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.
Subjective? New York trumps LA in size, GDP. It trumps LA as a business center having the largest and third largest central business districts and Wall Street / largest Stock Exchange on the planet, as a global political center having United Nations and as publishing giant having MOST of US publishing. You call this subjective? What are the advantages LA has over NY besides the weather which is debatable since some people like four seasons...?
Subjective ROTFL
Again, whatever. A lot of things were said about LA in a previous thread that got locked by the mods that pretty much summed up why I think LA is equal to, or only slightly below, NYC. I've stated elsewhere in this thread that my opinion isn't going to change, no matter what is claimed by the NYC supporters.
Not really, no. I don't believe that those cities pose a threat to LA being in 2nd place, or arguably on the same level as NYC. Even if politics and economy are counted, it still doesn't make a difference. The economic and cultural output of LA secures its place.
Economic output? Washington DC metro has more office space than all of Los Angeles metro. And it's much smaller too. Quite shocking isn't it? What powerful financial institutions exist in Los Angeles? None really. Washington DC? The Federal Reserve Bank which it's influence goes beyond anything that ever occurs in Los Angeles. Politics and economics, DC wins pretty easily...LA beats it in culture and media. I just love how people forget that Washington DC is a beast on its own and that people love to ignore it's impact.
Chicago on the other hand is a busier trading center than Los Angeles. Do you realize Chicago handles more goods than Los Angeles and New York COMBINED? Do you realize Chicago exchanges trade 80% of the world's commodities? How about the futures trading that goes on there? There's more money at play in futures trading than stock trading despite being less known. Chicago beats LA in economics simply because its a busier trading place, handles more goods, and is home to some of the most powerful financial institutions in the world (like New York and DC). Economic output is more of a reflection of size, rather than importance.
Los Angeles doesn't beat Chicago and Washington DC in political and economical influence. It beats them in cultural impact. Global city rankings show that Los Angeles and Chicago are very close in impact, some put Chicago slightly ahead while GAWC put LA only 2 spots higher than Chicago. This justifies my statement that Los Angeles has other rivals before it can be compared to New York. In America, New York is on a level of its own because of its TOTAL dominance. Worldwide, New York rivals London, Paris and Tokyo, NOT Los Angeles. Los Angeles and Chicago are far more comparable in terms of impact than Los Angeles and New York.
Last edited by Libohove90; 12-19-2009 at 12:01 PM..
Economic output? Washington DC metro has more office space than all of Los Angeles metro. And it's much smaller too. Quite shocking isn't it? What powerful financial institutions exist in Los Angeles? None really. Washington DC? The Federal Reserve Bank which it's influence goes beyond anything that ever occurs in Los Angeles. Politics and economics, DC wins pretty easily...LA beats it in culture and media. I just love how people forget that Washington DC is a beast on its own and that people love to ignore it's impact.
Chicago on the other hand is a busier trading center than Los Angeles. Do you realize Chicago handles more goods than Los Angeles and New York COMBINED? Do you realize Chicago exchanges trade 80% of the world's commodities? How about the futures trading that goes on there? There's more money at stake in futures than stock markets despite being less known. Chicago beats LA in economics simply because its a busier trading place, handles more goods, and is home to some of the most powerful financial institutions in the world (like New York and DC).
Los Angeles doesn't beat Chicago and Washington DC in political and economical influence. It beats them in cultural impact. Global city rankings show that Los Angeles and Chicago are very close in impact, some put Chicago slightly ahead while GAWC put LA only 2 spots higher than Chicago. This justifies my statement that Los Angeles other rivals before it can be compared to New York. New York is on a level on its own and rivals London and Paris, NOT Los Angeles.
LA has had far more growth in the past 80 years than NYC has. If this trend continues, there will be a point in time when LA surpasses NYC in population and economic output. Probably not by 2050, but very possibly by 2100. This is analagous to NYC eventually passing Philly as the #1 place in America back in the 1800s. Times change.
NYC gets props for being #1 at the present, but LA is #2 with a bullet, and should not be overlooked or belittled like I'm seeing.
PS. before anyone jumps down my throat, I like both for different reasons, and am viewing this from a 3rd person perspective.
Im not surprised, NYC's boundaries are firmly set within its 5 boroughs, theres a shortage of land and sprawl can't really happen the way it happens in other cities. Many old northeast cities reached their week decades or sometimes centuries ago (philly) population wise or will in the future shortly.
NYC trumps LA in almost every category in economic,political,fashion ect. relevance..it is simply on a world level rather than an actual state/city level. I would rather live in the LA area due to personal preference reasons, but do not see it as viable equal. The entertainment industry might be the only possible factor that ranks higher in favor of Los Angeles, but not by a huge margin. I to enjoy the beaches and weather in LA now and then, but that hardly falls into play when looking at actual data between the two cities. You have got to love driving down the 101 in a convertible on a clear 75 degree day in December, but more than a few people enjoy their NYC routine just as well. NYC wins objectively IMO. LA is also viewed rather negatively by many outsiders,especially by other Western States.. out here in the West,and often even in California NYC has a better public image between the two. LA suffers huge negative stereo types..NYC not quite as much.
You should've seen the LA vs Chicago threads, you'd see how a city like LA fares with Chicago. It was a nasty thread with no clear winner. Having seen that already, then what's with this thread? If anything, I hate assumptions like the title of this thread.
NYC trumps LA in almost every category in economic,political,fashion ect. relevance..it is simply on a world level rather than an actual state/city level. I would rather live in the LA area due to personal preference reasons, but do not see it as viable equal. The entertainment industry might be the only possible factor that ranks higher in favor of Los Angeles, but not by a huge margin. I to enjoy the beaches and weather in LA now and then, but that hardly falls into play when looking at actual data between the two cities. You have got to love driving down the 101 in a convertible on a clear 75 degree day in December, but more than a few people enjoy their NYC routine just as well. NYC wins objectively IMO.
Exactly why I think New York is on a level of its own. New York rivals London, Paris and Tokyo, not Los Angeles. LA has DC and Chicago to rival, let alone a monster like New York which beats in almost every category.
Surely we can get a better representative for LA than this guy. Hes making ya look bad. The whole purpose of this is too debate and discuss. Not for someone to bring up paragraphs of facts- to only get responded to with "OK" Theres nothing coming from the LA side
You should've seen the LA vs Chicago threads, you'd see how a city like LA fares with Chicago. It was a nasty thread with no clear winner. Having seen that already, then what's with this thread? If anything, I hate assumptions like the title of this thread.
For many people, myself included, there is a parity between NYC and LA. I think post #5 summed it up quite nicely. Also, there was another thread that compared NYC to LA that was locked by the mods. There was some great information/arguments in behalf of LA as a competitor with NYC.
My opinion is that Chicago and DC are not on the same level as LA and NYC, and that LA is very close to the level of NYC, despite all the chest-thumping that has taken place in this thread. Clearly, I am not alone in that opinion/perception. I'll leave it at that and step away from this thread.
Surely we can get a better representative for LA than this guy. Hes making ya look bad. The whole purpose of this is too debate and discuss. Not for someone to bring up paragraphs of facts- to only get responded to with "OK" Theres nothing coming from the LA side
I know. I was hoping for a counter-attack. With my experience in the Chicago vs. Los Angeles threads, every time the Chicago side makes a legitimate claim, the LA side comes up with no legitimate counter attack except their delusional "LA is the best cuz of the mountains, weather, beaches, and American idol setting". It's pretty funny.
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.
