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.
Thanks for that video. MC certainly is on my list of things to do since I moved down here to Dallas. I think a week there would be great. Only thing I'm worried about is getting sick - I hear it's unavoidable. Is that true.
Downside - I have to say from this video I'm unimpressed particularly with the highrises. Seems like they lack sensible urban planning there. I don't see any thought given to development. London, Dallas and Houston all seem to suffer the same malaise and from what I've seen, even Dallas and Houston's Skyline is heads and shoulder over MC. From what I see in the video I don't see that the street layout is truly world class - it pales compared to Paris. The other thump is the high rises in that vid are IMHO rather blah - even just ugly. Having spent time in Paris, London, and NYC, I must say I'm skeptical about the "more museums than ..." statement. I suspect it's like the Dallas promo hype about the "world's largest Art District". Or another typical case of delusions of grandeur among the locals.
Nonetheless, there is no doubt MC has a 2000 year old culture and history, so it is impossible that nothing of cultural significance exists there. If I don't puke for a week, I'm sure I will come away feeling I've visited yet another of one of the world's great cities!
I have always heard this misleading statement (at least to me) thrown around for years:
"Mexico City is the largest city in the world!"
By what measure?
It certainly can not be by population. If you go by metropolitan areas, Tokyo is the largest city in the world (and by a good margin). By city proper, Mumbai is the largest in the world.
Mexico City is, arguably, not even the most populous metro in the Americas. NYC, Sao Paolo, and Mexico City are all about on par and their ranking relative to one another depends on which survey/study you read.
Is it then based on land area (and even then I don't think it is the biggest in the world there) or is it just another proud self-proclamation?
This has puzzled me for some time and hopefully someone here can shed light on it.
-------------
EDIT: Anyways..To answer the question implied by the thread.. As impressive as Mexico City is, it has nothing on the NYC/Manhattan skyline IMHO.
Honestly, NYC, Osaka, and Tokyo have more interesting aerials. However, NYC is the only US city that can truly compete with MC. And Manhattan blows MC away from the air. Manhattan's density is just crazy sick. MC can't touch NYC when it comes to building density.
Honestly, NYC, Osaka, and Tokyo have more interesting aerials. However, NYC is the only US city that can truly compete with MC. And Manhattan blows MC away from the air. Manhattan's density is just crazy sick. MC can't touch NYC when it comes to building density.
I dunno. I've seen pix of BA & SP that compete with MC from the air. Might put LA in that cat too actually. And that's just in the west. Were we to take the show to the old world, well there's much to see over there as well.
I dunno. I've seen pix of BA & SP that compete with MC from the air. Might put LA in that cat too actually. And that's just in the west. Were we to take the show to the old world, well there's much to see over there as well.
LA is not even close to those other city's density from the air. If you would have picked a day shot of LA you'd see it is mostly houses very unlike those other cities.
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.