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.
I really dont think Toronto should even be in the same tier as DC, Chicago, and SF Bay let alone represented when Boston's not. Toronto's much closer to Boston than any place listed in this thread IMO. If this thread were a work place environ Toronto and Boston would be interns among the more experienced professionals IMO.
Come and get me Canadians, I went there. Your most important city would be at best our sixth city in the U.S. and it would still have to answer to Boston before all is done.
After that big gap! IMO you get join the big boys when you get to 1/2 a Trillion! So maybe in 20-30 years we will have another member! PS. On second thought. I'm not even sure Toronto qualifies as of now then. Oh well, maybe let's just assume it is. haha
Toronto doesnt qualify, if it qualifies then so should Boston. I like this post because you make it more selective/exclusive for true heavy weights. Boston has the metropolis population to match SF Bay and Toronto but its GDP is $430 billion and more on par with Toronto than any half trillion and up metro IMO.
I really dont think Toronto should even be in the same tier as DC, Chicago, and SF Bay let alone represented when Boston's not. Toronto's much closer to Boston than any place listed in this thread IMO. If this thread were a work place environ Toronto and Boston would be interns among the more experienced professionals IMO.
Come and get me Canadians, I went there. Your most important city would be at best our sixth city in the U.S. and it would still have to answer to Boston before all is done.
Agreed. Toronto is on this list by default because it is the economic capital of Canada, but if it was located in the US it would be a 4th tier or 3rd tier city at best.
Now before the Toronto love fest starts, this is not a reflection on which city you like better or is more "livable" (whatever that means in the first place) but rather which city is more influential economically Internationally.
As someone who has lived in Boston and Toronto, I can tell you without a doubt that Boston is a more influential city on an economic, scientific and education level and it isnt even close. Look at GDP and GDP per capita to start.
That's urban area, having lived in the Boston area and visited Toronto they are much larger than their urban areas would indicate. Boston feels like a place of 7.5 million while Toronto feels like a place of 8 million. Urban areas are ok, they show you the size of the urban form but they lack in economics. Metropolises are economic regions and the true size of these cities. I suspect your well traveled so let me rephrase this in a way I know you will understand. Would you agree that Boston and San Francisco feel closer in their size to Toronto than to Seattle despite this urban area/MSA standard applied? Keep in mind that Seattle is a place of 4 million
Toronto is the golden horseshoe area and Boston/SF go by their CSA's
I cant find any info on the GDP of the Golden Horseshoe/Toronto area but the GDP of the Canadian province Ontario is $490 billion and assuming the lionshare of that is in the golden horseshoe I find Toronto to be Boston's closest North American rival IMO. Greater Boston's GDP is $430 billion. Atticman, do you know where to find info on the GDP of the golden horseshoe?
What Rhymes stated is interesting and got me thinking that this thread can go either 1 of 2 ways, Boston should be included because it has the size and GDP argument to place with Toronto OR Toronto should be excluded for not surpassing half a trillion just as Boston was excluded. Not to mention other things going in Boston's favor MIT, Brown, Harvard?
I was going by the proximate metropolitan regions on max size which for the Bay Area is the CSA. I think with Silicon Valley and the international reputation San Francisco has that it would bear being in this discussion.
No, Silicon Valley is NOT San Francisco. There is no other major metro area in the world that can claim areas nearly 30 miles away as part of its own city's accomplishments.
It's like for Vancouver, people in Vancouver claiming Abbotsford or even Blaine, WA as part of the City of Vancouver's accomplishments.
SF's metro only produces a paltry $325 million, giving space for places like Houston, Boston, and Dallas to claim a spot over SF.
The only one I disagree with is downtown vibrancy, Id put SF #3
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.
