As a person who lives in the Bay Area, if I were forced to leave and live in Seattle, I think I'd be perfectly fine with it. I love Seattle, the weather is great and it feels pretty similar to San Francisco. I think I might even say I'd prefer to live in Seattle, but I think I'd miss Bay Area Mexican food too much lol.
With the exception of fresh seafood (which Seattle excels at), you would miss all the food. IMHO, Seattle has, on average, the worst food of any major city on the West Coast.
I visited both cities Seattle in October and San Francisco in November I found that both cities are very similar both cities have lots of hills and the weather seems to be cooler, as well the public transportation is very similar with both cities having a train that takes you back and forth from the airport to the downtown area of both cities the bus are the same going every on the cities San Francisco has bigger water then Seattle because of the bay area and the ocean I think the people in Seattle are more friendly I would probably choose Seattle over San Francisco if I had to chooses both cities are very beautiful and have a lot to offer
The best place to live of the two all comes down to you housing needs or choices. If you're renting, move to San Francisco. If you're buying, move to Seattle (but not in the city).
San francisco has great strong rent control my rent in nice area is $1128 was $680 when moved in 1995. So if going to rent find great place and sit on it cause it only go's up 1.7% 2.5$ a year SF he left off ferry sf to oakland
Thanks for this video. I lived in SF and live in Seattle now. Can vouch for the public transportation in SEA. It's super easy to get around and generally live car free in the city. In terms of cost of living, when I was in SF, I lived with roommates. In Seattle I have a condo (which is not cheap) but at least I'm not endlessly paying rent. Love both cities!
Thank you for this video! I visited SF about a couple years ago from the Midwest and fell in love immediately. I'm planning to move to the city this fall!
I would think that SF would have a better transportation options. There is a light rail in downtown that opened up from Chinatown to SOMA. BART will be accessible by San Jose. Maybe the California High Speed rail might be counted, but... we'll see... Give it decades lol
The transportation is pretty good in most areas, but the many hills and traffic make it take a little longer to get from point A to point B, but you can definitely get where you need to go using public transportation (and often it's faster than driving).
He is wrong on culture and transportation. SF has more museums and more cultural communities than Seattle. The largest Chinatown outside of Asia and one of the largest Japantowns in the world are in SF. And, there are a lot more public transportation to choose from in SF.
Thank you so much Chris. This video is very unique. So far your video is the best out of all other UA-cam videos that compare these 2 cities. I like your thoughts about the public transportation in these 2 cities
Very true. With Seattle, most of the city is easy to drive around (traffic wise) (the main exception is if it's around 6 - 9 AM or 3 - 6 PM, or if there is an event going on).
Not bad. Chicago has a much nicer downtown and is easier to travel around using public transportation. Chicago also has better food options, but... Seattle has much better weather (warm, dry summers and relatively mild winters). Seattle also has a lot more nature and in general the air feels cleaner. Seattle might not have the public transit that Chicago has, but it also has a much smaller downtown so it's easier to walk the entire downtown. The people out here are a little less social than out in Chicago (takes a little more effort to keep a conversation going) but in general that might be because a higher proportion of people in the area work in tech or engineering (there are more introverts per capita here haha).
@@Chris_jae Hey Chris, can you make a vid comparing Seattle with Minneapolis, pleeeease?? Considering moving to the latter since I can't afford to purchase a SFH in San Francisco. Can't wait to hear about the battle between Minnesota Nice and Seattle Freeze, lol!!
I definted the metro population in a wierd way. I got it from a government survey, but it depends on which cities are included in the metro area. Some only count King County while I believe google includes everywhere from Olympia to Arlington.
SF public transportation crushes seattles. I’m from one and live in the other. Neither are amazing but the BART, Muni and CalTrain are superior to seattles little train system and not yet completed light rail. Can’t even get to Seattle from Bellevue yet
Data says differently. Here’s an easy source. It has the answer right at the top just for you www.geekwire.com/2015/the-worst-cities-for-traffic-congestion-where-booming-seattle-and-san-francisco-rank/
Honestly just because BART/CalTrain go more places doesn't mean that you can't get around Seattle easily without a car. Rapid Ride Buses and Metro combined with the 2 street cars we have plus the Sounder Trains, Ferries, and LINK light rail we're no slouch. Like the OP said, less traffic than the Bay means easier and cheaper public transit in the Seattle area.
