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.
So what your saying is that Chicagoans at that time viewed their city as 2nd best/2nd rate compared to NYC? If what your saying is true, then that seems to me like an issue of inferiority complex.
I don't really follow your logic. Second rate and second best have very different meanings, you can't lump them together. "Second City" was used because Chicago was fairly universally seen as the second city of the USA after NYC from the early 1900's through the post WWII era. I'm not sure how that would be an inferiority complex. At the time it was more just the truth.
Chicago was easily the second largest urban area in the country, and as a massive hub of manufacturing and transport - both of which were absolutely booming after WWII. The city had a very bright future and the economy and population were exploding (metro grew over 40% from the end of WWII until 1970). People look back at the world 60 years later and make judgements, but you have to see how the world was at that time.
Chicago was about 25% larger than the next urban area (LA) and about 70% larger than the third largest urban area (Philadelphia). Chicago was estimated to the be the 5th largest urban area in the entire world in 1900 and the 8th largest in 1950...when it essentially didn't even exist 100 years before. I can understand why the residents probably weren't weirded about to be known as the second city of the USA, and I wouldn't say they had inferiority complexes about the term. Why on earth would they??
Philadelphia is overshadowed by NYC, absolutely. The Northeast Corridor High Speed line will connect Center City Philadelphia to Midtown Manhattan in just 38 minutes. There will be a lot of residents and businesses moving between the two then. I expect more businesses and residents will relocate to Philadelphia for the cheaper everything.
I agree. Is the project already approved or just proposed?
I don't understand how anyone can honestly compare Philadelphia to Chicago. It's like comparing San Diego to LA- it's just on another level. Only someone with a sentimental attachment to Philly could claim it's better than Chicago(Btw, I'm not from Chicago). The argument about how it's "on the East Coast...", or is "near NYC" could also be made for Trenton, NJ or Bridgeport, CT. It's telling that one of the main arguments for Philly is that you can easily get to(escape to?) NY or DC. Can you imagine a New Yorker saying, "yeah, one of the best things about NY is that it's so close to Philadelphia"?
Chicago is the 3rd(some would say still the 2nd) most important city in the US. It's level of investment, trade, arts, reputation etc., dwarfs Philadelphia(not to mention it's size). Look up any of the lists for world/global cities and see where Chicago is ranked vs Philadelphia. All this talk about crime rates and old architecture are essentially strawmen. Shanghai and Hong Kong lack large amounts of 19th century architecture as well, while New York up until 15-20 years ago had some of the worst crime rates in the US.
I actually like Philly, but it's not going to blind me to the fact its a second tier city(among US cities).
I don't understand how anyone can honestly compare Philadelphia to Chicago. It's like comparing San Diego to LA- it's just on another level. Only someone with a sentimental attachment to Philly could claim it's better than Chicago(Btw, I'm not from Chicago). The argument about how it's "on the East Coast...", or is "near NYC" could also be made for Trenton, NJ or Bridgeport, CT. It's telling that one of the main arguments for Philly is that you can easily get to(escape to?) NY or DC. Can you imagine a New Yorker saying, "yeah, one of the best things about NY is that it's so close to Philadelphia"?
Chicago is the 3rd(some would say still the 2nd) most important city in the US. It's level of investment, trade, arts, reputation etc., dwarfs Philadelphia(not to mention it's size). Look up any of the lists for world/global cities and see where Chicago is ranked vs Philadelphia. All this talk about crime rates and old architecture are essentially strawmen. Shanghai and Hong Kong lack large amounts of 19th century architecture as well, while New York up until 15-20 years ago had some of the worst crime rates in the US.
I actually like Philly, but it's not going to blind me to the fact its a second tier city(among US cities).
What's wrong with comparing San Diego to LA?
What city would you prefer Chicago be compared with? Only LA or New York? Philly is the cut-off?
You seem to be imagining things anyway. Who said Philly is "better" than Chicago? Not that there would be anything at all wrong with that subjective statement. And who, exactly, said the best thing about Philly is it's location?
Are you serious. I had no idea. I don't want to derail this thread anymore. I will DM you.
I wouldnt hold my breath but even said the time between the two will likely decrease even with much less bold plans which will eventually happen in some. It is somewhat required for capacity and infrastructure improvements.
Ie the approach to 30th street requires trains to slow to like 30 mph for the last few miles and additional NYC Hudson river capacity which ca slow trains significantly or even stop them at peak times.
That said even today the Acela routinely does the trip in 65 minutes 30th street to Penn Station NYC.
That said this will no be a commuter line, it wont be economically feasable for that
I don't care about suburbs or corporate commuters. If you want to make that argument then the entire Eastern Seaboard from Boston to DC is just one city.
I'm thinking that the Amtrak Trains, NJ Transit, Mega/Bolt/Chinatown Buses are always packed between Philly and NYC because they are the two biggest cities on the entire East Coast and are located less than 100 Miles from eachother, making up the most densely populated region in the entire country.
Baltimore and DC are much smaller cities, not as provincial as NYC and Philly, located much closer and STILL maintain distinct identities. Philly has nothing to worry about when it comes to being overshadowed by NYC.
Literally, huh?
Just look at the Lehigh Valley as a great example. Who would've thought 20-30 years ago that the Lehigh Valley would be added to the New York CSA. Of course Philly(city proper) will always have a culture distinct from NYC but there is no denying New York City's growing influence in the Northern(more particularly the Northeastern) suburbs of Philly. Sure Bucks County today doesn't have a high commuter rate to NYC but that doesn't mean it can't in the future. 20-30 years ago Mercer County, NJ had a very low commuter rate to NYC and look at it now. Burlington County, NJ has also seen a significant increase in commutership to the New York CSA. It wouldn't surprise in the next 10-20 years if Burlington County reaches the MSA threshold for the New York CSA. Like I said before Philly will always have a distinct culture from NYC but I can't say the same for its northern suburbs.
What city would you prefer Chicago be compared with? Only LA or New York? Philly is the cut-off?
You seem to be imagining things anyway. Who said Philly is "better" than Chicago? Not that there would be anything at all wrong with that subjective statement. And who, exactly, said the best thing about Philly is it's location?
yeah I don't think the drop off from Chicago to Philly is equal to to the drop off from Los Angeles to San Diego. San Diego is just not fun to compare to LA because they are very similar cities, one is just a lot smaller than the other.
Chicago and Philly are different enough but on the same playing field, making it an interesting comparison.
What city would you prefer Chicago be compared with? Only LA or New York? Philly is the cut-off?
You seem to be imagining things anyway. Who said Philly is "better" than Chicago? Not that there would be anything at all wrong with that subjective statement. And who, exactly, said the best thing about Philly is it's location?
These were comments made some way back in the thread that kept being repeated.
As for "who said Philly is better than Chicago", I'd say a good portion of the 31.37% of the people who voted in the poll for Philly(that is what the title of this thread is about, no?). Look at how many posts involve the word "better".
Philly can be compared to Chicago in certain specific aspects but in general terms they're in 2 diff. Leagues. Philly can be compared to most other cities in the country but New York-LA-Chicago are the leaders and make up the 1st tier. Or you might be able to make an argument that NY is in the 1st tier while LA and Chicago are in the 2nd. Either way, Philly and Chicago aren't even roughly equal.
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.
) NY or DC. Can you imagine a New Yorker saying, "yeah, one of the best things about NY is that it's so close to Philadelphia"?
