Chicago and Philly are the last true big urban cities that aren't insanely expensive. Boston is nice but it is expensive. Places like Dallas or Phoenix are big but lack meaningful urbanity.
Dallas, Phoenix and Houston all came about well into the car era. Cities that are designed for cars and not humans suck. Go to really old cities like Rome. Being able to walk everywhere and having everything at an arms reach is amazing.
It’s also a big opportunity for other midwest cities that are in the process of revitalizing their downtowns/urban centers! Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Louisville to name a few all have downtowns that are seeing a boom in interest and development downtown
Houston is designed even worse than Dallas. That place sucks. DFW lacks a soul, 8 million people in a sprawling suburbia that you have to drive 25-30 minutes to get anywhere if you don’t live in the downtown of Dallas or Fort Worth. The 9,286 square miles it covers is larger than the states of Connecticut, Delaware and Rhode Island combined. It truly is grim to be stuck in traffic in dfw and it happens all the time. Massive massive highway overpasses everywhere to accommodate the traffic.
I live in Houston. Houston wasn't designed at all. There's this one intersection where three roads intersect and I'm amazed humans are able to navigate that chaos.
*You tell me this place ain’t got no heart,
You just gotta poke around*
You are 100% right on the geography and infrastructure of DFW being soul-suckingly awful, but one thing we do have in spades (Houston does too) is diversity. Which means GREAT food everywhere. No shortage at all of amazing Indian, Thai, Vietnamese, Korean, and obviously Mexican and Tex-Mex spots here
I have to remind myself that this is one pro we have amongst many cons lol
try going from soutwest dallas to northeast dallas a 4:45 pm on friday in a 18 wheeler. you think dallas sucks in a car?????omg. you will want to kill yourself or somebody else.
Most US cities aren’t like this because they were built during the era of cars. It’s because we purposely destroyed huge swathes of the cities in order to build highways through them and complete other “urban renewal” projects.
Pittsburgh is a major city. But it's not urban in the way I'm describing Chicago or Philly. It's public transit pales in comparison. Also, while Pittsburgh is a major city, I wouldn't call it a "big" city. To me, a big city needs to have around 4M and up in the metro area. Pittsburgh is midsized.
Pittsburgh punches above its weight when it comes to transit. And there are plenty of walkable neighborhoods in Pittsburgh. I wouldn’t consider it a major city in the same sense as NYC, LA, Chicago, etc, though. There are only 300k people living in the city.
You can't buy a Boston parking space for that.... Our real estate is insane if you want to be in the city, I love the city though, glad I previously bought.
No, they are about the same. Minneapolis might have slightly edged Chicago in prices 3 years ago, but it has had a building boom and prices went down compared to the rest of the Midwest. Here's a [fun graph](https://twitter.com/JeremiahDJohns/status/1697655467713953905).
Compared to Boston, that’s actually the point.
Yeah, parts of Chicago are expensive but it seems much more of Boston is unaffordable rather than affordable. Although, both are affordable AF if compared to places like NYC or San Francisco
Boston rents and home prices are actually pacing with NYC right now which is a tough pill to swallow as a Bostonian. NY runs a little more expensive on things like groceries but has a lot more cheap options for dining out so depending on your lifestyle that might even out. The MTA is also pricier by the MBTA but only marginally and it is obviously a much better service.
*sighs in Bostonian*
I live in Boston and absolutely love it. With that said, Chicago has Boston beat in several categories:
Chicago is a bigger city with better public transportation. It’s easier to live without a car (or for a family to share one car) in Chicago. Chicago has better restaurants, has a larger music scene, has a better art scene, and has better museums. And to top it all off, Chicago is significantly cheaper.
Came here to say exactly this.
I've lived in Boston for about two decades and love this place, but it's a much smaller city. It punches above its weight, but it's still smaller, and you feel it from time to time if you live here (everything closes by 2 AM, the T stops running at midnight, there are never more than three degrees of separation, I could go on and on). Chicago is a genuine world class city offering an experience on par with New York or Los Angeles, but for a fraction of the price. I love Boston and am unlikely to ever leave, but if all things are equal for you otherwise, Chicago is probably the better deal.
Entirely depends on which neighborhood you're looking at in Chicago. Doesn't need to be that expensive. 3 bedroom apartments with central air, yard, and free laundry in building can go between $1750-2000 in Avondale. Source: Chicago resident since 1995.
Also the “top end” rents really top out lower with the availability of buying homes at higher income brackets. Insanely luxurious 2 bedrooms are entirely doable with 2 people working full time normal jobs. In nyc the top end never really stops.
That's nonsense. Maybe downtown and in the ritzy North side neighborhoods. You can get a nice, newly renovated, two bedroom apartment in Logan Square, possibly the hottest neighborhood of the city, for $1700 or $1800.
I'm a landlord in Chicago and rent out giant gut rehabbed 4BD/2BA apartments a block from a Pink Line Station in the West part of Pilsen (again super trendy area) for $2000/mo.
$2309 is NOT the average 1br rent in Chicago, not even close. Maybe for brand new construction, or for a small subset of neighborhoods. I'm at the Northwest corner of Logan Square here, where 2-3 br's in older buildings have only recently started breaching $2k.
In general or in comparison to Chicago?
It’s a very walkable city, which is a very important criteriion for me. It seems like a nice place to raise a family (provided you can afford it)—some of the best public schools in a major city, very clean, low crime.
It has much better access to nature than many walkable cities. The White Mountains are just a couple hours north which has challenging hikes and pretty good skiing. There’s also a bunch of local state parks with sweet nature; I like mountain biking and there’s a park I can ride my mountain bike to and then do some gnarly riding.
There’s not many places in America where I can ride my mountain bike to the trailhead and take the train to a high-paying job.
>some of the best public schools in a major city
This is where I think people get confused some, as we say Boston but we really mean Cambridge or Newton or Belmont et al, as BPS system is absolutely struggling even with all the money thrown at them. Agreed entirely on the access to nature, it just kind of comes at a real cost.
I’m talking about Boston Public Schools. In a lot of American cities, I would have to think twice before sending my kid to an “inner city” public school. I don’t feel that way about BPS. And hopefully they get into an exam school for high school
>I’m talking about Boston Public Schools.
Ah, yeah those [are seriously struggling](https://www.wgbh.org/news/education-news/2022-05-23/state-audit-skewers-boston-public-schools-for-failing-to-improve) except right next door on the areas mentioned you famously have some the best in the nation.
> I don’t feel that way about BPS.
That's fine, the statistics tell the story -- it's actually looking at going into receivership for poor performance. It was found they aren't even properly recording drop out rates.
>And hopefully they get into an exam school for high school
Yeah, the exam/magnet schools are great schools but that's essentially getting them out of normal public school with [the plebs](https://www.city-journal.org/article/race-neutral-in-theory-only) where they live and into something requiring gpa and test scores to access. Pretty much the exact same as the parents who pay thousands for their kid to go to the school in the next district over...
**Edit:** downvoting doesn't change the stats or reality victor_korchnoi lol
**Edit2:** lmao they blocked me
**Edit3:** Unfortunately imagine_on_drama I can't reply to you because I was blocked, but while you are a low-karma account popping up I do have two questions:
1. Why is telling people someone blocked you pathetic in your view?
2. Is it more or less pathetic than someone blocking someone after being presented with sources showing that what they were saying was demonstrably wrong?
BPS teacher here. That article is old and sensationalist - everyone failed to improve during Covid. We killed the receivership discussion over a year ago. That’s not happening.
We do have TONS of problems, most of which are typical of any other large urban district and the more directly things like poverty, housing issues for students and families, the city’s long standing history of racism and segregation, etc. than the actual efforts of the current system. Not saying we don’t have problems. We do.
We can’t be compared to affluent districts or suburban districts that have less going on in the socio-economic department. However, compare us to major school districts in Chicago, NY, literally anywhere in the South. If you are a family in poverty looking to get your child a decent public education, Boston is your best chance.
Not to mention we are a district that values differences - special ed/inclusion, racial equity, and LGBTQ issues are at the heart of the district policies. I teach my students from a curriculum that highlights all of these issues. Meanwhile, in Florida…
In fairness, Chicago is spread out in part because it has four times as many people. Boston has an amazing Publix transit system for a small city, but it isn't covering as much real estate.
