U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Celebrating Memorial Day!
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)
View Poll Results: Chicago MSA vs Philadelphia MSA: Most bang for your buck?
Chicago MSA 90 54.55%
Philadelphia MSA 49 29.70%
Too close to call 26 15.76%
Voters: 165. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-18-2011, 05:46 AM
 
Location: Villanova Pa.
4,887 posts, read 12,196,588 times
Reputation: 2574

Advertisements

Income report ranks MONTGOMERY COUNTY 16th in U.S.
April 22, 2011


Montgomery County remained among the nation's leaders in per-capita personal income for 2009, according to data released Thursday by the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis. The county had per-capita income of $63,469, ranking 16th among large counties in the U.S. and first among Pennsylvania's 67 counties.

Chester County's per-capita income of $57,033 placed it 28th nationally, while Bucks County was 57th at $50,898 and Delaware County 70th at $49,324. Burlington County, with $46,516 in per-capita income, was the highest-ranking of South Jersey's counties, at No. 95 nationwide.


Household Median Income is a different statistic and thats where Chester County tops Montgomery County.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-18-2011, 03:49 PM
 
Location: New York City
4,870 posts, read 4,511,920 times
Reputation: 2201
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainrock View Post
Income report ranks MONTGOMERY COUNTY 16th in U.S.
April 22, 2011


Montgomery County remained among the nation's leaders in per-capita personal income for 2009, according to data released Thursday by the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis. The county had per-capita income of $63,469, ranking 16th among large counties in the U.S. and first among Pennsylvania's 67 counties.

Chester County's per-capita income of $57,033 placed it 28th nationally, while Bucks County was 57th at $50,898 and Delaware County 70th at $49,324. Burlington County, with $46,516 in per-capita income, was the highest-ranking of South Jersey's counties, at No. 95 nationwide.

Household Median Income is a different statistic and thats where Chester County tops Montgomery County.

ok, i just noticed we were saying two different things, i agree
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 12:40 AM
 
Location: NY
269 posts, read 322,209 times
Reputation: 125
Every single Chicago vs. Philly thread is basically a Chicago vs. Philly + NYC + DC + Jersey shore thread.

Its Chicago vs. Philly. I cant choose personally because theyre probably my two favorites, but there are a ton of people using DC and NYC and the shore as reasons to pick Philly. Last time I checked, this was strictly the Chicago and Philly metros. Theres nothing "bang for buck" about driving 1 and a half to 2 hours to the shore when in Chicago its IN the city.

Nobody actually uses Philly, they bring NYC and DC into it.

Yes, Philly benefits from the better location, but strictly METRO speaking as the subject matter is, Chicago wins out. If the location sucks but Chicago is still winning, that should tell you something about what is more important. The city.

Too many times do people bring other cities into it. If thats the case, why not just move there? Honestly, these are all amazing cities, and none warrant having to leave so much on the weekend to go use another city as an advantage.

If im living in Chicago or Philly, im living those particular cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 12:50 AM
 
Location: NY
269 posts, read 322,209 times
Reputation: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Of course, I'm going with the hometown on this one! Chicago fans don't have the heart to beat up Santa!

The heart to beat up Santa?

Do you people listen to yourselves when you type or talk? That makes absolutely no sense.

I think the fact that they dont beat up Santa means they have heart?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 07:25 AM
 
Location: Center City
6,556 posts, read 7,308,701 times
Reputation: 8615
Pound for pound, Chicago clearly offers more amenities and big city bluster than Philly. But this thread is asking about MSA. Philly's metro borders DC/Baltimore to the south, NYC to the north, the Chesapeake Bay, Pocono Mountains, the Jersey and Delaware resorts and some of the most significant historical sites in the country. For these reasons, I prefer the Philly MSA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 08:13 AM
 
1,750 posts, read 2,804,143 times
Reputation: 764
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuy85 View Post
Every single Chicago vs. Philly thread is basically a Chicago vs. Philly + NYC + DC + Jersey shore thread.

Its Chicago vs. Philly. I cant choose personally because theyre probably my two favorites, but there are a ton of people using DC and NYC and the shore as reasons to pick Philly. Last time I checked, this was strictly the Chicago and Philly metros. Theres nothing "bang for buck" about driving 1 and a half to 2 hours to the shore when in Chicago its IN the city.

Nobody actually uses Philly, they bring NYC and DC into it.

Yes, Philly benefits from the better location, but strictly METRO speaking as the subject matter is, Chicago wins out. If the location sucks but Chicago is still winning, that should tell you something about what is more important. The city.

Too many times do people bring other cities into it. If thats the case, why not just move there? Honestly, these are all amazing cities, and none warrant having to leave so much on the weekend to go use another city as an advantage.

If im living in Chicago or Philly, im living those particular cities.
I disagree. There is no imaginary line that exists where the Philly MSA ends. Philly is also one of my favorite cities, and one of the factors that makes the metro so great is the proximity to so many different things (AC, NYC, DC, the Shore), I think it is very appropriate to look at what is within the vicinity of the metro.

