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 was on a project for 5 years dealing with only government data like this - trust me, I'm the first person for it. The numbers you posted are great, and I have absolutely nothing against them, but with anything in science there's analysis of the numbers but also theory with the numbers. Without some of this theory, we wouldn't have some of the demographic, economic, etc measures that we have right now. Some of what I brought up is definitely measurable (i.e. segregation vs. integration of various groups). It is just as valid as anything to bring it up - and trust me again, I 100% get what you are doing and am the same type of mind. I used to do this stuff for 5 years every single day as part of my job, but every single day there was always an analysis and theoretical discussion behind the numbers like with any science.
I know. We can measure integration and segregation and economic prosperity and political influence.
Look don't take it personal because I'm all for personal experience where it fits. The reason I am not for it in this thread is because I don't find City-Data posters to be trustable. A few, yes. The grand majority, no, at least by impression of what they say. This is why everyone of my polls are the types where you can see who votes for what. Public polls.
From an observation point of view: When people vote in threads that are positive topics, they almost assuredly vote for their own city or whatever city is their favorite. Nothing wrong with that but those people cannot really say they are objective people at all. It doesn't even matter what the actual topic is, who votes what is almost assuredly pre-determined. Look at this poll for example, given the information provided, I feel like we can summarize at least some people as voters that voted for the city they'd most want to live in. That would explain why the city's votes are in the sequence they are, because it definitely doesn't reflect the objective statistical information we've seen thus far here.
In negative threads I usually see people vote for cities they hate the most. You know, the ones they spend all their time talking about the absolute most that they don't like, then they vote for it, then post about it, then try to convince others that they are in fact objective people.
The other thing I've learned about this forum is that we cannot handle subjective arguments on topics like these, we're just not mature enough as a City-Data community for that yet. Don't get me wrong, the far and few actual quality experiences and posters on this forum make it worthwhile, but most posters here come across like they would sell their grandmothers cats to make a point that their city is top 5 at everything. I understand we all like cities, that is why we are all here, but sometimes does a city mean way too much to some people?
In another thread a dude compiled a list of Fortune 1000 companies for every metropolitan area, as in this dude literally went state by state in the site he was using and added them all up. That was great and all, except his information was for the year 2000 but he knew that it was from the year 2000 because he must've easily spent 2 hours on that site compiling the information. He used it because his city in 2000 had 41 F1000s and present day only has 28. No one else from his city that posted after him said anything about the information he was using and how it was from 2000 and not 2015, because for them "if it boosts and props my city, then I ain't doing nothin' about it." The silence, to me, said it all. Imagine using 2000 information for your city, the women born in the year 2000 are just 2 years away from legally being able to work in the "adult entertainment" industry as an 18 year old adult, a person born in 2000 in 2 years will be eligible to serve in the United States military as an adult, and this dude was that desperate and pathetic to prove his city is top 5 that he used statistics from well more than a past decade. That instance sticks out to me as an example of the lengths people will go to boost the hell out of their cities, often pitifully.
See it is stuff like that makes me cringe, makes me think we are not there yet to handle more "subjective" topics. We're still in baby stages and baby stages cater more to the objective line than the subjective one, in my opinion. I think talking about how social and cultural influences towards diversity and foreign borns is a great idea, but I don't feel like we're ready to do that yet. We're not objective enough and haven't cleared our biases enough to engage in that, in my personal opinion. It just wouldn't be objective, every Chicagoan and their supporters would just say Chicago, every Torontonian and their supporters would just say Toronto, every San Franciscan and their supporters would just say San Francisco and everyone would supposedly have a "in my experience" to try to justify what really will be a biased discussion. All that really does is take away from the city that actually should be winning the topic but doesn't because people make something that can be answered objectively and make it subjective to where anywhere can beat anywhere at anything. You see what I mean?
At least with objective statistics and data, at least on this topic, we can control the amount of nutjob and crazy we have to deal with, again, in my personal opinion.
Last edited by Trafalgar Law; 03-06-2016 at 02:21 PM..
I know. We can measure integration and segregation and economic prosperity and political influence.
Look don't take it personal because I'm all for personal experience where it fits. The reason I am not for it in this thread is because I don't find City-Data posters to be trustable. A few, yes. The grand majority, no, at least by impression of what they say. This is why everyone of my polls are the types where you can see who votes for what. Public polls.