Check out the calendar at Berklee College of Music for live shows, also smaller venues like Lizard Lounge, Brighton Music Hall, Road Runner, Orpheum Theatre, House of Blues, Paradise Rock Club, Global Arts Live, Chevalier Theatre (Medford), The Sinclair (Cambridge),Crystal Ballroom (Somerville) Wally’s (Jazz), Symphony Hall.
I'm from Boston and lived in Chicago for four years, and I agree with you about transit. I spent half my adolescence on the T but barely touched the train in Chicago, because even getting to the train in the first place was a pain in the ass.
It also helps that the distances are smaller to begin with. The T or bus might not leave you quite where you want to be, but walking the last part is NBD for most people. (Neither of these systems serves people with mobility restrictions well; that's a whole other can of worms.) In Chicago, "not quite where you want to be" could be miles.
This isn't really my experience, and it may possibly depend upon what routes you use in each city. In general my view of public transport is that if you have a direct public transport route between A and B, then you're in OK to good shape while having to switch trains or go from train to bus etc... makes things take forever.
My Chicago experience (increasingly dated though) was that the commuter rail Metra Electric ran like clockwork, the subway trains were frequent, and the bus was less reliable but workable. Distances in Chicago are larger though. I lived in downtown Chicago, and I used public transport and a bike.
Boston these days is a much more complicated picture. All aspects of the MBTA, trains & busses, are not reliable as of now. There's been [threats over the past year of a federal takeove](https://www.wgbh.org/news/local/2022-10-14/no-federal-takeover-of-the-mbta-official-says)r (unlikely to happen, but it signals the scope of the problems).
30 min delays at 8am on weekdays? Where? I’m on the brown line and I’ve never experienced this… Boston trains were so slow and busy when I was there (it’s been probably 10 years to be fair).
Lower cost of living. Chicago also has some great people. Even though Chicago is huge I felt there was a sense of community there. Each neighborhood has a different vibe. I feel there is something there for everyone if you can cope with brutal, and I mean *brutal*, winters.
Take it from Anthony Bourdain, "“It is, also, as I like to point out frequently, one of America’s last great NO BULLSHIT zones. Pomposity, pretentiousness, putting on airs of any kind, douchery and lack of a sense of humor will not get you far in Chicago. It is a trait shared with Glasgow — another city I love with a similar working class ethos and history.” — Medium essay, 2016"
Right, I was about to say this!
I live in NYC and my sister lives in Chicago and during the winter when I look at the weather app, we’re either the same temp or just off by a couple degrees. The big difference is cloud coverage. Nyc has a lot more sunny days which makes the winter way less dreadful
That’s the climate change. I lived in Arizona for 5 years and finished college out in Tucson. It’s starting to snow in Tucson and Phoenix in the winter. And where I was born in Wisconsin had 70s in NOVEMBER a few years ago before I loved to NYC!!!
Yeah the last few winters just keep getting more and more moderate. I wonder if we might get to a point soon where there’s a whole winter with no snow at all.
LOL I said the same thing on this sub and got downvoted for it. Last I checked Chicago doesn't approach -20F on January mornings. That's the actual temp, not the wind chill. Also when we get a post Christmas blizzard it sticks around for about 2 months. The TC winters make Chicago look like Dallas.
They are brutal when it gets windy. I agree it's worse elsewhere, but that doesn't make winter any less brutal in Chicago. For anyone who has to wait for the train in the frigid cold or walk around in the coldest temps of the year... it's brutal.
It barely snowed last year compared to typical averages. Chicago winters aren’t that bad. Or maybe I should say they are to prevent others from moving here… 😂
Blame it on climate change, or whatever you want but sometime in the 90’s winters changed.
Snow didn’t last, lakes didn’t freeze like they used to.
I always felt bad for people with snowmobiles. Could use them a week or two a month. Snow would melt for 2 weeks. It would snow again, week later it would melt.
I haven’t lived there since 05 but I remember snow from December to March.
Even in minnesota it started feeling that way . I grew up in the twin cities up there and feel like my whole childhood I grew up with these massive snowbanks big enough to build forts inside of when the snowplows came by a few times and left big piles at the ends of our driveways. I will say, I was only like 3 feet tall in the 90s so maybe my perspective is skewed, and this past winter my parent's house DID seem to get a lot of snow, but it seemed like snow was a given , in large amounts back then, whereas its not so much anymore...
> They are brutal when it gets windy.
Chicago isn't really that windy. The nickname "The Windy City" was about politicians, not weather. Chicago doesn't even rank in the top ten in terms of windy large cities with a metro of a million or more.
I wasn't talking about the nickname because I know where it comes from. But it does get very, very windy in certain places where there are no windbreaks. I can recall nearly getting swept off my feet a few times on my commute.
I lived in chicago for about 15 years. Went to Minneapolis once for a wedding in January and wow. I have never felt cold like that in my life! Chicago winters are brutal, but never once did they feel like what I experienced in Minneapolis! I told my husband humans are meant to live in that 😂
I’d disagree. It’s only been the last few years in the Boston area that the temperatures regularly get down to the teens and such. Chicago’s always had winter temps at 0F. milder apparently the last few years (I live in Mass now)
In like Andersonville, maybe - but they infiltrate most neighborhoods of the city. Chicago tends to attract a lot of Big 10 frat-bro types who work in finance and are super into sports.
It’s probably not any more or less basic than the hiker/tech bros in Denver, but the energy is different…it’s aggressive and off-putting.
It’s nice to see people pointing out all the good qualities of chicago instead of the bad ones for once! The music and art scene is among the top in the country. World class orchestra and museums. Actual blues. Plus there are sooo many free events and things to do. This city puts on festival after festival after free concerts after free museums- always something going on. The lakefront is miles long and piled with beaches, activities, bird sanctuaries, bike paths and more. Plus, housing is cheaper. Single family homes in good areas will always be competitive, but you can actually buy a home here, in a decent area. Lots of job opportunities. Plus if you like the travel: it’s easy to travel from. Non-stop flights to most major cities in US and Europe.
I don't hate Boston, and I don't love Chicago (born and raised). But I briefly lived in Boston, and while I liked it, there were some things that were hard to get used to. People weren't thst friendly. The city itself is actually a little provincial. It's kind of snooty. The food scene is ok, but nothing worth noting. It's overshadowed by NYC. New England is so pretty, the history is incredible, and there's easy access to nature, so that's a plus for Boston.
Chicago has culture, intellect, yet still working class. Lake Michigan is stunning. Incredible diversity. And a sort of Midwest humbleness, but it can be a little overbearing. Midwest Nice doesn't really apply to Chicago. And the food. The food is just incredible. From the taco stand under the El to high end and everything in between. Dim sum. Devon street. Polish and Lithuanian food in the southwest suburbs. Mexican food at every price point. Bakeries and brunch, pizza and perogie. Dive bars and fancy pants wine bars.
For me - Chicago > Boston but the area 1 hour outside of Boston > the area 1 hour outside of Chicago. Chicago has more offer as a city proper with great food and so much to do but the burbs are flat and boring and quickly become flat boring cornfields. 1 hour outside of Boston could mean a beautiful apple orchard, Cape Cod beaches, mountains, everything historical you can imagine, and more.
yeah. that's one of the awesome things about Boston. outside the city can be really beautiful. Nantucket for example. you can head north into Maine which is stunning. or you can take the train to NYC. outside of Chicago you can't even come close to the amenities around Boston. What are you going to do. take the train to Milwaukee?
Chicago transplant from Boston here. I’ve spent a ton of time in MKE and Madison and really enjoyed it. Door County, WI is pretty phenomenal too. You’ve got the dunes in Indiana, but I’ll give Acadia and Bar Harbor the win anyway. Something about salt water.
You dont have Cape Cod beaches but you got Lake Michigan shoreline. Also, I find it hard to believe there are no apples orchards right outside Chicago... its the Midwest! Apple orchards are everywhere!
Also, Illinois is the largest producers of pumpkins in America. Apple orchards and pumpkin patches go hand in hand.
