Why do New York and LA seem to elicit such different reactions from tourists?

Posted by EagleFang91@reddit | AskAnAmerican | View on Reddit | 381 comments

Looking at comments on Reddit and other sites from tourists who visit New York and LA, the vast majority of tourists seem to have a good experience in NY as per their online comments, and many consider the city to be among their favorites. On the other hand, LA tends to get a much more polarizing reaction: while there are people who loved their experience, I also see many comments saying how they hated LA and have no interest going back. What could explain this difference in impressions?

Reply to Post

Reply

381 Comments

[-]

yaya-pops@reddit

I think it's literally just that NY is easier to walk. LA is impossible to walk

Reply

[-]

TURK3Y@reddit

LA is a strip mall that goes in for hundreds and hundreds of miles. NY is an actual city.

Reply

[-]

throwaway_miles4dayz@reddit

>NY is an actual ~~city~~ [state](https://www.census.gov/geographies/reference-files/2010/geo/state-local-geo-guides-2010/new-york.html). LA is a city. NYC is a city. At least, according to the US Census: [LA](https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/losangelescitycalifornia/PST045222), [NYC](https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/newyorkcitynewyork/PST045222).

Reply

[-]

TURK3Y@reddit

1. Context clues, it's establishedwe're discussing New York City 2. "LA" as people tend to know it andnrefer to it as, is a county.

Reply

[-]

kirbyderwood@reddit

Not impossible to walk here, but certainly not New York levels of walking. Santa Monica, WeHo, Venice, Pasadena are among many walkable areas that we have. LA is basically an amalgam of these little villages. But you usually have to drive to get from one to another. And, although our mass transit is improving quickly, it will never reach NYC levels of density.

Reply

[-]

demonicmonkeys@reddit

I’mma be totally honest, walking in Santa Monica or Venice is awful compared to walking in a mid-tier Midwestern city… everything except a handful of isolated outdoor malls in LA feels actively designed to be uncomfortable if you’re not in a car. Can’t speak for WeHo or Pasadena but most of the Santa Monica and Venice Beach areas were weirdly hostile feeling on foot.

Reply

[-]

nothing_is_perfekt@reddit

LA defers to cars every time and fucks over transit and pedestrians. It’s a shame. It does have some cool stuff and cool people. The folks are just to enamored with their cars.

Reply

[-]

PTSD-2803@reddit

As someone who had at least a half hour added to my afternoon commute due to LA pedestrians, I disagree that they pedestrians are not deferred to. I never used public transit there, but I always heard it was not very safe.

Reply

[-]

breadman1010wins@reddit

I can guarantee you that the transit is safer than driving

Reply

[-]

PTSD-2803@reddit

There have been no police reports of drugged-out homeless dudes jerking off on me in my car. So I’ll take your word for what’s safer. Haha.

Reply

[-]

breadman1010wins@reddit

It’s called statistics my guy, driving is far more dangerous than any subway system in the country

Reply

[-]

PTSD-2803@reddit

Yeah, I’m aware of what the statistics say. You do you, I’ll do me.

Reply

[-]

breadman1010wins@reddit

Ah yes your feelings supersede objective reality of course

Reply

[-]

PTSD-2803@reddit

I lived too far out of LA to use public transportation. I currently live too far out of the closest city to use public transportation. That is objective reality. Sorry I don’t buy into your grand vision.

Reply

[-]

breadman1010wins@reddit

Yeah that’s the whole problem. The gov basically decided that you have to use a more dangerous form of transport in order to satisfy oil companies.

Reply

[-]

PTSD-2803@reddit

Not really a problem at all. You want walkable cities and mass transit. That‘s more of a European city thing. Not a priority to me.

Reply

[-]

breadman1010wins@reddit

That’s why every city built around cars has horrible traffic. On the train you actually get places quicker during rush hour. You’re clearly not interested in objective reality tho seeing as you said that driving is safer than transit lmao

Reply

[-]

PTSD-2803@reddit

Actually I told you that I am aware of the statistics, after making a joke about the unsavory characters who often use public transit. If you want to sell your vision, perhaps not take yourself so seriously. Since you’re incapable of that, I am indeed not interested in much of anything you have to say.

Reply

[-]

professorwormb0g@reddit

Not to mention that transport between these areas listed in Southern California is non-existent unless you own a vehicle. Most Eastern cities have more functional public transportation so that walking is just a novelty once you've driven somewhere. A lot of people still drive but you can definitely get by without it. The Los Angeles metropolitan area would be almost impossible to navigate if you didn't have a car and your life would be at a serious disadvantage.

Reply

[-]

Kidd-Charlemagne@reddit

I grew up in Pasadena, and outside of some small sections in and around old town, it's absolutely not a walkable area. You're still going to have to drive to get around and see most of the neighborhood.

Reply

[-]

audigex@reddit

There are areas that are walkable, but the city overall is very much car-centric. As you say, you walk to a place and then drive around As opposed to Manhattan where you can spend an entire week on foot Obviously Manhattan isn't the entire city - but from the point of view of a tourist it may as well be, that's where almost all the tourist stuff is

Reply

[-]

RickyNixon@reddit

LA has cool stuff but to get to any of it you have to endure traffic hell and once you get there drinks are hundreds of dollars LA sucks. People have bad experiences there because it sucks But it does have some very cool stuff that are worth tolerating LA once or twice in your life

Reply

[-]

AdFinancial8924@reddit

Do they not have a subway system?

Reply

[-]

MistaCapALot@reddit

Kind of. They have a couple of train lines but 4 of them are light-rail and only 2 are actual subway lines. They have a huge bus system though

Reply

[-]

kaatie80@reddit

I grew up in LA but haven't lived there for several years now. Last time I checked the public transit was still a major pain in the ass. I can't tell you how many times in middle school, high school, college, and beyond I've been at a bus stop with other people and watched the bus - already running late - just sail on by. Then had to wait another 30-90 minutes for the next bus.

Reply

[-]

MistaCapALot@reddit

My only experience with the LACMTA was when I took the train from Koreatown to Pasadena because I was visiting for a big international soccer game. At one point, on the train to Pasadena, we passed over a highway and the traffic was standstill. I’m grateful that we were able to take public transportation that day but I’ve been stuck in that LA traffic before and it’s a nightmare

Reply

[-]

kaatie80@reddit

Haha it was normal life for me for many years so my bar for bothersome traffic is pretty high now.

Reply

[-]

walxne@reddit

We're the busses full or just a lazy system? Busses seem like a nightmare in LA if the traffic is anything like I've heard. I grew up near NYC and, while there's no shortage of people complaining, the traffic there is really not bad for a city of its size.

Reply

[-]

kaatie80@reddit

Occasionally they were full, but it was usually a driver behind schedule trying to catch up. But also if the busses are getting so full they can't pick anyone else up, that line should run more frequently.

Reply

[-]

cptjeff@reddit

Run more busses? What, like a commie?

Reply

[-]

beyphy@reddit

Historically it's been very limited. So you wouldn't really use it unless you live right off of a line and were going somewhere that was off of a line. But that's changing a lot this decade. While delayed, multiple rail and subways lines have been opened recently or are currently under construction. Metro has a Twenty-eight by '28. This is a list of twenty-eight projects they'd like to complete before the 2028 Olympics. You can read more about that project [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-eight_by_%2728)

Reply

[-]

thehomiemoth@reddit

What’s with the internet and this baseless LA slander. LA is an incredible city with some of the best food, culture, nightlife, shows, in the world all next to the the beach with incredible weather.

Reply

[-]

Dorythehunk@reddit

Texas flair

Reply

[-]

hottapioca@reddit

Texas is easily the worst state I ever visited besides Kansas. I've been to probably like, half the states. I'd fly in to Dallas to eat at one restaurant and turn around and fly right back to Ohio and be glad for it, which is saying something because it's Ohio lol.

Reply

[-]

Dorythehunk@reddit

Lol I was born and raised in Ohio. I feel that.

Reply

[-]

hottapioca@reddit

Ok well now that we are kin I'm gonna come live in your crawl space in California. is $8500/month good or am I low balling you? 😂

Reply

[-]

Dorythehunk@reddit

That’s fair. But just a heads up it’s less of a crawl space and more of a one person tent set up next to my apartment building that I rent a room in. You’ll also need to pay me a parking fee even if you don’t have a car.

Reply

[-]

hottapioca@reddit

I assume this is a binding verbal agreement. See you in a hella few days or whatever, fam 🤙

Reply

[-]

Far_Blueberry_2375@reddit

The person to whom you're responding said nothing bad about any of the things you mention. Fuck's the matter with you?

Reply

[-]

hottapioca@reddit

Jealousy they can't afford to live even near there probably

Reply

[-]

thethirdgreenman@reddit

Not the OP but ultimately I don't give a shit what amenities you have if it's very hard/difficult to actually experience any of it. LA is a great city that absolutely fumbles the advantages it has because of quality of life/ease of living issues. The weather is really the only thing that's constant and easy to experience often which is a great thing. I really wanted to like LA, wanted to be able to tell my friends here who talk about it as some hellhole that they're totally wrong, but getting around (combined with how much everything costs) just makes it not worth it at all for me. There's a huge barrier to entry in terms of enjoying LA in terms of both time and money, and that's before getting into other problems. If you're cool with that or make enough to enjoy it, then great. Everyone has their preferences though. It definitely isn't a bad city, I just don't think it's worth it at all and based on the population trends for LA county the last few years, I'm not alone

Reply

[-]

professorwormb0g@reddit

LA is a wonderful place to live but a challenging place to get a feel for when visiting.

Reply

[-]

audigex@reddit

I think you've hit the nail on the head - by the end of our trip we were starting to get a bit of a feel for routes between places, good places to park etc But by the time you get to that point you're already going home

Reply

[-]

audigex@reddit

LA has lots of great stuff But it's EASILY the worst major city I've visited, in terms of being able to just enjoy the trip. I expected to love LA, and there's a lot there I enjoyed, but it was nowhere near as good as I expected because it just doesn't feel like the place is set up for people. New York, London, Paris, San Francisco, Berlin, Istanbul all have great food, culture, nightlife, shows etc, but they're much easier to get around and thus you can actually enjoy the stuff that's there rather than just spending half your trip sitting in traffic or trying to find your way between places I honestly thought LA would be at the top of my list, and there's definitely lots of great stuff there - but I just found it a frustrating place to visit, like a city that's designed to be a pain in the ass

Reply

[-]

nothing_is_perfekt@reddit

LA is great EXCEPT for the fact that LA is where some of the NIMBYist NIMBYs live who will only ever vote for more sprawl and more asphalt.

Reply

[-]

breadman1010wins@reddit

Dude, Texas is awful cause of traffic too cause Texans have the same auto addiction

Reply

[-]

RickyNixon@reddit

I live in downtown Austin and havent owned a car in years. It’s great. And there’s all kinds of amazing things I can walk to But it isnt as walkable as NYC obviously, Texas has a problem with this. But I dont think it is as severe

Reply

[-]

breadman1010wins@reddit

I like Austin, probably the only redeemable part of Texas as far as I can tell. But Dallas/HOU/SA are absolute hellscapes

Reply

[-]

RickyNixon@reddit

SA is great if you know the city. Lots of cool festivals and Mexican food, plus as Austin has gotten more expensive theres been some spillover. SA is way cooler than it was 10 years ago Houston is like LA to me - very cool stuff but the city itself kinda sucks. To me, if a city is gonna be that big, it has to be more walkable. I love NYC and Chicago

Reply

[-]

igotthatbunny@reddit

Spoken like somebody from Texas lol

Reply

[-]

RickyNixon@reddit

All my neighbors are socal refugees, weird yall are all in such a hurry to move here

Reply

[-]

breadman1010wins@reddit

They got priced out my guy

Reply

[-]

hottapioca@reddit

I'd move to hell before I moved to Texas and im stuck in Ohio 😂 Dallas/Tyler region were nearly unbearable. I was there long enough for surgery and got the hell out 😂

Reply

[-]

RickyNixon@reddit

I’m just telling you what’s happening. 70% of the people I meet walking around Austin are recent transplants from Los Angeles, and they all love it here. So when LA people say theyre glad we arent moving there it isnt the own they think it is Dallas is boring, I know this is currently kind of a regional pissing contest right now and I dont want to detract from that energy cuz I love a good rivalry but I promise Austin is worth a visit. Texas has a shitty fascist government and global warming is gonna make it uninhabitable but Austin is such a fun city. And it wont be like it is forever, you should visit before fascism or climate change claim it

Reply

[-]

Dorythehunk@reddit

> LA sucks Texas flair lol

Reply

[-]

GOTaSMALL1@reddit

"Only a nobody walks in LA!"

