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 think that's a very balanced and objective take on this comparison, and I think most would be inclined to agree. Philly has long been a time-honored and sophisticated cultural hub, but it's now rebuilding its global profile after decades of falling behind. Conversely, Atlanta has had a meteoric rise in the global sphere over the past half-century, although it's kind of leveled off at this point, at least in relative terms of other cities' rise.
I think where Seattle wins in this comparison is the current trajectory/momentum. It's had and continues to have an impressive rise by continuing to raise is global profile and matures as a bona fide major urban city.
Here are how the cities rank on this year's A.T. Kearney Global Index and Outlook (linked in the above post). The first figure is their 2018 rank, the second their change in rank since 2016. Seattle was added to the list, which now covers 135 cities, this year, and thus has no second figure. The third figure in the Index for Atlanta gives its change since 2012, which appears in the report as well; it was the only one of the three cities on the list in that year. Philadelphia was added in 2015:
Index
Atlanta 35 / +5 / +4
Seattle 48
Philadelphia 51 / -4
Outlook
Atlanta 26 / -20
Seattle 32
Philadelphia 41 / +2
So according to those researchers, those Atlantans and Atlanta supporters who have accused the rest of us here of having a bias against the place are probably right.
I'd also like to digress a bit for a musing on the word "cosmopolitan." It seems to have two meanings. One, which was the original one but seems less common now, is "attracting people from many different places / a wide range of (national) origins." It's related to "metropolitan" in that both words describe a city that serves as a center of activity for a wider region. The latter describes a geographic territory; the former, international reach.
But I often see it, and I have seen it here, used as a synonym for "sophisticated." That could be because the types of activities that go into assessing a place's sophistication indicate at least openness to influences from well beyond a place's home region or country.
I think that the anti-Atlanta bias here stems from our (and by "our" here I mean those living outside the South) perception of the South, especially the Deep South, as lacking "cosmopolitan" character in both senses of the word. Atlanta's cultural institutions definitely put the lie to the latter perception, and those passenger stats at Hartsfield Jackson destroy the former - though I wonder what fraction of those passengers are people taking up residence in Atlanta. Who here can tell me about Atlanta's ethnic neighborhoods and suburbs? What's its Bensalem, its Upper Darby? What's its answer to Oxford Circle, Bustleton or Baltimore Avenue? (Elaborations of the international character of each of these furnished on request.)
Nonetheless, with all of this, I would say that Atlanta stands as an outlier in its region. Philadelphia, on the other hand, is just one drop of water in a sea of globalism.
I think one reason Atlanta has so many consulates is, as has been noted about the city elsewhere in this discussion, it's pretty much all the marbles in its region (the Deep South in particular and the Southeast in general). The cities that are close to it aren't in its league (Charlotte, Birmingham), and the cities that are in its league aren't close to it. And there's that airport. It's the logical place to put a foreign consulate in the Southeast, no two ways about it.
By contrast, New York is just 90 miles up the road from Philadelphia. If you can only put one consulate in to serve both regions, it goes in New York for reasons that I shouldn't have to spell out.
And yet there had been an Italian consulate in Philadelphia until about a year ago.
I can tell you, by the way, that one of those six consulates in Philadelphia is that of the West African nation of Sierra Leone. It's located in the next block west of mine.
Which leads me to another observation: Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that one of the things that may determine whether a country sets up a consulate in a city is whether there is someone in that city willing to serve as a consul. It seems to me, based on someone I know who holds that title (ISTR), that these positions aren't regular posts in the country's foreign service but rather positions that go to nationals of the country already resident in the other country. (That would be my guess why the Sierra Leone consulate is a large twin house in a lower-income section of Germantown, an outlying neighborhood in Northwest Philadelphia.)
Based on several of the stats (in particular, international passenger traffic through its airport, a stat where Atlanta blows the other two away; its total is nearly twice that of PHL and Sea-Tac combined - and, as I noted in one of my other responses above, about on par with Newark Liberty, one of New York's two international airports), if any one of these three cities "pulls away" from the others, it will be Atlanta. The two best-known companies headquartered there are both "global" brands too (well, CNN is based there, but its corporate parent is headquartered in New York).
I think that the poster who said that Atlanta's location in the Deep South and its lower percentage of walkable urban communities conspire to work against it with this crowd is right. The former, IMO, more than the latter: the Deep South as a region is seen by many as still resistant to any sort of cosmopolitan influences, those Indians operating hotels on the Mississippi Gulf Coast notwithstanding; it's still "backward and prejudiced" in the eyes of many. Atlanta is what it is today because it set itself in contrast to that backwardness and prejudice, but the transformation from Just Another Southern City to a global hub is still of relatively recent occurrence, and as I'm sure you all know, perceptions sometimes take a while to catch up to reality.
If that New York Times article is any guide, the immigrants who move here from New York find work (or set up shop) here too. The two cities are close enough to each other to influence locational decisions but not close enough to become one commutershed; unless one lives in the area where those commutersheds overlap - a territory that includes Bucks County, PA, and Burlington Couty, NJ, in the Philadelphia CSA and MSA, Hunterdon and Middlesex counties, NJ, in the New York CSA, and most emphatically Mercer County, NJ, which is in the Philadelphia media market but the New York CSA, the Federal government having moved it out of the Philadelphia CSA in the mid-1990s - commuting from one metro to the other takes just a little too long (though the actual commuting time will vary depending on location of residence and employment; someone living in Yardley, for instance, might be able to take a job at Johnson & Johnson in New Brunswick). But city center-to-city center commuting is out of the question unless one is either willing to give up one's personal life or has enough money to afford an Acela commuter pass (or an Amtrak Northeast Regional one). Most of the immigrants fall into neither of these categories.