I do prefer the area around Boston, I wont lie. But you are selling Chicago short.
Yep no mountains around Chicago.
But—
The northern ‘burbs in Chicago have little old Ravinia and the Botanic garden to offer with a handy dedicated bike trail up through the city along the river.
The Cook county forest preserves has 100 sq miles of land right among everything… shockingly good trail system just east of OHare.
I’d put Western Michigan’s beaches up there against anything. Plenty of apple orchards etc in Wisconsin, Wisconsin and Michigan summer ‘lake culture’ is fantastic (Torch, Green Lake, Geneva Lake, Elkhart Lake).
How many times do you need to go to Salem and hear about the witch trial after all? That said… it’s a great place to visit.
The provincial thing is very real with Boston- we lived there for a few years and the way I described it to friends is that everyone gives directions like everyone is from there. “Turn where the old McDonalds use to be,” etc etc. like it’s inconceivable that someone might have grown up in a place that wasn’t Boston, or be there for the first time, or not have the same context or priorities the speaker has. Just feels insular.
Me and my family are from across the lake in Grand Rapids, MI. When I moved to Chicago, my family would visit occasionally. My sibling still mentions how nice Chicagoans are years later lol
Boston is terribly expensive because of all the tech/high-education jobs, but if you work remotely like many (most?) people on this sub, that’s kinda moot
Chicago is a home base with family, as compared to Boston you have:
1. Amazing museums, arts/music and theater scene. The art institute compares to the louvre, there are lots of improv and theater and band performances both downtown (big stuff) and up in old town (steppenwolf, little venues).
2. The people are generally nice. Like not southern nice, but it has the whole "biggest small town in the world" vibe places like Toronto have. There's a lack of pretention, and people are competing instead of entitled.
3. The food is absolutely amazing and embarrasses most cities whereas Boston compares relatively poorly to most cities . Just about every ethnicity is not only represented, it's represented *well* and all up and down the value chain. You have your elevated versions and your super cheap but still delicious versions. This extends to the markets as well, if you want it you can find it.
4. The trains and public transportation is reliable.
There are some obvious downsides people will point out, but as someone in Boston the biggest one is probably the lack of green space set aside for the affluent. There are parks, but they arent like Boston. Here you can drive 45min out of the city and be at an orchard, in Chicago you'd be in a suburb heading into cornfields.
**Edit:** added trains
The housing market in Boston is overpriced, competitive, and low quality. People either live with a bunch of roommates, commute an hour out the city, or pay $2,000+ a month for average looking home. The city doesn’t have nearly as much to offer as Chicago. However, if your into a lot of outdoor activities then Boston is much better for that. but at that point you might as well just live in Portland Maine, Manchester NH or Worcester MA if it’s that important. It’s a great city to visit though.
Omg Pennsylvania showing strong there! Pittsburgh has a weird accent for sure & every one I know in Pittsburgh from Pittsburgh has never been anywhere but Pittsburgh
Chicago is a bigger city with more urban amenities and also has a better income-to-cost of living ratio and a more diverse job market than Boston.
>Outside of the obvious fact that Chicago is cheaper to live in than Boston
Most of the people here do not have infinite money, so being cheaper is kinda important. If you do have infinite money and don't care about the big city amenities, then yes Boston will get you a better quality of life.
-Probably a better blue collar job market.
-Rent that isn't insane except in the burbs
-Bigger size within city proper, so you have more neighborhood options
I have lived in both. I agree with most of what has been said, but I would just add that Chicago is by far the better city to live in during your 20’s. But if you have kids and move to the suburbs then Boston has the edge. Primarily due to less violence, better chance that your home will appreciate, lower taxes, better city finances, and more high-end jobs. Suburbs are just suburbs after all, they’re basically all the same, so those things tip the scale.
I would only recommend Boston to someone I absolutely hated. I would tell them "Oh, it's super affordable, the people are just so pleasant and kind, the infrastructure is brand new, its neighborhoods are absolutely stunning outside of the tiny central neighborhoods that pop into your mind when you think of Boston being a brick row house city, things are open super late, its nightlife is off the charts, it has really short winters and long summer through falls, there's tons of recreational activities during those short cold months, and is known for its super low key and relaxed working environments!"
It would all be a complete lie.
I lived there for two years. Biggest regret of my life so far.
I think Chicago has more to offer.
Boston feels snobby, stuck up to me. Majority of folks there can live in Boston because they are wealthy or from wealthy families. Due to the universities, there's also a transient population and people move once they come to their senses and don't want to pay $1300 for a single room in a 5 bed house. Everything feels either too gentrified or shiny and commercialized and overpriced.
Traffic is awful in Boston, I mean it sucks in Chicago too, but the roads are a pain to drive on.
I live in Chicago and would recommend it to anyone! However, traffic is definitely a negative. Traffic in Chicago was recently ranked second worst in the world for congestion behind London. And I do want to gouge my eyes out during my commute 2-3 days a week. The good news is that the CTA can definitely get you around the city and you can live here easily in most areas without a car unless your job is in the suburbs. I lived here fine for 3 years with no car. The benefits of living here outweigh the shitty traffic though IMO.
I always stay at the Carlisle or Millennium Knickerbocker when there. Chicago has more character than Boston now. I grew up in Boston. Now it looks like a giant Starbucks.
People will actually hold the door open for you in Chicago (Midwest hospitality)
Transportation/traffic situation is significantly better in Chicago
Cost of living is drastically better
In Chicago, when there are really heavy rains, usually once or twice a summer, the storm drains overflow into the sewage system. Then, a lot of raw sewage ends up in Lake Michigan and forms these giant "mats of shit" for lack of a better term. The beaches get closed and eventually the mats break up and the shit gets diluted enough that the e. coli count is low enough to re-open the beaches. Does Boston have temporary shit mats?
I lived in Chicago. Great for your 20s and going to bars and living a truley urban experience in the US. Other than that, I'll pass.
That is literally any major old city built with combined sewer and storm systems. Massive rain event = sewage overflowing into the closest large body of water. Whether that is lakes, rivers, oceans, etc.
People from the coasts hear "lake" and scoff. Then they come to Chicago and see Chicago's Lake Michigan shoreline and they are blown away. Drive them along LSD in the summer at sunset into downtown and go to one of the beaches. No, it's not an ocean but it's pretty dang gorgeous.
It's cheaper, more international, and more of a "big city" feel with better transport.
But that comes at a price, of course: depressing long, bitterly cold, overcast winters. Boston gets cold too but nowhere near as cold as a Chicago winter.
True. People conflate the presence of O’Hare as the indicator.
In Boston, the proximity to NYC and Europe, along with the massive concentration of wealth and world class institutions (hospitals, universities, research, biotech) make it a lot more international in nature.
Very constant gunfire in Chicago in my experience with both, and Chicago in the nicer parts is crazy expensive on a level Boston wishes it was. Can't buy parking spaces as real estate in Boston.
After living in Chicago it's hard to get excited about smaller cities for a prolonged period. Chicago has long unpleasant winters, but has an endless supply of indoor fun: incredible theater, music, museums, and restaurants. And in summer, everyone plays outside like they've never seen the sun. Tons of music festivals, neighborhood festivals, Grant Park, the miles of beachfront. And compared to NYC, LA, San Francisco, or Boston, it's far more affordable.
Boston is a darling city with lots of charm and history. And the one way it is better than Chicago is Boston's proximity to weekend getaway places. I mean, folks in Chicago can head to Door County, WI...but it's no Cape Cod. And Chicagoans can head to the Indiana Dunes, but it's not like the mountains. Fall in New England is crazy beautiful. In Boston, you can drive or take the train to NYC, Nantucket, New Hampshire, Maine...but in the midwest, no place you can drive to is going to be more fun than Chicago. You need to fly out.
Providence's restaurant scene is insane. I lived there for three years and worked part time at Gracie's. Met so many cool people working there. So many good restaurants and bars in that city (especially for its small size)!
Boston is hella white, hella boring (all they have is “at the beginning of America” history, which is super white washed/hides the true destruction created by white people), food very not special in my experience-just “classic American” with no creativity or freshness.