Reply

[-]

yabbobay@reddit

[My first thought as well! ](https://youtu.be/80WyBxo0Hto)

Reply

[-]

qwerty_ca@reddit

A pedestrian in LA is someone who just parked their car. 😂

Reply

[-]

frogvscrab@reddit

Seriously, its really that simple. Predominantly suburban cities are just not very fun to visit as a tourist.

Reply

[-]

Equivalent-Bend6628@reddit

Walkability and public transit. Most tourists don’t have cars so they will have to rent a car or taxi/Uber everywhere in LA which gets expensive real quick. In NY a $2.75 subway ticket gets you anywhere in the city

Reply

[-]

SomeGoogleUser@reddit

New York is urbanized America at its best. Los Angeles is urbanized America at its worst; it is simultaneously the first five minutes of *Demolition Man* and yet also the rest of *Demolition Man*. Dallas is urbanized America at its biggest. Maximum burgerpunk.

Reply

[-]

DConstructed@reddit

New York is a wonderful city to visit because it’s densely packed full of things easily accessible by public transportation. Los Angeles you need a car. And while the weather can be great and the beaches beautiful there are a lot of places with beaches. It’s just not as interesting to visit if you want to walk around and see things. You really need a car.

Reply

[-]

stoicsilence@reddit

Hi. So Cal native here. Los Angeles is a city you work and live in. Not a city you visit. It will never offer itself up to tourists on a silver platter the way New York does. Getting to places requires effort in the form of driving unfamiliar roads on busy freeways. Los Angeles is a very "anti-civic" city. It's a very private city. It lacks the public engagement and civic investment that makes places like New York great to visit. Our world famous monument, is a sign that advertised a housing development in the 1920s. People in said housing development despise tourists so much that they are trying to block off access to aforementioned sign. New York meanwhile has the Statue of Liberty and Central Park. On top of that, people go in with the wrong expectations. They come not realizing that Hollywood is an idea not a place. Or rather that the actual Hollywood is a shit hole. People come expecting public glitz and glamor and leave disappointed when all of it is sequestered away from the prying public behind closed boardroom doors in Century City and leafy gated communities in Bel Aire. It's why its always recommended a local show you around.

Reply

[-]

ptoftheprblm@reddit

The concept of a “private city” is very accurate as far as what people do not realize about Los Angeles as a whole. That there are plenty of slices of paradise.. one with sweeping city views from the hills, the lush grounds of the playboy mansion, or unobstructed views of the pacific.. but it’s all behind a private gated residence. People don’t realize how big, spread out, crowded and kinda nothing glamorous most of LA is. And how unlike reality tv portrayal of it it is.

Reply

[-]

stoicsilence@reddit

>People don’t realize how big, spread out, crowded and kinda nothing glamorous most of LA is. And how unlike reality tv portrayal of it it is. Precisely this. The wealth of the city has been focused inwardly, ***privately***, for a long time. Los Angeles will never be a Paris, or Rome, or London, or a New York city. The city's culture is just fundamentally disinterested from using its wealth to project tangible image of wealth in its public built environment.

Reply

[-]

Professional_Pretty@reddit

I’d never heard of it phrased this way, but this makes so much sense!

Reply

[-]

rileyoneill@reddit

I am also a life long Californian from Riverside. People sort of confuse "The City of Los Angeles" with "Greater Los Angeles". Most of the stuff people would really want to see isn't actually in Los Angeles, its in Greater Los Angeles or even further out. In my 39 years of life, I have only been to the beach in Los Angeles once. Like for a proper beach trip, not just near the water. I have been to Orange County and San Diego county beaches hundreds of times, but Los Angeles, only once. A lot of people really think that all the good stuff is clustered in the City of Los Angeles, and there is definitely good stuff worth seeing, but a lot of the best versions of stuff are outside it. People also think that summer time means fun in the sun! Only if you are at the beach. The rest of the time most of Greater Los Angeles is miserable during the summer months. Unless you have a beach, lake, or are high in the mountains, summers here can be brutal. Spending two weeks at Newport Beach in August is fun, I grew up doing it. What really surprises me is people hear about this magical place called Palm Springs and are surprised by how affordable it is when they did their research. Of course they looked into visiting during August, when its 125 degrees. Not the winter months when the weather is beautiful.

Reply

[-]

boldjoy0050@reddit

It is really confusing for outsiders though. Hollywood has an Los Angeles address, but Beverly Hills does not. Basically, it's hard to know what's in the city and what's not.

Reply

[-]

rileyoneill@reddit

It absolutely is and usually being in Los Angeles isn't going to really have what they want. The better places to vacation are more like Orange County and then take day trips into LA. Unless what you want to see is specifically in or west of Los Angeles, you probably won't want to spend all your time there. Especially for families that want to do the beach and Disney thing...

Reply

[-]

stoicsilence@reddit

I would say to people you're not visiting LA, you're visiting the LA County and Metro areas.

Reply

[-]

avocado_whore@reddit

If you wanna go to the beach in LA you gotta go to the South Bay.

Reply

[-]

stoicsilence@reddit

Or y'all get wise and flood VC beaches every Memorial Day weekend 😜

Reply

[-]

OptatusCleary@reddit

> The best parallel example of this are all the foreign tourists visiting San Jose to see the Facebook and Google headquarters, only to realize its just a bunch of generic office parks. Yes! So many people say they want to spend a day in “Silicon Valley,” I guess imagining some sort of science fiction world and not just totally regular suburbs with occasional office parks.

Reply

[-]

thatswacyo@reddit

Does that actually happen? It has never occurred to me that people would think that. What are they expecting to see?

Reply

[-]

avocado_whore@reddit

>So many people say they want to spend a day in Silicon Valley… Ew why? Lol 😂

Reply

[-]

00zau@reddit

Because the reputation of Silicon Valley makes them think they're basically visiting Epcot But Real.

Reply

[-]

witch_andfamous@reddit

I think its telling that if I were to build an itinerary for someone visiting LA, it would look pretty different than what they probably saw online googling the sights. I can sometimes see a tourist’s itinerary on r/AskLosAngeles and know they’re going to have a bad time. First indication is that it has them staying in DTLA. DTLA has tons of cool stuff to do but it is not at all going to match up with what they’ve pictured, and I don’t recommend it to first-timers. I save that for when they have a better feel for the city.

Reply

[-]

JadeBeach@reddit

Agree - most of my family lives in or near LA. But where would you suggest people stay that is even slightly affordable? Almost no where to stay near Griffith Park, LACMA, the Getty, Koreatown...

Reply

[-]

rakfocus@reddit

You should be staying in orange county and driving up in a rental car in my opinion. That way you'll have access to theme parks, beaches, and museums easily

Reply

[-]

JadeBeach@reddit

Nope. Also have a brother in Dana Point and my oldest friend lives in Laguna, so would not get in a hotel in OC. Very bad idea for a base from which to see LA. I think it would be the height of insanity to drive the 405 from OC to say, Santa Monica or Los Feliz every day, for sightseeing. Or to a Dodger's game. BUT there is a nice, fairly affordable hotel at Dana Point Harbor. Nice place, lovely beach, good food, and close to Catalina if the goal is to see OC and not LA.

Reply

[-]

rakfocus@reddit

Why on earth would you get a hotel that far south. I'm talking about getting a hotel in Anaheim, Irvine, Orange, Newport Beach, etc. Anywhere north of the 55 freeway dividing line. The trip to LA will be around 45min which is totally fine and your hotel will be cheaper and in a safe area.

Reply

[-]

witch_andfamous@reddit

The neighborhoods that are going to match what people imagine LA to be are Santa Monica and West Hollywood. If you can swing it, that’s what I recommend. However, to most people that is not affordable. People are going to disagree with me, but I honestly think a cheap underrated option would be to stay in Studio City or near the WB/Universal lots. They have great freeway access to get you to the east and west sides respectively as long as you arent driving during rush hour like a dummy. It’s also just on the other side of the hill from weho/hollywood. Just take laurel or coldwater canyon (weho) or the cahuenga pass (hollywood). People act like its so cut off from the city because its technically in the valley, but its not. It’s right on the edge. It also is insanely easy to get to Griffith Park using the forest lawn entrance, which can also help you cut through to the Los Feliz area. Also Universal Studios and the WB Lot are tourist attractions in and of themselves. As long as you plan accordingly, for example doing the west side all on one day, and aren’t criss crossing around the city, it’s not a bad option. Not too hard to get to the Santa Monica Mountains for some hiking or Malibu either. There are also a few hotels in “culver city” (but not really, they’re kind of off of the 405 near the mall) that are somewhat affordable. Hilton, Courtyard Marriott. And a Travel Lodge in Mar Vista if you need to go even cheaper. Super easy to get to Santa Monica/Venice from. Also great highway access to 405 and the 10 to help get you to other parts of the city. Culver City is also very charming spot to get a few meals and it is near the SONY lot if you’re still into seeing a studio lot. It’s also not far from the airport, and it’s easy to get to LAX, or to the South Bay Beach Cities or Orange County/Disney/Knotts.

Reply

[-]

PacSan300@reddit

Very well said. However, to be pedantic, it would be more accurate to say that tourists are visiting Silicon Valley for tech campuses, rather than San Jose specifically. Meta's and Google's headquarters are actually in Menlo Park and Mountain View, respectively, not San Jose.

Reply

[-]

stoicsilence@reddit

Very fair!

Reply

[-]

otterpop21@reddit

So cal native from San Diego, couldn’t agree more. I drove to LA countless times to visit the fashion district for work, highly recommend to anyone - check out santee alley. Anytime I visited I know where to go, made friends, had a solid grasp of what I could do in a day or two each time. There is tons of stuff to check out, always needs to be planned around traffic and location. If you speak the language, are willing to get out of your comfort zone, and be someone you’re not - you probably will not even crack the shell of what the city has to offer. I worked in customer service, fashion, and famous art galleries and would find myself at invite only events with a lot of big inflated egos tycoons / pioneers/ prodigies of their industry, or regular people that were simply happy to be there. There isn’t much in between unless your part of film or catering team. LA is a horrendous tourist destination. I am currently on a road trip, and despite all my knowledge of LA found myself unable to go to 2 of my favourite bars due to remodelling that happened a few days before I arrived and a broken pipe the night before. On top of that tried to go to the Griffith observatory and the entire parking lot was closed and there were cars parked down to the entrance of the road to get up there. It was a shit show. After all that, stuck with the original plans, had an amazing time and don’t ever care if I go back or not. It’s personally the city I love to hate. I love all the people, my friends, and certain spots (San pedro especially) but it’s not worth the grime, the homeless behaviour, the sketchy people, the traffic, the over priced everything.

Reply

[-]

tu-vens-tu-vens@reddit

> It will never offer itself up to tourists on a silver platter the way New York does. This is precisely why I prefer LA. The fun part of visiting a city is taking the effort to find places that you appreciate. I don’t like having a city handed on a platter to me.

Reply

[-]

cIumsythumbs@reddit

(Outsider here) So... Is San Diego's approach to public engagement and civic investment better than LA's? Because from what I've heard SD is a great place to visit as a tourist.

Reply

[-]

morgan_lowtech@reddit

Without going too deep, San Diego is tiny compared to LA, so it matters less. You could get a reasonable impression of San Diego on a weekend trip, that's impossible for LA.

