|

09-19-2007, 01:08 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
374 posts, read 218,100 times
Reputation: 38
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by j33
Actually, unless you are going to re-define 'diverse' to fit your tastes, then it is a simple fact that more ethnic groups are represented in Chicago than Seattle (and of course more ethic groups represented in nyc than either of those two cities), any demographer knows this. However, since you've seemed to redefine everything else to fit your myopic view of the world , I suppose you have your own definition of that term as well.
|
No, you are correct. I will give you that. I'm sure there are a lot of places more ethnically diverse than Seattle. I stand corrected.
|
|

09-19-2007, 01:10 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
374 posts, read 218,100 times
Reputation: 38
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by j33
Actually, unless you are going to re-define 'diverse' to However, since you've seemed to redefine everything else to fit your myopic view of the world , I suppose you have your own definition of that term as well.
|
How have I re-defined everything else? I was wrong on ethnic diversity. If you are referring to "bigger" - I did not re-define it. There are many meanings for the word "bigger". Chicagoans associate it with size, because that's the only thing they can associate it with. I associate it with more important things, such as noted again. Again, Chicago is a BIG town!
|
|

09-19-2007, 02:44 PM
|
|
*Sigh* AC 0063100
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago
9,844 posts, read 4,800,838 times
Reputation: 1992
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by beone
How have I re-defined everything else? I was wrong on ethnic diversity. If you are referring to "bigger" - I did not re-define it. There are many meanings for the word "bigger". Chicagoans associate it with size, because that's the only thing they can associate it with. I associate it with more important things, such as noted again. Again, Chicago is a BIG town!
|
Actually, you first associated "bigger" with population density, but when you got called out on that, you moved the goalposts and shifted your definition rather than being solid enough to admit that Chicago met your criteria after all. If you don't like Chicago as much as Boston or Seattle or San Francisco, just say as much and be done with it -- despite what you believe, we're secure enough about our own city that we can handle not being everyone's favorite. But don't keep shifting your rationale when the factual bases of your claim are shown to be false. (Of course, it might do well to have an actual grasp of those facts first if you intend to use them for your criteria to judge cities against one another...)
|
|

09-19-2007, 02:55 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
323 posts, read 227,962 times
Reputation: 59
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by beone
Good points. However, LA is different in the respect that people seem to love their cars there. I would still definitely argue that parts of LA (including lower Beverly Hills) are urban.
Urban isn't necessarily gritty. To me, urban is a high density of buildings and people. LA definitely has both. No, LA doesn't feel as urban to me as NYC or SF, or even Boston, but it doesn't feel any less urban than Chicago.
|
IMO, parts of LA are as urban as Chicago, but it's patchy. When you are looking at the whole of the city, more of Chicago is urban. Heck, "Los Angeles" goes almost to Santa Clarita! If Chicago were to include it's boundaries out to almost Naperville, I wouldn't call Chicago as urban either.
However, as a Chicagoan who now lives out in California, I'm constantly amazed by so many people on the coasts (having spend a fair amount of time with New Yorkers) think Chicago is a cowtown. One of my good friends was a flight attendant from Los Angeles (Korean Town) who once said, "I got stuck on a layover in Chicago so a few of us gals took a cab to the Cheesecake Factory. I was really surprised that most of the women were so fashionable, I thought they'd all be wearing overalls." Now I realize that Deb was overstating the overalls, thang, but she had no clue that it is a world-class urban center. She had no idea is was the birthplace of the high-rise, was such a financial center and that -- horrors -- is was actually hip! I didn't want to call her out and say that visiting the Cheesecake Factory is Chicago was like visiting a TGIFridays in New York, but at least it did have the John Hancock location going for it.
|
|

09-19-2007, 02:58 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Western Chicagoland
14,560 posts, read 7,801,446 times
Reputation: 3065
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by cw68
I was really surprised that most of the women were so fashionable, I thought they'd all be wearing overalls." Now I realize that Deb was overstating the overalls, thang, but she had no clue that it is a world-class urban center.
|
Thats sad. Really.
|
|