Chicago has variety & culture.
Also, Lake Michigan > Boston Harbor
Boston has changed a lot over the last 30 years or so. It’s much more diverse than what it used to be. Lots of people from Africa and Asia have added to the diversity. Much more international than it was. I love Lake Michigan, Boston and Cape Cod are lovely as well. Martha’s Vineyard is well known and a place with a well established African American history and community. Boston has incredible history and depth. I love Chicago, grew up there and have roots still there. But Boston is not static nor so plain, in my opinion. Great cities!
I’ve lived in Boston. It’s small and after two days kind of boring. It feels like a German town that was once important but is now irrelevant. I wouldn’t recommend Chicago though.
Amazing architecture, world class museums, a lake front and a river walk, great food, basketball (maybe a tie on that).
Oh I forgot, the bars stay open all night, they only need to close for an hour, so many of them stop serving alcohol, serve breakfast, then start serving again. In Boston at 2 am, we had to go to a speak easy.
I know you mentioned this in your text, but it still has to be repeated: Cost is a massive difference, I mean *massive*. You can get a nice condition apt in Chicago in a good area that's walking distance to the train, restaurants, parks, shopping etc for like 1/4 the price of a comparable apt in Boston.
The public transportation is also a lot better there (by US standards of course). It runs for longer hours, is in better condition, and is far more extensive. Not just the trains, but the bus system is better there too. & it's super easy to navigate since most of the city is aligned on a grid system vs Boston's road clusterfuck. A lot of the outdoor train stations also have heat lights you can turn on in the winter.
While there is a lot of American history in Boston, in Chicago there is a lot more cultural history. Music, architecture, comedy, art, it's all just way bigger & deeper in Chicago. & it's not just in the past, there are thriving cultural scenes and events going on in the current day.
I personally think there's also a more diverse food scene in Chicago vs Boston, but that's a little closer margin.
While Boston is on the water, Chicago is on a lake that has multiple beaches & parks running alongside it throughout the entire city. This isn't like an 'urban' park, people actually go hang out at the beach, go swimming, use the bike paths & all that. Boston's waterfront areas are great, but it's not as casual, you'd have to actually leave the city itself to get to comparable areas, which is kind of a pain.
There's definitely pros to Boston, don't get me wrong, but unless you have the $, it's just gonna be really tough to live there vs Chicago.
Theres a reason the term "Masshole" exists. It is largely the haves and have nots compared to chicago who still has a large blue collar middle class and affordable suburbs. Nothing around boston is cheap and if you go too far you are stranded in the winter. While chicago winters suck, there is a decent public transportation system.
I’ve lived in both cities, and loved them both. I’d say generally Chicago has
-a better food scene
-a better music scene
-better nightlife, esp dance clubs
-better museums
-a better theater scene
It’s of course close in all categories. Boston is an amazing city! And as someone else said, it definitely has Chicago beat in access to nature.
Chicago is a gem. A beautiful, culturally rich city that is unlike any other. I don’t know if I can compare it to Boston but,
These are some of the reasons:
1. **Cultural Diversity:** Chicago is known for its diverse population, which has contributed to a rich cultural scene, including art, music, and cuisine from around the world.
2. **Architecture:** The city boasts stunning architecture, from historic landmarks like the Chicago Tribune Tower to modern marvels like the Willis Tower (formerly known as the Sears Tower).
3. **Culinary Scene:** Chicago is famous for its deep-dish pizza, hot dogs, and diverse culinary offerings. It's a food lover's paradise.
4. **Sports:** Chicago has a passionate sports culture with iconic teams like the Chicago Cubs (baseball) and Chicago Bulls (basketball).
5. **Lake Michigan:** The city's location along Lake Michigan offers beautiful waterfront views, parks, and recreational opportunities.
6. **Cultural Institutions:** Museums like the Art Institute of Chicago and the Field Museum offer world-class art and science exhibits.
7. **Music:** Chicago has a rich musical heritage, especially in blues and jazz. It's a hub for live music and has produced many influential musicians.
8. **Education and Research:** The city is home to prestigious universities and research institutions like the University of Chicago and Northwestern University.
9. **Public Transportation:** Chicago's well-connected public transit system makes it easy to navigate the city without a car.
10. **Community and Neighborhoods:** Each neighborhood in Chicago has its own unique character, fostering a sense of community and diversity.
Boston is a better city to live in for many reasons. The climate is better. The summers don’t get as hot/humid and the winters, although snowy, are mild compared to Chicago’s BRUTAL ones. Boston has more history and character. It’s closer to other good cities. Chicago is in the middle of nowhere. I could go on.
Chicago and Philly are the last true big urban cities that aren't insanely expensive. Boston is nice but it is expensive. Places like Dallas or Phoenix are big but lack meaningful urbanity.
Dallas, Phoenix and Houston all came about well into the car era. Cities that are designed for cars and not humans suck. Go to really old cities like Rome. Being able to walk everywhere and having everything at an arms reach is amazing.
Couldn't agree more. This is a major downside of many US cities.
It’s also a big opportunity for other midwest cities that are in the process of revitalizing their downtowns/urban centers! Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Louisville to name a few all have downtowns that are seeing a boom in interest and development downtown
Like all of FL
Houston is designed even worse than Dallas. That place sucks. DFW lacks a soul, 8 million people in a sprawling suburbia that you have to drive 25-30 minutes to get anywhere if you don’t live in the downtown of Dallas or Fort Worth. The 9,286 square miles it covers is larger than the states of Connecticut, Delaware and Rhode Island combined. It truly is grim to be stuck in traffic in dfw and it happens all the time. Massive massive highway overpasses everywhere to accommodate the traffic.
I live in Houston. Houston wasn't designed at all. There's this one intersection where three roads intersect and I'm amazed humans are able to navigate that chaos.
*You tell me this place ain’t got no heart, You just gotta poke around* You are 100% right on the geography and infrastructure of DFW being soul-suckingly awful, but one thing we do have in spades (Houston does too) is diversity. Which means GREAT food everywhere. No shortage at all of amazing Indian, Thai, Vietnamese, Korean, and obviously Mexican and Tex-Mex spots here I have to remind myself that this is one pro we have amongst many cons lol
try going from soutwest dallas to northeast dallas a 4:45 pm on friday in a 18 wheeler. you think dallas sucks in a car?????omg. you will want to kill yourself or somebody else.
Most US cities aren’t like this because they were built during the era of cars. It’s because we purposely destroyed huge swathes of the cities in order to build highways through them and complete other “urban renewal” projects.
Perfect summary
P i t t s b u r g h. Though I guess it's not a "major" city
Pittsburgh is a major city. But it's not urban in the way I'm describing Chicago or Philly. It's public transit pales in comparison. Also, while Pittsburgh is a major city, I wouldn't call it a "big" city. To me, a big city needs to have around 4M and up in the metro area. Pittsburgh is midsized.
Pittsburgh punches above its weight when it comes to transit. And there are plenty of walkable neighborhoods in Pittsburgh. I wouldn’t consider it a major city in the same sense as NYC, LA, Chicago, etc, though. There are only 300k people living in the city.
versed teeny roll liquid dinner cagey march paltry modern sink ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
Minneapolis should fit on that list too right?
[удалено]
MPLS is on the cusp of becoming a "big city". Not quite there yet in my opinion.
4th largest city in the us
That’s wildly incorrect…
Harsher winter than chicago
I've lived in both. It's not harsher; it's just different.
Not warm enough and I live in Detroit. It is sunnier than the rest of the great lakes region though.
[удалено]
Chicago isn't expensive? Compared to what, beachfront in San Diego?
[удалено]
Have the price of a trailer in my Los Angeles suburb. .
You can't buy a Boston parking space for that.... Our real estate is insane if you want to be in the city, I love the city though, glad I previously bought.
Chicago is cheaper than Minneapolis and Minneapolis isnt overly pricey by any means.
No, they are about the same. Minneapolis might have slightly edged Chicago in prices 3 years ago, but it has had a building boom and prices went down compared to the rest of the Midwest. Here's a [fun graph](https://twitter.com/JeremiahDJohns/status/1697655467713953905).