Reply

[-]

kit10mama@reddit

SD checking in: We're smaller than LA (though SD is still quite spread out) so it feels like both a big city and a small town. I can often see the same people at different places all over the city/county because we tend to spend our time in similar ways (hiking, beach, brunch, bars, etc.) It's hard to explain if you don't live here. I love LA, but SD feels more intimate amd friendlier. It's kind of the best of both worlds but with a LOT less (or at least much more predictable) traffic.

Reply

[-]

Nelroth@reddit

I couldn't have said this better myself. I did not grow up in LA, but I would visit it from time to time for vacation with family, and always felt like it was overrated. However, I ended up moving there for college and then fell in love with the city. I think you have to live in LA to truly appreciate it.

Reply

[-]

Nyxelestia@reddit

> Los Angeles is a city you work and live in. Not a city you visit. I would add that L.A. is a city you can travel to, but not visit. The difference being that when you travel to somewhere, you usually have a specific goal or plan in mind. A visit is much more casual and and less planned out. L.A. can be wonderful if you plan ahead, but if you come in expecting you can just wander around or drop in on things and find something to do, you'll be severely disappointed.

Reply

[-]

kjb76@reddit

Thank you for this. It’s a really good explanation. I have lived in and around NYC my whole life and I didn’t care for LA when I visited for work. I had some free time and went to Santa Monica and Venice, very touristy, I know. I also went to the Griffith Observatory which was the coolest thing I saw. To me it seemed like a lot of sprawl. The only reason I’d go back is because I’m a huge baseball fan and there are two teams. I’ve been to SF and San Diego and liked them much better.

Reply

[-]

RGV_KJ@reddit

>People in said housing development despise tourists so much that they are trying to block off access to aforementioned sign. Well.. still happening. **City of Malibu accused of trying to keep public beaches a secret after signs removed near Lechuza Beach** https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/losangeles/news/city-of-malibu-accused-of-trying-to-keep-public-beaches-a-secret-after-signs-removed-near-lechuza-beach/

Reply

[-]

SmellGestapo@reddit

Also a local. And I think a lot of what you say is true, and a number of the things you point out are things I specifically dislike about LA--like the fact that it's such a private, individualistic city. I've also heard people express a similar impression of LA before they got here: they think it's all just celebrities or film industry types trying to get into exclusive parties or clubs so they can be seen. So the expectations are definitely way off. Frankly, a lot of people should probably have a local show them around, or at least help plan their trip. There's tons of cool things to do here and if you have a few days, you could spend a day in different sub-regions to really maximize your time: downtown and Exposition Park; Hollywood; Santa Monica-Venice; Long Beach. There's lots of museums, restaurants, interesting architecture, and natural beauty to see in each place. But very little of that is a part of LA's global brand.

Reply

[-]

TheManInTheCrowd@reddit

For me, it's that you get exactly what you expect from new York. Nobody really oversells it. La, you want it to be this paradise. Some idealized version of a massive city. But in reality that's all it is: a massive city.

Reply

[-]

spinster-core@reddit

Because people don't actually know what to expect of LA. If someone's visiting New York, they're visiting Manhattan. If someone's visiting LA, they're visiting... ??? LA is huge. And a lot of people visiting LA think LA = southern California. Instead of people planning to visit the La Brea Tar Pits and then LACMA and then a bar for instance on day 1, a lot of tourists want to walk through Hollywood then go to the Santa Monica Pier then go to Disneyland then have dinner in Echo Park and go to a bar in Silver Lake then back to their hotel in Long Beach.

Reply

[-]

yo_itsjo@reddit

I think it's this. New York culture is so heavily portrayed in media that you know the good and bad aspects of the city before you go. LA is just beaches and celebrities and... no one knows what to expect of the city

Reply

[-]

IBlockShitheads@reddit

> New York culture is so heavily portrayed in media So is LA culture. Really, in film and TV, there's NY, LA, and *occasionally* something that leans *hard* into a stereotype like Ozark.... But the rest of the world may as well not exist.

Reply

[-]

lord_flamebottom@reddit

I really can't agree. Hollywood and LA beach culture is definitely heavily portrayed in media, but it's just not accurate to how most of LA actually is.

Reply

[-]

EmpRupus@reddit

100% this. If you go to New York, it is exactly what you had seen on TV. Big dense city - a bit gritty - but very walkable, with lots of cool interesting things to do with a short reach of each other in a compact space. What is shown about LA on TV - well, you ain't running into movie-stars on Rodeo Drive. And celebrities aren't inviting you to their private mansion pool parties. You - as a tourist - aren't getting the TV LA. If LA marketed itself more realistically - such as talking about interesting neighborhoods, historic California Missions, local museums, michellin star restaurants, etc. - then, people's expectations and experiences will improve.

Reply

[-]

IBlockShitheads@reddit

ROFL! But of course, the rest of the world (that the media gives less than zero fucks about) they actually take a minute to get it right.

Reply

[-]

revanisthesith@reddit

But it's easier to show the transportation aspect of everyday life in Manhattan. Or Brooklyn. Having someone walk or take the subway is realistic enough. As someone else pointed out, they never show how much time you'll spend in your car in L.A. And that's a harsh reality to a tourist who has limited time to see things that are more spread out.

Reply

[-]

LionLucy@reddit

Obviously, a sitcom isn't in anyway an accurate depiction of anything, but I was watching New Girl recently and thinking it's the only time I've seen LA depicted in the media as a place with normal people roughly my own age, leading "normal-ish" lives, rather than super-rich people and celebrities. I don't know if it's at all accurate to what living in LA is like, though. I've never been to the western US at all,(but I'd love to!)

Reply

[-]

crash12345@reddit

Then you got directors like John Hughes and M Night Shamalyan who showcase into their city of origin (Chicago and Philly respectively). I love them for that.

Reply

[-]

Current_Poster@reddit

I'd really like going to *John Hughes*' Chicago.

Reply

[-]

Sv33stunov@reddit

You really could pull off a Ferris Bueller day off in Chicago. If you didn’t watch the entire Cubs game.

Reply

[-]

Stepsonrakes@reddit

Why were the cubs playing during school hours?

Reply

[-]

Current_Poster@reddit

It was during October, maybe it was a pennant game.

Reply

[-]

Stepsonrakes@reddit

Doesn’t the movie take place toward the end of the school year? Double header is a definite possibility though

Reply

[-]

Current_Poster@reddit

I kinda thought the German-American themed float was for Oktoberfest?

Reply

[-]

Stepsonrakes@reddit

That makes sense. Google says it’s June 5th 1985

Reply

[-]

quasifun@reddit

I heard that everybody is either a brain, an athlete, a basket case, a princess or a criminal

Reply

[-]

Current_Poster@reddit

I think that's Shermer, IL.

Reply

[-]

yo_itsjo@reddit

I mean the everyday life aspects of New York, like the traffic and subways and mundane things. Whereas LA is just another big city but with a different social environment.

Reply

[-]

Prowindowlicker@reddit

Don’t forget the disaster films which like to branch out and destroy San Fran or Chicago

Reply

[-]

PacSan300@reddit

And there is ALWAYS an obligatory shot of the Golden Gate Bridge getting damaged or destroyed, with a pivotal rescue scene on the bridge.

Reply

[-]

TrepanationBy45@reddit

LMAO when I read the comment above, I thought about Planet of the Apes showing the overgrown Golden Gate or whatever. Then I read your comment, and think of the climactic confrontation on the bridge hahahaha

Reply

[-]

quasifun@reddit

Chicago comes pre-destroyed, saves money on CGI

Reply

[-]

nothing_is_perfekt@reddit

There are plenty of movies and shows set in the suburban areas of LA. They just don’t usually show how often you spend in your car.

Reply

[-]

GOTaSMALL1@reddit

> a lot of tourists want to walk through Hollywood then go to the Santa Monica Pier then go to Disneyland then have dinner in Echo Park and go to a bar in Silver Lake then back to their hotel in Long Beach. Almost forgot... can we squeeze in the Getty Center and The Galleria too? Map says they're right next to each other.

Reply

[-]

sayheykid24@reddit

If they do make it to the Getty they’ll just be utterly disappointed by the artwork inside lol

Reply

[-]

InterPunct@reddit

I was there a few weeks ago. It wasn't horrible. I've seen worse at MoMA.

Reply

[-]

sayheykid24@reddit

MoMA has some of the famous famous contemporary art in existence. The Getty is famously more interesting to look at from the exterior than it is to view any of their exhibitions. LACMA on the other hand is a fantastic museum.

Reply

[-]

I_Am_Mandark_Hahaha@reddit

I often do La Brea, LACMA and Petersen Auto Museum as a group since they're close to each other

Reply

[-]

Disco99@reddit

Our best family vacation day in LA was when we decided to skip Disney and do La Brea, LACMA, and the Natural History Museum instead.

Reply

[-]

kaatie80@reddit

You did all three in a day? Dang

Reply

[-]

Disco99@reddit

I could have spent a week in LACMA, but with kids the law of diminishing returns applies. However, if you sign a child up for the free membership, it gives admission for two adults per membership at no cost. So, free entrance for us until the kids are 18. And now we go there every time we are in LA.

Reply

[-]

adudeguyman@reddit

Peterson Auto Museum is an awesome place. I recommend their vault tour too.

Reply

[-]

InterPunct@reddit

MoMA absolutely has amazing works. I've also seen things there that left me scratching my head. One of them was a bag of kitty litter on the floor. If the point of the art was to remember it, then it was successful.

Reply

[-]

sayheykid24@reddit

If you can’t appreciate the genius of kitty litter on the floor I don’t know what to tell you, man! S/

Reply

[-]

NeighborlyOrc@reddit

You wrote that as sarcasm, but my cat holds the same opinion and it isn’t sarcastic at all.

Reply

[-]

ulchtar@reddit

As a Getty lover, I’m hurt. I think it’s also dependent on the type of art you like.

Reply

[-]

PacSan300@reddit

The preference for the type of art can also determine which Getty facility someone likes better: the Center or the Villa.

Reply

[-]

im_on_the_case@reddit

Can confirm, love the Villa but found the Center terribly uninteresting.

Reply

[-]

redjessa@reddit

That made me cackle.

Reply

[-]

FashionGuyMike@reddit

Don’t forget the observatory!

Reply

[-]

spinster-core@reddit

If we have time after lunch do you wanna check out Palm Springs? I'll make sure we make it back for dinner before Nobu closes. Maybe I should make a reservation...

Reply

[-]

sayheykid24@reddit

As someone who has lived in both cities, was basically going to say this. LA is fun to visit if you’re going for a specific reason to do something. If you want to wonder around you’ll have a terrible time. In NYC you can basically just lose yourself wondering the city and have an experience. LA has tons of awesome things to do, they just tend to be far apart and you really have to live there to know about them.

Reply

[-]

wallagrargh@reddit

LA is a fundamentally unwalkable hellscape of highways and car parks. I experienced serious culture shock as a European tourist and can't see myself going there again. New Orleans was much more appealing, mostly because you can get around without dystopian two hour car rides.

Reply

[-]

tu-vens-tu-vens@reddit

Where in New Orleans did you stay? You can walk around the French Quarter, but you're probably not getting from there to the Garden District or Mid-City without a car. Los Angeles is the same way. Venice Beach, Koreatown, and Echo Park are all great places to walk around, you're just not going to walk from one to another.

Reply

[-]

wallagrargh@reddit

You're right. The standard points of interest for a tourist were all in walking distance of each other though, whereas in LA I had to take a 90min Uber ride from my apartment to go see the walk of fame. And everything I got to see inbetween looked really bleak, probably because no one builds nice places next to a seven lane highway.

Reply

[-]

tu-vens-tu-vens@reddit

That’s the thing – I think going to New Orleans and sticking to the standard “tourist points of interest” is doing the city a disservice. I love the French Quarter, but it’s more of an urban theme park than a neighborhood. Where were you staying in LA where your Uber ride to Hollywood was 90 minutes? Were you seeing anything else on that side of town that day? That seems like it might be poor planning. And it’s not like LA is the only big city where things are far apart: in New York, taking the subway from Central Park to much of Brooklyn will take you the better part of an hour, and it’s not like there’s anything cool to see from the subway windows.