Hi Chris , i have been thinking a lot about moving to Seattle, but I worry so much about the Big One. Have you done anything to prepare for it? Do you feel like the city have made an effort to prepare? Thank you so much for your time.
Great question. As long as you live in either a wood frame house or a high rise built after 1988 you should be safe. It’s just in everyone’s best interest to stock up at least 1-2 weeks of non perishable foods. In general, it’ll be 2 weeks of struggle but I think the area is generally prepared. Personally, I am a little concerned about it, but the worst case scenario is also not that likely. Mostly likely it will be bad, but not something we can’t recover from. I don’t think it should prevent people from moving here though. If anything, consider it like a hurricane.
Don't. I made the mistake of moving here two years ago and have desperately been saving up to leave. If you want to leave the bay area go anywhere else.
That’s a good thing. San Fran is only a big name but the quality of life there is worse. San Fran is declining bad. Seattle is starting to thrive again despite all the work that still needs to be done.
San Francisco was arguably the best city in the United States, with only NYC as a competitor. But its politicians and that of California have systematically acted to destroy it. It'll always have natural beauty, great weather, and charms that even moron politicians can't destroy, despite their best efforts, but after awhile even the leftist lunatics of Seattle's government start to look sane by comparison.
I grew up in Stockton so SFO and the Bay were the places to go for concerts and festivals. Fishing and surfing are pretty good along the coast as some people hit the breaks at Ft. Point under the Golden Gate Bridge. The SF neighborhoods are plentiful and diverse...its a variety of landscapes. SFO seems to have a more variety of cultures and ethnicities. I currently live in Portland and miss NorCal a lot. ❤
I was counting King county as the Seattle Metro area. I didn’t count Snohomish county or the Tacoma metro area as a part of the Seattle metro. If I did that then I’d have to greatly expand the area I called the SF metro and then we get into a whole mess of what we consider the metro area. Both answers are correct. My data is from government census data: www.census.gov/quickfacts/kingcountywashington and the 4 million is from Google.
Agreed. Seattle actually has much more physical space than San Francisco does. So even without Seattle’s growing tech scene, it has much more space to grow and expand
Dude the culture of the NorthWest is White. why deviate to Native peoples when it's clearly not relative, the navajo and hopi nations yeah, zuni and pueblo nations yeah, American cities? not a single one!
Moved to Seattle from the bay area 2 years ago. I find it hard to compare them. Seattle seems like a wannabe San Francisco with far less culture, diversity, or style than San Fransisco; yet thinks it's the best city on the west coast. The weather is significantly more depressing, the people are much more boring and rude ( in my opinion), and Seattle has far less big city amenities than San Francisco. Not to mention, the food in Seattle is mid at best. Seattle is still a decent city, but SF takes the cake any day.
They must love you there. Move into another town and then bitch nonstop about how where you are from its much better. You're entitled to your opinion, but don't be offended if someone says, "go back to where you came from." You're kind of deserve it.
I was counting King county as the Seattle Metro area. I didn’t count Snohomish county or the Tacoma metro area as a part of the Seattle metro. If I did that then I’d have to greatly expand the area I called the SF metro and then we get into a whole mess of what we consider the metro area. Both answers are correct. My data is from government census data: www.census.gov/quickfacts/kingcountywashington both are technically correct but also equally wrong
I agree with Orange Guy, Puget Sound area should be compared with Bay Area and Seattle should be compared with San Francisco. Puget Sound Area is basically 4 metro areas: Tacoma, Everett, Bellevue, Seattle while the Bay area is basically San Jose, Santa Cruz, Oakland, & SF with all the little cities in between. Comparing Seattle area to the Bay area seems a little off...
@@misteriknow2069if you take all of the Puget sound at roughly 4 million, then We’d need to take the entire SF Bay Area at almost 9 million. Still quite a difference
@@EddieJWilliams Bay Area is more like 7.7 million while the Puget Sound is more like 4.5 million if we’re being technical, but it’s still more accurate than comparing King County to the entire SF Bay Area like what the OP did.
