Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is why I tell visitors to not stay in the actual city of Manila (they can visit it though) but stay in Makati, Ortigas, or Fort Bonifacio instead. It's easier and safer to walk around in those areas. But I consider all of those areas as "Manila" because it's basically one contiguous city.
But there are much more dangerous cities than Manila. Even the US has cities that are more dangerous than Manila. I think the perception of crime in Manila is greater than the reality. But im still trying to figure out how Bangkok is considered aesthetically attractive when most of it looks the same as Manila..
If you are recommending tourists to go to Manila suburbs, because Manila has danger issues, then its going to be a harder to sell the idea that 'Manila is better than Bangkok'
Regarding Bangkok and Manila and more aesthetically-pleasing. I prefer walking around the sois and such of Bangkok, because I feel safe doing so. I don't feel like anything is going to happen to me. Regardless if I'm walking around Manila or Makati or Pasay or any other Manila suburb, I still have to be hyper aware of the people around me, at all times.
Anyways, maybe a more interesting question would be, "If Manila was inhabited by Thai people, and Bangkok inhabited by Manila people, which would you prefer?" You'd probably quickly see people say 'The Manila inhabited by Thai people' answers. Which probably means to say that which city is more aesthetically-pleasing is largely irrelevant. People are more concerned with other issues. If people want to look at architecture and visit aesthetically-pleasing cities, they will probably opt for Europe or Japan or somewhere like that.
You can't really think of Makati, Ortigas, and Fort Bonifacio as suburbs. All of Metro Manila is the capitol of the country. Federal government offices are spread throughout the different cities. They're not just concentrated in the actual city of Manila. The setup of Metro Manila is more like NYC, with different burroughs and city centers. Manila the city is the old city center of Manila. For the past several decades, the city centers have moved further east away from Manila Bay. Now the newest one is Fort Bonifacio. Makati is still the main one though. If you want to consider this as a suburb, well...
It's not a suburb. That's the main downtown of Manila, in Makati
If you feel unsafe in Manila then just avoid all of Latin America and many big cities in the US
As a person who has spent four years living in both Sao Paulo and New York City, I think both of them are fantastic cities, and I'd live in either one of them again in a mini-heartbeat.
I like Makati as well, but it isn't that easy to walk around. It looks fantastic when you are inside Greenbelt Mall or Ayala Mall or whatever else, with all the security guards guarding it. But, much of Makati is walking along nothingness of interest. I don't find the city streets appealing at all to stroll around. Neither do many Filipinos. Most take the taxis or jeepneys right to the malls.
I don't mean to bash Manila/Makati, I've spent a lot of time in both, but I'm just saying why Bangkok is more appealing to most foreigners. Personally, I quite like both Manila/Makati. But, I'm just explaining what the mass majority of both foreigners, and overseas Filipinos also experience, as they go through Manila's airport or have to spend the night in Manila, before they get back to their own province.
I'm assuming you probably are a Filipino, and I understand that Filipinos don't like to say to foreigners what they say about Manila to each other. But, honestly speaking, what I am saying about Manila is basically what every foreigner who knows Manila well, says about it, as well as what most Overseas Filipinos say about Manila to each other.
To me the difference is the number and degree of slums in Manila versus BKK. True that some areas of Manila/Markati are gorgeous but there's plenty of areas that I wouldn't feel safe walking around in but I don't get that feeling anywhere in BKK. I like Manila, I just find BKK a better city.
To me the difference is the number and degree of slums in Manila versus BKK. True that some areas of Manila/Markati are gorgeous but there's plenty of areas that I wouldn't feel safe walking around in but I don't get that feeling anywhere in BKK. I like Manila, I just find BKK a better city.
I agree, there are a lot more and worse slums in Manila. Manila has areas that are much worse than Bangkok but also areas that are much nicer. Manila has the two extremes and then a lot of areas in between. Bangkok mostly looks like those "in between" areas of Manila. Everything is more mixed up because of zoning.
I'd walk through the slums of Tondo before walking through a ghetto in the U.S. The ghettos in the U.S. are much more dangerous. Look at this Japanese tourist walking through Tondo, Manila (one of the roughest areas, though this particular neighborhood doesn't look so bad).
I'd walk through the slums of Tondo before walking through a ghetto in the U.S. The ghettos in the U.S. are much more dangerous.
Would you please STOP comparing Manila to U.S. ghettos.
U.S ghettos have nothing to do with which is more attractive, Manila vs Bangkok. Create a different thread, if you want to compare U.S. ghettos with Manila slums.
Would you please STOP comparing Manila to U.S. ghettos.
U.S ghettos have nothing to do with which is more attractive, Manila vs Bangkok. Create a different thread, if you want to compare U.S. ghettos with Manila slums.
just putting things into perspective. People act like Manila is sooo dangerous, when they have more dangerous neighborhoods in their own cities (in 1st world countries).
just putting things into perspective. People act like Manila is sooo dangerous, when they have more dangerous neighborhoods in their own cities (in 1st world countries).
Neighborhoods can be avoided, the crime in Manila is a lot less concentrated than the crime in 1st-world cities.
Neighborhoods can be avoided, the crime in Manila is a lot less concentrated than the crime in 1st-world cities.
Even if you go into the bad neighborhoods of Manila, most people won't bother you. "slum tourists" go all the time. On the other hand, most tourists won't step foot in American ghettos.
Most people just ignored this dude as he was walking through their neighborhood and peaking into their houses. And this is in one of the roughest sections of Manila
Also, back to the aesthetics. Nobody has been able to show me that Bangkok is aesthetically better than Manila. Manila has worse-looking areas, but it also has better-looking areas. The one part that Bangkok does beat Manila on aesthetically are the parks. But besides that, the way the city is haphazardly set up is not attractive at all. It looks a lot like most of Manila. A LOT of Bangkok looks just like that video^ but somehow Bangkok is the beautiful city and Manila is the dump.
but somehow Bangkok is the beautiful city and Manila is the dump.
The only person i ever heard saying this is you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