Someone else here commented on the low number of foreign-born residents in Philadelphia relative to its size. This fits in with a longstanding pattern here of civic and other institutions punching below their weight for a number of reasons. I tell people all the time that the Philadelphia I live in now is a vastly different city from the one I lived in 20 or even 10 years ago. If Atlanta is late to the global-city game, then Philadelphia is late to the urban-revival game, and it still shows. (One stat the head of the special services district focused on the city core trots out often in presentations is this: All of the rest of the nation's 10 largest cities that had lost jobs since 1970 had recovered them all by 2010, and several had surpassed their 1970 levels. Philadelphia remained 25 percent below its 1970 employment level in 2010.) We will probably be a laggard on globalization too, but - as with employment - at least we're back in the game now (on globalization, finally in the game), and that makes a big difference.
WOw.What a lengthy post!lol
Consulates are in a city more the fact that there is a population significant enough that needs the support,
A country doesnt put a mission in a city because of its proximity although im sure there is some consideration to that of course.
There has to be a big of a base in addition to proximity.
All those consulates in Atlanta are well represented by s sizable population of that nationality
Seattle is the most international, and whatever metric you measure that by, its lead will only grow over the next five years.
It has more international air traffic than Philly, and more capacity on international air carriers than Atlanta, which relies heavily on hubbing Delta pax for its overseas flights.
Seattle is the most international, and whatever metric you measure that by, its lead will only grow over the next five years.
It has more international air traffic than Philly, and more capacity on international air carriers than Atlanta, which relies heavily on hubbing Delta pax for its overseas flights.
You always attempt to minimalize Atlanta, especially when it comes to the Airport.
The capacity on foreign carriers is a good thing in regards to SEA, but the International passenger numbers are what counts. In that category, ATL far exceeds SEA. I would actually like to see the numbers to substantiate this claim on foriegn capacity as well.
It's certainly not a situation here that non-SkyTeam Airlines aren't doing well. Air Canada, British Air and Lufthansa have been here for years. Qatar and Turkish are also here now, and are doing quite well.
Delta SkyTeam partners Air France and Korean will be operating A380's here next year, and Korean has been doing so off and on for several years now during high demand.
The myth that all passengers mostly connect here is just that, a myth. Our O&D numbers are between 30 to 35 million, which is about right and respectable for the 10th largest Metro in the U.S.
Many of our peer cities top O&D International markets are either Cancun, London or Toronto. Ours happens to be Seoul. That should tell you something about this 'lesser' market, as you like to frame it.
You always attempt to minimalize Atlanta, especially when it comes to the Airport.
The capacity on foreign carriers is a good thing in regards to SEA, but the International passenger numbers are what counts. In that category, ATL far exceeds SEA. I would actually like to see the numbers to substantiate this claim on foriegn capacity as well.
It's certainly not a situation here that non-SkyTeam Airlines aren't doing well. Air Canada, British Air and Lufthansa have been here for years. Qatar and Turkish are also here now, and are doing quite well.
Delta SkyTeam partners Air France and Korean will be operating A380's here next year, and Korean has been doing so off and on for several years now during high demand.
The myth that all passengers mostly connect here is just that, a myth. Our O&D numbers are between 30 to 35 million, which is about right and respectable for the 10th largest Metro in the U.S.
Many of our peer cities top O&D International markets are either Cancun, London or Toronto. Ours happens to be Seoul. That should tell you something about this 'lesser' market, as you like to frame it.
Well it isnt a myth that ATL is mostly connections. Even if ATL generated 35 million O&D passengers a year (which isnt completely unrealistic but its certainly generous), that would still mean roughly 2/3 of passengers are connections. Considering domestic O&D, ATL is smaller than cities like Dallas and Denver, but bigger than cities like Houston, Philly, Seattle, Detroit, etc.
You said, "international numbers are what counts", but Atlanta's are boosted very heavily by the DL hub and flights to leisure destinations. There isnt much denying that. Seattle doesnt have that benefit.
When we talk about international O&D, one thing that has to be considered is business traffic vs. leisure traffic. From ATL, you get a lot of traffic vacation traffic to places like Jamaica, the DR, Aruba, etc. that you dont get in Seattle. That would boost its international numbers compared to Seattle. That said even when that is considered, Atlanta is still larger but by a smaller gap.
Also, I would refrain from talking about which airlines are "doing quite well". Unless you have access to P&L data, theres no way you can know about that. I can almost assure you QR and TK dont make a dime in Atlanta, but they also lose money on most cities they fly to in North America due to heavy competition. Both are state supported so it doesnt really matter, but Id hardly say those are doing well.
None of this actually refutes what Be Proud said though.
He said: "All those consulates in Atlanta are well represented by s sizable population of that nationality"
That isnt a true statement. Some are, but certainly not all. Thats why I said what I said.
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.
