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.
The US never had an affinity for having large, powerful capital cities. DC's location - a swamp between two states - was chosen on purpose. Because it was away from the power centers of the South and Northeast.
European capitals became the capitals because they were the largest, most powerful cities. Where there isn't an overwhelmingly, dominant city you've had regional tensions (historically or presently). See: Barcelona vs. Madrid and the push for Catalan independence; Milan vs Rome vs Naples and the regional political parties that exist in Italy.
Here we don't make LA or SF the capital - we stick it out in Sacramento - near the middle of the state. Trenton, Albany, Springfield, Harrisburg, Madison, Olympia, etc. Only 15 states have their capital in the largest metro area in the state and most of the time that's because the metro became the largest later and likely only because the capital was there or, in the case of western states, because it was near the only reliable source of fresh water.
You're right, I was just pointing out that the international tourist stats merely reflect what is already a well-known fact – that DC is not a premier urban destination in this country. People come to America to see New York, California, Vegas, Miami... DC is an afterthought. And those who come expecting to see a city that measures up to the great world capitals are often disappointed. Whether that should cause embarrassment to anyone is I guess another question.
You're right, I was just pointing out that the international tourist stats merely reflect what is already a well-known fact – that DC is not a premier urban destination in this country. People come to America to see New York, California, Vegas, Miami... DC is an afterthought. And those who come expecting to see a city that measures up to the great world capitals are often disappointed. Whether that should cause embarrassment to anyone is I guess another question.
Why even try to suggest DC or even INFER? It as the bold above. No one says it should be #1.
Why knock DC to boost even further your NYC as King? We know NYC is King and LA with Hollywood and the whole Cali mystique to International Tourist.
Most chose as a once in a lifetime visit or a retirement adventure to youth Hostel world traveling one. Miami has Latin America to shop and Sotho Beach. LA Hollywood, NYC the World Capital. Or one of them that was promoted by Hollywood of old and today in film. SF has a Romantic mystique to Orlando for Disneyworld. Even Vegas is not huge to them. But the Grand Canyon is.
Chicago, DC and other city's suffer in the top two as MUST SEE. DC also SUFFERS by the Anti-US Political climate in the world. Free Museums don't seem to help even? We THINK they want to see the White House and Capital? But not over the others is clear.
But to demean DC or any other is overkill. But some see anything not NYC as flyover.... and for urbanity outside of NYC... fa'geta'bout'it.
that DC is not a premier urban destination in this country. People come to America to see New York, California, Vegas, Miami... DC is an afterthought. And those who come expecting to see a city that measures up to the great world capitals are often disappointed. Whether that should cause embarrassment to anyone is I guess another question.
Orlando and Vegas aren't "urban" destinations at all. People are going for the "entertainment." I've traveled Europe quite a bit and while our cities can't compete for history I think our big cities hold up quite well and in many cases have far more going on in terms of culture, nightlife, entertainment, etc. San Diego or Portland are a lot more fun than Lyon. So I find it ironic that a lot of Americans go to Europe for the culture while a lot of Europeans come to the US for the debauchery. I'm focusing on Europe because they visit the East Coast in bigger numbers. But that's what a lot of foreigners, Europeans especially, think of the US - they don't think about the restaurants or the food scene, the architecture, the culture, the history - they think about hedonism. Spring Break, amusement parks, McDonald's drive-thrus, etc. When you ask the average European what they think the US is like you wind up with some mish-mash of the Santa Monica pier, the Vegas strip, and Texas.
Anyway, I think DC is a great city. I don't particularly care for the culture there but it's because it's a transient place and there's not much anyone can do about that. In terms of cultural offerings, transportation, walkability . . . it's up there. Not the greatest city in the US but easily in the top 10 if not top 5.
