I feel it is a fairly large, diverse metro area. Is it larger and more diverse than NYC? No, but that doesn't mean it is a blue collar town either.