Despite being the 2nd largest city in California, why is San Diego not as relevant as Los Angeles or San Francisco?

33 comments

1. Look at metro population not just the city population

2. San Francisco has silicone valley while LA has Hollywood.

3. It’s *very* relevant to the military and the military industry.

4. I just want to point out that SF being a “much smaller city” is due to it being 49 square miles. And size doesn’t always equate with “relevant”.

5. LA has the entertainment industry and San Francisco has a lot of cultural relevance.

6. As a San Diegan, I live 20 miles away from downtown and I’m still in the city limits if that puts things into context. The city sizes are just arbitrary at this point, it’s really the metro area that matters. In that sense, SD is definitely behind the Bay Area and possibly even behind OC (I haven’t done the math lol).

7. Because LA has the entertainment industry, and San Francisco has the history of counterculture; and more recently, the tech industry.

   San Diego is basically a navy town with nice beaches. That’s not a knock on San Diego… it’s universally considered one of the most beautiful cities in the US. But plenty of places have nice beaches and/or military bases.

8. Lol you framed the wrong question, now you asked about San Jose .

9. Metro≠city proper

   But to give you a more in depth (uneducated) answer it’s probably because SF is a port city centrally located. LA has a film industry that’s extremely well located for filming

10. LA and SF have a lot more reach due to entertainment and tech. San Diego still has a lot going on, just not with as much outreach

11. Um I live in Indiana, I am pretty sure San Diego is more relevant than my entire state. Maybe you just have middle child syndrome from SF and LA. It’s all in your perspective

12. SF punches above its weight on basically any metric.

13. *Note: this is a generalization of complicated things. I have absolutely no evidence to back up the connections I make. Obviously, the lives of individuals are more complicated than I make it seem. This theory is meant to at least make someone think about it as a reflection of myth and culture building.*

    I have a theory…Look at the demographics of all the cities. Next, consider “diversity” in general terms. LA and especially SF have, more or less, generally have been more diversified historically. Diversity is a good thing but certain members of the demographic population have a weird history with diversity in that they make it an ideal while at the same time hating it. Those groups kinda split up in California and grouped together in certain communities of like-minded individuals. And then word of the American Dream gets out and starts to lure people in from outside those communities like never before. Even though the populations exploded and diversified the cities, the focus remained on cities where the historic value of diversity remains a symbol. I’ll put it in plain terms, San Jose and San Diego are historically more white towns whose populations have exploded because of increasing opportunities. The fact that they’re large today mostly seems accidental and the reason why people still idolize LA and SF as the symbols of what it means to be a good person through embracing diversity. Though, that rarely gets reflected in practical ways because it’s an image that people think of, not the reality.

14. Less relevant to who or what? I love San Diego

15. Metro area is more important than city proper. SF is a much larger metro area with SF, Oakland, San Jose, Silicon Valley in general…

    Also, LA and Bay Area have much larger economic pull with Hollywood and tech.

16. Houston is the 4th largest city in the nation by population.

    It *might* crack the top 25 in cultural relevance. It’s not all about population.

    LA has the entertainment industry. The Bay Area is the heart of the tech industry.

17. I do not think of SF as being smaller than SD lol I think you are looking at the wrong metrics

18. It’s farrrrrr.

19. As someone born and raised in San Jose I can answer your question as to why San Jose has a big population with 0 cultural clout:

    San Jose was a farm town with a lot of land due to being in a valley that could be used to build homes, especially in comparison to San Francisco which (as I said before) is limited.

20. LA has bigger ports and damn near everything that comes down to San Diego has to come through LA.

21. San Diego doesn’t have a major industry besides the military. LA is entertainment mecca. SF is tech mecca.

22. As a San Diegan I want to say San Diego is super boring and irrelevant.

    There is literally nothing to do here and I spend my days wishing I was somewhere else.

    Once again, there is nothing to do here, so please don’t come down here people from LA and SF.

23. >Edit: Also San Jose which seems even less relevant while being the 3rd largest city in California.

    This part is extra wild to me as someone who grew up in the Bay. It’s constantly overshadowed by not only SF, but also us (Oakland) even though it’s the only Bay Area city with over a million residents. Funny enough when I went to SJ a while ago, it felt less “urban” than either of those two cities. Its downtown is relatively sleepy, and it’s even smaller than Oakland’s.

24. I grew up in San Diego. Beyond amazing. It’s just a fun easy place to live with beautiful people everywhere and aloha shirt weather pretty much year round. Great environment to produce nothing.

25. San Diego is more of a tourist area and vacation spot. They do not have the same kind of job market as cities like LA, SF,Chicago, NYC, Boston, etc… the weather is very nice and they did use it for military years ago, which the military is still there but they usually stay to themselves now.

    San Diego is the equivalent of Newport, Rhode Island basically, just much larger from all the traveling I have done so far. However San Diego has the palm trees like in Florida…and it seems to have a big population of adults aged 55+ and people under age 24.

    People aged 25-54 often want to find a career and buy a house which is hard to do in Sn Diego because it is very expensive and the job market does not match the cost of living…so you have a lot of wealth in San Diego but it is often foreign investors and old money that was the driving force behind it. Many of the wealthy in San Diego do not have regular jobs.

26. San Francisco is the tech capital of the world and financial capital of the American west.

    Los Angeles is the entertainment capital of the world and a sizable tech and financial hub on its own.

    San Diego is a beautiful city with a sizable Navy presence as well as a decent tech and science industry. But from a purely economic perspective, it’s nothing special.

    As for San Jose, it’s normally considered part of the San Francisco Metro Area.

27. I’d like to add SD is kind of isolated. Mexico to the south, Camp Pendleton to the north, and nothing to the east. LA and OC are one megalopolis and it’s the same in the bay area.

28. metro population. San Jose is basically a bloated suburb of SFC anyway, especially because I don’t think it has that much more to it than any other Bay Area suburb.

29. LA and the bay are way more iconic than San Diego. San Deigo is cool but there aren’t even close to as many movies and stuff taking place there.

30. San Diegan here. It’s mainly because of the city’s close proximity to Los Angeles.

31. San Fran was the biggest, richest city in California until the early 1900s. Because if it’s early prominence, especially during the gold rush years. It already had alot of the economic institutions in the state as well as cultural ect. It’s still seen as a cultural and economic hub today, because of this it gets an outsized influence. San Diegos rise or relatively more recent, and it’s basically a overgrown military town, without the established economic, political and economic institutions built in that create dominance

32. Because you only hear about the cities that have nonstop problems and San Diego has it together a lot better than the other ones do.

33. Much smaller metro area, less industry, not as diverse.
    San Diego is a major city in the US, but LA and San Francisco are global cities.

    San Diego has an amazing zoo, perfect weather, a couple professional sports teams, a small bioengineering presence and communications, a few good schools, is the gateway to Baja California, and has a major military presence of the Navy/Marines.

    LA, aside from the entertainment industry everyone thinks of, is a major port, the gateway to Asia-Pacific and a major logistics hub between Asia and America, cultural centers for several diasporas in America (Chinese, Korean, Filipino, Mexican, Central American, Thai, Armenian, etc). Aerospace engineering, research and development like NASA-JPL and the Space Force. Prominent schools like USC, UCLA, CalTech. Fashion, art, politics, manufacturing. Multiple professional sports teams.

    There’s just a lot going on in LA and SF. San Diego is more laid back and has less going on. Less interesting and exciting, but a lot more livable with less of the problems the other areas experience. Less dense, less intense, but also less diverse and dynamic.