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.
Such as? Chicago is a much more active city with much better food, better nightlife and a far superior urban envirnoment. You are one misinformed booster. You're kind of amusing with your hubris though.
I would argue that DC has much better nightlife for black people than Chicago. As for far superior urban environment, not hardly. Chicago is more urban in places and more suburban in places. DC is somewhere in the middle of that.
DC arguably has an equal or better urban environment, though. It's close, and depends on what you value. DC is more consistently urban and less car-oriented, with fewer gaps, but Chicago has a larger core, and the urbanity stretches further.
To me DC seemed like a small town with suburbs on steroids, and even all these new developments going on are making the area look more cookie cutter by the minute.
The South Side of Chicago could take notes from D.C. on how to redevelopment extreme blighted crime ridden neighborhoods. The Southside of Chicago looks like Detroit.
Little city because the population size is deceiving. Given that DC has 10% of the land area of London and has no power to annex, you have to look at the metro population as a whole. As a whole, there's about 6 million people here, which does not include Baltimore's figures. The density of DC is also just a little less than London, so I'm not sure what your measuring stick for "little" is. Little compared to Hong Kong or NYC? Yes, but certainly not little when compared to London.
Put the crack pipe down
If we use UA, London's population is twice that of D.C.'s, 4 million to 8 million. In person, London feels leagues ahead of the tiny town that is D.C.
Visiting both cities many times I choose Chicago. I will say both cities have their own charm and both have that fast pace feel, but chicago for me. D.C is closer to other American giants, but chicago is also one of the America's giants. I guess im one of those people that don't care how close I am to the next big city, if my city has everything that I need. On the other hand when I do want to get away I don't have a problem buying a ticket and flying where ever I'm going. All and all both are great, but Chicago is the better city.
Such as? Chicago is a much more active city with much better food, better nightlife and a far superior urban envirnoment. You are one misinformed booster. You're kind of amusing with your hubris though.
How can Chicago be more active than DC? 5 months out of the year, Chicago is frozen. DC is an international city. There is always something going on in DC year round. The city is home to 300 embassies, think tanks, IMF, World Bank and political organizations. Every news organization on the planet has a DC bureau. DC is a media mecca behind NYC and LA. The Mall is the country's front porch where millions come to protest everything from gay marriage to immigration. Millions come to DC to see our iconic landmarks 100 museums, monuments and history. Chicago is a great city but it's not busier than DC 12 months out of the year.
per capita income
disposable income after taxes
higher salaries
real estate
international investment
jobs
higher percentage of transportation usage
diversity
educated populace
Higher incomes and salaries are offset by higher costs of living. Personally, I believe in having very low expenses relaive to income. And DC is comparable to Chicago in terms of overall diversity. It's not far ahead by any stretch of the imagination. Transportation is comparable. I won't really comment on the rest.
The South Side of Chicago could take notes from D.C. on how to redevelopment extreme blighted crime ridden neighborhoods. The Southside of Chicago looks like Detroit.
You've never spent considerable time in either or you would know that's not true. You and that other guy don't seem to get out much.
To me DC seemed like a small town with suburbs on steroids, and even all these new developments going on are making the area look more cookie cutter by the minute.
Have you ever been to the southside of Chicago? It's very suburbanish. Drive down Cicero, Pulaski, Western, Racine, etc.....Strip malls, gas stations, parking lots and big box stores.
How can Chicago be more active than DC? 5 months out of the year, Chicago is frozen. DC is an international city. There is always something going on in DC year round. The city is home to 300 embassies, think tanks, IMF, World Bank and political organizations. Every news organization on the planet has a DC bureau. DC is a media mecca behind NYC and LA. The Mall is the country's front porch where millions come to protest everything from gay marriage to immigration. Millions come to DC to see our iconic landmarks 100 museums, monuments and history. Chicago is a great city but it's not busier than DC 12 months out of the year.
Chicago receives way more overnight visitors than Washington DC. It's not even close. DC probably recevies a few more international visitors but nowhere near as many as New York or LA. Not to mention the fact that Chicago is simply a much larger urban environment that is more densely populated. Chicago isn't 'frozen' 5 months out of the year. You need to stop with the silliness.
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.
