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.
For a "city" tourist, Chicago x10 over LA. It's not necessarily iconic, but it's a good, active, huge, vibrant city. You can walk to basically everything.
If it's more about theme parks, beaches, or where stars live, then LA. I'd add that rail goes to a lot of places, but getting around is still a chore.
I don’t know if I agree with the premise of the thread. Foreigners don’t all have the same tastes. Chicago offers a lot for tourists in terms of dining, nightlife, museums/cultural attractions, architecture, and doesn’t require a car. And in the summer there’s the beaches and lots of things to do on the water. It just depends on what factors are important to a visitor (and what time of the year it is).
Sure, but every one of those attributes is better is other cities. What is there in Chicago that is so unique to America? Plus Chicago is pretty isolated. If you’re basing your trip there you’re pretty much stuck unless you want to get on a plane. I suppose Detroit can offer up a decent side trip 4 hours away, but what else?
From my interactions overseas and from overseas visitors here, I have found that tourists generally go for stereotypes of American cities rather than going for the city we consider more urban or have more amenities.
NY is our biggest city and exports more culture than anywhere else so there's lots of cheese to make it a no Brainer for the list.
I would recommend LA to a foreigner if they were not visiting all 5 cities on the same trip. If the 5 cities were 5 different trips then LA would be among the 5. If it is visiting all 5 on the same trip I would probably recommend SF instead.
I have been to Miami a ton of times and didn't realize how big of a destination it was with non Hispanics until I visited Europe. Apart from the partying, it is popular among Europeans for the tropical atmosphere and Shopping. Honolulu is for all the same things too. One of these 2 cities would be in my top 5.
Las Vegas and New Orleans certainly live up to the stereotypes and both wouldn't be bad recommendations.
You can have fun in just about any city, especially the large ones, but sometimes foreigners expect things that you wouldn't expect them to expect. I have heard a lot of foreigners to Texas have the western image in mind so they want to see cowboys on ranches and want to shoot guns so the big cities in Texas wouldn't be on the top 5 list. Chicago I tend to think of in a similar boat. Any visitor would have a ton more to do in Chicago than say Vegas, but it's the expectation of something unique that leaves me with reservations.
Saying that though, a place like San Juan to me is so rich culturally that I dunno if I would recommend it as a top 5 US city to visit. It is definitely worth a visit but I don't know if I would make that American connection. Maybe it's the mental barrier of Puerto Rico not being a state.
Good grief. Do you really think -- as far as urban cities go, that Chicago isn't a more appealing city than LA? Really? Talk about homerism. LA has its charms -- the region itself is appealing, nearness to a varied natural environments, etc. -- but as far as a "city" -- vitality, culture, museums, ease-of-transit, it's lacking. IN MY OPINION, Chicago-- and the other four cities I mentioned, are more appealing than LA for foreign travelers. I think a lot of people would agree with my reasoning.
Also, this is one of the most ridiculous comments I have seen on this board -- "Chicago doesn't stand out in any way why on earth...". What a ridiculous and insecure comment.Please open your mind before spouting against other posters and treat others with respect.
But you can imagine what a tourist would think if they went from NYC to Chicago right? It's the same kind of thing with many other cities. Maybe have them visit Chicago before NYC lol? Hey it is what it is..
.
But you can imagine what a tourist would think if they went from NYC to Chicago right?
.
Yeah, they'd probably think "Wow it's very clean here!"
This whole "Chicago offers nothing that you can't see in any other cities" argument is a bit silly. Chicago is its own city with its own unique history, cuisine, neighborhoods, quirks, etc... It doesn't have to look super distinctive like New Orleans or San Francisco nor be as big as NYC to be worth visiting.
Yeah, they'd probably think "Wow it's very clean here!"
This whole "Chicago offers nothing that you can't see in any other cities" argument is a bit silly. Chicago is its own city with its own unique history, cuisine, neighborhoods, quirks, etc... It doesn't have to look super distinctive like New Orleans or San Francisco nor be as big as NYC to be worth visiting.
You do understand that we can only pick 5 cities right? Making sure they're all really unique is a pretty big factor when most people choose their 5. I love Chicago..
For a "city" tourist, Chicago x10 over LA. It's not necessarily iconic, but it's a good, active, huge, vibrant city. You can walk to basically everything.
If it's more about theme parks, beaches, or where stars live, then LA. I'd add that rail goes to a lot of places, but getting around is still a chore.
NYC - Best example of urban, iconic, massive city
LA - Best example of Sunbelt, iconic, massive city
Miami - the tropical city of the US
DC - The US Capitol
Number 5 could be a toss up between SF, Chicago, Phoenix, Seattle for various aspects of the US.
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.