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'm wondering, is it possible that ok: Chicago proper may have more crime than Toronto, but are there any bad areas outside Toronto that Chicago might not have as much of? Just curious.
In general poverty is more dispersed in Toronto - so there's nothing really equivalent to the South Bronx or South Side of Chicago. Not only is the ethnic diversity remarkable in Toronto but so is the economic diversity. The poorest neighborhoods in the city core include the area just east of downtown (Moss Park, etc.) and South Parkdale. But even in those areas plenty of middle class people live not too far away.
North York, Scarborough and Etobicoke were post-war suburbs that were amalgamated into Toronto in '98 (in some way that makes Toronto seems like a frozen L.A.). The decline of these areas is more akin to the decline of what the Brookings Institution called "first suburbs" than real ghettoes (i.e. losing ground to newer, outer-ring suburbs). And it's really only certain areas within them - in North York for instance it's really only the western part (Downsview) that is somewhat run-down. Central and eastern North York is mostly middle class. Scarborough is really made up mainly of affordable working class bungalows now populated largely by immigrant and non-white families). "Scarlem" has nothing in common with Harlem.
Just don't understand why those cities have to "almalgamate" into a giant. When cities get bigger and bigger, chances are social/environmental problems arise, and people have to commute more.
Just don't understand why those cities have to "almalgamate" into a giant. When cities get bigger and bigger, chances are social/environmental problems arise, and people have to commute more.
Didn't stop Tokyo, and it's not stopping The Golden Horseshoe either.
All Toronto did in 1998 was go from a two-tiered municipality to a single tier municipality, the old core city and it's inner (416 area code) suburbs have pretty much been one big city since the 1950's, since they all shared things such as transit, police, public housing etc.
All Toronto did in 1998 was go from a two-tiered municipality to a single tier municipality, the old core city and it's inner (416 area code) suburbs have pretty much been one big city since the 1950's, since they all shared things such as transit, police, public housing etc.
Exactly. For various economic reasons, people have a habit of clustering together in prosperous areas.
The presence or lack of invisible administrative boudaries doesn't really have an impact on commute distances or social interactions.
I am not sure if this is true on Toronto, but here in Chicago, they are pushing the poor out of bad areas getting ready to gentrify. For example, Logan Square, Wicker Park, Ukranian Village are going under heavy gentrification. They are pushing to poor to the suburbs
They seem to be building hi rise condos near the South Loop
The only thing about Chicago has that Toronto doesn't have is a heavy Latino presence. Chicago has Mexican and Puerto Rican neighborhoods. They have many ethnic festivals.
However, Chicago is very segregated. African Americans live in one area while Whites and Latinos live in separate areas.
I myself want to visit Toronto. I have visited Windsor, I know it is no where near as nice is Toronto
To me, Chicago has a much more modern downtown core, where numerous superhigh towers line along the lake. Toronto, however, is actually 1/2 has high (except the CN tower), because no buildings are above 300 meters.
On the other hand, Toronto has probably more potential in terms of urban development considering much of its lake side area is still largely undeveloped.
By the way, does one have any idea why the area south of Front street is such a mess? Anyone agrees with the Gardiner Expressway ruins the beauty of the lakeshore?
I've been to both cities a number of times and I think Chicago is FAR, FAR superior in many ways. I'll admit Canada is safer and people seem a bit happier, but it is a FAR less interesting, exciting, and fun city than Chicago.
First off, although roughly the same size, it feels about four times smaller. It's attractions are spread apart much further, and the city's overall "energy" or "atmosphere" is very cold and sterile. Yonge St, which I guess would be comparable to Chicago's N. Michigan Ave, is incredibly boring and is full of chain stores, crappy restaurants, and about 1000 different versions of the same 3 cafes. Toronto's downtown architecture is either bland, uninventive glass condo towers, tall boxes, or stretches of concrete one or two-story strip malls right in the middle of downtown. The waterfront is an industrial wasteland right next to a major elevated highway, and lake Ontario doesn't have the "warmth" to it that Michigan does, anyway. Although the diversity is good and noticable, it doesn't have the historical backing that Chicago's does and many of it's "ethnic" neighborhoods feel like they were invented or forced by developers. As a result, they often don't last more than a few square blocks and feel incredibly tacky. Oh, and you can't get decent Mexican food anywhere.
In terms of food, nightlife, entertainment, shopping, and atmosphere, Chicago simply crushes Toronto, and I actually like Toronto a lot.
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.
