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 think there is a big difference between being influential and being well known. For example, Moscow is one of the most well known cities in the world...but are most of us in America really influenced by Moscow and what goes on there? Unless you have ties to Moscow, probabaly not. I think the only cities that have a significant influence across the globe are NYC and LA. There are other cities in the US that are major global players when it comes to business and/or tourism such as Miami, DC, Chicago, Boston, Atlanta, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Dallas, Houston, Las Vegas, Orlando, etc., but none of those cities have a significant influence across the globe outside of the people that come to those cities for business or tourism. People all over the world (including those that will never probably get the chance to go to NYC or LA) have an interest in New York (there is a reason why people worldwide watch the ball drop in Time Square on New Years and why so many movies and TV shows take place in NYC) and are culturally influenced by what they see in all of the Hollywood movies that come from Los Angeles (like NYC, LA is featured in media worldwide). Very few cities on Earth have that sort of influence
Now, if we were going for most well known cities which a lot of people in this thread seem to be doing, I'd say:
New York
Los Angeles
Washington, DC
Miami
Chicago
San Francisco
Las Vegas
Boston
Atlanta
Philadelphia
Orlando's Disney World may be a tourist juggernaut, but I know in many parts of the world, it tends to be more associated with Florida rather than Orlando specifically.
I don't understand how ATL and DC weren't on the list. Espessially DC, that's the nation capital and has the most signifigant worldwide influence of any US city and really most cities in the world. ATL is capital of the south and almost all business in the US have a regional or global HQ up there.
Here is my stab at this fairly nebulous topic. The further down the list I got, the less certain I was of the choices. It is kind of hard to find a clear winner when comparing Mia to Phil for example.
Tier 1 and Tier 2: significant worldwide influence (comparable to Lon, Beijing, eventually Brussels)
Tier 1:
NYC/DC NYC- UN, Wall Street, media. DC- Not as famous as NYC or LA, but the capitol of the world's most powerful nation. Policy decision have global ramifications (monetary policy, trade , foreign policy). IMF, White House, military, the Fed, etc. Influence out of proportion to the scale of the actual city.
Tier 2: LA- Hollywood/int trade hub. IMO, the city straddles tier 1. Obviously, influential. But its source of influence (entertainment/culture) is less important. Michael Jackson/Steven Spielberg vs. Barack Obama/Ben Bernanke.
Tier 3: not in headlines on a daily basis, but still exert significant influence overtime (Frankfurt, increasingly Brasilia, Seoul)
SF Bay Area- Silicon Valley, most innovative region. Culture: liberal politics, hippies, gay rights. Chicago- the city's influence is broad based, 2nd largest financial center, culture, edu, etc.
Tier 4/5/6: influential cities, but not necessarily "significant" (Munich, Bangkok, Santiago, Ottawa, etc)
Tier 4: Bos- Comparable to the tier 5 cities. But, its role as intellectual/innovation hub give it leg up, IMO.
Tier 5: Mia, Phi, Hou, DFW, Atl- big MSAs, large int trade centers.
Tier 6: Sea- major tech/ innovation center. Det- losing relevance by the day, but still a major econ hub.
I'm surprised anyone would put DC in the same tier as NYC, and to not put LA and Chicago above DC? Please.
I'm surprised anyone would put DC in the same tier as NYC, and to not put LA and Chicago above DC? Please.
Whacked.
I would put DC ahead of NY actually. DC determines the policies that shape the world. The guy made a good point about San Francisco too. In my opinion technology immovations determines a country's advantage over another country not the finacial centers so Silicon Valley is very important. We can do without a few finacial banks in the long run but our technology makes us the #1 nation. The only major diference is I would switch Boston with Houston.
I would put DC ahead of NY actually. DC determines the policies that shape the world. The guy made a good point about San Francisco too. In my opinion technology immovations determines a country's advantage over another country not the finacial centers so Silicon Valley is very important. We can do without a few finacial banks in the long run but our technology makes us the #1 nation. The only major diference is I would switch Boston with Houston.
There's more to worldwide influence than the political policies that are generated out of DC, and that's hardly enough to put DC above NYC, LA, or Chicago. DC is a tier below those, IMO.
I can't understand the people who don't rank DC highly. Granted it's not as big as a few of the others on the list, but it has outsize power and influence. Do people really think that what goes on in DC has little/no effect on the rest of the world? I'd say it's pretty important...probably right after NYC.
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.