You got some things wrong here in a way that I don't think was a mistake: 1) Population. Seattle's metro area population is 4,034,248. San Francisco’s metro area population is 4,579,599. If what you were trying to talk about are the larger combined statistical areas then Seattle’s is 4,953,421 while San Francisco’s is 9,482,708. Stating that Seattle’s metro area was a little over 2 million was very misleading and likely not a mistake, more an out right lie. 2) Why did you way that Mount Rainier is 100 miles from Seattle? Another out right lie. Just get on Google Maps and look it up. It’s 57 miles. San Francisco is a larger, older, more diverse, frankly more important city, but there is no need to misrepresent the truth.
1. depends on what you consider the metro population. If just Seattle then 749K, if King County then 2.25M, if you just use the first results on google then 4M. Same for SF. Depends on what you categorize as the metro area 2. If I said 100 miles, then that was a mistake on my side.
As a person who lives in the Bay Area, if I were forced to leave and live in Seattle, I think I'd be perfectly fine with it. I love Seattle, the weather is great and it feels pretty similar to San Francisco. I think I might even say I'd prefer to live in Seattle, but I think I'd miss Bay Area Mexican food too much lol.
Hahaha I totally understand. You can’t beat the food options in the Bay Area
With the exception of fresh seafood (which Seattle excels at), you would miss all the food. IMHO, Seattle has, on average, the worst food of any major city on the West Coast.
I visited both cities Seattle in October and San Francisco in November I found that both cities are very similar both cities have lots of hills and the weather seems to be cooler, as well the public transportation is very similar with both cities having a train that takes you back and forth from the airport to the downtown area of both cities the bus are the same going every on the cities San Francisco has bigger water then Seattle because of the bay area and the ocean I think the people in Seattle are more friendly I would probably choose Seattle over San Francisco if I had to chooses both cities are very beautiful and have a lot to offer
Thanks for you comment! And yes! Both cities are so similar. I also prefer Seattle (it’s a close match though)
Punctuation... could bb-be nnice
I live in San Francisco and you are correct, Seattle people are way friendlier, another reason why I choose Seattle.
BOTH cities are beautiful
Very true!
The best place to live of the two all comes down to you housing needs or choices. If you're renting, move to San Francisco. If you're buying, move to Seattle (but not in the city).
Great take!
San francisco has great strong rent control my rent in nice area is $1128 was $680 when moved in 1995. So if going to rent find great place and sit on it cause it only go's up 1.7% 2.5$ a year SF he left off ferry sf to oakland
Thanks for this video. I lived in SF and live in Seattle now. Can vouch for the public transportation in SEA. It's super easy to get around and generally live car free in the city. In terms of cost of living, when I was in SF, I lived with roommates. In Seattle I have a condo (which is not cheap) but at least I'm not endlessly paying rent. Love both cities!
Thank you for this video! I visited SF about a couple years ago from the Midwest and fell in love immediately. I'm planning to move to the city this fall!
Can't beat SF with Seattle's wetter colder smaller skyline.with that said Seattle's very beautiful and great place to live
As a lifelong SF resident who spent the last summer in Seattle for an internship, their skyline is significantly larger than SF
You definitely haven't compared the skylines 🤣😭😭
Which city do you prefer? Let me know! Also let me know if you like these types of videos so I can decide if I want to make more!
I live in Phoenix az currently but I’m really sold on San Francisco I see myself living there very soon
Seattle is like a scene out of the movie blade runner 2049..
Hahaha not going to lie, I think this every winter
In June 2023, everything you said still very much relevant. As a Bay Area resident who's visited Seattle, I hands-down agree!
Thanks!
I would think that SF would have a better transportation options. There is a light rail in downtown that opened up from Chinatown to SOMA. BART will be accessible by San Jose. Maybe the California High Speed rail might be counted, but... we'll see... Give it decades lol
The transportation is pretty good in most areas, but the many hills and traffic make it take a little longer to get from point A to point B, but you can definitely get where you need to go using public transportation (and often it's faster than driving).
He is wrong on culture and transportation. SF has more museums and more cultural communities than Seattle. The largest Chinatown outside of Asia and one of the largest Japantowns in the world are in SF. And, there are a lot more public transportation to choose from in SF.
I agree with you! I can't believe BART and MUNI rank lower than Seattle's transportation system LOL... do they have anything even like BART
Agreed! SF has the highest amount of LGBT population per capita
in the world too!
Thank you so much Chris. This video is very unique.
So far your video is the best out of all other UA-cam videos that compare these 2 cities.
