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.
You apparently didn't read my post. No one said Mexico City had a higher median income than Toronto. If that were true, Mexico City would be as rich as any city on earth.
The point is that Mexico City has massive income inequality, and a huge middle and upper class. There are 8 million Mexico City residents that are middle class or higher, which is more than the entire population in the Toronto area.
So obviously, Mexico City, as a whole, has a lot more wealth than Toronto, including millionaires, billionaires, and regular middle class people. The richest man in the world lives in Mexico City. Neighborhoods like Polanco and Las Lomas have millioanaire and billionaire wealth that is unknown in North America outside of NYC area and California.
The Bridal Path in Toronto and those leafy neighborhoods off Yonge would be upper middle class by DF standards. The wealth in Toronto isn't even comparable to similarly sized U.S. cities, because Canada has less wealth inequality. But compared to Mexico, with its crazy wealth inequality, the comparison is crazy. People have Ferraris in every color, just for fun.
I think it is silly to say with a badge of honour that a city with over 20 million people is going to have more absolute wealth than a city with 6.3 million people and think that that is somehow a shocking or sobering revelation.. That may be the case but average poor joe, average middle class joe and average joe millionaire is more prosperous and well off in Toronto than M.C. That is the case with the average American city versus M.C as well. If Slim Helu disappeared Toronto very well may have more absolute wealth than M.C and don't forget Toronto is home to the Thomson, Weston and Rogers families..
Even if we eliminate the income inequality and just make this a direct comparison of established per capita middle class incomes - do you really think the average middle class individual in M.C is more well off than the average middle class person in Toronto? I think most people would find that hard to believe. If you believe that than please back that up..
When it comes to millionaires - As per the article in my post: Toronto has 118K millionaires - Mexico city has 102K millionaires. I think those numbers speak for themselves and Toronto does it with a lot less people.. Mexico city does have more multimillionaires (1800 versus T.O's 1184) but even still it has significantly more people as I mentioned.. Toronto outstrips M.C's multimillionaires on a per capita basis which is a pretty important factor i'd say.. Additionally, 1800 or even 1184 is not a large number in places with millions upon millions of people.. Even NYC only has 3000 multimillionaires so these people are not exactly representative of a population.. they are your .01 percent.. As for the Billionaire comparison (which is laughable we are talking about a minute number of individuals), Canada has more billionaires than Mexico.. ooooohhhh Mexico City has Slim Helu...... ooooohhhh
btw Rosedale is the wealthiest nabe in Toronto not the Bridal Path.
As for large U.S cities (I'm talking top 8 only), per capita our incomes aren't as high but when you factor net worth and the value of our real estate it has an equalizing force. Besides, if you want to compare GDP between Canadian and U.S cities, at the very least compare apples to apples population metrics as opposed to inflated MSA/CSA's to metro Toronto please. We don't have MSA's/CSA's in Canada so the comparisons aren't always exactly accurate. Shockingly, only NYC and LA have more millionaires in the U.S than Toronto and only NYC has more multimillionaires. I was actually surprised by this and it looks like the number of exclusive residences in leafy nabe's in Toronto with nice cars in the driveway is a more common site than many realize.....1/53 persons walking around in the GTA is a millionaire - few places can post this ratio.
People have Ferraris in every color, just for fun, while there is raw sewage running down the street a mile away.
Sounds lovely...actually sounds like Miami, one of my least favorite American cities save for the occasional party trip (which hasn't happened for me there in a couple years). Miami/S FL has a ton of wealth, too, but its economy isn't nearly as robust as the other cities/metros in its population league.
Granted, Miami does feel very large to me, probably larger than Boston, SF, Philly, certainly Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, etc. But it also doesn't feel that urban to me at all (large and urban are mutually exclusive). Just a ton of resi high rises everywhere and a lot of impoverished neighborhoods with mostly SFR.
Where would people rank Panama City? Personally I think it deserves to be mentioned in the mix with many of the other cities after NYC and MC.
Of course you have modern urban areas like Punta Paitilla, San Francisco and La Cresta (Along with all the other highrise areas) but there is also low rise historic areas like Casco Viejo and San Felipe. Mix that with the rough around the edges Urban areas like Calidonia and El Chorillo and you have quite the urban mix of neighborhoods.
I recall looking out from my balcony where I was staying and looking out to Cinta Costera Park and people filling it until all hours of the night. Plus the amount of Taxi's running day and night must rival NYC. I think PC is an underrated place when people are rating Urban areas in N. America.
Most Latin American cities would be much more urban than their American counterparts, at least in terms of population and infrastructural density in the low-rise areas.