I understand what you're saying, and that's fine because most of us have no idea who each other is. At the end of the day though, people are going to still interpret and analyze the data to their own personal experience. None of the posts before this that I made have to do anything with my personal experience either when I first brought this up, at least. They are completely valid topics to bring up when you're talking about cosmopolitanism, diversity, etc in how various groups interact with one another and their influence on the communities. There is no right or wrong answer, but it is still a valid point that needs to be discussed because again, one measure of data only tells part of the story. There are many other different measures of data (and various dimensions within each) that you could bring up, or even measure that haven't been measured yet, or ones that need you or whomever to actually put together a new calculation that hasn't been done before. These things need to be talked about if you're going to have a discussion about these topics. They aren't "personal experience" topics - they are valid theoretical questions and issues. I used to be in meetings with guys from Brookings Institute - it was never JUST about the data. There was *always* a theoretical discussion about what the demographic and economic data meant, how one affects the other (and another, and another), why things are the way they are, how some numbers may be misrepresentations while others may be fine, etc. It's all part of being a sociologist, demographer, and economist. The real work comes in what you do with the data that you have and how to interpret it, like with any science.
I understand what you're saying, and that's fine because most of us have no idea who each other is. At the end of the day though, people are going to still interpret and analyze the data to their own personal experience. None of the posts before this that I made have to do anything with my personal experience either when I first brought this up, at least. They are completely valid topics to bring up when you're talking about cosmopolitanism, diversity, etc in how various groups interact with one another and their influence on the communities. There is no right or wrong answer, but it is still a valid point that needs to be discussed because again, one measure of data only tells part of the story. There are many other different measures of data (and various dimensions within each) that you could bring up, or even measure that haven't been measured yet, or ones that need you or whomever to actually put together a new calculation that hasn't been done before. These things need to be talked about if you're going to have a discussion about these topics. They aren't "personal experience" topics - they are valid theoretical questions and issues. I used to be in meetings with guys from Brookings Institute - it was never JUST about the data. There was *always* a theoretical discussion about what the demographic and economic data meant, how one affects the other (and another, and another), why things are the way they are, how some numbers may be misrepresentations while others may be fine, etc. It's all part of being a sociologist, demographer, and economist. The real work comes in what you do with the data that you have and how to interpret it, like with any science.
I considered your argument pretty subjective:
Quote:
Originally Posted by marothisu
Just because one city has a higher Angolan foreign born population doesn't mean that it's automatically more cosmopolitan than another with a lesser foreign born population of the same group (but still a sizable population). The population could be very insular or not too influential to the rest of the community/city.
The statistics have spoken and while I'm not advocating that the numbers are end all and be all, the counter-arguments aren't really verifiable, thus not objective.
For example: Do we have data that specifically outlines that the Angolan population, in particular, in one city can be more insular than another city? No. Do we have the verifiable information that supports that the city with the smaller Belizean population actually has more influence and power in its community than the larger Belizean community in another city? No. Therefore, from what we know, through data, is that the city with the largest Angolan population has the edge because, well, until proven otherwise, it does.
This is why I don't support personal opinions in threads based off objectivity, because while you may not be biased yourself, someone else is and will use these "subjective" avenues to actually make absurd arguments and I wont do my part in being an enabler for that.
Again, I have nothing against personal experiences or subjectivity, just not in this thread.
Here's one of my threads where personal opinion is fostered and institutionalized straight from the start, the subjectivity crowd can get their kick in here:
Anyhow, I'll make this my last post on clarification because really, I want this thread to be more on the objective rails, as in nothing at all that cannot be verified. Again, subjectivity is great, and one day in the future when maybe we can seem like a more trustable based City-Data community, where we can objectively balance data and subjective thoughts, I'll implement subjective factors into my diversity based threads. Today is not that day though.
That was an example - I was simplifying it for people reading it as it is easier to understand a theory if there's an example associated with it. Most people have trouble thinking abstractly, so an actual example always helps.
Quote:
We wont be entertaining this train of thought further in this thread. The statistics have spoken and while I'm not advocating that the numbers are end all and be all, the counter-arguments aren't really verifiable.
Then don't advocate for a scientific process if you aren't willing to have people theorize about the actual data. It's part of the process whether you like it or not.
Quote:
Do we have data that specifically outlines that the Angolan population, in particular, in one city can be more insular than another city? No.
No, but we can still talk about the topic and why it's important for determining if one place is truly more diverse/cosmopolitan than another.
Quote:
This is why I don't support personal opinions in threads based off objectivity, because while you may not be a nutjob, someone else is and will use these "subjective" avenues to actually make laughable arguments.
Again, I have nothing against personal experiences or subjectivity, just not in this thread.
When you're dealing with science, collecting the numbers is only part of the process. It is not the entire process. If you have a large background in science (or something like Economics), then you will know this right away. And whether you like it or not, "Cosmpolitanism" is subjective. I know people who think that Des Moines, IA is cosmpolitan - they have their own reasons for it, and it's completely subjective.