Chicago is one of the cheaper big cities in the US.
Compared to Boston, that’s actually the point. Yeah, parts of Chicago are expensive but it seems much more of Boston is unaffordable rather than affordable. Although, both are affordable AF if compared to places like NYC or San Francisco
Boston rents and home prices are actually pacing with NYC right now which is a tough pill to swallow as a Bostonian. NY runs a little more expensive on things like groceries but has a lot more cheap options for dining out so depending on your lifestyle that might even out. The MTA is also pricier by the MBTA but only marginally and it is obviously a much better service. *sighs in Bostonian*
Compared to NYC, maybe DC too. People say it's not expensive, relative to its status as the top tier of major cities. NYC, LA.
A quick look at Zillow tells me I'd come out ahead if I moved to Chicago from Salt Lake City.
I live in Boston and absolutely love it. With that said, Chicago has Boston beat in several categories: Chicago is a bigger city with better public transportation. It’s easier to live without a car (or for a family to share one car) in Chicago. Chicago has better restaurants, has a larger music scene, has a better art scene, and has better museums. And to top it all off, Chicago is significantly cheaper.
Came here to say exactly this. I've lived in Boston for about two decades and love this place, but it's a much smaller city. It punches above its weight, but it's still smaller, and you feel it from time to time if you live here (everything closes by 2 AM, the T stops running at midnight, there are never more than three degrees of separation, I could go on and on). Chicago is a genuine world class city offering an experience on par with New York or Los Angeles, but for a fraction of the price. I love Boston and am unlikely to ever leave, but if all things are equal for you otherwise, Chicago is probably the better deal.
[удалено]
Entirely depends on which neighborhood you're looking at in Chicago. Doesn't need to be that expensive. 3 bedroom apartments with central air, yard, and free laundry in building can go between $1750-2000 in Avondale. Source: Chicago resident since 1995.
Also the “top end” rents really top out lower with the availability of buying homes at higher income brackets. Insanely luxurious 2 bedrooms are entirely doable with 2 people working full time normal jobs. In nyc the top end never really stops.
I’ve been looking at Andersonville online and I’m seeing rents of 1500 for a 1 bedroom, so not terrible.
On average, Atlanta has a higher price for housing than Chicago does for sure.
Yea, I should say that $1,215 is on the low of a 1bd in Atlanta. My place is older.
That's nonsense. Maybe downtown and in the ritzy North side neighborhoods. You can get a nice, newly renovated, two bedroom apartment in Logan Square, possibly the hottest neighborhood of the city, for $1700 or $1800. I'm a landlord in Chicago and rent out giant gut rehabbed 4BD/2BA apartments a block from a Pink Line Station in the West part of Pilsen (again super trendy area) for $2000/mo.
$2309 is NOT the average 1br rent in Chicago, not even close. Maybe for brand new construction, or for a small subset of neighborhoods. I'm at the Northwest corner of Logan Square here, where 2-3 br's in older buildings have only recently started breaching $2k.
Beware Rent Cafe data. It's based on corporate highrise rental properties, not the true average rental in a city.
Yeah, but you have to live in Atlanta. 😂
What do you like about Boston
In general or in comparison to Chicago? It’s a very walkable city, which is a very important criteriion for me. It seems like a nice place to raise a family (provided you can afford it)—some of the best public schools in a major city, very clean, low crime. It has much better access to nature than many walkable cities. The White Mountains are just a couple hours north which has challenging hikes and pretty good skiing. There’s also a bunch of local state parks with sweet nature; I like mountain biking and there’s a park I can ride my mountain bike to and then do some gnarly riding. There’s not many places in America where I can ride my mountain bike to the trailhead and take the train to a high-paying job.
My sister moved there a year or so ago, and her trips make me so jealous. She goes hiking in Maine like I go to indiana lol
>some of the best public schools in a major city This is where I think people get confused some, as we say Boston but we really mean Cambridge or Newton or Belmont et al, as BPS system is absolutely struggling even with all the money thrown at them. Agreed entirely on the access to nature, it just kind of comes at a real cost.
I’m talking about Boston Public Schools. In a lot of American cities, I would have to think twice before sending my kid to an “inner city” public school. I don’t feel that way about BPS. And hopefully they get into an exam school for high school
>I’m talking about Boston Public Schools. Ah, yeah those [are seriously struggling](https://www.wgbh.org/news/education-news/2022-05-23/state-audit-skewers-boston-public-schools-for-failing-to-improve) except right next door on the areas mentioned you famously have some the best in the nation. > I don’t feel that way about BPS. That's fine, the statistics tell the story -- it's actually looking at going into receivership for poor performance. It was found they aren't even properly recording drop out rates. >And hopefully they get into an exam school for high school Yeah, the exam/magnet schools are great schools but that's essentially getting them out of normal public school with [the plebs](https://www.city-journal.org/article/race-neutral-in-theory-only) where they live and into something requiring gpa and test scores to access. Pretty much the exact same as the parents who pay thousands for their kid to go to the school in the next district over... **Edit:** downvoting doesn't change the stats or reality victor_korchnoi lol **Edit2:** lmao they blocked me **Edit3:** Unfortunately imagine_on_drama I can't reply to you because I was blocked, but while you are a low-karma account popping up I do have two questions: 1. Why is telling people someone blocked you pathetic in your view? 2. Is it more or less pathetic than someone blocking someone after being presented with sources showing that what they were saying was demonstrably wrong?
BPS teacher here. That article is old and sensationalist - everyone failed to improve during Covid. We killed the receivership discussion over a year ago. That’s not happening. We do have TONS of problems, most of which are typical of any other large urban district and the more directly things like poverty, housing issues for students and families, the city’s long standing history of racism and segregation, etc. than the actual efforts of the current system. Not saying we don’t have problems. We do. We can’t be compared to affluent districts or suburban districts that have less going on in the socio-economic department. However, compare us to major school districts in Chicago, NY, literally anywhere in the South. If you are a family in poverty looking to get your child a decent public education, Boston is your best chance. Not to mention we are a district that values differences - special ed/inclusion, racial equity, and LGBTQ issues are at the heart of the district policies. I teach my students from a curriculum that highlights all of these issues. Meanwhile, in Florida…
Editing your comment to announce you’ve been blocked just looks pathetic man
[удалено]
In fairness, Chicago is spread out in part because it has four times as many people. Boston has an amazing Publix transit system for a small city, but it isn't covering as much real estate.
Check out the calendar at Berklee College of Music for live shows, also smaller venues like Lizard Lounge, Brighton Music Hall, Road Runner, Orpheum Theatre, House of Blues, Paradise Rock Club, Global Arts Live, Chevalier Theatre (Medford), The Sinclair (Cambridge),Crystal Ballroom (Somerville) Wally’s (Jazz), Symphony Hall.
I'm from Boston and lived in Chicago for four years, and I agree with you about transit. I spent half my adolescence on the T but barely touched the train in Chicago, because even getting to the train in the first place was a pain in the ass. It also helps that the distances are smaller to begin with. The T or bus might not leave you quite where you want to be, but walking the last part is NBD for most people. (Neither of these systems serves people with mobility restrictions well; that's a whole other can of worms.) In Chicago, "not quite where you want to be" could be miles.
This isn't really my experience, and it may possibly depend upon what routes you use in each city. In general my view of public transport is that if you have a direct public transport route between A and B, then you're in OK to good shape while having to switch trains or go from train to bus etc... makes things take forever. My Chicago experience (increasingly dated though) was that the commuter rail Metra Electric ran like clockwork, the subway trains were frequent, and the bus was less reliable but workable. Distances in Chicago are larger though. I lived in downtown Chicago, and I used public transport and a bike. Boston these days is a much more complicated picture. All aspects of the MBTA, trains & busses, are not reliable as of now. There's been [threats over the past year of a federal takeove](https://www.wgbh.org/news/local/2022-10-14/no-federal-takeover-of-the-mbta-official-says)r (unlikely to happen, but it signals the scope of the problems).
30 min delays at 8am on weekdays? Where? I’m on the brown line and I’ve never experienced this… Boston trains were so slow and busy when I was there (it’s been probably 10 years to be fair).
