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.
No offence but anybody with common sense should be able figure out what I meant by more on my post. The same can't be said about what you mean by "more complicated." Boston really is more Asian than Chicago.
I knew exactly what you were getting at, but no offense, this is what you actually said:
Quote:
Plus, Chicago has the least amount of Asians out of any of these cities so that might be an issue for you.
You provided no explanation for what you said. All you said was "Chicago has the least amount of Asians." You never said anything about how many people out of such and such will be Asian. So no, some people WILL take you at face value because you provided no further substance for your thought process.
If you want people to imply something from what you say, even if you say "amount," then expand upon your thought. You did none of that. You merely stated that Chicago has a lesser amount of Asians, which is not true. It's important to actually say what you mean, instead of creating one line assertations without any further substance.
I knew exactly what you were getting at, but no offense, this is what you actually said:
You provided no explanation for what you said. All you said was "Chicago has the least amount of Asians." You never said anything about how many people out of such and such will be Asian. So no, some people WILL take you at face value.
If you want people to imply something from what you say, even if you say "amount," then expand upon your thought. You did none of that. You merely stated that Chicago has a lesser amount of Asians, which is not true. It's important to actually say what you mean, instead of creating one line assertations without any further substance.
No most people have more common sense then what you give them credit for. The fact that I got a reputation comment right after I made that post shows that. Frankly I just don't see how anybody with common sense would seriously think I am talking about Boston and Seattle being more Asian as a positive thing if it actually felt less Asian than Chicago.
Anyways to stay on topic, Seattle and Boston are still more Asian than Chicago whether some people didn't understand how I worded it or not.
No most people have more common sense then what you give them credit for. The fact that I got a reputation comment right after I made that post shows that. Frankly I just don't see how anybody with common sense would seriously think I am talking about Boston and Seattle being more Asian as a positive thing if it actually felt less Asian than Chicago.
Anyways to stay on topic, Seattle and Boston are still more Asian than Chicago whether some people didn't understand how I worded it or not.
You don't see how anybody with common sense could do that? You literally said Chicago has a lesser amount, and then said nothing else. Get real. I, however, knew what you were trying to get at, because it's stupid to bring up pure numbers for cities that are different populations. You give some people too much credit. Many people will take you exactly at face value because you provided exactly zero extra substance after your assertation.
Yes, of course Boston and Seattle are more Asian by percentages. Statistics show that. My point before was that since Chicago is literally over 4 times larger than both Boston and Seattle, that there are sections of Chicago that nearly total the population of both of those cities, but have a higher population percentage of Asians
Here are the further racial breakdowns of the cities I found elsewhere
Boston White/Hispanic alone: 54.23%
Black/African American alone: 24.88%
Asian alone: 9.15%
Other race alone: 6.75%
Two or more races alone: 4.73%
Chicago
White/Hispanic alone: 46.55%
Black/African American alone: 33.59%
Other race alone: 12.32% Asian alone: 5.59%
Two or more races: 1.74%
San Francisco
White/Hispanic alone: 51.45% Asian alone: 33.4%
Black/African American alone: 6.14%
Other race alone: 4.49%
Two or more races: 3.61%
Seattle
White/Hispanic alone: 69.77%
Asian alone: 14.66%
Black/African American alone: 8.12%
Two or more races: 4.58%
For fun too, here are the average percent differences between the majority group and the others. IMO the lower the better (no, not because I like Chicago, but because that means there's a more even distribution of numbers):
Chicago: 33.24%
San Francisco: 39.54%
Boston: 42.85%
Seattle: 60.65%
Based on what you've said, Seattle and San Francisco best meet your criteria.
For pure 'Asian stuff," I agree, as they have the highest percentage of Asians, but none of the cities would be bad. There are plenty of Asians in each of those cities, some more than others, and it's not like any one of them barely have any. You won't be really singled out or anything in any of them. So in that case, I think it depends on the other stuff they want too in a city (i.e. public transit, nightlife?, food, etc). Then it becomes a question of balancing the Asian stuff with the other non self-cultural stuff that you may want. Then the job thing, and for marketing, Chicago is ahead of the other three cities in that space, but it's not like the other three don't have marketing jobs either.
