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.
Now sixth, I could see, but second? Give me a break! It's half the size of LA, and a fraction the importance of DC.[/quote
Just what exactly makes LA more important than Chicago? It's got a huge industrial base...but so does Chicago. It's got a major international port...but Chicago's the trucking and freight capital of the US. LA has entertainment and cultural influence...Chicago has its powerful financial sector. To me, it all balances out.
Los Angeles is known for smog far more than Chicago. Remember that whole suburban thing? Los Angeles has a higher proportion of registered cars for its size than Chicago. LA's mass transit system has far less ridership than CTA & Metra. LA is the city encouraging people to drive, not Chi-town.
Just what exactly makes LA more important than Chicago?
For one, LA is twice the size of Chicago.
For another, LA is known globally, and Chicago isn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
It's got a huge industrial base...but so does Chicago.
But LA has BY FAR the largest manufacturing base in the U.S.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
It's got a major international port...but Chicago's the trucking and freight capital of the US.
Nobody cares that Chicago has lots of trucks passing through its suburbs. It's the center of the Rust Belt, with lots of smoky, declining industries requiring shipping.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
LA has entertainment and cultural influence...Chicago has its powerful financial sector.
Chicago has a tiny financial sector. It's known for one middling exchange, which will likely soon leave.
I doubt there are even 2,000 employees working at the exchange. And Chcago has no investment banking to speak of.
Heck, I bet you there are more private equity firms in LA than in Chicago.
LA is the largest entertainment center on earth. It probably has a half million people working in entertainment industries.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
To me, it all balances out.
LOL!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
Los Angeles is known for smog far more than Chicago.
Because it's surrounded by beautiful mountains. Chicago is surrounded by corn and large, unattractive people.
Chicago is much more polluted, however. Only Phoenix is more polluted than Chicago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
Remember that whole suburban thing?
Yes, we know, we are talking about the Midwest here. Suburbia central.
This is why LA has FAR more multifamily units than Chicago.
Chicago is the capital of the single family home. Its one-floor suburban bungalows dominate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
Los Angeles has a higher proportion of registered cars for its size than Chicago.
Source?
Chicago has a higher proportion of residents with vehicles, yet is a much poorer city, meaning people are forced to drive, even if they're flat broke.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
LA's mass transit system has far less ridership than CTA & Metra.
Source?
LA's bus system has FAR more passengers. Check out the APTA numbers.
Neither city has high rail ridership.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
LA is the city encouraging people to drive, not Chi-town.
LOL, this is why LA has modern transit lines, and Chicago transit lines are rusted and falling down.
Hardly. I want to set the record straight on these forums!
All these homers with their lies! I source everything, and they know it!
If that's your goal, you won't accomplish it by coming off as a shrill hater with a strong penchant for generalizations and exaggeration,
Your obsession proves the intrigue of Chicago. If it was that non-worthy of notice, why would you spend so much time bashing it? It's like hate for Chicago fuels your day
For another, LA is known globally, and Chicago isn't.
But LA has BY FAR the largest manufacturing base in the U.S.
Nobody cares that Chicago has lots of trucks passing through its suburbs. It's the center of the Rust Belt, with lots of smoky, declining industries requiring shipping.
Chicago has a tiny financial sector. It's known for one middling exchange, which will likely soon leave.
I doubt there are even 2,000 employees working at the exchange. And Chcago has no investment banking to speak of.
Heck, I bet you there are more private equity firms in LA than in Chicago.
LA is the largest entertainment center on earth. It probably has a half million people working in entertainment industries.
LOL!
Because it's surrounded by beautiful mountains. Chicago is surrounded by corn and large, unattractive people.
Chicago is much more polluted, however. Only Phoenix is more polluted than Chicago.
Yes, we know, we are talking about the Midwest here. Suburbia central.
This is why LA has FAR more multifamily units than Chicago.
Chicago is the capital of the single family home. Its one-floor suburban bungalows dominate.
Source?
Chicago has a higher proportion of residents with vehicles, yet is a much poorer city, meaning people are forced to drive, even if they're flat broke.
Source?
LA's bus system has FAR more passengers. Check out the APTA numbers.
Neither city has high rail ridership.
LOL, this is why LA has modern transit lines, and Chicago transit lines are rusted and falling down.
So much for rusted and falling down, Chicago's CTA is the 2nd most extensive transportation system in the US LOL. Ridership? According to the transit agencies' sites, theres 1.7 million trips on the CTA and another 300,000 on the Metra. That's 2 million trips daily...again ranks 2nd in US and 4th in North America. Los Angeles ranks behind Philadelphia's and Boston's tranist systems lol. The facts are very easy to find. ANY site will tell you.
Los Angeles has the most extensive freeway system in the world. A simple look at a map justifies this. Not only that, Los Angeles has wider highways too....you know, West Coast style.
As fars as car goes, Los Angeles is notoriously known for its traffic and heavy usage of cars.
^article calls Los Angeles "the city of the automobile" LOL.
Not only that but even a simple encylopedia states "Los Angeles has 27 intertwining freeways handling millions of commuters on a daily basis. Los Angeles is the most car-populated metropolis in the world with one registered automobile for every 1.8 people."
So much for suburbia? Eh?
Chicago highways are less extensive and have less lanes than those highways in Southern California...and Los Angeles has worse traffic than Chicago? L-O-L...the facts contradict your erroneous statements. It is well known among the people of city-data, those dumber than you and those smarter than you, that Los Angeles is the ultimate car city.
Chicagoland has 230 million square feet of office and Downtown Chicago IS the 2nd largest business district in the country. Los Angeles has a smaller and far less significant office sector than Chicago.
Oh yeah, did you know there are more Fortune 500 companies headquartered in Chicago than LA? Not a surprising fact either.
Los Angeles doesn't have ANYpowerful financial institutions btw...it doesn't even have many Fortune 500 companies headquartered there...so it in this category, LA stands no chance against Chicago.
Hardly. I want to set the record straight on these forums!
All these homers with their lies! I source everything, and they know it!
It sounds like you've never even been to Chicago though. Anyone well travelled knows it is the 2nd biggest transit system in the country. And anyone who has been to Chicago lately knows that most of the CTA stations are brand new. The things you keep saying, it's like you've never even been there.
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.