If you had the choice.... to move and live in any of these cities, which one would you pick?Chicago, New York, Boston, San Francisco. I have been given the choice... and im lost for words.

ChicagoBut it's a personal choice. These are very different cities. The climates alone are very different. A big factor has to be where you're working and where your clients are. Commuting by air is more common in the US but it's still going to be a pain if you're living in SF and all your clients are in the Midwest.

Why would you pick chicago? I know there are climatic differences between the cities, perhaps more with SF than the other 3. I would be more inclined on SF as a I see it as a more 'relaxed' city, and i have heard that consultants tend to travel less on the west coast. Any advice?

Depends what stage you are at in your career and your life. If I was just starting out, had bags of energy and wanted to be in the thick of it, I'd probably choose NYC. If I was raising a family, it wouldn't be my first choice.Personally, I'd go for Boston or Chicago.

With the caveat that I haven't lived in the US I have done engagements in NYC, Boston and SF and San Diego.I think the previous point about the type of work and location is pertinent. How important it it to you then that's up to you to decide.The SF culture is significantly different from the others. It depends what you're after and what market the firm would want you in.As above about the styles.If I was to make a choice I'd go for Boston beause I liked the place as well as the type of work and work environment.

As I am from North America I can say one thing about the eastern coast and Chicago...its extremely cold in the winter. San Fran is definately more temperate, has a laid back atmosphere (as most west coast cities have). However, having said that if you are young and are all full of beans, then you want a larger city. New York, then Chicago, then Boston.Hope this helps.