Reply

[-]

quasifun@reddit

You're describing most American cities, including New Orleans once you get outside the historic district. More than half of Americans live in suburbs, and driving a lot is something most of us do all the time.

Reply

[-]

nothing_is_perfekt@reddit

Hellscale is dramatic. LA has great stuff, but it isn’t worth renting a car because the transit sucks or the amount of time spent in traffic.

Reply

[-]

AdFinancial8924@reddit

This is exactly how I’m feeling as someone who goes to NYC several times a year, but has never been to LA. Like I pretty much know my way around Manhattan I know where to go/how to get there. But when thinking about what to see in LA, I have no clue. I want to do a Pacific Coast highway trip and camp my way down. But once in LA- I just think- okay what’s here? I’ve heard the Walk of Fame is overrated and in a bad neighborhood. I’m not particularly interested in DisneyLand. I’m not rich so could never afford any shopping. One friend told me don’t even bother. It’s just a city. Not a tourist destination. But so many Europeans think it is.

Reply

[-]

tu-vens-tu-vens@reddit

Here are some decent starting points for making an itinerary: * Beach neighborhoods: Santa Monica is nice, pretty chill, a little spread out but is still good to walk around, has a famous pier and some cliffs overlooking the water. Venice Beach feels like a Red Hot Chili Peppers song come to life. Manhattan Beach is known for surfing. All of these are fun places to walk around and explore. * Inland neighborhoods: a lot of the trendy/interesting neighborhoods are basically laid out in an east/west corridor between Santa Monica and downtown. Echo Park has a great park and a cool artsy feel, Koreatown is one of the densest neighborhoods in the city. Even Hollywood has some cool bars and music stores that I enjoyed visiting * Attractions: Griffith Observatory is amazing. Dodger Stadium is one of the best environments in baseball. There are all kinds of trails going through the hills. * Food: throw a stone and you'll find a good restaurant. It's arguably the best place in the country for Mexican and Asian food, and its privileged location means that fresh produce and seafood are easy to come by. I chose places to eat pretty much at random and I had universally fantastic experiences.

Reply

[-]

betaich@reddit

Thats becfause your media that gets over here portrays the cool sides of LA a lot and of course people will be disappointed when they can't find them, also media portrayal, no matter if European or US never seems to get the scale of LA right, NY doesn't seem to have that problem.

Reply

[-]

AdFinancial8924@reddit

My media? I live in Maryland. Lol. I’m fully aware of how large LA is but I don’t know what there is to do. Like what do people do when they go there?

Reply

[-]

betaich@reddit

Your media as ain US media not as in Maryland media, is there even media in Maryland?

Reply

[-]

AdFinancial8924@reddit

All metro areas have local news, yes. But I missed the tag that you’re from Germany so I didn’t realize you meant US media. It’s late and I didn’t read correctly.

Reply

[-]

MooseHeckler@reddit

LA is not compact. A tourist is going to have to know what they want. While New York is fairly straightforward compared to LA.

Reply

[-]

CTeam19@reddit

> LA is not compact. A tourist is going to have to know what they want. I assume that is just basic Itinerary planning. I am going to assume I basically going to Iowa as a whole and you can't go to Backbone State Park, Watch the Iowa Cubs, and go to Big Grove Brewery in Iowa City in a day without it being a long as day. Group things in tight clusters of: Morning Activity, Lunch, Afternoon Activity, and Dinner. Then center my Hotel to want I want to do at night.

Reply

[-]

BreakfastInBedlam@reddit

Spent a week in LA. Stayed in Long Beach. It took over an hour to get anywhere. And it usually took an Uber because transit was a day's commitment - when it was working.

Reply

[-]

Bathmatthew@reddit

This is a very odd comment.

Reply

[-]

MooseHeckler@reddit

Yes but, moreso.

Reply

[-]

sayheykid24@reddit

Yeah, that’s basically what I saw - in LA things are very spread out and you need to know where you’re going. That’s also one reason I strongly prefer living in NYC as opposed to LA.

Reply

[-]

arbivark@reddit

"there's no there there." "nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

Reply

[-]

gold818@reddit

Another thing is New York will have like 50 events going on at the same time from fairs, art exhibits, sporting events, parades and so on. You may not even plan to attend those events but you might just stumble into them on your way to work or going some place. LA on the other hand tends to be single focused on a particular event to get the whole city to gather too. But overall I think New York has spoiled me because in a lot of ways there's not much originality in the things you can do in LA other than good weather all year round it's kinda boring and you might as well go to Miami Beach over Santa Monica and have a better experience.

Reply

[-]

MooseHeckler@reddit

There are some great places on LA I loves hae ha heng and blue palms draft house. I greatly enjoyed how organized NYC felt.

Reply

[-]

BenjaminSkanklin@reddit

I went to UA and had my fist experiences with city kids who found Albany to be boring, I asked why and they would say some version of "nothing happens *to* you here". It's hard to explain but I eventually understood when friends started moving there, you just leave the house and things happen to you/around you. In LA you just sit in your car for hours and ???

Reply

[-]

kaatie80@reddit

Huh, that's so interesting. I always wondered about stuff like that just happening *to* people. I grew up in LA and I think that's an apt observation. But, I think it also depends on the crowd you run with. There are definitely some people that are magnetic in any city.

Reply

[-]

TheShadowKick@reddit

I have, in fact, lost myself wandering NYC and had a great experience.

Reply

[-]

SmellGestapo@reddit

I'm always amazed at how people get the map so wrong. I don't know what it is because I've never heard these kinds of geographical mistakes being made when people visit other cities or regions. People think they can do a Malibu winery and Disneyland in the same day. That's 60 miles. But nobody would try to do a Napa winery and Fisherman's Wharf in San Francisco in the same day, and that's almost the same distance.

Reply

[-]

boldjoy0050@reddit

60 miles takes forever in LA but in other parts of the country it's maybe a 1hr drive. I have coworkers here in Dallas that drive 60mi one way to get to work. So I think that's where the confusion comes from.

Reply

[-]

TheManWhoWasNotShort@reddit

These are both California traffic things, though. You *may* consider (and people sometimes do) go from Denver to Garden of the Gods, shop in Manitou Springs, and be back in Denver for an evening baseball game. That’s about 80 miles both ways, and yet a very doable day. People massively underestimate distances, but they even more so don’t account for California traffic

Reply

[-]

professorwormb0g@reddit

Definitely 60 miles in upstate NY you cJ commute without traffic. I visit State Parks that far away all the time then I'm back in my own town to do different events that very day and I don't feel very taxed because the commute is easy as balls.

Reply

[-]

Consistent-Mix-9803@reddit

Some Europeans MASSIVELY underestimate just how big the continental USA is, and just how spread out our cities are. I recall someone mentioning once they had European visitors in Seattle who asked if they could visit the Grand Canyon on the weekend. Those two locations are over a thousand miles apart; that is not a weekend trip.

Reply

[-]

GOTaSMALL1@reddit

In all fairness 'cause they prolly didn't know. Seattle exists in some kind of rip in the space/time continuum and it's at least 1000 miles from everything in existence.

Reply

[-]

avocado_whore@reddit

That is so true. There’s *nothing* around it. What’s the next biggest city? Portland I guess but then what? San Fran? It’s just in its own little corner of the US.

Reply

[-]

IdenticalThings@reddit

That coastal highway south to Oregon is just epic, stunning vistas all the way down through Northern California. As a Canadian guy I was expecting more of what we have but you'll are fucking spoiled.

Reply

[-]

aprillikesthings@reddit

I mean, the San Juan islands are beautiful. But your average Seattle tourist isn't planning a trip to the San Juan islands.

Reply

[-]

DiscordantRaven@reddit

Vancouver, BC resident here. We are a 2.5 hour drive away from Seattle 😅

Reply

[-]

avocado_whore@reddit

Ok that’s true! I was thinking just thinking inside the US. But that is a fair point, it is not barren up there. I’ve heard great things about Vancouver and I would love to visit.

Reply

[-]

netopiax@reddit

Like he says, nothing around there (Only joking, Vancouver is awesome)

Reply

[-]

mcm87@reddit

This place is a geographical oddity! It’s two weeks from everywhere!

Reply

[-]

Kellosian@reddit

Houston meanwhile is 2 hours away from Houston

Reply

[-]

aprillikesthings@reddit

I'm a Dapper Dan man!

Reply

[-]

Puukkot@reddit

Unlike what? Utah?

Reply

[-]

ToddMath@reddit

I heard a story about a tourist in the Space Needle. He pointed to an island 20 miles away, and asked, "Is that Alaska?" That is mind-bogglingly the wrong scale. The closest part of Alaska is 20-30x further away.

Reply

[-]

WeaponizedPoutine@reddit

I have made mention before of some cousins visiting for the first time from Jordan and thinking they can fly into SJC and we coud take them to Disneyland and the next day drive to NY, NY (for a day).... we took them to Paramount's Great America instead.

Reply

[-]

BuildNuyTheUrbanGuy@reddit

I don't think it's that crazy. They just don't know the traffic but you could tailgate, and go to and LSU game then go have dinner in New Orleans before a night cap at your rooftop hotel.

Reply

[-]

SmellGestapo@reddit

That sounds crazy and I'd never do that if I were a tourist. 160 miles roundtrip in one day? I'm supposed to be on vacation! Google Maps is showing Tiger Stadium to NOLA is 1 hour and 16 minutes right now.

Reply

[-]

TheManWhoWasNotShort@reddit

If you go somewhere more natural, you’ll find yourself doing it a lot. A Colorado vacation may find you basing yourself in Denver and going to Rocky Mountain National Park, Garden of the Gods, and more all in one trip. A trip to Montana might have you doing Yelllowstone and Glacier in the same go, and basing yourself somewhere like Bozeman. A trip out to Tennessee would probably tempt a lot of people to stay in Nashville but do a day down in Memphis to see some of the museums and sites there, then back to Nashville for the night. I don’t think that’s that ridiculous unless there’s outrageous traffic

Reply

[-]

jfchops2@reddit

I've seen a ton of the country this way. It's a ton of driving, but it's also the only way to see a lot of places out west in any reasonable amount of time.

Reply

[-]

BuildNuyTheUrbanGuy@reddit

People do it pretty frequently for those games.

Reply

[-]

gaspitsagirl@reddit

This, exactly. Staying in Downtown L.A. isn't the best way to experience L.A., like staying in Manhattan would be the way to do NYC. You have to choose an area of Los Angeles COUNTY and possibly even Orange County for your hotel or main focus, but you're likely going to be exploring the entire county and beyond, rather than just one city center.

Reply

[-]

crackanape@reddit

But how can you really explore anything? You have to be in a car to get anywhere, and that's the opposite of exploring.

Reply

[-]

stangAce20@reddit

I think that’s more just a lot of tourists just not having a clue about how big Los Angeles (if not the United States in general) is.

Reply

[-]

IdenticalThings@reddit

Tourists in general don't understand size. I wanted to drive from Sydney Australia to Cairns and realized it was like 1700 miles which is like LA to Houston

Reply

[-]

arbivark@reddit

LA to texas, 700 miles. texas border to houston, 1000 miles. these figures may not be exact, but it's the general idea.

Reply

[-]

DURTY_HAIRY@reddit

Put simply: as a tourist, you want spontaneity and culture, neither of which exist in LA.

Reply

[-]

Katyafan@reddit

In what universe is there a lack of culture in LA?

Reply

[-]

DURTY_HAIRY@reddit

Wild guess here: you’ve never lived in New York, right?

Reply

[-]

Katyafan@reddit

It doesn't have to be the same. But to deny the incredible cultural diversity and breadth here is just wrong.

Reply

[-]

MacNeal@reddit

Does downtown New York City have a funicular railway? No, it does not. Does downtown LA have a funicular railway? Why, yes, it does. It has had one since 1901, in fact.