Mexico City is in a different league of urbanity to Toronto. In North America only NYC compares. While there are few parts of DF as dense as Manhattan - there is endless mid rise development- feels like greater LA with the density of Queens. DF also has a much larger and better subway system than Toronto but like Toronto and unlike NYC and some el lines in Chicago, it does not run 24/7.The middle class urban neighborhoods in DF are spectacular - Condesa, Roma, La Zona Rosa, Reforma et al. The Centro Historico is large and has one of the highest concentrations of 17th and 18th century buildings in the world -certainly the highest in North America, but while gentrifying fast is still predominantly working class and can be dodgy in parts especially at night. That said the Zocalo has to be one of the largest and most beautiful and busy urban plazas in the world. There are large pockets of poverty in DF, but very little informal housing or favelas these days and the poverty is more prevalent on the outskirts of the city. Without a local, driving out of the city can be an adventure. Only New York has more middle-class urban neighborhoods. With the exception of Polanco, the uber wealthy neighborhoods in DF are more suburban in character - they look much more like Beverly Hills than Park Avenue. Mexico City is a monster of a city
Ito urbanity - density, vibrancy (day and night), concentration of amenities (Mexico City has more museums than any city in the world) etc, in North America in my experience it is NYC and DF and then a notable drop to the next tier down to cities like Chicago, SF, Toronto, Guadalajara, and I would rank them in roughly that order.
In the last decade Toronto has experienced a spectacular construction boom, but compared to NYC and DF, it still feels a little sleepy at street level, particularly outside the boundaries of Old Toronto. I think it is getting to Chicago levels of urbanity, though the north side of Chicago, the most contiguously urban part of the city is still denser and more hopping than the densest and most hopping part of Toronto. All the new high-rise construction between downtown and the lakefront is very similiar to what has happened in the south loop of Chicago in the last decade or so, but as long as that horrible elevated Gardiner expressway stands that part of Toronto is going to feel patchy, fragmented and pedestrian unfriendly in its urban infrastructure.
I think Toronto is a terrific city and only getter more urban, but I can't see it ever being number two - certainly not in my lifetime. It is certainly top 5 in North America in terms of any definition of urbanity that I can imagine.
I feel that they are about the same. at least the loop compared to Toronto downtown. they both have wide streets and sidewalks and there aren't holes in between each building like in a suburban city. For example, Schaumburg.
Mexico City is in a different league of urbanity to Toronto. In North America only NYC compares. While there are few parts of DF as dense as Manhattan - there is endless mid rise development- feels like greater LA with the density of Queens. DF also has a much larger and better subway system than Toronto but like Toronto and unlike NYC and some el lines in Chicago, it does not run 24/7.The middle class urban neighborhoods in DF are spectacular - Condesa, Roma, La Zona Rosa, Reforma et al. The Centro Historico is large and has one of the highest concentrations of 17th and 18th century buildings in the world -certainly the highest in North America, but while gentrifying fast is still predominantly working class and can be dodgy in parts especially at night. That said the Zocalo has to be one of the largest and most beautiful and busy urban plazas in the world. There are large pockets of poverty in DF, but very little informal housing or favelas these days and the poverty is more prevalent on the outskirts of the city. Without a local, driving out of the city can be an adventure. Only New York has more middle-class urban neighborhoods. With the exception of Polanco, the uber wealthy neighborhoods in DF are more suburban in character - they look much more like Beverly Hills than Park Avenue. Mexico City is a monster of a city
Ito urbanity - density, vibrancy (day and night), concentration of amenities (Mexico City has more museums than any city in the world) etc, in North America in my experience it is NYC and DF and then a notable drop to the next tier down to cities like Chicago, SF, Toronto, Guadalajara, and I would rank them in roughly that order.
In the last decade Toronto has experienced a spectacular construction boom, but compared to NYC and DF, it still feels a little sleepy at street level, particularly outside the boundaries of Old Toronto. I think it is getting to Chicago levels of urbanity, though the north side of Chicago, the most contiguously urban part of the city is still denser and more hopping than the densest and most hopping part of Toronto. All the new high-rise construction between downtown and the lakefront is very similiar to what has happened in the south loop of Chicago in the last decade or so, but as long as that horrible elevated Gardiner expressway stands that part of Toronto is going to feel patchy, fragmented and pedestrian unfriendly in its urban infrastructure.
I think Toronto is a terrific city and only getter more urban, but I can't see it ever being number two - certainly not in my lifetime. It is certainly top 5 in North America in terms of any definition of urbanity that I can imagine.
Yes to all this. I can tell you have been to Mexico City many times, and know the city well.
In North America, only NYC tops DF. LA is possibly comparable too, but in urbanity/vibrancy definitely have to go with DF. Some place like Toronto is closer in size to a Guadalajara than to a DF, which is an urban beast with few rivals globally.
NYC, Sao Paulo, London, Paris, Tokyo, Shanghai, Seoul, Bangkok are probably the only cities that match or top DF in urbanity.
I'm from Toronto and I even said that M.C was more vibrant and urban... so who exactly is the everyone lol... most people that I garner in here say M.C is the most urban and vibrant outside NYC and that Toronto deserves a mention as in a tier with S.F. Boston, D.C, Chicago etc. I don't think anyone from Toronto at the very least said that Toronto is the 2nd most urban city in N.A - they just said it was urban including myself btw.... Old Toronto does make a case for being a very urban place but I wouldn't crown it number 2 when you have the likes of Mexico City on here or even some other cities.
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.