I used to tutor French kids - high school kids from all over France - they were here on a summer program and I would help them with their English. We were based in Philly and their stay usually involved a day trip to DC and to NYC. Of course the kids loved NYC but I think they were just as in awe and certainly more reflective standing on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial (especially after learning about L'Enfant). DC is very iconic and most visitors instantly recognize the landmarks even if they're not sure of the exact names. It's just that nearly all of our media comes from LA and NYC and it likes to make shows and movies about itself. It's like London and Paris. They have a much greater hold on the imagination for most Americans vs. Lisbon or Barcelona . . . and I much prefer Barcelona to Paris.
"Los Angeles County drew 1.8 million visitors from Mexico, followed by a record 1 million visitors from China and 708,000 visitors from Canada." - LA times article.
I often read travel related forums like Tripadvisor which mostly has queries from international visitors from mainly english Speaking foreign countries like New Zealand, Australia, Canada, Ireland, UK, Singapore and other countries too.
From what I gather, most want to visit the LA area for beaches of Santa monica/Venice, Hollywood sights like sign, walk of fame, celebrity homes and Observatory, Universal Studios and Disneyland. Those alone is 3-5 full days which is typical of many vacation lengths in one area. Others would split vacation from LA-SF, or LA-Las Vegas or do grand trips like LA-big sur-SF-Yosemite-Death Valley-Vegas-Grand Canyon. Some do LA-SD for zoo or sea world. It seems like Disneyland is often a major destination in itself and will stay 2days up to 5 days because of the two parks. Some dont even visit LA and just do Disney straight from landing LAX.
Yes, according to the survey, 48% of international visitors to Toronto came from the U.S.
With that said, TO received well over 2.2 million international visitors even after we discount all of its U.S. visitors, which I'd say is a respectable number given how long NYC and Chicago's shadows can cast over the entire Midwest/Northeast region.
In terms of Foreign flag Carriers - O'Hare and Pearson are actually equal in number 35 at each airport (NYC area airports have more foreign flag Carriers by far than any other in N.A not surprisingly). In terms of domestic Carriers at each airport - I suspect that Air Canada, Sunwing, Air Transat and WestJet connect Toronto to more International destinations (not even including U.S) than United, American and Frontier connect Chicago to International destinations (Not Including Canada).
Looking at the latest 2017 March stats - the percentage of International travellers to Pearson is growing at a faster rate than Transborder so I suspect you will see a greater percentage of International vs Transborder visitors in 2017 vs 2016. Transborder flight activity is growing impressively at Pearson it is just that International is just so much more.
Their visitor numbers may be inflated by that, which lowers spending per tourist.
Others have corrected your assumptions - but in addition to what they said, these figures are in USD. When visitors come to Canada they are spending money in the local currency which is the Canadian dollar and that is now valued at .75 cents to the USD. Obviously if these figures were in local dollars the amount of visitor spend would go up. That said, cities like Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal would be well served focussing on increased international visitors spend for sure but it is important to realize that countries can differ in terms of how much of a bargain they are. With the exchange being what it is - for Americans to Canada it may be shocking how cheap things are for you up here now ie restaurants, hotels etc due to a much stronger USD vs CAD.
Yes, Toronto is superior to all but NYC..... yet that is. It should be just said straight..... pun intended ----> out.
That wasn't the intention of my post. It was to show that when it comes to International passenger traffic - Pearson and O'Hare are on a pretty even keel even when you don't include Canada and the U.S traffic at each airport. When reading posts in here, I get the impression that a lot of people just assume that Canadian airports' International traffic is mostly to and from the U.S and while a lot is, in cases like Pearson there is more International traffic than U.S. Miami and S.F for example definitely have more International overseas traffic when we don't include N.A (not sure about L.A i'd have to evaluate) but Pearson is up there. I'm providing information - your post is just bait and making assumptions about my intentions which is not my intention. That said, if you have information that actually counters what I write that is factual - I am ALL ears.....
Atlanta's numbers are interesting. They sort of go against the common notion on city-data that people only visit Atlanta for business. 81.6% of overnight international visitors to Atlanta went for leisure which is a higher percentage than a city like Boston or Toronto. Atlanta also isn't on a coast, nor is it as much of an international city as most of the cities on this list so you can't really use the excuse of accessibility or family visitors.