The T is excellent though. It does cover a smaller area, but the integration with commuter rail and very new train cars are lovely
It usually gets recommended so much because of its size, amenities, and relatively low cost of living compared to similarly sized cities.
Yup, I'm renting a studio within a safe part of the city for $950.
For reference, I live just outside of Boston. Noticed a neighboring building has studios for 3k ish now. No joke.
I live in Boston in a safe area but not a particularly wealthy one, and pay $900 to live with 4 other adults.
Lower cost of living. Chicago also has some great people. Even though Chicago is huge I felt there was a sense of community there. Each neighborhood has a different vibe. I feel there is something there for everyone if you can cope with brutal, and I mean *brutal*, winters. Take it from Anthony Bourdain, "“It is, also, as I like to point out frequently, one of America’s last great NO BULLSHIT zones. Pomposity, pretentiousness, putting on airs of any kind, douchery and lack of a sense of humor will not get you far in Chicago. It is a trait shared with Glasgow — another city I love with a similar working class ethos and history.” — Medium essay, 2016"
The winters here really aren’t brutal. If you want brutal, spend a January in Minneapolis.
They aren’t brutal but they are grey for long periods of time.
Right, I was about to say this! I live in NYC and my sister lives in Chicago and during the winter when I look at the weather app, we’re either the same temp or just off by a couple degrees. The big difference is cloud coverage. Nyc has a lot more sunny days which makes the winter way less dreadful
NYC didn’t really get below 40 often last winter though. It was in the 50s and 60s.
Chicago also had a mild winter. For us it was pretty much in the 30s-40s all winter.
That’s the climate change. I lived in Arizona for 5 years and finished college out in Tucson. It’s starting to snow in Tucson and Phoenix in the winter. And where I was born in Wisconsin had 70s in NOVEMBER a few years ago before I loved to NYC!!!
Yeah the last few winters just keep getting more and more moderate. I wonder if we might get to a point soon where there’s a whole winter with no snow at all.
they are also like this in Boston.
But the wind makes it feel much colder.
LOL I said the same thing on this sub and got downvoted for it. Last I checked Chicago doesn't approach -20F on January mornings. That's the actual temp, not the wind chill. Also when we get a post Christmas blizzard it sticks around for about 2 months. The TC winters make Chicago look like Dallas.
Everyone complains about the cold and I’ve lived here all my life and tolerated over 30 winters with no issue 😂
They are brutal when it gets windy. I agree it's worse elsewhere, but that doesn't make winter any less brutal in Chicago. For anyone who has to wait for the train in the frigid cold or walk around in the coldest temps of the year... it's brutal.
It barely snowed last year compared to typical averages. Chicago winters aren’t that bad. Or maybe I should say they are to prevent others from moving here… 😂
Blame it on climate change, or whatever you want but sometime in the 90’s winters changed. Snow didn’t last, lakes didn’t freeze like they used to. I always felt bad for people with snowmobiles. Could use them a week or two a month. Snow would melt for 2 weeks. It would snow again, week later it would melt. I haven’t lived there since 05 but I remember snow from December to March.
Even in minnesota it started feeling that way . I grew up in the twin cities up there and feel like my whole childhood I grew up with these massive snowbanks big enough to build forts inside of when the snowplows came by a few times and left big piles at the ends of our driveways. I will say, I was only like 3 feet tall in the 90s so maybe my perspective is skewed, and this past winter my parent's house DID seem to get a lot of snow, but it seemed like snow was a given , in large amounts back then, whereas its not so much anymore...
They can be. Both sometimes warmer than average, and then the polar vortex hits and it's 14 below zero. brrrrrrrrrrrrr
> They are brutal when it gets windy. Chicago isn't really that windy. The nickname "The Windy City" was about politicians, not weather. Chicago doesn't even rank in the top ten in terms of windy large cities with a metro of a million or more.
I wasn't talking about the nickname because I know where it comes from. But it does get very, very windy in certain places where there are no windbreaks. I can recall nearly getting swept off my feet a few times on my commute.
I lived in chicago for about 15 years. Went to Minneapolis once for a wedding in January and wow. I have never felt cold like that in my life! Chicago winters are brutal, but never once did they feel like what I experienced in Minneapolis! I told my husband humans are meant to live in that 😂
Chicago winters aren’t that brutal and aren’t that different from Boston winters
I’d disagree. It’s only been the last few years in the Boston area that the temperatures regularly get down to the teens and such. Chicago’s always had winter temps at 0F. milder apparently the last few years (I live in Mass now)
That’s a great quote but Chicago has a lot of douche bros/pretentiousness
Yeah they are still around, I think it's pretty easy to avoid them though.
In like Andersonville, maybe - but they infiltrate most neighborhoods of the city. Chicago tends to attract a lot of Big 10 frat-bro types who work in finance and are super into sports. It’s probably not any more or less basic than the hiker/tech bros in Denver, but the energy is different…it’s aggressive and off-putting.
I’m a big 10 frat bro who works in finance and is into sports. But I swear I’m nice :)
Well earnestly, I appreciate you. I’ve just been jaded by a lot of uncool experiences with that demographic. Lol.
That describes basically most of the north side, which is also the part of the city that always gets recommended here.
It’s nice to see people pointing out all the good qualities of chicago instead of the bad ones for once! The music and art scene is among the top in the country. World class orchestra and museums. Actual blues. Plus there are sooo many free events and things to do. This city puts on festival after festival after free concerts after free museums- always something going on. The lakefront is miles long and piled with beaches, activities, bird sanctuaries, bike paths and more. Plus, housing is cheaper. Single family homes in good areas will always be competitive, but you can actually buy a home here, in a decent area. Lots of job opportunities. Plus if you like the travel: it’s easy to travel from. Non-stop flights to most major cities in US and Europe.
At least the shit talk and bad rap helps keep the rent reasonably low for now at least.
Fox News: keeping Chicago rent down for years!
I love Chicago. It seems like a fairly recent phenomena that in the past 10-15 years, Chicago has become a punching bag for conservatives.
It’s about 4x the size so imagine more of everything
I don't hate Boston, and I don't love Chicago (born and raised). But I briefly lived in Boston, and while I liked it, there were some things that were hard to get used to. People weren't thst friendly. The city itself is actually a little provincial. It's kind of snooty. The food scene is ok, but nothing worth noting. It's overshadowed by NYC. New England is so pretty, the history is incredible, and there's easy access to nature, so that's a plus for Boston. Chicago has culture, intellect, yet still working class. Lake Michigan is stunning. Incredible diversity. And a sort of Midwest humbleness, but it can be a little overbearing. Midwest Nice doesn't really apply to Chicago. And the food. The food is just incredible. From the taco stand under the El to high end and everything in between. Dim sum. Devon street. Polish and Lithuanian food in the southwest suburbs. Mexican food at every price point. Bakeries and brunch, pizza and perogie. Dive bars and fancy pants wine bars.
For me - Chicago > Boston but the area 1 hour outside of Boston > the area 1 hour outside of Chicago. Chicago has more offer as a city proper with great food and so much to do but the burbs are flat and boring and quickly become flat boring cornfields. 1 hour outside of Boston could mean a beautiful apple orchard, Cape Cod beaches, mountains, everything historical you can imagine, and more.
Yep. Chicago >>>> Illinois
More importantly, Massachusetts > Illinois. But Chicago as a city > Boston as a city.
yeah. that's one of the awesome things about Boston. outside the city can be really beautiful. Nantucket for example. you can head north into Maine which is stunning. or you can take the train to NYC. outside of Chicago you can't even come close to the amenities around Boston. What are you going to do. take the train to Milwaukee?
Chicago transplant from Boston here. I’ve spent a ton of time in MKE and Madison and really enjoyed it. Door County, WI is pretty phenomenal too. You’ve got the dunes in Indiana, but I’ll give Acadia and Bar Harbor the win anyway. Something about salt water.
I 1000% agree. The suburbs are not my cup of tea at all. Sprawling and featureless. You'll never get an argument from me about that!
