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 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-20-2013, 12:39 AM
 
1,901 posts, read 2,176,069 times
Reputation: 1845

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
It's unlikely that Seoul metro is more auto-oriented than NYC proper, let alone Seoul proper. As it having a density greater than Manhattan, unlikely, as the densest districts are less dense than the densest Manhattan ones.
I think you'd be shocked by how much Seoul manages to cram cars and highways into such a small space. I've been told one of the reasons for this was to help build up the domestic auto industry (half of South Korea lives in metro Seoul)

And Seoul is way more dense than NYC.

Seoul: City Land Use: 1998

There are massive mountain areas and the huge Han River and its tributaries (which are floodplains, need to be very wide cause of the monsoon) means Seoul's real available land area is tiny. The population density of the city is roughly on par with Manhattan and the 15,000,000 in the suburbs are every bit as packed in.

Heck the entire country minus the 80% mountains terrain is smaller than New Jersey and has 50,000,000. This, plus the need to maintain agricultural lands gives the government more or less 100% control over land planning/housing etc. They aren't dense by choice, but by neccesity. That's another reason (in addition to Hyundai Kia and Daewoo) why the government has worked so hard to enable the Kims to drive as much as the Kims in LA.

This is part of the official territory of Seoul, so you can't compare official city sizes too well....

Northern Seoul

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bu...2006-03-28.JPG

Southern Seoul

http://discoveringkorea.com/wp-conte..._gwanaksan.jpg

and there are dozens of smaller mountainscapes in the official city limit

Last edited by midwest1; 08-20-2013 at 12:53 AM..

 
Old 08-20-2013, 06:48 AM
 
Location: The City
21,959 posts, read 30,873,769 times
Reputation: 7495
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwest1 View Post
Yes I read...but the word overlap does not only refer to how lines are drawn on a graph......my point was that there are plenty of people in Chicago who reside in neighborhoods denser than plenty of people in NYC. Millions of New Yorkers live in neighborhoods less dense than places like Streeterville and the Near North Side.

And not only Staten Island folks. There is indeed overlap. Think of it this way...a Streeterville resident on vacation in Florida walks into a bar somewhere in Broward County...and meets a mentally challenged ex?-New Yorker who claims that there is no way a Chicagoan lives a more urban lifestyle than a New Yorker, cause there is well, you know, NO OVERLAP....The Chicagoan, being aware of special needs folks' special needs, says, "You are absolutely right"..... end of story.
And more than the whole popluation (actually they could basically replace every Chicage resident, then come and do it again) of ALL of Chicago live denser than ANYONE in Chicago in NYC, you are just too much. I like Chicago a ton for what it is, wouldn't change it but you need a reality check.

As with some SF posters, you are starting to give a place I really like a bad taste in my mouth...
 
Old 08-20-2013, 07:22 AM
 
1,901 posts, read 2,176,069 times
Reputation: 1845
No doubt. I was just disputing that there was no overlap between the two cities, something to which nei later agreed. My point was that there is no way to determine an individual's urban lifestyle on simply the city they live in, you need more information such as what neighborhood. I can't tell you how many times over the decades I've met "New Yorkers" from places like CT, NJ, and LI who either question and/orscoff at Chicago's urbanity....as if the millions of urban residents of Chicago can learn something from suburbanites of NYC.

And Flotard does what for NY to you? Float your boat? He is easily the most obnoxious uninformed poster I've encountered on this forum, he NEVER posts real information (as I do constantly) and is proud to represent NYC. Are you seriously telling me I should somehow judge NYC because of his posts as you so scarily are threatening to alter your opinion of Chicago because of my posts???

Seriously...who needs a reality check dude?
 
Old 08-20-2013, 08:12 AM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
27,640 posts, read 24,871,872 times
Reputation: 11205
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly View Post
And more than the whole popluation (actually they could basically replace every Chicage resident, then come and do it again) of ALL of Chicago live denser than ANYONE in Chicago in NYC, you are just too much. I like Chicago a ton for what it is, wouldn't change it but you need a reality check.

As with some SF posters, you are starting to give a place I really like a bad taste in my mouth...
The arguments get pretty creative when one city gets roundly beaten on every metric possible.
 
Old 08-20-2013, 08:12 AM
 
Location: The City
21,959 posts, read 30,873,769 times
Reputation: 7495
I don't question Chicago's urbanity one bit, to me probably the next largest urban enclave in the US not named NYC. But the scale of these two places is significantly different. Chciago is far closer to the scale of a SF or Philly than it is to NYC on these aspects.

I like Chicago for what it is, it is the true urban center of the Midwest, no doubt a great city but some of these arguments just dont pass the hairy eyeball test IMHO, especially when pawned off as rationale, not sure all the points of the other poster are meant to be anything but inflammatory, someone keeps taking the bait then to me uses false logic to defend.
 
Old 08-20-2013, 08:24 AM
 
1,901 posts, read 2,176,069 times
Reputation: 1845
Fair enough...I'm on the other side of the planet.....which certainly may add a bit to the equation, especially when drink is involved.

