U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
View Poll Results: Where does Seattle Belong? Importance Tiers
With 1-AA (Atlanta, Dallas, San Fran, Philly etc.) 45 45.00%
With 1-A (Denver, Baltimore, San Diego, Phoenix etc.) 55 55.00%
Voters: 100. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-09-2010, 05:50 PM
 
1,992 posts, read 4,554,421 times
Reputation: 756

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico View Post
It's on the same scale as those. I'd rank it below for many reasons. Somebody was going off on education, which is obviously very important.
Here is a national map of the top 40, u.s. news



St Louis/Pittsburgh/Cleveland all have a top 40 while Seattle doesn't.
That is just one field...

If you wanted to go into the arts, all 3 fare better than Seattle.

Sports? They all have more major league teams than Seattle.

I'm just wondering where you are getting this idea to put Seattle above these cities?

Now Seattle is probably more scenic, better restaurants, better music scene, higher qol, more literate, certainly trendier...all that stuff. But that doesn't mean it is a higher caliber city...

I am not even sure if Seattle is *on the rise* either. It lost its biggest company Boeing, and WaMu/Safeco the past decade, which were 3 of its Fortune 500s, as well as their NBA team which went to Oklahoma City.
UW is a globally significant research university that is a major national player, so its not like there's no higher education in Seattle. I've seen rankings of UW as a top 20 global university...there are many rankings that evaulate schools in different ways.

Also, is there some sort of objective ranking on arts that I'm not aware of, that places lower tier cities like pittsburgh, cleveland and st. louis ahead of Seattle? Does that even figure into this argument at all?

The fact is, Seattle is larger population-wise, has a much, much larger GDP, and is a major economic player on the pacifc rim. It's a major port city, something the inland cities cannot achieve.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-09-2010, 05:52 PM
 
222 posts, read 499,669 times
Reputation: 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico View Post
It's on the same scale as those. I'd rank it below for many reasons. Somebody was going off on education, which is obviously very important.
Here is a national map of the top 40, u.s. news



St Louis/Pittsburgh/Cleveland all have a top 40 while Seattle doesn't.
That is just one field...

If you wanted to go into the arts, all 3 fare better than Seattle.

Sports? They all have more major league teams than Seattle.

I'm just wondering where you are getting this idea to put Seattle above these cities?

Now Seattle is probably more scenic, better restaurants, better music scene, higher qol, more literate, certainly trendier...all that stuff. But that doesn't mean it is a higher caliber city...

I am not even sure if Seattle is *on the rise* either. It lost its biggest company Boeing, and WaMu/Safeco the past decade, which were 3 of its Fortune 500s, as well as their NBA team which went to Oklahoma City.
Seattle is most definitely on the rise I would argue. Seattle's position on the pacific rim and it's historical connections to Asia will only help it in the future. It's fared pretty well compared to other cities during this recession and it's still a place that more people are moving to, instead of away from. It's been over a decade since Boeing left during which time other Seattle based companies have experienced major growth. While the loss of the Sonics sucked, it really has no bearing on whether Seattle is on the rise or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2010, 05:58 PM
 
1,992 posts, read 4,554,421 times
Reputation: 756
Quote:
Originally Posted by jr75 View Post
Seattle is most definitely on the rise I would argue. Seattle's position on the pacific rim and it's historical connections to Asia will only help it in the future. It's fared pretty well compared to other cities during this recession and it's still a place that more people are moving to, instead of away from. It's been over a decade since Boeing left during which time other Seattle based companies have experienced major growth. While the loss of the Sonics sucked, it really has no bearing on whether Seattle is on the rise or not.
The Sounders have filled in for the sonics pretty well...almost 40k every game. More than some NFL teams can manage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2010, 06:04 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia,New Jersey, NYC!
6,970 posts, read 12,630,303 times
Reputation: 2492
i think Seattle could easily be in 1-AA just for name recognition alone

i voted 1-A though. need more info on that city
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2010, 06:07 PM
 
Location: Boston Metro
1,997 posts, read 3,644,043 times
Reputation: 1781
It should stay where it is closest because the cities that are closer have similarities
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2010, 06:13 PM
 
Location: Spain
1,856 posts, read 2,842,528 times
Reputation: 898
Quote:
Originally Posted by toughguy View Post
UW is a globally significant research university that is a major national player, so its not like there's no higher education in Seattle. I've seen rankings of UW as a top 20 global university...there are many rankings that evaulate schools in different ways.

Also, is there some sort of objective ranking on arts that I'm not aware of, that places lower tier cities like pittsburgh, cleveland and st. louis ahead of Seattle? Does that even figure into this argument at all?

The fact is, Seattle is larger population-wise, has a much, much larger GDP, and is a major economic player on the pacifc rim. It's a major port city, something the inland cities cannot achieve.
As of 2008, Seattle's GMP is actually the seventh largest of the entire Pacific Rim. Pretty impressive.

1. Tokyo
2. Los Angeles
3. Osaka
4. Hong Kong
5. San Francisco
6. Seoul
7. Seattle
8. Shanghai
9. Singapore
10. Sydney
11. San Diego
12. Melbourne
13. Manila
14. Guangzhou
15. Busan
16. Santiago
17. Bangkok
18. Portland
19. Lima
20. Vancouver

p.s. San Francisco shoots up to 3rd if you use Bay Area data

Last edited by PDX_LAX; 07-09-2010 at 06:21 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2010, 06:13 PM
 
1,992 posts, read 4,554,421 times
Reputation: 756
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDX_LAX View Post
My hesitation is that Dallas and Boston seem like "command centers" of the U.S. economy, whereas Seattle and Denver are more like regional capitals. I haven't looked at GMP numbers yet though.
Here are the GMP numbers from 2008 (obviously things may have changed since the economic meltdown)

Gross metropolitan product - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The closest city, St. Louis, is 8 spots behind Seattle, and is just 56% the size of Seattle's GMP. Denver is just a few spots behind Seattle and is roughly 2/3 the size of Seattle's economy.

Pittsburgh is 10 spots behind Seattle. and Cleveland doesn't crack the top 25. Does this correlate to how "important" a city is on a national scale? I think so. Seattle may not belong in the same tier as the upper echelon cities such as Houston, Boston, and San Francisco, but I think you have to conclude that its a notch above places like Cleveland, Milwaukee, Pitt, etc (as an entire package).

Last edited by toughguy; 07-09-2010 at 06:40 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2010, 06:15 PM
 
Location: Boston Metro
1,997 posts, read 3,644,043 times
Reputation: 1781
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDX_LAX View Post
My hesitation is that Dallas and Boston seem like "command centers" of the U.S. economy, whereas Seattle and Denver are more like regional capitals. I haven't looked at GMP numbers yet though.
i agree
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2010, 06:20 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,516 posts, read 16,609,834 times
Reputation: 7270
Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico View Post
It's on the same scale as those. I'd rank it below for many reasons. Somebody was going off on education, which is obviously very important.
Here is a national map of the top 40, u.s. news

.
awwww one little dot in Texas and such a big and populous stat too. get on the ball Texas
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2010, 06:22 PM
 
Location: Underneath the Pecan Tree
15,831 posts, read 20,061,685 times
Reputation: 6687
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove View Post
awwww one little dot in Texas and such a big and populous stat too. get on the ball Texas
I think universities in Texas are underrated and don't receive the recognition that they deserve.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $89,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:47 AM.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top