Chicago, its trains, and how tourists from abroad view the city (Geneva: best cities, 2009)

[chicagojoe23]

Here is an article a friend sent me this summer.
Is Chicago truly viewed as a world city? Or are we descending into "backwater status"?

The Chicago Architecture Blog: Chicago Called "Sad" in Latest Best Cities List

There is also this humbling bit from a former Chicagoan...where we are described as the fat kid at recess, and somehow similar to to "several other" midsized cities.
Hulu - The Colbert Report: 2016 Olympics in Chicago - George Wendt

[linicx]

ROTFLOL!!! Surely you don't take the opinion of a blogger, and a comedian reading from a prompter, seriously? Chicago will not wither on the vine and die in your lifetime or mine.

[Chicago60614]

I could care less about what a few people think of Chicago, what I was more surprised at was the ignorance of that stupid blogger.

Most 3rd world cities have better rail access to their airports? What? Chicago airport trains are no worse than taking the picadilly line in London, or the RER in Paris. What about LaGuardia or Kennedy's direct assess in New York? No. LAX? Toronto? No. Rome's trains were pretty run down, etc. Chicago's $2.25 for 40 minute access to downtown 24 hours a day really doesn't upset me at all.



Regardless......I'd love to see these 3rd world cities with far superior access......

[chicagojoe23]

Originally Posted by Chicago60614

I could care less about what a few people think of Chicago, what I was more surprised at was the ignorance of that stupid blogger.

Not that I agree with him, but he is commenting on a rating by a "well respected" publication.

[Chicago60614]

Haha, I just read that bloggers entry, and the original article he based it off. It's pretty funny reading the people who commented and tore him/her apart. He brought up places with airport access that completely blow Chicago away.

Like New York (none of the airports have direct access), London (certainly no better than Blue Line), Pittsburgh (it's a BUS), Brussels, Vienna - umm, no.

[Chicago60614]

Originally Posted by chicagojoe23

Not that I agree with him, but he is commenting on a rating by a "well respected" publication.

Here was the article though:

“Could you live here?” and “would you live here?” are two of the most common questions colleagues ask each other at the end of a business trip. Responses rarely take the form of a shrugged “I don’t know” or a half-hearted “I guess so”. Rather, they typically come in vehement declarations suggesting that considerable thought has gone into the topic already. Here are a few I’ve heard over the years:

On the train to Chicago’s O’Hare: “No way. It’s neither one thing nor the other and just look at this sad excuse of a train to the airport.”

In a cab to Vancouver International Airport: “Definitely not for me – seems a bit sleepy and limp.”

In a big Mercedes en route to Hong Kong’s Chek Lap Kok: “I could do it for a short stint but it wouldn’t be for the quality of life.”

Hitching a ride with an associate to Geneva’s Cointrin: “If I could get a great flat close to the lake and move my five closest friends, then it would be amazing.”

Being taxied to Fukuoka airport: “If I wanted the best of Japan but also great connections to the rest of Asia then it would be my first choice.”




The article had nothing to do with those specific cities, he was just throwing out random examples and then discussing what different people value as their own "quality of life"

[chicagojoe23]

Originally Posted by Chicago60614

Here was the article though:


The article had nothing to do with those specific cities, he was just throwing out random examples and then discussing what different people value as their own "quality of life"

Uh yeah. We get that. The point of the blogger rings true though with many people here who live outside the city or in other countries. You may not care what other "non-Chicagoans" think and you may take the old "I only care what Chicagoans think" stance. But that is small minded. World cities DO care what outsiders think and push thier leaders to do a better job. The transit here, specifically the L, is in pretty poor shape. O'Hare is a cluster of an airport too. I cannot see how anyone says that it's not. It is indeed "sad"

[zz4guy]

Somebody obviously has a beef with Chicago is finding ways to bash it. I'd live in Chicago over London, Zurich, or any other european city with 7' wide roads. Screw that.

Munich should be on that list if we are talking public transit. You can go virtually ANYWHERE in that city by train. All the cars are electric and are never more than a minute late.

[Attrill]

Lists are generally stupid, and this one is exceptionally stupid. I wouldn't waste too much time thinking about a list that not only omits Chicago, but also NYC, London, SF, Rome, etc. However, Honolulu is apparently one of the best cities in the world by their criteria.

[gichicago]

The blog comparing airport/rail transit was amateurish. LGA doesn't have rail; JFK's is no better than blue/orange line. The argument for Newark was weak; its still $11 (or whatever the cost) and it only brings you to Manhattan.