> You mean there is a restaurant with a star? Hold the presses.

How many cities of a similar size have even 1?

> Art?

I'll grant you this one. No great museums (maybe the Computer History museum?) or art galleries in MTV.

> Music?

Shoreline Amphitheatre? It's a rather large music venue by the water. If you want a smaller venue, Dana Street Roasting Company has live performers every weekend. The city does free concerts a few times a year.

> (Cuesta Park. Which is by far the biggest "park").

Did you just completely forget the Shoreline recreational area? You can learn how to sail, windsurf, and stand-up paddleboard there.

> Dance?

Two nightclubs and a (salsa?) dance club in downtown. MVCPA for performances. Is that unimpressive? It's a city with 80k population, how much exactly are you expecting?

> That's like saying Gary, Indiana is a great city because you can drive to Chicago.

That would be a true statement if Gary had Mountain View's economy, weather, crime rates, and Michelin-starred restaurants.

> In terms of diversity, yeah, no.

What kind of diversity are we talking? There's plenty of people with varied cultural backgrounds and national origins.

> culturally dead suburban monoculture,

I'm not sure you've lived in an actual culturally dead suburban monoculture. There are some other towns I could introduce you to. I can also introduce you to towns that are actually a "pit" :-)

> How many cities of a similar size have even 1?

Taking the first Italian city from this list that has 7x,xxx population, turns out to be Fiumicino, and seems to have two 1-star restaurants. This was a kind of random sample of size 1.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Italy

I wasn't implying 0 other cities of similar size have Michelin stars. Heck there's a small town in Napa valley with 5k population, with a 3 star restaurant, so even more stars/capita than Fiumicino :-). But of all the ~70-120k population towns in the world (even excluding developing nations), I'd wager proportionally not that many have Michelin stars.

i know nothing about the area but just casually reading this thread and your counter arguments,the fundamental point remains - why is it so bad when Google is there? why hasn't Google done anything to improve living conditions outside of it's plex? improve the art scene,improve the food scene etc etc it has significant power to do so.

What city would you recommend? I’m genuinely curious because I thought Mountain View was alright but now you’re making me feel like I’m missing out on cities with amazing parks, cheap gourmet food, and lots of culture. The closest I’ve had to that was Changsha, and that’s not considered a nice place to live by a long shot.

Los Angeles. New York.

You want MTV sized? Asheville. Boulder. Greenville. Santa Fe.

Slightly bigger: Ann Arbor. Berkeley. Cambridge. Lafayette.

Good chunk bigger: Savannah (140k), Madison (250k)

Smaller: Bozeman. Port Chester.

Elsewhere: Plenty of cities all over Europe that are in the 100k pop range and _much_ more vibrant than MTV.

The point is, Google's presence doesn't magically improve the place. It's still a bland suburbia, like, yes, 99% of US cities this size. Google's presence won't improve SJC, either.

Upvoted for the city suggestions - that's really helpful. But I'm still going to vigorously disagree that MTV is "bland suburbia" :-), even if it's not better than these cities (and I personally did not enjoy Savannah when I visited). There's a spectrum of city interestingness - all I'm arguing is that MTV is very much not at the boring end of it. It might be somewhere in the middle.

As you can see by my "99%" statement, my cut-off point is simply at a different point on that scale :)

You're right that there are cities that are worse than Mountain View. What's upsetting about it is not merely the blandness, but the fact there could be tremendous potential. A rural city of the same size, with a historically uniform population and a relatively small tax base, has very little choice. Mountain View does, and they squander it.

But even if they didn't, "it could be worse" has never been a statement that attracted me to a city ;)

There are far more interesting cities in the US and the world than MTV. Berlin is one of them. In the US I like Austin and San Diego.

That's moving the goalposts though. I was originally disputing the categorization of MTV as a "pit". I'm not at all arguing it's comparable to Berlin - that would be crazy.

You also asked what cities would you recommend. I recommended some :)

Nope, that was someone else. I'm just defending MTV being called a "pit" and a suburban dystopia - it's not the most interesting city in the world but it has interesting parts and tons of opportunities not available elsewhere.

Some cities just never develop "good" living conditions for values of restaurant diversity,art and things to do - whether out of apathy or bad luck.

>Culturally it is almost completely dead. Art? Music? Dance? Just forget it. In terms of diversity, yeah, no.

> Unless you like living in a culturally dead suburban monoculture, it's not a city I'd recommend to anybody.

What level of Maslow's hierarchy is this because I'm legitimately becoming concerned I'm neither wealthy enough or educated enough to understand or appreciate any of this and it's scaring me.

Wtf? People like different things from their cities. Some people like living in cities with lots of different options for entertainment, lots of diversity. Others like the quietness, calm and cleanliness of suburbia.

Most art galleries have showings open to the public. Museums are fairly affordable. Your local community college will have dance and theatre performances on the cheap.

Well, unless you're in a city like Mountain View, which lacks these things - but even here, the public library carries excellent recordings of music/dance performances, and has wonderful art books. There's also https://artsandculture.google.com/ for a vast number of the world's greatest art pieces.

It's really not a question of wealth.

Neither is it "education". You don't need education to appreciate beauty, and there are quite a few pieces that have a beauty that's immediately accessible even without a background in art or dance. Some art might not resonate with you -- and that's OK. Find the stuff you like, ignore the stuff you dislike.

Sure, you can go from there and get an education, and it will open more avenues for you. But it's not necessary. And as far as Maslow goes - setting aside that the "hierarchy" isn't - I'd put art at "Love and belonging". It's a connection to people across space and time, and it can unlock deep, profound emotions.

Give it a try, don't be scared!

> Culturally it is almost completely dead. Art? Music? Dance? Just forget it. In terms of diversity, yeah, no.

Yep, when I say to people that the south bay is completely devoid of anything resembling culture they still look at me funny. Until they go, that is.

> devoid of anything resembling culture they still look at me funny

Because it's hyperbole - it's not a literally true statement. The Bay Area is culturally middling. It's no Paris or NY or even Atlanta - unless we count Valley tech culture's influence on the world, which obviously is immense. But it has its share of museums, theaters, music venues, and good food.

It's strip malls and chain restaurants with far too much concrete everywhere. And for what you do get, absurdly overpriced.