I like your thoughts about the public transportation in these 2 cities
I noticed the population difference when I visited San Francisco, traffic was booming 24-7. Very different from Seattle. That was in 2005
Very true. With Seattle, most of the city is easy to drive around (traffic wise) (the main exception is if it's around 6 - 9 AM or 3 - 6 PM, or if there is an event going on).
Cool video
Seattle should be called "Crystal City' rather than a 'depressing city' that sound 2 bad,
Haha yeah. Even if it is grey, we’re still surrounded by evergreens so it’s kinda cozy actually
Near DePaul alumni here. I noticed you mentioned moving from Chicago to Seattle. How’s the transition?
Not bad. Chicago has a much nicer downtown and is easier to travel around using public transportation. Chicago also has better food options, but... Seattle has much better weather (warm, dry summers and relatively mild winters). Seattle also has a lot more nature and in general the air feels cleaner. Seattle might not have the public transit that Chicago has, but it also has a much smaller downtown so it's easier to walk the entire downtown. The people out here are a little less social than out in Chicago (takes a little more effort to keep a conversation going) but in general that might be because a higher proportion of people in the area work in tech or engineering (there are more introverts per capita here haha).
@@Chris_jae Hey Chris, can you make a vid comparing Seattle with Minneapolis, pleeeease?? Considering moving to the latter since I can't afford to purchase a SFH in San Francisco. Can't wait to hear about the battle between Minnesota Nice and Seattle Freeze, lol!!
Seattle has an NHL team. They win.
I would say seattle's metro population is around 4 million but otherwise agreed
I definted the metro population in a wierd way. I got it from a government survey, but it depends on which cities are included in the metro area. Some only count King County while I believe google includes everywhere from Olympia to Arlington.
SF public transportation crushes seattles. I’m from one and live in the other. Neither are amazing but the BART, Muni and CalTrain are superior to seattles little train system and not yet completed light rail. Can’t even get to Seattle from Bellevue yet
No state income tax WA
Easy win
I have lived in both, and Seattle's public transportation and traffic are FAR worse. I cannot believe anyone would state otherwise.
Data says differently. Here’s an easy source. It has the answer right at the top just for you www.geekwire.com/2015/the-worst-cities-for-traffic-congestion-where-booming-seattle-and-san-francisco-rank/
Honestly just because BART/CalTrain go more places doesn't mean that you can't get around Seattle easily without a car. Rapid Ride Buses and Metro combined with the 2 street cars we have plus the Sounder Trains, Ferries, and LINK light rail we're no slouch. Like the OP said, less traffic than the Bay means easier and cheaper public transit in the Seattle area.
8:37, thats not right, Seattle has a metro population of at least 4.2 Million
Love this.
Thanks!
Hi Chris , i have been thinking a lot about moving to Seattle, but I worry so much about the Big One. Have you done anything to prepare for it? Do you feel like the city have made an effort to prepare? Thank you so much for your time.
Great question. As long as you live in either a wood frame house or a high rise built after 1988 you should be safe. It’s just in everyone’s best interest to stock up at least 1-2 weeks of non perishable foods. In general, it’ll be 2 weeks of struggle but I think the area is generally prepared.
Personally, I am a little concerned about it, but the worst case scenario is also not that likely. Mostly likely it will be bad, but not something we can’t recover from. I don’t think it should prevent people from moving here though. If anything, consider it like a hurricane.
Don't. I made the mistake of moving here two years ago and have desperately been saving up to leave. If you want to leave the bay area go anywhere else.
They both WERE amazing. Now they’re just filthy and sad.
Why I just visited San Francisco and it's so beautiful. All cities have problems but that golden state park is so beautiful l.
You a hater.
Thank You
Seattle is a generic San Francisco
Yup, Seattle is lower cost and the only reason people go for SF is because of the legacy brand name.
That’s a good thing. San Fran is only a big name but the quality of life there is worse. San Fran is declining bad. Seattle is starting to thrive again despite all the work that still needs to be done.
San Francisco was arguably the best city in the United States, with only NYC as a competitor. But its politicians and that of California have systematically acted to destroy it. It'll always have natural beauty, great weather, and charms that even moron politicians can't destroy, despite their best efforts, but after awhile even the leftist lunatics of Seattle's government start to look sane by comparison.