Reply

[-]

CTeam19@reddit

Damn people really need to have better Itinerary planning. I have had like a list 40 deep of places to visit and eat and move things around based on geography for the best travel in LA. Granted it helps that my sister now lives there so I get her advice on somethings. But this is my parents did it and we were able to go to Disney World, Talladega Motor Speedway, and Shiloh Battlefield(among other Civil War sites) driving in 2 weeks.

Reply

[-]

InsertEvilLaugh@reddit

LA is so spread out compared to how condensed NYC is due to geography. As the Country expanded Westward, towns started spreading out over larger and larger areas.

Reply

[-]

Phil_ODendron@reddit

> visit the La Brea Tar Pits I've always wanted to visit The The Tar Tar Pits.

Reply

[-]

owledge@reddit

Out-of-towners in general underestimate how big and spread out SoCal is. You’ll see lots of transplants asking if something like San Clemente to Burbank is a reasonable daily commute. A simple look at Google Maps would tell you that’s 80 miles and 2+ hours during rush hour.

Reply

[-]

FashionGuyMike@reddit

Man it’s been a while since I went to the brea tar pits. Thanks for reminding me that it exists

Reply

[-]

amcjkelly@reddit

Fitzgerald's view of Hollywood: "I hate the place like poison... with a sincere hatred.” That was like in the 1930s, so this isn't new.

Reply

[-]

Tricky_Succotash_882@reddit

Tourist from the UK here thats visited both! NY is very accessible and tourist friendly. People are ( overall ) welcoming as well as a strong sense of identity and culture as a city. I'd rate it in my top 3 cities of all time! LA, like many people have said, is impossible to walk around. Many people from Europe walk from place to place a LOT so I think that threw me off a bit. I also found the people quite rude and judgmental, kind of like they are above you? Obviously not all but I can see why influencers migrate there. Like every place ever, I expect to see homeless people. I was so disturbed by some of the homelessness in LA, in comparison to NY and other cities I've seen around the world, it was on a different level to anything I've ever seen

Reply

[-]

Hey_Laaady@reddit

The best way to see LA is to visit a relative or friend who lives here. My sister lived here when I came to really know it. I have lived here over twenty years and have hosted countless relatives and friends. It's much easier for me to drive them around and for us to go to myriad things together, because I know what they want to see, what's worth seeing, and how long it takes to get there. Plus they save tons of money staying with me. It's fun playing tour guide.

Reply

[-]

crackanape@reddit

> The best way to see LA is to visit a relative or friend who lives here. I've done that on several occasions and they always have us go everywhere in a car which is really not a pleasant experience.

Reply

[-]

Hey_Laaady@reddit

You're not going to experience LA without traffic, whether you stay with someone you know or not. It's a twofer.

Reply

[-]

crackanape@reddit

I usually end up ditching my hosts eventually and riding the metro, I find it way less scary than driving. We go to what we know, I guess.

Reply

[-]

Kondrias@reddit

That is a probably a big part of what influences the experience. You know how to get around and where it is worth to get around TO! NYC you can go anywhere easily and accessible cause good public transit. Wish we had it here. But not LA. But if you know where to be taken, there is some wild and wonderful stuff here.

Reply

[-]

CatOfGrey@reddit

Lifetime Los Angeles area resident. Travel time to New York City is about 2-3 weeks. Los Angeles is much less 'tourist friendly', in that the city is much more spread out. Key tourist areas are often more than an hour's drive separated from each other, and then factor in traffic. In addition, the Los Angeles 'best known' sites are often underwhelming. The "Hollywood" area is not very tourist friendly, for example, compared to the Statue of Liberty. Los Angeles has a variety of impressive museums and cultural centers, but that's not the attraction of going to LA, compared to NYC, where you go explicitly to see some of those things. LA sells a 'movie star' or 'media' experience, but that doesn't really exists for tourists in the LA area. And then you take a trafficked drive down to Anaheim, and pay for parking to go visit the Mouse Republic that is what Disney has become. Cool if you are a Disney fan from anywhere outside of LA and Florida, but not so much otherwise. There is one 'killer app' for Los Angeles, and that is natural resources, and then not very many tourists come here for that purpose. You can swim in the ocean, hike in the mountains, rock-climb in the desert, then go skiing for the day, if it's not Summer. *And you can do all these things in a long weekend, if you are crazy enough.*

Reply

[-]

hottapioca@reddit

"Travel time 2-3 weeks" are you walking there lol? It's less than a 6 hour flight and only a 3 day bus ride??????

Reply

[-]

pizza_for_nunchucks@reddit

Travel by wagon. I wonder what they do to cross the Mississippi. Do they ford it, caulk the wagon or wait for a ferry?

Reply

[-]

CatOfGrey@reddit

I never understood why caulking the wagon wouldn't help the success rate of fording the stream. Also: it depends on the depth of the river. You can't ford the stream if it's more than 3 feet deep. Don't forget to buy more bullets!

Reply

[-]

Different-Tie-1085@reddit

Sounds like caulking it prevented leaks... you have to be ABLE to cross..plus it's a river, not a stream.

Reply

[-]

rawbface@reddit

Only about 30 hours via the Cannonball Run.

Reply

[-]

CatOfGrey@reddit

My time spent in NYC. Two trips, each a bit over a week.

Reply

[-]

hottapioca@reddit

Oh lol 😆

Reply

[-]

DarkWolf2017@reddit

I mean some still consider Anaheim part of the Los Angeles area, and there’s Disneyland there. I would think that kinda counts, even if it is considered the lesser of the 2 parks, and I’d guess people who go for that are there specifically to stay at the park, not experience LA.

Reply

[-]

Hey_Laaady@reddit

To one of your points, Hollywood itself isn't the "Hollywood" people think of as far as movie studios. Much of that is in Burbank.

Reply

[-]

Kellosian@reddit

I'd imagine that the perception of "Hollywood" is also really outdated. The American film industry is a bunch of global conglomerates operating on every corner of Earth and not a bunch of studios literally right next to each other in the same 10mi^2 of town. AFAIK there isn't really a "backlot" anymore, filming can happen basically anywhere on Earth (loads of movies are all done in Georgia for tax reasons, TV shows are shot in Toronto for the same reason).

Reply

[-]

Loud_Insect_7119@reddit

One funny consequence of this is that New Mexico is also a big filming site nowadays, so I've sometimes seen movies that are set in LA but clearly filmed in places I recognize in NM. They're not really that similar geographically/climate-wise, but they both are deserts with mountains and a bit of Spanish influence on the architecture so it's possible enough to substitute them. I don't spot it super often, but I've done it a couple times and it always strikes me as really funny just because you do think of LA as *the* place to film, but it's really not anymore to the point that they'll even film elsewhere when the movie is set in Hollywood.

Reply

[-]

nothing_is_perfekt@reddit

The studios still have their old buildings in Hollywood, but they are not exactly open to the public. They are private businesses.

Reply

[-]

Hey_Laaady@reddit

Oh no, there are definitely back lots. Warner Bros. has a huge one, for example. There's a joke here about Burbank -- Warner Bros. owns half of Burbank. Disney owns the other half. While you're correct that location has expanded to include tons of places outside of CA, the physical studios here are still definitely in the mix.

Reply

[-]

the-annoying-vegan@reddit

Born, raised and reside in La: people go to LA expecting the wrong thing. It´s spread out and hard to get that "hollywood" experience. A lot of tourist attractions are underwhelming and not packed together. Look at any overlay of Manhattan on DTLA, it would be incredible if we had that many tourist attractions packed in such a small area. There are plenty of things to see in that area, but not many tourists really go somewhere to experience those types of things. For tourists coming in expecting to experience a city like how they experienced New York, will be disappointed.

Reply

[-]

CarrionComfort@reddit

LA is significantly more boring than most people think, it can get hot as balls and you need a car to get most places quickly and comfortably.

Reply

[-]

EternalLostandFound@reddit

God forbid it rains or there’s a marine layer during someone’s vacation, because how dare a city have normal weather.

Reply

[-]

SmellGestapo@reddit

I do feel bad though, as a local, when that happens. We had April showers, May gray, and then June gloom this year. It felt like the sun didn't truly come out for months. If I were visiting from Iowa and wanting to lay on the beach I'd be pretty disappointed.

Reply

[-]

velociraptorfarmer@reddit

Someone visiting California from the Midwest during late spring, summer, or early fall is a moron. Our warm months up here are incredible. The time to bail to California is during January and February when we're giving Hoth a run for its money.

Reply

[-]

_roldie@reddit

I felt the opposite. I was so glad thankful for the gray gloomy weather. Can't wait till it's back.

Reply

[-]

SmellGestapo@reddit

For locals I get it. I just felt bad for the tourists.

Reply

[-]

trampolinebears@reddit

New York is just as hot in the summer, and significantly more humid.

Reply

[-]

professorwormb0g@reddit

Beautiful during the fall though!

Reply

[-]

procgen@reddit

Spring too. And winter, for the first fifteen minutes after it snows.

Reply

[-]

SmellGestapo@reddit

This sub hates LA *and* loves car-centric city design, though.

Reply

[-]

PacSan300@reddit

OP's mention of Reddit comments disliking LA gets a new dimension when considering how Redditors view car-centric design. Many Redditors loathe cars and non-walkable places, and LA unfortunately fits the bill. NYC, on the other hand, has a compact, public transport-based, and walkable layout: the Holy Grail of urban design for many Redditors.

Reply

[-]

OceanicMetropolitan@reddit

That’s because LA has too many brown people for their liking.

Reply

[-]

Dai-The-Flu-@reddit

And NYC doesn’t?

Reply

[-]

OceanicMetropolitan@reddit

NYC doesn’t have a car centric design. Please read the whole thread you’re replying to next time.

Reply

[-]

Dai-The-Flu-@reddit

I never said it does

Reply

[-]

followedbyferrets@reddit

Because other large cities don’t. Weak

Reply

[-]

Maktesh@reddit

Don't worry about them; take a look at their page. They're just trolling.

Reply

[-]

OceanicMetropolitan@reddit

I want you to take some deep breaths, maybe have a sip of water, and then tell me what exactly you find upsetting here.

Reply

[-]

yaya-pops@reddit

dafuq

Reply

[-]

FashionGuyMike@reddit

He’s from NYC. Don’t mind him

Reply

[-]

OceanicMetropolitan@reddit

Please, do go on.

Reply

[-]

FashionGuyMike@reddit

New Yorkers be funny. And not haha funny

Reply

[-]

OceanicMetropolitan@reddit

And what do you find funny about what I said?

Reply

[-]

FashionGuyMike@reddit

Cuz that is definitely not the reason people dislike LA

Reply

[-]

OceanicMetropolitan@reddit

Never said it was, skip. Would you like me to refer you to some adult literacy programs in your area?

Reply

[-]

Sivalleydan2@reddit

Well, LA certainly has better tacos than NYC.

Reply

[-]

yaya-pops@reddit

xD

Reply

[-]

GOTaSMALL1@reddit

Hey man... I did my part. I drug my wife with me when I escaped. So Cal -1 brown person... Utah +1 brown person.

Reply

[-]

0x706c617921@reddit

That's an oxymoron, lol.

Reply

[-]

OceanicMetropolitan@reddit

Lifelong NYC resident here: Living here in the summer is like spending 3 months in a sauna someone just peed in.

Reply

[-]

frogvscrab@reddit

Yeah I was gonna say, LA and NYC have the same average temps during summer, but NYC is dramatically more humid on average.

Reply

[-]

Darkfire757@reddit

Speaking from experience summer in AL and summer in NJ/NY is basically the same level of satan’s taint

Reply

[-]

OceanicMetropolitan@reddit

I was recently a groomsman at an outdoor wedding in Tuscaloosa. They had a fan and cover set up for the guests, but by the end of the vows the entire wedding party looked like they had just gotten out of the pool.

Reply

[-]

RGV_KJ@reddit

Agree. LA for its size is very underwhelming. I loved the rest of SoCal. Orange County was great. San Diego has a nice vibe as well.

Reply

[-]

HuckleberrySpy@reddit

Quickly and comfortably? I think it's likely visitors underestimate just how much time they're going to spend sitting in traffic to get to the places they want to go in the LA area.