You don't see how anybody with common sense could do that? You literally said Chicago has a lesser amount, and then said nothing else. Get real. I, however, knew what you were trying to get at, because it's stupid to bring up pure numbers for cities that are different populations. You give some people too much credit. Many people will take you exactly at face value because you provided exactly zero extra substance after your assertation.
Are you seriously suggesting that most people will think that I am actually making a negative comment about a city even though I am trying to say positive things about it? Like I said you either don't give people enough credit or give yourself too much credit. The fact that you and another person understood what I meant shows that people have the common sense to understand what I meant. Why the hell would I make a positive comment about something if it's not? What exactly do I accomplish by saying Boston and Seattle has more number of Asian if they actually feel less Asian? So yes I don't see how anybody with common sense could think that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marothisu
Yes, of course Boston and Seattle are more Asian by percentages. Statistics show that. My point before was that since Chicago is literally over 4 times larger than both Boston and Seattle, that there are sections of Chicago that nearly total the population of both of those cities, but have a higher population percentage of Asians
So what? Unless you expect every Asian person to live, work, socialize, shop, eat or do anything in general in life all in those Asian neighborhoods in Chicago (which by the way is really quite absurd if you do) what is the purpose of this post? Even if they miraculously managed to pull this off and did most those things in only Asian neighborhoods, anytime that person goes out those neighborhoods for something they are going to be surrounded by even lesser Asians. So your limiting Asians to what only that those neighborhoods offer in Chicago if you really expect that. Can't imagine that being a very pleasing quality of life.
Boston and Seattle might not have as much in total number of Asians compared Chicago but they it gives Asians in their cities more people of their group in what they have offer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marothisu
For fun too, here are the average percent differences between the majority group and the others. IMO the lower the better (no, not because I like Chicago, but because that means there's a more even distribution of numbers):
Chicago: 33.24%
San Francisco: 39.54%
Boston: 42.85%
Seattle: 60.65%
I don't get what this is suppose to prove. Yes, Chicago is more diverse OVERALL than those cities. But we are talking about Asians here. Since the OP when out of his way to tell us he is Asian he obviously thought it was important and wanted us to consider that when answering. All 3 of these cities has more Asians in what they offer overall than Chicago. I don't get how this is even a debate.
Are you seriously suggesting that most people will think that I am actually making a negative comment about a city even though I am trying to say positive things about it? Like I said you either don't give people enough credit or give yourself too much credit. The fact that you and another person understood what I meant shows that people have the common sense to understand what I meant. Why the hell would I make a positive comment about something if it's not? What exactly do I accomplish by saying Boston and Seattle has more number of Asian if they actually feel less Asian? So yes I don't see how anybody with common sense could think that.
So what? Unless you expect every Asian person to live, work, socialize, shop, eat or do anything in general in life all in those Asian neighborhoods in Chicago (which by the way is really quite absurd if you do) what is the purpose of this post? Even if they miraculously managed to pull of this off and did most those things in only Asian neighborhoods, anytime that person goes out those neighborhoods for something they are going to be surrounded by even lesser Asians. So your limiting Asians to what only that those neighborhoods offer in Chicago if you really expect that. Can't imagine that being a very pleasing quality of life.
Boston and Seattle might not have as much in total number of Asians compared Chicago but they it gives Asians in their cities more people of their group in what they have offer.
I don't get what this is suppose to prove. Yes, Chicago is more diverse OVERALL than those cities. But we are talking about Asians here. Since the OP when out of his way to tell us he is Asian he obviously thought it was important and wanted us to consider that when answering. All 3 of these cities has more Asians in what they offer overall than Chicago. I don't get how this is even a debate.
Marthious just proved you wrong with he asian population, your completely misinformed of chicago.
To make yyures look even worse Chicago has more than twice the Asian population of seattle and boston.
So now that I see the number of people without common sense I see that I have to simplify every little comment with detail for those that doesn't understand.
Okay, I lose.
See if you understand now, CHICAGO HAS LESS PERCENTAGE OF ASIANS COMPARED TO THEIR POPULATION.
Kapish?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cali3448893
Marthious just proved you wrong with he asian population, your completely misinformed of chicago.
Can you read English? The only thing he proved me wrong on after your last post is that various number of people doesn't have common sense.
If you look at numbers for the metropolitan area, it's clear that San Francisco is in a class of its' own here. Seattle comes in a distant second. Chicago is third and Boston is fourth.
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.
