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.
Either you confused Flotard with MichiVegas or you identified them as one and the same!
Either way, Chicago's absolute gorgeousness more or less insures that its tourism market will grow for the forseeable future. NY's, I dunno, as a long time visitor of the place I feel it is gradually being overwhelmed by tourists,,,,and many NY pals of mine say the same, citing Brooklyn's resurgence as a response to Manhattan's Disneyfication. I doubt Chicago, with its never-ending grid, would ever suffer from such a fate, but who knows?
What do you mean? NYC is a tourist mecca, so obviously there are so many tourists there all the time, visiting many different places. Do you mean tourists are moving in and becoming residents, and this is happening too much, or that there are just so many of them visiting? Because tourism is NOT a bad thing in the slightest so I'm not quite sure of your logic here.
an over-reliance on the tourist economy is not a good thing. And in a geographic space such as Manhattan, it can drive up living expense, overcrowd transit, and deprive the city of authenticity. My old NY buds have said the same....most of whom have fled to Brooklyn, Queens or NJ. Manhattan's tourist economy, which is of course good for the economy...isn't necessarily good for the culture of the place.
an over-reliance on the tourist economy is not a good thing. And in a geographic space such as Manhattan, it can drive up living expense, overcrowd transit, and deprive the city of authenticity. My old NY buds have said the same....most of whom have fled to Brooklyn, Queens or NJ. Manhattan's tourist economy, which is of course good for the economy...isn't necessarily good for the culture of the place.
I have to disagree. New York has industry without tourism (finance, business, arts) and plenty of people are commuters from LI, NJ, CT, or upstate, even PA. Plenty of people live within the city and work there. You act like the only ones in the city are tourists. The residents obviously have no problem with the cost of living and tourism because it's worth it. If they did have a problem, they would move and NYC wouldn't be so highly sought after. Despite cost and abundance of tourists, people still want New York so I don't think tourism is bad for the city at all and I also don't think it relies on tourists like you say. It was doing just fine before it became such an important and popular city and it will do fine always as long as it has the finance and business centers like it currently does.
Part of NYC's authenticity IS the melting pot and all the people you see and languages you hear, whether tourists or residents. Since the days of Ellis Island when this whole area became an immigration center, that's one reason NYC got its flavor and popularity it has today. It is vibrant with different cultures and influences whether or not you have tourists because you still have immigrants. I'm betting people you know have left Manhattan because it's expensive but that is because of its sheer popularity and demand, its price has nothing to do with tourists. Plenty of people can't afford it and move out but plenty of people of all socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds still call it home.
I have a problem with you always calling out flotard for BS posts when you honestly often do the same. You just reverse it.
I have to disagree. New York has industry without tourism (finance, business, arts) and plenty of people are commuters from LI, NJ, CT, or upstate, even PA. Plenty of people live within the city and work there. You act like the only ones in the city are tourists. The residents obviously have no problem with the cost of living and tourism because it's worth it. If they did have a problem, they would move and NYC wouldn't be so highly sought after. Despite cost and abundance of tourists, people still want New York so I don't think tourism is bad for the city at all and I also don't think it relies on tourists like you say. It was doing just fine before it became such an important and popular city and it will do fine always as long as it has the finance and business centers like it currently does.
Part of NYC's authenticity IS the melting pot and all the people you see and languages you hear, whether tourists or residents. Since the days of Ellis Island when this whole area became an immigration center, that's one reason NYC got its flavor and popularity it has today. It is vibrant with different cultures and influences whether or not you have tourists because you still have immigrants. I'm betting people you know have left Manhattan because it's expensive but that is because of its sheer popularity and demand, its price has nothing to do with tourists. Plenty of people can't afford it and move out but plenty of people of all socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds still call it home.
I have a problem with you always calling out flotard for BS posts when you honestly often do the same. You just reverse it.
Of course NYC is fine, it has almost a 3x larger economy than Chicago, a lower unemployment rate and a growing city population.
As for international visitors. Top 10 U.S. cities in terms of total marketshare and visitors in millions
1 New York City 33.3 9,285
2 Los Angeles-Long Beach 13.1 3,653
3 Miami 10.6 2,956 11.7
4 San Francisco 10.3 2,872
5 Orlando 10.0 2,788
6 Las Vegas 10.0 2,788
7 Washington, DC 6.5 1,812
8 Honolulu 6.4 1,785
9 Boston 4.7 1,311
10 Chicago 4.3 1,199
First, you're not even posting to the right person.
Second, you first claimed Chicago hotel construction was booming, and then redefined booming to "not booming" once confronted with the fact that it wasn't a leading market for new hotel construction.
When did I redefine it as not booming? You know multiple cities can be booming in something similar at the same time.
Just because one is booming in one industry means no one else can. Or if one city is booming more in one industry than the other doesn't mean the other can't be booming as well.
I was calling you flotard cause you are acting like it.
You really need to stop deflecting to things like this. And you talk about flotard…
How is talking about the two cities' respective leadership(s) deflecting? If you honestly can't attribute a bit of NYC's recent resurgence to its Republican mayors....then don't complain when things go quickly into reverse.
Unfortunately, Chicago, land of Obama, has been stuck on the one-party train for way too long.
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.
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.