Reply

[-]

Flamelord29@reddit

Even with a car, the 'quickly' is far from guaranteed

Reply

[-]

SquidwardGrummanCorp@reddit

New York is a real city, LA is an extended suburb.

Reply

[-]

gold818@reddit

I feel like NYC is what people think America is but in reality it's LA with its cookie cutter housing and boring polluted beaches. People used to watch shows like Rocket Power back in the day and think LA would have this action laid back vibe to it but in reality it's a bunch of people at a Giant shopping mall. New York on the other hand has pretty much become a stereotype of itself to the point it looks like a Disney interpretation of what New York is but it's actually the reality when you walk by 48th Street.

Reply

[-]

procgen@reddit

NYC feels like its own country.

Reply

[-]

Maynard078@reddit

Yep. That said, I like 'em both equally. NYC has a vibe that can't be beat. And LA has the sunshine, mountains, and Coastal highway. And Laurel Canyon.

Reply

[-]

High_Life_Pony@reddit

It’s mostly an expectations thing. I live in Los Angeles, and I really like it here. It’s not a particularly tourist friendly city. Public transportation doesn’t serve a city well that is so spread out. People expect the glamour of Hollywood, but don’t realize that glamour only exists in private homes. Traffic and homelessness is all they see. Our beaches are cold, nightlife is tame. Its just not what people expect. Living here is great if you know your way around though. Loads of natural beauty and nature, a dynamic arts, culture, and culinary scene, etc. I met a guy at a bar that was on his way to the airport, traveling for work. I said yeah, traffic isn’t too bad at this time, you can probably get to the airport in about an hour. He almost shit himself because his expectation for a 12 mile trip was about 15 minutes… And that interaction pretty much sums it up.

Reply

[-]

Similar_Victory5166@reddit

i worked in hollywood on cahuenga, and my favorite thing to do was watch tourists come down the walk of fame and be visibly disappointed by the dirt and vagrancy. same with venice beach. people expect a five star, luxury, movie experience. but a lot of tourist traps are dirty and expensive. people don’t like that

Reply

[-]

Wolf97@reddit

I honestly had a great time at the Walk of Fame. For anyone reading, go early in the morning. If you go during mid-day it will be terrible. But early to mid-morning is pleasant. Also take the tour of the Chinese Theatre if you are interested in film/US history.

Reply

[-]

nothing_is_perfekt@reddit

The beaches being cold is a good mention. They are beautiful, but so cold.

Reply

[-]

lakeorjanzo@reddit

Well said about the glamour being confined to private homes. I was surprised by the tameness of the (queer) nightlife — New York is lowkey WILD haha

Reply

[-]

bellairecourt@reddit

I have lived in and near NYC, and near LA in Orange County. There were some things about LA and Southern California that are cool, but I had a much harder time making friends to hang out with in LA than in NYC. People in NYC go out for drinks after work with coworkers. They don’t have to drive home. People in LA would just go home after work. NYC is more friendly and social than LA imo. (This was when I was in my 20s and valued having a social life.)

Reply

[-]

elainegeorge@reddit

Los Angeles is soooooo spread out. If you want to visit LA, get different hotels every day or two, or expect to spend all your time in a vehicle. NYC - you can find things to do in a walkable distance. If you like nature, you have the variety in Los Angeles. Each city has its perks.

Reply

[-]

Stepsonrakes@reddit

Why were the cubs playing during school hours?

Reply

[-]

CategoryTurbulent114@reddit

LA is so busy everywhere all the time.

Reply

[-]

beyphy@reddit

LA Native here. It's probably due to a few things: * LA does not have a good and efficient public transportation system. LA is the only tier 1 world city (AFAIK) that does not have a subway system to the airport. Other cities have had that for decades and LA is *finally* getting one next year. The subway system in the city is being expanded and will be significantly improved in the next five years or so. * Hollywood is kind of a dump and very sketchy. I think tourists expect that they're just going to run into celebrities everywhere in Hollywood. But that is not the case. * Since public transportation is bad, you need to drive places. One problem is that traffic is really bad. This is at least partially due to not having a good public transportation system. So people need to drive everywhere. And that makes traffic worse than it otherwise would be. People likely come from places without traffic problems. So they assume things like if something is 15 miles away, it's only 15 minutes away. When in reality that could be like 1 - 2 hours+ away. * In addition to traffic, you also have to deal with other driving problems like finding parking, paying for gas, being careful to avoid parking / traffic tickets, etc. These are additional hassles you wouldn't have to deal with in other places. * The homeless situation is really bad here. Much worse than what you'd find in places like NYC. That's not exactly something you'd want to deal with on a vacation.

Reply

[-]

crackanape@reddit

> LA is the only tier 1 world city (AFAIK) that does not have a subway system to the airport. I'm not sure what a tier 1 world city is, but NYC also doesn't have a subway to the airport. Thanks to dumb federal funding restrictions, you have to ride the subway to a parking lot at the edge of the airport grounds and then take a hinky lego elevated train to the airport. Mumbai doesn't have a rail connection to the airport (though they're building one). There must be others as well among the world's top cities though I struggle to come up with one at the moment.

Reply

[-]

beyphy@reddit

I think my previous language was too restrictive. The subway doesn't need to be *directly* to the airport. I just meant there needs some form of public transportation, ideally rail, that will take you to the airport. With JFK, you can take trains to do that e.g. Skytrain to some other train to the subway. LA has nothing like that. It's the only T1 city where you either have to drive, take a shuttle, or take the bus to get to the airport. One subway line is currently near the airport. But you also still have to get off of it and take a shuttle to take you the rest of the way. I would classify world class cities as being economic powerhouses. They also tend to be some of the biggest cities in their regions / countries. And so they have lots of money to do things like build subway stations. So I'm not sure if Mumbai would fit into that classification. Examples of some world-class cities I'd include are probably LA, NYC, London, Shanghai, Tokyo, Paris, perhaps Taipei, perhaps Chicago, etc.

Reply

[-]

hottapioca@reddit

I've never heard anyone loving NY but hating LA unless they are natives of those cities so I really don't know what you mean. Different personality types will prefer different areas, just like anywhere else. I don't think there's one reason for your question and I don't think what you're saying is what the majority of tourists experience. This seems like a generalized perspective you made based off what a few friends said or something.

Reply

[-]

lekoli_at_work@reddit

New york is filled with angry helpful people. LA is filled with friendly useless people. So that could also be part of it. New York is also easy to navigate, and even though there are lots of people everywhere, there is still plenty of stuff for everyone. and great sites to see. LA has a few landmarks, but not much else.

Reply

[-]

Sorry_Astronaut@reddit

I’m from England and have been to both. I didn’t like New York but I loved LA. I love the beach and mountains and general laid back feeling of much of LA, whereas much of the New York I saw was suited, head down, rude and depressed, with no nature outside of a big park. Just depends on the person I guess, but I can see why many would like one and not the other

Reply

[-]

Easy_Break@reddit

I live in nyc and we have all that, tons of nature, tons of beaches, tons of huge parks and forests, amazing views of hills and mountains from great nature trails. But you stayed in Manhattan, obviously. Just last month I took the most relaxing morning ferry ride from Wall Street in manhattan to a big beach, yes, still within NYC, then just a bus ride back to my home in queens, and that all only took the first half of the day, https://youtu.be/rg9gkd7Jcrk You can take a very short bus or train ride and be at any number of beautiful mountains for hiking from the city. Even within NYC there is way more than Central Park. If you like nature so much, why didn't you bother to see what was available? It's not new york's fault you didn't do any real research into what they have. If you saw all that in LA you must have taken long car trips to either the beach or the mountains or both. So why didn't you do that in New York where you can get similar things?

Reply

[-]

im_on_the_case@reddit

Hold up, have you ever even been to LA? The mountains aren't that far from the city. The time it takes you to get from Manhattan to the Catskills is the same time it would take to get from LA to Yosemite. There's a 10,000 foot peak in LA county (Mt Baldy). Mt Lukens the highest point in the actual city is about the same height as the highest point in the whole of New York State. Yes there's lots of great nature and hiking around NYC but the proximity to actual mountains doesn't remotely compare to LA.

Reply

[-]

Easy_Break@reddit

Yes I used to live there and my entire extended family is still out there. Loved it. We are not comparing dick sizes here, *how did we even get to comparing mountain sizes between the east and west coast* which is common sense US geography? The point is not "how long does it take to get to a 10k ft high mountain in NY vs LA". The point of this person's post was they thought there was NO nature to be had when visiting NYC "outside of a big park". It seems vastly unfair for someone looking for nature... where in LA you drive (because of course you do) 30-45 minutes in any direction and find a beach or a hiking area, but in NYC you didn't drive anywhere, sat in one neighborhood the entire time and say "well there's nothing here but Central Park." That is utterly ridiculous. No you aren't going to get the sheer amounts of beaches and/or heights of mountains as CA, but the point is you can have them. They are no less beautiful to visit and yes they exist within a very reasonable distance. It's a different vibe. Cute small towns here along the river near (comparatively) smaller mountains and valleys. It's quaint, it's beautiful, it's charming. It exists. As well as a load of other wonderful areas even inside city limits. Sure, on average it's probably an extra 15-45 minutes drive to get to a place like Bear Mountain or similar in NY. Big whoop. That's not that much further. Frankly I'm tired of people from outside america, not only that but also other americans, who think if you go to NYC you will just have wall to wall city with a single Central Park for nature as if you are visiting Star Wars land. But you don't go to NYC for nature you go for the bright lights and big city, many others have said it on this thread. But it doesn't preclude the fact that it still has great nature resources available. Just because most tourists ignore that fact doesn't meant it doesn't exist.

Reply

[-]

Curmudgy@reddit

Did you miss the beaches in NYC? (Coney Island and Rockaway).

Reply

[-]

Black_Hipster@reddit

Larger, more invested tourist industry. Easier to travel by walking. We're also just better.

Reply

[-]

bettyx1138@reddit

cuz LA is boring

Reply

[-]

crackanape@reddit

NYC gives to you all day long. You don't need any plan or even a map. You can walk out of your hotel and keep walking in random directions and you will see interesting things for as long as you keep walking. In LA you have to pull it out of the city like Arthur drawing the sword from the stone. You have to figure out how to get everywhere and then spend an hour commuting through bleak suburban wastelands between each thing you see/do/eat. Totally opposite experiences.

Reply

[-]

mklinger23@reddit

NYC is walkable and has transit. LA requires you to have a car almost everywhere you go.

Reply

[-]

Unicorns-and-Glitter@reddit

I personally hate NYC. It's dirty, people are rude, and you have to walk everywhere (which many people seem to prefer, but it's a lot if you're spending all day site seeing). Outside the city is ok, but it takes forever to get into the city of you stay outside of it. I love LA. There's so much to do and see, and the scenery is quite nice in most places. Try and stay away from the touristy areas and you'll be fine. I like taking drives through the hills, and there's a car museum with a vault tour that is UNMISSABLE. My mom is from New York and my dad is from LA, so I have a lot of experience with both.

Reply

[-]

solrac1144@reddit

Both are kind of trash. Literally. Trash in the streets, endless traffic, homelessness.

Reply

[-]

Maynard078@reddit

Homelessness is not just a big city problem anymore; it's an epidemic in rural areas, too. The middle class was hollowed out a long time ago and will take years to recover.

Reply

[-]

nothing_is_perfekt@reddit

There is definitely a housing crises everywhere. It isn’t for the same reasons that the middle class has been so hammered. Deindustrialization, government divestment, and globalization have hurt the middle class in the absence of better public policy. Housing is a different animal. Individual homeowners have essentially been given a veto over all development. Predictably, they favor their own selfish desires over the needs of others. There has not been sufficient building since the 1970’s. Rural areas can pretend to not have issues with homelessness because the homeless people usually squat in the woods. You literally don’t know they are there until you look for them. But the cost of housing in rural areas has gotten out of control as well.