I grew up in Chicago and my biggest complaint with Chicagoland was the lack of anything interesting outside the metro, something that I hear many people complain about. I have been living in DC for the last 3 years, and it really is amazing how much is within a 2 hour drive (Beach, Philly, Mountains); Philly has it even better, imo.

Also, comparing the beaches within Chicago and the Jersey Shore/Rehoboth/Dewey beaches is really apples and oranges. They are not in the same league.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 08:14 AM
 
1,750 posts, read 2,804,143 times
Reputation: 764
Quote:
Originally Posted by jm02 View Post
Pound for pound, Chicago clearly offers more amenities and big city bluster than Philly. But this thread is asking about MSA. Philly's metro borders DC/Baltimore to the south, NYC to the north, the Chesapeake Bay, Pocono Mountains, the Jersey and Delaware resorts and some of the most significant historical sites in the country. For these reasons, I prefer the Philly MSA.
Agree.

City: Chicago > Philly
Metro: Philly > Chicago
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 09:03 AM
 
Location: Florida
398 posts, read 597,386 times
Reputation: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuy85 View Post
Every single Chicago vs. Philly thread is basically a Chicago vs. Philly + NYC + DC + Jersey shore thread.

Its Chicago vs. Philly. I cant choose personally because theyre probably my two favorites, but there are a ton of people using DC and NYC and the shore as reasons to pick Philly. Last time I checked, this was strictly the Chicago and Philly metros. Theres nothing "bang for buck" about driving 1 and a half to 2 hours to the shore when in Chicago its IN the city.

Nobody actually uses Philly, they bring NYC and DC into it.

Yes, Philly benefits from the better location, but strictly METRO speaking as the subject matter is, Chicago wins out. If the location sucks but Chicago is still winning, that should tell you something about what is more important. The city.

Too many times do people bring other cities into it. If thats the case, why not just move there? Honestly, these are all amazing cities, and none warrant having to leave so much on the weekend to go use another city as an advantage.

If im living in Chicago or Philly, im living those particular cities.
I was just about to say that.. Couldn't have said it better.. do NOT pick Philly b/c it is near NYC or DC... You aren't going to be happy if what you really want is NYC or DC... Moving to a "region" to be close to a city is one of the dumbest things ever honestly. Especially a major city like Chicago where you could walk from your doorstep, onto the subway and go directly to two airports. That is like moving to Milwaukee or Indianapolis to be near Chicago... or moving to Sacramento to be near San Francisco, moving to San Diego to be near LA. It's just not going to work out well. That is why you see "city people" who can't afford California(LA/SF) anymore move somewhere like Austin, instead of "random spot in CA" Or folks in NYC move to Midtown Atlanta instead of Long Island. And you will see my reasoning for this with city vs suburbs soon.
Honestly specific neighborhoods in the city alone will make a world of difference, much less being hours away. If you feel the need to "escape" to other destinations so much, then it seems to be the problem is you don't like where you live that much, or there isn't enough going on there. I have lived in a few major cities, and when I left for the weekend, I felt like I was missing out on what is going on. I hear this from New Yorkers and Chicagoans all the time.

I really don't like the trend on here that cities need to cling on to other cities in their region. I see Philadelphia doing it all the time, San Diego doing it, Orlando doing it, and so on.

I would say this, if you are a suburban type person and going to be living in the suburbs mostly anyway, then go with Philadelphia. If you are a city person and wanting a big cosmopolitan city as your daily stomping grounds, Chicago quite easily beats Philadelphia. Philadelphia is great, but it's no Chicago. Chicago is not NYC, no city is... but it is definitely in my mind on another level over Philadelphia.

I may be reading into this wrong, but I get the gist from reading the thread that OP secretly wants to be in New York, save yourself the additional move, bite the bullet...and just go to New York.

That being said, Cheese Steak > Italian Beef I really do <3 Philly, but given these two options I would pick Chicago every time, Midwest location be damned, you are in CHICAGO. Still love to visit both cities though.

Last edited by Lizz0rd; 03-13-2012 at 09:45 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 09:20 AM
 
1,750 posts, read 2,804,143 times
Reputation: 764
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lizz0rd View Post
If you feel the need to "escape" to other destinations so much, then it seems to be the problem is you don't like where you live that much, or there isn't enough going on there. I have lived in a few major cities, and when I left for the weekend, I felt like I was missing out on what is going on. I hear this from New Yorkers and Chicagoans all the time.
Where did you live? My time living in NYC I escaped the City virtually every weekend in the summer, as did most of my friends. Never heard anybody say they felt like they were missing out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 09:34 AM
 
Location: Villanova Pa.
4,887 posts, read 12,196,588 times
Reputation: 2574
Quote:
Originally Posted by prelude91 View Post
Agree.

City: Chicago > Philly
Metro: Philly > Chicago
I have no qualms with this sentiment^.

And if Philadelphia gets shortchanged statistically with NYC poaching into its rightful territority, then it should at least have the right to use its nearby neighbors as a positive feature.

To be quite honest the Philadelphia metro most likely is the top metro in the usa for" bang for your buck". Best bargain in the country. Mega metro amenities without the exorbitant coastal cost of living.


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 $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
Similar Threads
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