But I find the conceit that New York can't be compared to Chicago, a city built on the scale of Paris or London (mega cities in the 10,000,000 range before you or anyone else has a conniption fit) not only offensive but a disservice to NY. Trust me, Bloomberg studied quite a bit about Daley's approach (esp. re; beautification) and NYC benefited. I wish Chicago could copy certain NYC approaches to policing (which may soon go the way of the dinosaur).....but that was never an option in the city Jesse Jackson, Farrakhan and Oprah called home.

But as long as any comparison between NYC and CHI is dominated by real, fake, or adopted NY'ers egos oppposed to any such comparison.......this forum will remain a joke.

And that goes for the possibility of comparing New York to other cities such as Philly, SF, LA.
 
Old 08-20-2013, 09:42 AM
 
Location: roaming gnome
12,391 posts, read 23,813,219 times
Reputation: 5617
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwest1 View Post
Fair enough...I'm on the other side of the planet.....which certainly may add a bit to the equation, especially when drink is involved.

But I find the conceit that New York can't be compared to Chicago, a city built on the scale of Paris or London (mega cities in the 10,000,000 range before you or anyone else has a conniption fit) not only offensive but a disservice to NY. Trust me, Bloomberg studied quite a bit about Daley's approach (esp. re; beautification) and NYC benefited. I wish Chicago could copy certain NYC approaches to policing (which may soon go the way of the dinosaur).....but that was never an option in the city Jesse Jackson, Farrakhan and Oprah called home.

But as long as any comparison between NYC and CHI is dominated by real, fake, or adopted NY'ers egos oppposed to any such comparison.......this forum will remain a joke.

And that goes for the possibility of comparing New York to other cities such as Philly, SF, LA.
What... Here we go again ... NYC London Paris Chicago ... One is not like the others, that is Chicago. Sure they can be compared but it will result in metric after metric of being walloped. Its no slight on Chicago its just how they stack up. Philly Boston or DC would be getting the same thing. But sine these cities are closer and the people in the area seem to be more familiar with the differences you get a lot less of these battles. All those cities are better match ups for Chicago, and while Chicago might win many things it will lose out on others, BC they are more peer cities in how they stack up. You could throw in SF and toronto in that group also


It would be similar if Chicago went up against Seattle, minneapolis or something.. To me they are similar drop offs

Last edited by grapico; 08-20-2013 at 09:58 AM..
 
Old 08-20-2013, 10:14 AM
 
517 posts, read 538,527 times
Reputation: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwest1 View Post
But I find the conceit that New York can't be compared to Chicago, a city built on the scale of Paris or London (mega cities in the 10,000,000 range before you or anyone else has a conniption fit) not only offensive but a disservice to NY.
Chicago isn't built on the scale of London or Paris. That's absurd. Both London and Paris are much larger and denser than Chicago.

I don't even know the relevance of population, as Dallas is the closest city in population to Chicago in the U.S., yet I don't think anyone would claim that Dallas and Chicago have the same city scale.

Quote:
Originally Posted by midwest1 View Post
Trust me, Bloomberg studied quite a bit about Daley's approach (esp. re; beautification) and NYC benefited. I wish Chicago could copy certain NYC approaches to policing (which may soon go the way of the dinosaur).....but that was never an option in the city Jesse Jackson, Farrakhan and Oprah called home.
No, I won't trust you, considering everything you've written is BS. I have no idea what you mean "about Daley's approach" or "beautification". Daley and Bloomberg were completely different, and there was no "beautification initiaitive" in NYC as under Daley in Chicago.

I don't even know why a NYC mayor would look to some former Chicago mayor. Why not a Boston mayor, or Houston mayor, or anywhere else?
 
Old 08-20-2013, 10:21 AM
 
Location: roaming gnome
12,391 posts, read 23,813,219 times
Reputation: 5617
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCH_CDM View Post
Chicago isn't built on the scale of London or Paris. That's absurd. Both London and Paris are much larger and denser than Chicago.

I don't even know the relevance of population, as Dallas is the closest city in population to Chicago in the U.S., yet I don't think anyone would claim that Dallas and Chicago have the same city scale.


No, I won't trust you, considering everything you've written is BS. I have no idea what you mean "about Daley's approach" or "beautification". Daley and Bloomberg were completely different, and there was no "beautification initiaitive" in NYC as under Daley in Chicago.

I don't even know why a NYC mayor would look to some former Chicago mayor. Why not a Boston mayor, or Houston mayor, or anywhere else?
I think you mean Houston, but yes... same thing. But even then, the gap from Houston to Chicago is 500k people and don't feel similar at all. Chicago is way more *city* than Houston. The gap on NYC to Chicago is 5.6 million. Either way, the population and city limits are arbitrary and don't have much relevance.
 
Old 08-20-2013, 10:27 AM
 
517 posts, read 538,527 times
Reputation: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwest1 View Post
Yes I read...but the word overlap does not only refer to how lines are drawn on a graph......my point was that there are plenty of people in Chicago who reside in neighborhoods denser than plenty of people in NYC. Millions of New Yorkers live in neighborhoods less dense than places like Streeterville and the Near North Side.
What is the point of this strawman statement?

You are saying the very densest parts of Chicago are denser than the least dense parts of NYC. So what?

I bet you the densest areas of Phoenix, Schaumburg, IL, or Walla Walla, Washington are much denser than the least dense part of Chicago.

Therefore, we should compare these areas to Chicago, correct?
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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, 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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top