Reply

[-]

Maynard078@reddit

Correct, and very well said. Housing and homelessness is a complex issue.

Reply

[-]

Goodlake@reddit

Because New York is one of the world’s greatest cities and Los Angeles isn’t. LA has a better climate, though.

Reply

[-]

JACKMAN_97@reddit

I’m from Australia and have been to LA. The big thing was LA was away more dirty then it looks in movies. The movies make LA look really nice where they don’t really do it with NY. I was also surprised by how many places in the city were not safe or just really run down. It was like what you see in the movies was like one area of LA

Reply

[-]

nothing_is_perfekt@reddit

LA is not tourist friendly because it is an ugly mass of suburban sprawl and doesn’t have decent public transit.

Reply

[-]

BigBoy1966@reddit

im one of those that hated LA. I was on vacation with the rest of my family. we basically couldn't get anywhere without a car so it takes away a lot of fun of exploring a city. After we had seen the basic tourist stuff we just stayed in the hotel. (i also thought it was a pretty uninteresting city if you compare it to new york)

Reply

[-]

Buff-Cooley@reddit

“LA” is a vague term bc it could mean the valley, Long Beach, Orange County or in the Inland Empire and each has its own distinct vibe and culture. The Greater LA area is place you need to live in to truly get the most out of it. From what I’ve heard from transplants who’ve moved to LA, it’s a place that gradually grows on you as it’s treasures become more apparent. It’s impossible for a tourist to be able to experience these treasures, unless you’re staying with someone who’s in the know and has the time to show you what’s up.

Reply

[-]

Traditional_Trust_93@reddit

In NY I'll go to Camp Half Blood: [https://goo.gl/maps/9JUKvHQDA69ixE37A](https://goo.gl/maps/9JUKvHQDA69ixE37A) It actually exists. If I'm going to LA on the other hand Corridor Digital Studio here I come. Its only about a three hr. drive from Morro Bay which is an amazing place and the only city I have stayed in while visiting family in Cali.

Reply

[-]

gypsymegan06@reddit

Because they’re two wildly different cities and cultures 🤷🏼‍♀️🤓

Reply

[-]

prp4241@reddit

Because NY is awesome and LA sucks.

Reply

[-]

dethb0y@reddit

NY is nicer than people expect from TV, LA is much nastier than people expect from TV.

Reply

[-]

WaddleD@reddit

I would say NY is a lot nastier than people expect as well. For instance you can’t really what the trash and piss smell on the streets is like unless you’ve actually been there.

Reply

[-]

JTP1228@reddit

Yea and also there's like 4 parts of NYC that are depicted. It's mainly midtown Manhattan. Obviously there are exceptions, but I'd say over 90% of media is the one borough

Reply

[-]

The_perfect_Melody@reddit

*Well said*

Reply

[-]

Emergency-Double-875@reddit

Cause we the best

Reply

[-]

crys1348@reddit

NYC is geared toward tourists. LA is not.

Reply

[-]

thethirdgreenman@reddit

There's a bunch of reasons, the main point about assumptions on NYC/LA being a good one. But the biggest one for me is that NYC is easier to experience because it has the best public transit in the country by FAR, whereas LA has horrible sprawl, horrible traffic, and minimal public transit. Therefore, while in NYC you can just kinda wander and spontaneously do stuff, it's not realistic to do that in LA, it's much more difficult to actually experience all the good parts when you're there because of the amount of time and effort it takes to do so unless you're based in a select few neighborhoods which would cost you your first born to be able to stay in

Reply

[-]

Wndlou@reddit

I have not read all of the comments so please forgive if this has already been said. I think one of the easy things about visiting New York is that you can do it easily without a vehicle. In LA you have to drive there & that can be really scary, especially on the freeway. I personally have loved visiting both equally!

Reply

[-]

brydye456@reddit

LA sucked. But I live 30 mins from NYC so I'm biased.

Reply

[-]

mfigroid@reddit

Los Angeles is more of a lifestyle

Reply

[-]

Easy_Break@reddit

There isn't much to LA the city proper to be honest. I used to live in LA and I did like it but you needed a car to drive anywhere fun, and everything cool was far apart and there wasn't decent transit for a tourist without a car who came by plane. Really inconvenient. Whereas manhattan you can do as much as you want all compacted into one small space. It's flashy, entertaining, in your face, colorful, noisy, and fun, it's like going to the arcade. Walk 10 minutes and you can see a million dollar theater show. Sure you can do that in LA after an hour stuck in traffic. And even if you wanted to go to the outer boroughs where barely any tourist goes, it's a 20 min ride on a $2.75 train you can pick up right outside your hotel room most likely. Then when you get to the outer borough it's easy to walk around to anything you want to see. It's like a theme park, really. In NYC if you really wanted to go outside the bright lights to the beach, the forest, an island, a fishing village, or see an ethnic neighborhood, you can do that for $2.75 and about 20 min to an hour travel time on a train, no driving, no traffic, all easy.

Reply

[-]

talie24@reddit

People in LA were blatantly rude to our faces. Not wanting to be helpful whatsoever. I honestly dont understand how New Yorkers get this bad wrap. Ny's were the complete opposite. In fact one of my good long time friends is a NY'er who i asked for directions one evening. I would never ever go back to LA.. it just feels dirty too lol

Reply

[-]

bambooozer@reddit

New York is 4000km from LA why are they so different?!?!

Reply

[-]

zmamo2@reddit

NYC is basically what most people expect it to be. It’s a fairly dense and urban metro area well connected by public transportation. Most of its attractions are easy to get to and it’s not hard to spend a few days exploring the city without ever needing a car. LA is literally nothing like that. We are investing in public transit but our current public transit is pretty awful and walkability is basically laughable. If you come to visit and actually want to see things you need a car and will be stuck on our congested freeways, which is a pretty awful way to experience a new city imo. .There is beautiful weather, great food, lots of entertainment, and beautiful sights to be had here but it’s pretty awful in terms of being a metropolis

Reply

[-]

tracygee@reddit

New York City to tourists is really basically Manhattan. And Manhattan is small (22.7 square miles), packed, and easy to get around with public transportation. Tourists know what to expect, what they will see, and what they want to see when they go. Los Angeles, on the other hand, is *502* square miles, sprawling, hard to get around, and attractions are kind of all over the place, depending what you want to see. Los Angeles can be glamour and stars (which is what everyone expects), sure, but you’re unlikely to actually be in those places or see that. It’s just kind of a sprawling city with horrible traffic.

Reply

[-]

divorcedbp@reddit

Because they are two very different places. New York is a giant, world-class city with a million things to do an experience. LA is one great big festering neon distraction that needs to learn to swim.

Reply

[-]

HPayne62@reddit

George Carlin had an interesting take on it. New York has a common shared energy and direction. LA is more loose and disjointed, kind of lacking its own identity in the same sense.

Reply

[-]

ChocolatePain@reddit

I'm from NYC and visited LA this year and absolutely loved it.

Reply

[-]

Bookkeeper967@reddit

New York doesn't have many special features, just high-rise buildings, and all ordinary cities can reach this level. However, Los Angeles is a very distinctive city, which means that some people like it but some people don't.

Reply

[-]

Current_Poster@reddit

One thing I can think of is that NYC is much denser, and more public-transit oriented, so that if you didn't like one thing on your visit, there isn't much between you and the next thing. If you're navigating Los Angeles (with a car, most likely), you're a fair distance between attractions.

Reply

[-]

bryku@reddit

New York bribes people with their delicious pizza.

Reply

[-]

DunebillyDave@reddit

Because they're very different cities. New York's weather is more like Britain; frequently rainy, overcast, snow in winter, etc. L.A. is sunny all the time, all four seasons. New York is compact and crowded. L.A. is spread out so far that the city is also a county. New York is old and has brick and cobblestone streets in some areas, and its steeped in tradition with American Colonial history. L.A. is new and made up of highways and overpasses and has its own traditions and Mexican missionary history. They're just very different places. Note: These are generalizations painted with a broad brush. There is much more nuance to both places than I have time or space to deal with here.

Reply

[-]

jamughal1987@reddit

My dad say too many homeless in California.

Reply

[-]

Crunchy__Frog@reddit

Accessibility. You can check a lot off your list in a single day in NYC. LA is much less tangible as a vacation destination.

Reply

[-]

JadeBeach@reddit

New York is accesible. LA has almost no public transportation and is really tough to get around in. It can be done, but it's hard. So while there are interesting areas of LA (the Strip not included, or the theme parks), it's hard to get to them, stay near them and navigate between them.

Reply

[-]

RainbowCrown71@reddit

LA’s downtown is full of mentally ill druggies, Hollywood has tent encampments everywhere, the metro feels very unsafe, you spend $100 just Ubering around, the vibe feels superficial. I always tell people to go to Orange County and San Diego, as that’s what people actually think LA is like. Instead, it’s a very crappy city.

Reply

[-]

urmyheartBeatStopR@reddit

Los Angeles is big. You can be at WeHo, Beverly Hills, Westwood (UCLA), any of the beaches (even the mid one Venice), Little Tokyo, Sawtelle (Japan town), China Town, Korea Town, Thai town, Walk of fame, Sunset, etc... USC is nice and then the surrounding is so bad. LA convention center is nice but fuck is it so bad to find parking to anime expo.

Reply

[-]

dathip@reddit

Because both states are loaded with POS liberals. Couldnt pay me to live in either state

Reply

[-]

IBlockShitheads@reddit

Because they're different kinds of assholes.

Reply

[-]

tu-vens-tu-vens@reddit

Because people have dumb opinions – LA is a superior city to New York and I will die on this hill. All the manmade wonders of NYC pale in comparison to a tall palm tree blowing in a 75-degree ocean breeze in front of a blue sky.

Reply

[-]

NudePenguin69@reddit

I know the point you are making however, I find it funny out of all the things you can compare between these two giant cities, your go to was the "nature" in LA vs the lack of it in NY, both of which pale in comparison to the nature 20 minutes outside the city.

Reply

[-]

fasterthanfood@reddit

Yeah, if your primary criterion is nature, you’re looking for literally the opposite of a city lol

Reply

[-]

tu-vens-tu-vens@reddit

Nature’s an important factor that makes many great cities what they are. Try imagining Rio de Janeiro, Barcelona, San Francisco, Miami, Hong Kong, Seattle, or Lisbon with different terrain. A good city is one where it’s enjoyable to walk around, and having good weather and hills and water to look at certainly helps in that regard.

Reply

[-]

_roldie@reddit

>Hong Kong Bruh. Hong Kong has even less nature than NYC.

Reply

[-]

tu-vens-tu-vens@reddit

The majority of Hong Kong Island is undeveloped. You have skyscrapers at the foot of 1800-foot mountains, scenic outlooks, and hiking trails strewn throughout.

Reply

[-]

OceanicMetropolitan@reddit

Yeah thank god NYC doesn’t have hills and water. Set foot outside of midtown the next time you decide to waddle through and you might get a sense of that.

Reply

[-]

tu-vens-tu-vens@reddit

The rivers are nice, the hills are unremarkable and barely register for people who don’t live on the eastern seaboard, and the weather is subpar. I haven’t even touched Midtown the past three times I visited.

Reply

[-]

OceanicMetropolitan@reddit

I get you can’t see much from the M&M store, but the fact you’re complaining about a city that’s literally built on an archipelago not having enough water is pretty funny. You don’t have to like NYC, but outright making things up to dislike about it is just sad.

Reply

[-]

tu-vens-tu-vens@reddit

Water is NYC’s best natural attribute. There’s still nowhere in the city as pleasant as the beach in Santa Monica or Malibu.

Reply

[-]

FuckTheStateofOhio@reddit

I agree with everything you said, but LA is not a walkable city lol. That's the reason I prefer San Francisco and NY to LA; spending time in LA reminds me of growing up in the semi-denae suburbs of New Jersey where everything was within a 30 min drive but nothing was within a 30 min walk.

Reply

[-]

tu-vens-tu-vens@reddit

The natural setting is a part of the city – its physical environment is shaped by its topography, climate, flora, sunlight patterns, and vistas. LA has those in spades, New York less so.