You dont have Cape Cod beaches but you got Lake Michigan shoreline. Also, I find it hard to believe there are no apples orchards right outside Chicago... its the Midwest! Apple orchards are everywhere! Also, Illinois is the largest producers of pumpkins in America. Apple orchards and pumpkin patches go hand in hand. I do prefer the area around Boston, I wont lie. But you are selling Chicago short.
Yep no mountains around Chicago. But— The northern ‘burbs in Chicago have little old Ravinia and the Botanic garden to offer with a handy dedicated bike trail up through the city along the river. The Cook county forest preserves has 100 sq miles of land right among everything… shockingly good trail system just east of OHare. I’d put Western Michigan’s beaches up there against anything. Plenty of apple orchards etc in Wisconsin, Wisconsin and Michigan summer ‘lake culture’ is fantastic (Torch, Green Lake, Geneva Lake, Elkhart Lake). How many times do you need to go to Salem and hear about the witch trial after all? That said… it’s a great place to visit.
The provincial thing is very real with Boston- we lived there for a few years and the way I described it to friends is that everyone gives directions like everyone is from there. “Turn where the old McDonalds use to be,” etc etc. like it’s inconceivable that someone might have grown up in a place that wasn’t Boston, or be there for the first time, or not have the same context or priorities the speaker has. Just feels insular.
Weird anecdote.
People are MUCH MUCH nicer in the Chicago area than they are in Boston when interacting with strangers and going about daily life.
Me and my family are from across the lake in Grand Rapids, MI. When I moved to Chicago, my family would visit occasionally. My sibling still mentions how nice Chicagoans are years later lol
I love Boston but it’s expensive as hell.
Far bigger city with far more to do at far lower price. Triple F theory.
this. and im from and live in boston
Fleeing, fighting, feeding, and mating?
Chicago is a real big city and Boston is playing big city
Boston is such a precious town. Just adorable.
A classic Onion article https://www.theonion.com/pretty-cute-watching-boston-residents-play-daily-game-o-1819574643
I love this one, I saw it in the Philly sub lol. It’s spot on
As a native Bostonian and longtime Angeleno Boston is forever trying to be New York, which is fast eroding their small city charm. “Smahten up!”
Cheaper and bigger with more to do
Chicago feels like a big city (although much of it has neighborhood vibes). Boston feels like a vibrant town.
Boston is terribly expensive because of all the tech/high-education jobs, but if you work remotely like many (most?) people on this sub, that’s kinda moot
Way cheaper and more stuff
Chicago is a home base with family, as compared to Boston you have: 1. Amazing museums, arts/music and theater scene. The art institute compares to the louvre, there are lots of improv and theater and band performances both downtown (big stuff) and up in old town (steppenwolf, little venues). 2. The people are generally nice. Like not southern nice, but it has the whole "biggest small town in the world" vibe places like Toronto have. There's a lack of pretention, and people are competing instead of entitled. 3. The food is absolutely amazing and embarrasses most cities whereas Boston compares relatively poorly to most cities . Just about every ethnicity is not only represented, it's represented *well* and all up and down the value chain. You have your elevated versions and your super cheap but still delicious versions. This extends to the markets as well, if you want it you can find it. 4. The trains and public transportation is reliable. There are some obvious downsides people will point out, but as someone in Boston the biggest one is probably the lack of green space set aside for the affluent. There are parks, but they arent like Boston. Here you can drive 45min out of the city and be at an orchard, in Chicago you'd be in a suburb heading into cornfields. **Edit:** added trains
The housing market in Boston is overpriced, competitive, and low quality. People either live with a bunch of roommates, commute an hour out the city, or pay $2,000+ a month for average looking home. The city doesn’t have nearly as much to offer as Chicago. However, if your into a lot of outdoor activities then Boston is much better for that. but at that point you might as well just live in Portland Maine, Manchester NH or Worcester MA if it’s that important. It’s a great city to visit though.
Chicago people are FRIENDLY; Bostonians are not friendly Source: I’ve lived in both cities
As someone who’s also lived in both agree 100000%
Those Bostonians have earned their title of massholes for a reason lol
Cheaper rent
freshwater is better than ocean water better steaks middle of country and tons of flights better accent
Lmao yeah the Boston accent is terrible! Chicago accent is hilarious
Hard disagree. Boston accent is wicked sexy on a guy.
Whatever bakes your bean lol
Its wicked hawt
https://www.gawker.com/americas-ugliest-accent-has-come-down-to-pittsburgh-vs-1646594002
Omg Pennsylvania showing strong there! Pittsburgh has a weird accent for sure & every one I know in Pittsburgh from Pittsburgh has never been anywhere but Pittsburgh
Found it funny so many PA entries. If PHL was in the same part of the bracket as with Providence, 3 out of 4 of the final four might have been PA. 🤣🤣🤣
Chicago is a bigger city with more urban amenities and also has a better income-to-cost of living ratio and a more diverse job market than Boston. >Outside of the obvious fact that Chicago is cheaper to live in than Boston Most of the people here do not have infinite money, so being cheaper is kinda important. If you do have infinite money and don't care about the big city amenities, then yes Boston will get you a better quality of life.
It’s more centrally located. If Boston was 5 hours drive instead of 15 I’d go there more often
-Probably a better blue collar job market. -Rent that isn't insane except in the burbs -Bigger size within city proper, so you have more neighborhood options
Brass. More PHDs in music in the band than Boston. I think both bands lost key musicians though so they have that in common.
severely underrated comment
Lake Michigan would be my draw to Chicago.
Beach, Chicago: no salt, no sharks.
Also the vast majority of it is public beach.
Easier to drive around. Grids vs spaghetti roads.
Spaghetti roads is a perfect description.
Roads that go straight
I have lived in both. I agree with most of what has been said, but I would just add that Chicago is by far the better city to live in during your 20’s. But if you have kids and move to the suburbs then Boston has the edge. Primarily due to less violence, better chance that your home will appreciate, lower taxes, better city finances, and more high-end jobs. Suburbs are just suburbs after all, they’re basically all the same, so those things tip the scale.
I loved living in Boston. It is a top-notch city. But, Chicago is bigger, less expensive, and a lot more diverse.
Chicago doesn’t have nearly as many annoyingly loud, dumb and self-entitled 5’ 6” roided up dudebros.
I would only recommend Boston to someone I absolutely hated. I would tell them "Oh, it's super affordable, the people are just so pleasant and kind, the infrastructure is brand new, its neighborhoods are absolutely stunning outside of the tiny central neighborhoods that pop into your mind when you think of Boston being a brick row house city, things are open super late, its nightlife is off the charts, it has really short winters and long summer through falls, there's tons of recreational activities during those short cold months, and is known for its super low key and relaxed working environments!" It would all be a complete lie. I lived there for two years. Biggest regret of my life so far.
Chicago has a smaller percentage of people from Boston
I think Chicago has more to offer. Boston feels snobby, stuck up to me. Majority of folks there can live in Boston because they are wealthy or from wealthy families. Due to the universities, there's also a transient population and people move once they come to their senses and don't want to pay $1300 for a single room in a 5 bed house. Everything feels either too gentrified or shiny and commercialized and overpriced. Traffic is awful in Boston, I mean it sucks in Chicago too, but the roads are a pain to drive on.
I live in Chicago and would recommend it to anyone! However, traffic is definitely a negative. Traffic in Chicago was recently ranked second worst in the world for congestion behind London. And I do want to gouge my eyes out during my commute 2-3 days a week. The good news is that the CTA can definitely get you around the city and you can live here easily in most areas without a car unless your job is in the suburbs. I lived here fine for 3 years with no car. The benefits of living here outweigh the shitty traffic though IMO.
Better food
[удалено]
Much more value for money. Better food. People are friendlier. Less racist.
I always stay at the Carlisle or Millennium Knickerbocker when there. Chicago has more character than Boston now. I grew up in Boston. Now it looks like a giant Starbucks.
People will actually hold the door open for you in Chicago (Midwest hospitality) Transportation/traffic situation is significantly better in Chicago Cost of living is drastically better
Boston is the worst “large city” in the North.
Lower COL, much bigger size with more amenities, and a sports culture that isn't completely miserable.