@@topsykretts2264 But SF has the highest LGBT per capita in the US🤣
SF is more gay
W vid
I grew up in Stockton so SFO and the Bay were the places to go for concerts and festivals. Fishing and surfing are pretty good along the coast as some people hit the breaks at Ft. Point under the Golden Gate Bridge. The SF neighborhoods are plentiful and diverse...its a variety of landscapes. SFO seems to have a more variety of cultures and ethnicities. I currently live in Portland and miss NorCal a lot. ❤
Chris Seattle metro Population is 4million People you was wrong on that
I was counting King county as the Seattle Metro area. I didn’t count Snohomish county or the Tacoma metro area as a part of the Seattle metro. If I did that then I’d have to greatly expand the area I called the SF metro and then we get into a whole mess of what we consider the metro area. Both answers are correct. My data is from government census data: www.census.gov/quickfacts/kingcountywashington and the 4 million is from Google.
Seattle is better to live in. SF is more amusing to visit.
Seattle will be bigger than San Francisco soon...
Agreed. Seattle actually has much more physical space than San Francisco does. So even without Seattle’s growing tech scene, it has much more space to grow and expand
Bigger don't mean better
@@Chris_jae So it means SF / Bay Area houses will be more expensive and worth buying ASAP. Buying a house is buying its rarity.
Seattle all day baby
Bay Area heads salty
Dude the culture of the NorthWest is White. why deviate to Native peoples when it's clearly not relative, the navajo and hopi nations yeah, zuni and pueblo nations yeah, American cities? not a single one!
Moved to Seattle from the bay area 2 years ago. I find it hard to compare them. Seattle seems like a wannabe San Francisco with far less culture, diversity, or style than San Fransisco; yet thinks it's the best city on the west coast. The weather is significantly more depressing, the people are much more boring and rude ( in my opinion), and Seattle has far less big city amenities than San Francisco. Not to mention, the food in Seattle is mid at best. Seattle is still a decent city, but SF takes the cake any day.
They must love you there. Move into another town and then bitch nonstop about how where you are from its much better. You're entitled to your opinion, but don't be offended if someone says, "go back to where you came from." You're kind of deserve it.
Agreed! Plus SF has the highest percentage of LGBT per capita in the US
Leave Seattle and make room for a real G. SF has almost 100 years on Seattle. Seattle is barely writing its history. It doesn’t wanna be SF yuck
8:36 Seattle metro population is actually 4.1 million, get your facts right bro
I was counting King county as the Seattle Metro area. I didn’t count Snohomish county or the Tacoma metro area as a part of the Seattle metro. If I did that then I’d have to greatly expand the area I called the SF metro and then we get into a whole mess of what we consider the metro area. Both answers are correct. My data is from government census data: www.census.gov/quickfacts/kingcountywashington both are technically correct but also equally wrong
I agree with Orange Guy, Puget Sound area should be compared with Bay Area and Seattle should be compared with San Francisco. Puget Sound Area is basically 4 metro areas: Tacoma, Everett, Bellevue, Seattle while the Bay area is basically San Jose, Santa Cruz, Oakland, & SF with all the little cities in between. Comparing Seattle area to the Bay area seems a little off...
@@misteriknow2069if you take all of the Puget sound at roughly 4 million, then We’d need to take the entire SF Bay Area at almost 9 million. Still quite a difference
@@EddieJWilliams Bay Area is more like 7.7 million while the Puget Sound is more like 4.5 million if we’re being technical, but it’s still more accurate than comparing King County to the entire SF Bay Area like what the OP did.
You got some things wrong here in a way that I don't think was a mistake:
1) Population. Seattle's metro area population is 4,034,248. San Francisco’s metro area population is 4,579,599. If what you were trying to talk about are the larger combined statistical areas then Seattle’s is 4,953,421 while San Francisco’s is 9,482,708. Stating that Seattle’s metro area was a little over 2 million was very misleading and likely not a mistake, more an out right lie.
2) Why did you way that Mount Rainier is 100 miles from Seattle? Another out right lie. Just get on Google Maps and look it up. It’s 57 miles.
San Francisco is a larger, older, more diverse, frankly more important city, but there is no need to misrepresent the truth.
1. depends on what you consider the metro population. If just Seattle then 749K, if King County then 2.25M, if you just use the first results on google then 4M. Same for SF. Depends on what you categorize as the metro area
2. If I said 100 miles, then that was a mistake on my side.
Both cities rate 5 dirty syringes, with a bonus score of 3 piles of sidewalk feces. 😂😅😂😅😂