Reply

[-]

fasterthanfood@reddit

I live “in” LA, but I enjoyed my visit to NYC. Central Park, and the views of it from skyscrapers throughout the city, was part of the reason. However, I would argue/agree that LA is built to showcase the environment (ironically, this is a big part of why it’s much less dense, which is the root of many of the complaints people have about it). On most blocks, you see the sun, the skies, the trees, probably mountains and interesting-looking rocks. In NYC, you see city.

Reply

[-]

CupBeEmpty@reddit

People do a shit job of finding decent stuff to do in LA? No idea I fucking love going to LA and I say that as a huge fan of NYC.

Reply

[-]

JacqueTeruhl@reddit

Because LA is a garbage city. -San Diego

Reply

[-]

Additional-Software4@reddit

You mean Bland Diego.

Reply

[-]

avocado_whore@reddit

Omg I love this. 😅

Reply

[-]

JacqueTeruhl@reddit

Good, stay away. Spread the word.

Reply

[-]

NoHedgehog252@reddit

I certainly do.

Reply

[-]

SingleAlmond@reddit

One of the benefits of San Diego is that you can experience everything LA has to offer without actually having to live there

Reply

[-]

0x706c617921@reddit

Based

Reply

[-]

Maynard078@reddit

I like them both equally but live on a quiet lake smack in the middle of each, which I adore. The Midwest is really where it's at, baby, but don't tell anybody. It's my little secret.

Reply

[-]

Ananvil@reddit

One smells of pee. The other smells of artisanal pee.

Reply

[-]

GOTaSMALL1@reddit

I would guess... if you're from a City in another country or go to Cities in other countries and then ask what City to see in the US and go to LA expecting it to be like ther other Cities you live in or have seen... it's gonna be pretty damn disappointing.

Reply

[-]

Nyxelestia@reddit

"The city of Los Angeles is more of an idea than a real city. Most of what you see in Los Angeles on TV is somewhere in the *county*, but not in or even near the city."

Reply

[-]

sleepygrumpydoc@reddit

Honestly this is probably it. LA is huge and much more spread out (tourist attraction wise) for a city that NYC. NYC is much more like a city in Europe where you can walk it or just easily take public transit. LA is not the same, sure it’s a city but really it’s a bunch of cities pushed together to make a major metro area where you aren’t really walking or taking public transit the way you would otherwise. It’s has an extremely dense population but it’s not dense in the same fashion as people think of most urban cities. It’s why I see people liking SF more than LA event though SF has lost of the same problems, but you can walk it and go to the tourist things without having to hop in a car and get on the freeway. Both LA and NYC are cities but NYC is more similar to how cities function in lots of other countries so it fits the city idea better.

Reply

[-]

Im_Not_Nick_Fisher@reddit

I’ll assume you’re talking about NYC and not just New York State. But one possibility is that the metro Los Angeles area is gigantic. It’s larger than some states. So who knows what area they actually went to, or what they were even expecting. Meanwhile NYC is the opposite. It’s very compact, which some might be expecting when they are visiting a city

Reply

[-]

beyphy@reddit

Here's a map of other cities put inside the city of Los Angeles: https://i.imgur.com/uMPgOKQ.jpg

Reply

[-]

Im_Not_Nick_Fisher@reddit

That’s really cool! And shows just how massive it really is. I’ve always felt that Orlando was massive. But compared to LA or Houston it’s not that big. Orlando is sort of limited because of the shape of the state.

Reply

[-]

beyphy@reddit

Yup it's a cool pic. It's a bit deceptive however. Most of what people would consider LA is an area that would be known as "LA Proper." And so the LA Proper area would be perhaps the Minneapolis to Pittsburgh area if it were also extended to include to a good chunk of the coast (i.e. the Venice to Pacific Palisades area to the west.) Some areas on the map (e.g. Cleveland, St. Louis, Milwaukee, Manhattan, etc.) are more suburban and don't really have major attractions. So you wouldn't really have a reason to go there.

Reply

[-]

totalitariana_Grande@reddit

Well if we’re comparing metros—the NY metro is not only denser but also BIGGER than the LA metro. Furthermore NYC is part of the Northeastern Megalopolis.

Reply

[-]

SmellGestapo@reddit

NYC is denser than Los Angeles, but the suburbs surrounding New York drop off very quickly in terms of their density. The LA region has a lot of "dense sprawl," so the regional density is actually higher than New York's.

Reply

[-]

lakeorjanzo@reddit

As a New Yorker, LA feels more like a spread out (but still dense) region than a singular city. I’ve both driven and taken the metro, the metro is less scary for me than the highways, but it doesn’t serve many destinations

Reply

[-]

tsukiii@reddit

LA is the kind of place that has something for almost everyone (luxury shopping, beaches, sports, entertainment, hiking, ethnic foods of all kinds, etc) but you’ve gotta know where to go and you can’t do it all in one day.

Reply

[-]

redjessa@reddit

Oh boy, well they are very different cities. NY is easier to navigate for one. LA does not look like it does in television shows. I don't think people know how big it actually is. The spots they are probably interested in checking out are probably all very far away from each other. If people are wanting to visit Southern California, LA area, I would suggest staying in a beach city, having plenty of time and renting a car. There is plenty to do and see but it has a level of difficulty that is different from NYC.

Reply

[-]

studio28@reddit

>NY is easier to navigate for one. LA does not look like it does in television shows. Sure it does. it just looks like a lot of other things, too.

Reply

[-]

redjessa@reddit

Well true, maybe I worded that incorrectly. Often on shows, I think The Rookie is a good example, it appears as if everything is close and convenient. Somehow they get from Downtown to the Santa Monica Pier in like ten minutes or it appears that is part of the same beat. It is all spread out and not portrayed accurately on tv.

Reply

[-]

SingleAlmond@reddit

It's so easy to walk around LA and think "oh shit I saw this building on tv" or "hey this street was in a video game"

Reply

[-]

buried_lede@reddit

Cars, it makes LA a town where the place you stay overnight, the environment where you relax, is more important than elsewhere

Reply

[-]

Certainly-Not-A-Bot@reddit

The greater LA region is a car-infested wasteland. For tourists from countries with decent public transit, having to drive in traffic on unfamiliar highways in poor condition and with bad drivers is not a welcoming experience. New York, meanwhile, has among the best metros in the world, much less North America. It's very easy to only walk and take the subway in New York, which makes the city much more accessible and lively to tourists.

Reply

[-]

TheBuyingDutchman@reddit

It's been said a number of times here, but in order to see or do most fun activities in LA, you're going to need a car. To get to said fun activities, you're likely going to need to wait in traffic. The traffic is awful, and the freeways are bland concrete slabs that often are heavily littered with trash on the sides of the road. The public freeway infrastructure often looks downtrodden - old, worn concrete barricades, sun-faded traffic signs that may or may not be covered in graffiti. Dead, dried weeds all over the sides of the road. And, if in the summer and fall, it's going to be clear and hot, as you sit in your metal oven on the concrete. It's not a pleasant experience getting around the city. On top of that, there is also the major issue of homelessness. Large tent/tarp and RV encampments are common, especially as you get closer to downtown and Hollywood. But, it's scattered fairly regularly around the city. Seeing the despair of humanity is generally not an enticing tourist proposition. On top of this, everything is pretty spread out, so you can comfortably explore about two, MAYBE, three neighborhoods in a day. But, it's a lot of driving and a lot of trying to find parking in tight, congested streets and parking lots (which are inevitably full from like 11:00am - 5:00pm) Despite all this, once you get off the freeway and into a "normal" neighborhood, it can be a very pleasant experience. You just need someone to advise you or show you around the cool spots.

Reply

[-]

heytherefakenerds@reddit

I’m sure running into skid row can cause some negative reactions since most people think of LA as a “rich and famous” kind of place where everyone has so much money and it’s a good time. Whereas New York I believe it’s kind of disbursed and not so concentrated on one singular place (am not from these places but visited)

Reply

[-]

jephph_@reddit

>All the manmade wonders of NYC pale in comparison to a tall palm tree blowing in a 75-degree ocean breeze in front of a blue sky. LA’s palm trees are effectively man made as well.. Or, at least, they’re trucked in.. Those things don’t grow there natively

Reply

[-]

1Rab@reddit

NYC is walkable. LA was built cara.

Reply

[-]

NoHedgehog252@reddit

As an Eastern European, I have never heard of anyone having a positive New York experience.

Reply

[-]

Short-Size838@reddit

I’ve never been to NYC, but LA traffic stressed me out, it was not as glamorous as it’s portrayed, and it didn’t feel very walkable. Everything was impossible to get to, and I didn’t even go during peak tourist season. I had a nice time, but would probably never go again. Like someone else mentioned, it’s a very large place and so spread out so it you don’t feel like you ever reach that spot that’s like “Wow look it’s the famous City of Angles!” unlike the way I imagine it feels in Manhattan. That being said, everyone I spoke to was extremely friendly. I stayed at a motel 6 in just outside of Compton and was not intimidated at all compared to places I’ve stayed in smaller cities like New Orleans.

Reply

[-]

DeeDeeW1313@reddit

I like New York City better than LA because I hate traffic and love when things are walkable. So it’s truly just a personal preference. I don’t “hate” LA at all. But I wouldn’t choose to vacation there the way I would NYC.

Reply

[-]

uhbkodazbg@reddit

LA is a great city to visit if I have a reason to be there. Just going to hang out for a few days? Nah. NYC can be a lot of fun when you have a free afternoon to kill, a meticulously planned 2 week schedule, and everything in between.

Reply

[-]

FreekMeBaby@reddit

LA is extremely car-centric and spread out. As a tourist, you are basically driving the distance from one point of interest to the next. NYC on the other hand is way more compact, dense, walkable, with a pedestrian lifestyle. So as a tourist, you are literally experiencing everything about NYC - the diversity, the people, the neighborhoods, the architecture, the smell of food, etc - while you walk.

Reply

[-]

ucbiker@reddit

I think LA is great but it’s more difficult to “get” than New York. A car is sort of necessary, a motorcycle is better. A local to show you around is the best because a lot of the coolest things about LA are low key or out of the way. New York though, you can fly in, pop around the subway to all the major sights, and wander around famous named neighborhoods and see all the stuff you came for. Like I’m only sort of into fashion and when I wandered into SoHo I knew I was *somewhere* important even if I’d only vaguely ever heard of that neighborhood.

Reply

[-]

Antitenant@reddit

I am no expert on LA, but I have to imagine if you're a tourist, you've got a limited amount of time and probably limited transport options too. In NY, you can absolutely cover a lot of ground in one day and you've got public transport/walking to get around. LA is a different layout, a different vibe...I've never known too many people to say "I'm just going to wander around LA today."

Reply

[-]

MrAnachronist@reddit

LA is a huge, sprawling hellscape of freeways and gas stations. The air is yellow and the water tastes like sewer. Is there a nice downtown core? I have no idea, it all looked the same to me. I can get tacos at home, and after a while, all the single story concrete buildings covered in graffiti and spray painted murals look the same. New York is the dirtiest, noisiest place I’ve ever visited in the United States. Is the food good? Sure, but it isn’t so good that it’s worth waiting as long as you will wait to eat out there. I saw more people walking a couple blocks than I did in a year of living at home. It was exhausting. The fact of the matter is that New York has some famous attractions, and some famous neighborhoods. Visiting New York is an experience every American should have. Walking around and taking the subway in New York is vastly preferable to the Mad Max death race that is travel in LA. I hated visiting both of them, but I hated LA way more than New York.

Reply

[-]

wwhsd@reddit

If you go to LA as a tourist you’ll probably need to rent a car to get around. If you aren’t familiar with LA, you’ll probably plan to do a few touristy things each day that don’t seem that far apart but might end up stuck in LA traffic for a couple of hours each day trying to get from place to place.

Reply

[-]

notthegoatseguy@reddit

Never been to NYC but I enjoyed my time in LA. But I think NYC is easier with less knowledge/planning. LA takes research

Reply