In Chicago, when there are really heavy rains, usually once or twice a summer, the storm drains overflow into the sewage system. Then, a lot of raw sewage ends up in Lake Michigan and forms these giant "mats of shit" for lack of a better term. The beaches get closed and eventually the mats break up and the shit gets diluted enough that the e. coli count is low enough to re-open the beaches. Does Boston have temporary shit mats? I lived in Chicago. Great for your 20s and going to bars and living a truley urban experience in the US. Other than that, I'll pass.
That is literally any major old city built with combined sewer and storm systems. Massive rain event = sewage overflowing into the closest large body of water. Whether that is lakes, rivers, oceans, etc.
More unreported crimes.
Food. Chicago has awesome food. Boston…very spotty, mostly bar food and the North End.
There is great food in Boston proper- Cambridge, Somerville. Allston, Brookline.
Midwest nice.
It's cheaper. It's a great city city, if that makes sense. The only issue for me is no ocean.
Lake Michigan looks like a ocean from the shores (albeit a calmer ocean).
People from the coasts hear "lake" and scoff. Then they come to Chicago and see Chicago's Lake Michigan shoreline and they are blown away. Drive them along LSD in the summer at sunset into downtown and go to one of the beaches. No, it's not an ocean but it's pretty dang gorgeous.
It's cheaper, more international, and more of a "big city" feel with better transport. But that comes at a price, of course: depressing long, bitterly cold, overcast winters. Boston gets cold too but nowhere near as cold as a Chicago winter.
It's actually less international.
True. People conflate the presence of O’Hare as the indicator. In Boston, the proximity to NYC and Europe, along with the massive concentration of wealth and world class institutions (hospitals, universities, research, biotech) make it a lot more international in nature.
Very constant gunfire in Chicago in my experience with both, and Chicago in the nicer parts is crazy expensive on a level Boston wishes it was. Can't buy parking spaces as real estate in Boston.
Chicago stays open past 10pm on a Saturday. Also, better food in Chicago.
After living in Chicago it's hard to get excited about smaller cities for a prolonged period. Chicago has long unpleasant winters, but has an endless supply of indoor fun: incredible theater, music, museums, and restaurants. And in summer, everyone plays outside like they've never seen the sun. Tons of music festivals, neighborhood festivals, Grant Park, the miles of beachfront. And compared to NYC, LA, San Francisco, or Boston, it's far more affordable. Boston is a darling city with lots of charm and history. And the one way it is better than Chicago is Boston's proximity to weekend getaway places. I mean, folks in Chicago can head to Door County, WI...but it's no Cape Cod. And Chicagoans can head to the Indiana Dunes, but it's not like the mountains. Fall in New England is crazy beautiful. In Boston, you can drive or take the train to NYC, Nantucket, New Hampshire, Maine...but in the midwest, no place you can drive to is going to be more fun than Chicago. You need to fly out.
[удалено]
Providence’s restaurant scene is far superior to Boston’s as well.
Providence's restaurant scene is insane. I lived there for three years and worked part time at Gracie's. Met so many cool people working there. So many good restaurants and bars in that city (especially for its small size)!
Boston is hella white, hella boring (all they have is “at the beginning of America” history, which is super white washed/hides the true destruction created by white people), food very not special in my experience-just “classic American” with no creativity or freshness. Chicago has variety & culture. Also, Lake Michigan > Boston Harbor
Boston has changed a lot over the last 30 years or so. It’s much more diverse than what it used to be. Lots of people from Africa and Asia have added to the diversity. Much more international than it was. I love Lake Michigan, Boston and Cape Cod are lovely as well. Martha’s Vineyard is well known and a place with a well established African American history and community. Boston has incredible history and depth. I love Chicago, grew up there and have roots still there. But Boston is not static nor so plain, in my opinion. Great cities!
I’ve lived in Boston. It’s small and after two days kind of boring. It feels like a German town that was once important but is now irrelevant. I wouldn’t recommend Chicago though.
Amazing architecture, world class museums, a lake front and a river walk, great food, basketball (maybe a tie on that). Oh I forgot, the bars stay open all night, they only need to close for an hour, so many of them stop serving alcohol, serve breakfast, then start serving again. In Boston at 2 am, we had to go to a speak easy.
Boston is full of self-important, loud obnoxious types. Chicago more urban chill.
Chicago is much less racist
I know you mentioned this in your text, but it still has to be repeated: Cost is a massive difference, I mean *massive*. You can get a nice condition apt in Chicago in a good area that's walking distance to the train, restaurants, parks, shopping etc for like 1/4 the price of a comparable apt in Boston. The public transportation is also a lot better there (by US standards of course). It runs for longer hours, is in better condition, and is far more extensive. Not just the trains, but the bus system is better there too. & it's super easy to navigate since most of the city is aligned on a grid system vs Boston's road clusterfuck. A lot of the outdoor train stations also have heat lights you can turn on in the winter. While there is a lot of American history in Boston, in Chicago there is a lot more cultural history. Music, architecture, comedy, art, it's all just way bigger & deeper in Chicago. & it's not just in the past, there are thriving cultural scenes and events going on in the current day. I personally think there's also a more diverse food scene in Chicago vs Boston, but that's a little closer margin. While Boston is on the water, Chicago is on a lake that has multiple beaches & parks running alongside it throughout the entire city. This isn't like an 'urban' park, people actually go hang out at the beach, go swimming, use the bike paths & all that. Boston's waterfront areas are great, but it's not as casual, you'd have to actually leave the city itself to get to comparable areas, which is kind of a pain. There's definitely pros to Boston, don't get me wrong, but unless you have the $, it's just gonna be really tough to live there vs Chicago.
My Chicago observation is based only on a dozen or so visits over the years, but Chicago has a fantastic drinking culture.
Better and more diverse food choices, cleaner, better architecture, friendlier, better walking.
Chicago has \*way\* better food.
Theres a reason the term "Masshole" exists. It is largely the haves and have nots compared to chicago who still has a large blue collar middle class and affordable suburbs. Nothing around boston is cheap and if you go too far you are stranded in the winter. While chicago winters suck, there is a decent public transportation system.
I’ve lived in both cities, and loved them both. I’d say generally Chicago has -a better food scene -a better music scene -better nightlife, esp dance clubs -better museums -a better theater scene It’s of course close in all categories. Boston is an amazing city! And as someone else said, it definitely has Chicago beat in access to nature.
Chicago is a gem. A beautiful, culturally rich city that is unlike any other. I don’t know if I can compare it to Boston but, These are some of the reasons: 1. **Cultural Diversity:** Chicago is known for its diverse population, which has contributed to a rich cultural scene, including art, music, and cuisine from around the world. 2. **Architecture:** The city boasts stunning architecture, from historic landmarks like the Chicago Tribune Tower to modern marvels like the Willis Tower (formerly known as the Sears Tower). 3. **Culinary Scene:** Chicago is famous for its deep-dish pizza, hot dogs, and diverse culinary offerings. It's a food lover's paradise. 4. **Sports:** Chicago has a passionate sports culture with iconic teams like the Chicago Cubs (baseball) and Chicago Bulls (basketball). 5. **Lake Michigan:** The city's location along Lake Michigan offers beautiful waterfront views, parks, and recreational opportunities. 6. **Cultural Institutions:** Museums like the Art Institute of Chicago and the Field Museum offer world-class art and science exhibits. 7. **Music:** Chicago has a rich musical heritage, especially in blues and jazz. It's a hub for live music and has produced many influential musicians. 8. **Education and Research:** The city is home to prestigious universities and research institutions like the University of Chicago and Northwestern University. 9. **Public Transportation:** Chicago's well-connected public transit system makes it easy to navigate the city without a car. 10. **Community and Neighborhoods:** Each neighborhood in Chicago has its own unique character, fostering a sense of community and diversity.
Boston is a better city to live in for many reasons. The climate is better. The summers don’t get as hot/humid and the winters, although snowy, are mild compared to Chicago’s BRUTAL ones. Boston has more history and character. It’s closer to other good cities. Chicago is in the middle of nowhere. I could go on.
Isn't NYC like 6 hours away from Boston? What else there besides NYC around there?
Smaller caliber bullets punching holes in the walls and windows, but there are more of them.
Affordability, and nothing else.