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 used to think that NYC was in its own tier in terms of sheer size. However it seems LA is closer than I thought. It seems it would compare better to NYC than to Chicago in terms of CSA population and (to a lesser extent) GDP
I used to think that NYC was in its own tier in terms of sheer size. However it seems LA is closer than I thought. It seems it would compare better to NYC than to Chicago in terms of CSA population and (to a lesser extent) GDP
It 2nd largest city in the country by population and 2nd in GDP.
Aside from built environment, I would say by far it's closer to NYC than Chicago. Chicago and LA have very little in common other than they are global cities and the fact that they share global recognition (world class museums, institutions, etc).
Location: Midwesterner living in California (previously East Coast)
296 posts, read 437,695 times
Reputation: 598
Interesting topic. I really enjoy all 3 cities, each for very different reasons. I think overall, LA is more like NYC than Chicago.
Let me explain why
Demography
Whites:
White people are a minority in the LA MSA. This is not particularly common by mainland USA standards. NY has a plurality of Whites being the biggest group and Chicago is an outright majority white in its MSA.
The White population in Chicago looks more like the Midwest at large. Lots of German, large numbers of non-Jewish Eastern Europeans (Polish, Ukrainian, etc). NYC is not like that. You have lots of Italians, Irish, and Jewish Eastern Europeans making up a plurality of the White population.
I guess on the topic of White people, LA has more in common with NYC.
Hispanic:
Chicago and LA both have majority Mexican Hispanic populations. NYC's Hispanic population is culturally very different being mainly Puerto Ricans and Dominicans.
Black:
Chicago and LA both have fairly small immigrant Black populations. NYC's is heavy with West Indian, Afro-Latino and African immigrant groups, mixed in with some non-immigrant Blacks.
Asian:
NYC and LA have more in common here. Both have large and diverse Asian populations. Chicago's is noticeably smaller and is less East Asian (a plurality of Indians)
Socially/Culturally:
I think the social and cultural DNA of New York and Los Angeles are much closer than that of Chicago's. At its core, Chicago is a "classically American" city, that happens to be very large and has a bunch of more recent immigrants living in it.
LA and NYC at their core are equal parts Classic American, equal parts New Age International. I'm not saying Classic American is better or worse than New Age International. They are just different social-cultural realities. That difference manifests itself in local politics, the arts, cuisine, etc
Economically:
Both Chicago and NY are economic powerhouses, but LA's economy seems more different to Chicago's. Entertainment is big business in LA as it is somewhat in NYC. Also, LA's startup tech of Silicon Beach feels more like NY than Chicago.
LA is nothing like NYC in terms of employment opportunity, social norms, atmosphere, variety, climate, ethnic neighborhoods, or things to do and see. Population and GDP are just statistics. They don't define a city or it's population.
Interesting topic. I really enjoy all 3 cities, each for very different reasons. I think overall, LA is more like NYC than Chicago.
Let me explain why
Demography
Whites:
White people are a minority in the LA MSA. This is not particularly common by mainland USA standards. NY has a plurality of Whites being the biggest group and Chicago is an outright majority white in its MSA.
The White population in Chicago looks more like the Midwest at large. Lots of German, large numbers of non-Jewish Eastern Europeans (Polish, Ukrainian, etc). NYC is not like that. You have lots of Italians, Irish, and Jewish Eastern Europeans making up a plurality of the White population.
I guess on the topic of White people, LA has more in common with NYC.
Hispanic:
Chicago and LA both have majority Mexican Hispanic populations. NYC's Hispanic population is culturally very different being mainly Puerto Ricans and Dominicans.
Black:
Chicago and LA both have fairly small immigrant Black populations. NYC's is heavy with West Indian, Afro-Latino and African immigrant groups, mixed in with some non-immigrant Blacks.
Asian:
NYC and LA have more in common here. Both have large and diverse Asian populations. Chicago's is noticeably smaller and is less East Asian (a plurality of Indians)
Socially/Culturally:
I think the social and cultural DNA of New York and Los Angeles are much closer than that of Chicago's. At its core, Chicago is a "classically American" city, that happens to be very large and has a bunch of more recent immigrants living in it.
LA and NYC at their core are equal parts Classic American, equal parts New Age International. I'm not saying Classic American is better or worse than New Age International. They are just different social-cultural realities. That difference manifests itself in local politics, the arts, cuisine, etc
Economically:
Both Chicago and NY are economic powerhouses, but LA's economy seems more different to Chicago's. Entertainment is big business in LA as it is somewhat in NYC. Also, LA's startup tech of Silicon Beach feels more like NY than Chicago.
I think you are short changing Chicago’s. Jewish community which has always ranked America ng the largest and most prominen in the nation. At the turn of the 20th century, Chicago was the world’s third largest Jewish city after New York and Warsaw. Jews were always considered a major group of Chicago ethnics in the era that included the midpoint of the 20th century and a bit beyond.
Lived in Chicago and NYC, and spent a lot of time in LA. I don't find LA is like either place. Each place is unique in reality. If you want to get into the nitty gritty of things then there are some things that LA and Chicago are closer on, and other things that NYC and LA are on. It's a relative comparison though. At the end of the day, they are all unique and I've never once thought that LA and NYC even share a lot in common.
Also the stereotype of "classically american" for Chicago is overplayed. Not saying it's less classically american than the other 2 places, but it's overplayed. Usually by people who have never actually lived in the area or by people who have and never leave a 3 neighborhood radius (there's a lot of that in the city) and don't truly know the area that well.
Location: Midwesterner living in California (previously East Coast)
296 posts, read 437,695 times
Reputation: 598
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25
I think you are short changing Chicago’s. Jewish community which has always ranked America ng the largest and most prominen in the nation. At the turn of the 20th century, Chicago was the world’s third largest Jewish city after New York and Warsaw. Jews were always considered a major group of Chicago ethnics in the era that included the midpoint of the 20th century and a bit beyond.
No major metro area outside of Israel is at New York's level in terms of Jewish cultural influence, percent of total White population, or raw numbers.
I didn't say Chicago doesn't have a meaningful Jewish population. Just simply stated that the White population in LA MSA overall has more in common with NYC than Chicago. And even at that, the similarities are quite thin for both.
No major metro area outside of Israel is at New York's level in terms of Jewish cultural influence, percent of total White population, or raw numbers.
I didn't say Chicago doesn't have a meaningful Jewish population. Just simply stated that the White population in LA MSA overall has more in common with NYC than Chicago. And even at that, the similarities are quite thin for both.
The Chicago area has around 300,000 jews. The LA area is a little over 600,000 while the NYC population is over 2 million (other sources are more like 500K for LA area and 1.5 million for NY area). In terms of population alone, LA is much closer to Chicago than it is to NYC. Even percentage wise - NYC area is something like 11% Jewish while the LA area is a little under 5% and Chicago is a little over 3%.
I'm not religious, but I am Jewish with my entire dad's side from LA (who had moved from NYC in the 1930s). Just from my own viewpoint, I find Chicago and LA much closer in terms of cultural Jewish things than to NYC. NYC is in its own planet when it comes to this stuff and in America it's not even close. All 3 of these cities have their fair share of orthodox, Hasidism, etc but NYC is much, much, much more than LA and Chicago. I find percentage wise that LA and Chicago are higher when it comes to secularism, reformism, etc. Just my own experiences in all 3 places as someone who is Jewish, I never once thought that LA was like NYC in terms of this. It's more like Chicago, Miami, Philadelphia, SF, etc areas than the NYC area when talking about Jewish things. To me at least, personally.
Last edited by marothisu; 02-06-2019 at 04:46 PM..
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.