09-19-2007, 03:07 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
1,215 posts, read 660,114 times
Reputation: 232
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by cw68
If Chicago were to include it's boundaries out to almost Naperville, I wouldn't call Chicago as urban either.
|
exactly. when i say chicago i mean chicago. however, there are probably people out in dekalb saying they're "from" chicago. please.
i hate the sprawl of chicago. hate it. but the CITY is amazing.
you mentioned LA. the difference b/w Chicago and LA is that LA began to develop in the car age. Chicago developed in the rail age. That says it all in how each respective city is laid out (and how dense each is).
|
|

09-19-2007, 03:24 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago
2,063 posts, read 621,266 times
Reputation: 396
|
|
|
As someone who spend most of this summer in San Francisco and LA, and the last two weeks in NYC, I can almost see the point about San Fran feeling "bigger" even though its a much smaller city. Chicago tends to maintain a sense of order in its main streets that you don't see as much in San Fran or New York, in terms of how the store fronts appear, and the spacial use between buildings. I don't have time to define this difference proper, but its something I've noticed as I've tried to compare the cities the past few months.
However, to say that LA is "more urban" than Chicago...I don't even know what to make of that. In all the areas I went to, I never felt like I was in a city, let alone the second largest city in the country. Much of it felt like being in Franklin Park or all those second tier collared cities. Its not Naperville suburban, but sure as hell not urban.
|
|

09-19-2007, 03:25 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
374 posts, read 218,100 times
Reputation: 38
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by cw68
However, as a Chicagoan who now lives out in California, I'm constantly amazed by so many people on the coasts (having spend a fair amount of time with New Yorkers) think Chicago is a cowtown. One of my good friends was a flight attendant from Los Angeles (Korean Town) who once said, "I got stuck on a layover in Chicago so a few of us gals took a cab to the Cheesecake Factory. I was really surprised that most of the women were so fashionable, I thought they'd all be wearing overalls." Now I realize that Deb was overstating the overalls, thang, but she had no clue that it is a world-class urban center. She had no idea is was the birthplace of the high-rise, was such a financial center and that -- horrors -- is was actually hip! I didn't want to call her out and say that visiting the Cheesecake Factory is Chicago was like visiting a TGIFridays in New York, but at least it did have the John Hancock location going for it.
|
I can relate. When I moved from Minneapolis to Seattle, I often got, "How does it feel to live in the big city?" They were surprised that the Twin Cities are fairly a big Seattle, although Seattle is bigger to me, more interesting, and just a cool place.
As a native Californian (living in Seattle) put it to me, "To us, there's the west coast, a whole bunch of stuff, Chicago, some more stuff, then the east coast."
I admit, I went to the Cheesecake Factory when I was there. It's the best pig-out place there is.
|
|

09-19-2007, 03:27 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
374 posts, read 218,100 times
Reputation: 38
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover
Actually, you first associated "bigger" with population density, but when you got called out on that, you moved the goalposts and shifted your definition rather than being solid enough to admit that Chicago met your criteria after all. If you don't like Chicago as much as Boston or Seattle or San Francisco, just say as much and be done with it -- despite what you believe, we're secure enough about our own city that we can handle not being everyone's favorite. But don't keep shifting your rationale when the factual bases of your claim are shown to be false. (Of course, it might do well to have an actual grasp of those facts first if you intend to use them for your criteria to judge cities against one another...)
|
I don't like Chicago as much as Boston, Seattle or San Francisco. And now, I'm done with it.
|
|

09-19-2007, 03:34 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago
2,063 posts, read 621,266 times
Reputation: 396
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by beone
I admit, I went to the Cheesecake Factory when I was there. It's the best pig-out place there is.
|
You have just forfeited the game.
|
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|
Thanks to your votes we advanced to the final voting round for the Open Web Awards out of 43,000 different nominated sites! Please vote for us here:
|