Quote:
Anyhow, I'll make this my last post on clarification because really, I want this thread to be more on the objective rails nothing at all that cannot be verified. Again, subjectivity is great, and one day in the future when maybe we can seem like a more trustable and non-agenda based City-Data community I'll implement subjective factors into my diversity based threads. Today is not that day though.
Again, I know what you're trying to do, but it's just not going to happen, especially on this site. Even if all you do is post numbers, people are bound to theorize about them because that is actually part of the process. You asked a question in the beginning about cosmopolitanism/diversity and you want to keep it objective, but you don't have all the data to keep it objective. You have part of the data and story - and a lot of the information on determining it is not even out there. You can expect people to just look at the numbers and only say "Oh wow, cool!" without actually discussing what they mean, the consequences, etc and actually theorizing about society.
We're not going the subjective route in this thread.
That example of the Angolans [subjective route] is exactly what I was talking about when I said things we cannot verify and what we cannot verify we are not discussing in this thread. If there is evidence to support a community with the smaller Angolan population having more influence, then awesome. If there isn't then we're not going there in this thread.
We're not going the subjective route in this thread. Period.
Good luck with that. Cosmopolitanism is not something that you can 100% define objectively for every single person where everyone is on the same page. If you think that, then you don't understand your own topic plain and simple. If you didn't want subjectiveness in this thread, then why would you even make it a poll? Everyone has their own opinions on what constitutes "cosmopolitanism." If you don't want peoples' opinions, then don't ask their opinions in the form of a poll.
Quote:
That example of the Angolans [subjective route] is exactly what I was talking about when I said things we cannot verify and what we cannot verify we are not discussing in this thread. I mean, if you have this theory then make sure to have the facts to support it.
Again, it was an example to help people understand an abstract idea. I think a person with average intelligence would not take it as a fact and would have understood it was to help understand the idea/theory presented before, because again, most people have trouble understanding abstract thoughts unless there's something more tangible they can associate to it.
If you didn't want subjectiveness in this thread, then why would you even make it a poll?
Probably because while I ask for objectivity and provide statistics, they come from a variety of different factors including nationalities, race, ethnicities, foreign borns, religions, languages, and other aspects.
Not every list is going to have the same city on top nor exemplify the same city with the same strengths. I made the poll so that way people can look at the variety of factors that I asked about then vote. Not because I wanted to foster subjective sentiments of "oh my good golly gosh, I went to this city and it was so cosmopolitan" I'd hope people weren't voting that way but voting after looking at ALL of the lists provided with data. The ethnicity ones, the race ones, the foreign born ones, and the soon to be language ones.
Again, for the final time, we're not going the subjective route. We're going the route where we can verify what people say and if they cannot, then I encourage them to design their own thread topic where they can get their own fill in. Because it is not going to be in this thread.
Also I don't need luck. I established a pretty straightforward outline that we can measure objectively. Ethnicities, race, religion, languages, nationalities, so on and so forth. We're sticking to simply just that. The real discussion should stem from the different avenues each city can take to make an argument, be it race and balance of racial composition, be it ethnicity, be it national representation, be it religious diversity, or be it linguistic influence.
You can try it yourself, but it's pretty much a lost cause if what we're talking about was what I mentioned: museums, universities, performing arts groups. This doesn't really beggar an in-depth comparison when you're talking about Toronto vs Chicago specifically because it's obvious and across the board, however, you can give it a shot. In the end, it makes a lot more sense for someone trying to make a case for Toronto to refer to its large foreign-born population and subsequent diversity as its marker for being more "cosmopolitan" rather than to delve into definitions where Toronto is a bit lacking in comparison.
What an arrogant post. TBH if its getting into a comparison with you i'll pass and save it for someone more objective and open minded.
Probably because while I ask for objectivity and provide statistics, they come from a variety of different factors including nationalities, race, ethnicities, foreign borns, religions, languages, and other aspects.
People are still going to apply their subjective nature to the analysis of this because one person's idea of "cosmopolitan" is different than another's. One person may think it has to do with the amount of cocktail lounges around them with a nice, tranquil setting while another may think it has to do with amount of different religions around them. You can't expect everyone to agree with what your idea of cosmpolitanism is, which is why you're going to get subjective answers. Look all around this thread, before I came into it - read it. It's full of subjectiveness whether you like it or not.
I think we need to define what cosmopolitan is in connection with this thread. I posted a definition of it pages back but people just started getting into museums and opera - though conveniently ignoring live theatre lol.
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.