I figure that the entertainment and film industry helps put Atlanta on the world stage that it otherwise wouldn't be on without it.
Chicago suffers from the HUGE pull of NYC as the city you MUST see.A world Capital if not.... thee Capital. Many have the US as a once in a lifetime trip. So the pull of a NYC and LA for Hollywood and the California dreaming. Leaves Chicago much lower in choices. Too much just a smaller NYC to them. SF has the Romanticized most European US city interest.
Chicago has no Hollywood (though the movie industry began there and moved for sunny weather early film needed). No Disneyland or Times Square and no Miami Beach South Beach. Miami is like a Latin America Capital in tourist levels. But 54.1 Million overall visitors 2016 isn't bad at all in a steady rise each year. With high traveler feedback on travel sights for Conde' Nast. NYC #1 Chicago #2 San Francisco #3.
Yes, having been here for 16 years this is very obvious, and that's fine, it makes sense. I've talked to countless international travelers in Chicago, mostly at bars. Last night I was at a bar and the entire London Gay Man's Chorus came into the bar and I was chatting it up with them. Been to nearly 30 countries around the world and work at an international company.
Without a doubt when you talk Chicago the first thing people say is something along the lines that they must hit up New York City, and after that they want what they think of as a varied trip to see other unique cities, and that Chicago is just a smaller NYC. The same that people would visit London over Manchester. It makes sense. You hit up NYC and you want to see a New Orleans, San Fran or Miami - or at least if you do get out you want to see something nearby, the east coast cities or LA/San Fran and up the Pacific coast.
It's not really the distance, it's that Chicago doesn't have many other international draws right in the region, is seen as the "other" large urban US city, and doesn't have that BEACHES, HOLLYWOOD, MOUNTAINS aspect for scenery, etc.
I'm actually surprised just at the sheer number of international tourists you do see in the summer, which is when most of the 2,000,000 bunch together and come visit. I've just started noticing in the past few weeks the huge number of foreigners walking the streets.
One thing I do appreciate as a local is that when talking with international travelers, almost universally, Chicago blows away their perception before coming and they're extremely impressed with the city once here. It's one that flies under the radar for most foreigners and then once here is shocking.
A good friend from Amsterdam whom I met while he lived in Chicago had moved home and told his friend there to drop by Chicago when he was on his big USA trip. The friend (unbeknownst to us) came tracking us down at a bar my friend owned on the tip of his/our friend back in Amsterdam. It was his last US city he visited, he knew nothing of it and threw it on his list because his friend mentioned it and he decided why not. He spent the entire weekend we hung out going CHICAGO CHICAGO CHICAGO. He said it was by far his favorite city and he was just blown away at everything and now nice the city was, the people, the downtown, neighborhoods and energy. He just couldn't understand why he hadn't heard of it much before, and why it was so far off the radar. Even domestically Chicago gets SUCH terrible press all the time, but once people are here in the downtown areas and hopping neighborhoods, it usually leaves people impressed as opposed to disappointed. I do appreciate that aspect of living here.
That wasn't the intention of my post. It was to show that when it comes to International passenger traffic - Pearson and O'Hare are on a pretty even keel even when you don't include Canada and the U.S traffic at each airport. When reading posts in here, I get the impression that a lot of people just assume that Canadian airports' International traffic is mostly to and from the U.S and while a lot is, in cases like Pearson there is more International traffic than U.S. Miami and S.F for example definitely have more International overseas traffic when we don't include N.A (not sure about L.A i'd have to evaluate) but Pearson is up there. I'm providing information - your post is just bait and making assumptions about my intentions which is not my intention. That said, if you have information that actually counters what I write that is factual - I am ALL ears.....
I recall researching Pearson's international flights and just about half of the nonstop destinations from Toronto are to warm caribbean locations where Snowbirds flock to in the winter.
For example, Air Canada flies to a whopping 10 Cuban beach towns nonstop from Toronto.
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.
and for urbanity outside of NYC... fa'geta'bout'it. 
