S.F. Among Best Places to Live if You're Under 35, Report Says

There seems to be a lot of negativity about San Francisco floating around recently. From ballooning rents and home prices to gripes about gentrification ...  yes, even the poo problem is getting press.

But friends, there's good news too. Even if we don't always think San Francisco is the greatest place to live, outsiders still think we're pretty hip.

A listacle out today from Voactiv pins San Francisco as the #3 best city to live in if you're under 35.

What gives us the honor? Widely used public transportation, bike-friendly roadways, a high average salary and cheap pot, to name a few. A few factoids that helped propel San Francisco to the top:

Other hipster-chic cities like Portland, Austin, Seattle and Minneapolis join S.F. in the top 5.

It's not until you reach Las Vegas at No. 6 that things get interesting. They have cheap Wi-Fi, lots of young, single people (read: strippers) and cheap cigarettes. Pack your bags!

The list does acknowledge that San Francisco's $4,000-a-month average for a 2-bedroom apartment was among the highest in the country, but apparently that doesn't hurt us too much. (If you want the cheapest rent, head to Detroit.)

I should add, as a recent East Coast transplant, I've seen firsthand how enamored the U.S. remains with San Francisco. When I told friends I was uprooting my life in Baltimore to move across the country, I was met with a wide-eyed look of delight. "I love San Francisco!" everyone would say, "You're so lucky!" (Then they would tell me they had a cousin in San Diego that they should put me in touch with, to which I would fake a smile and say, "Oh yeah?" Geography, folks. It's hard.)

What do you think? Is San Francisco the place to be if you're under 35? Why or why not?