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.
There is a difference between superiority and taste
Indeed there is, but that's not what we're discussing. You're equating "bigger" with "superiority". A lot of New Yorkers make that mistake, but I hate to inform you that you're off base there. Personally, I find DC uperior to New York in many respects, some of which I mentioned. I'm not going to go to the trouble of copying out your statements and responding to them one-by-one, simply because this "argument" is really quite baseless.
Which city is "better" is dependent upon what you want.
EDIT: I meant to add above (but had to step away), no one disputes that New York is the epicenter in the U.S. for such things as the arts, restaurants, fashion, etc. Which is fine as far as it goes. But you can't address only the positive aspects of New York without also addressing the trade-offs. It's not as if people "choose" a city based upon a transit system that isn't as robust as New York's; rather, they choose to live in a city that fits their lifestyle. For an avid outdoor enthusiast, for instance, Denver may be utopia. For a family looking to raise children in an inexpensive city, they may choose to live in Indianapolis. And so on. No one city can be everything to everybody.
For me, I can't imagine being anywhere but DC. I live in a lovely condo in the middle of a beautiful historic neighborhood that has everything I could possibly want--four star restaurants, cafes, jazz clubs, theaters, galleries--blocks from my doorstep. I can walk, ride a bike or take the subway to work. I can stroll through my neighborhood and gawk at the Victorian mansions, or spend an afternoon reading in one of America's great urban parks, just a few blocks from my home. And despite the vibrancy of my neighborhood, it's a relaxed pace of life that suits my wife and I perfectly. It's an ideal life fr us that we would have great difficulty replicating in any other city, and nor would we care to try. (At least for now.)
So, yes, accept the accolades your city deservedly receives, but maintain some perspective. Not everyone is striving to live there.
Last edited by 14thandYou; 09-23-2009 at 09:00 PM..
First of all, please learn how to properly respond and quote someone in your response. The way you do it makes it appear as if the person you're responding to is saying the things you are.
Of course Metro is DC's system. Its hub-and-spoke design is set up specifically funnel people from outside the central city into it. Simply because it crosses jurisdictional boundaries is meaningless. Regardless, your statement was that DC (as opposed to, I suppose, NY) Metro is a secondary form of transportation. It's like that everywhere--even in New York.
Not true, half of new york households don't have a car and rely on public transit, and its not like that everywhere.
In DC or NY? Some of the DC area's densest developments are built around Metro stations. I don't live in NY and thus can't speak to it, although I would guess their's is much the same. Although I must say, picking a transit fight with the city with the second-highest rate of public transit ridership doesn't make a tremendous amount of sense. Of course NY is going to have a more robust transit system than DC--NY is one of the world's largest cities. Everything pales in comparison.
Its not so much bigger, its the organization structure with the exception of certain parts like staten island.
I'm not certain how this is germane to anything being discussed. I don't recall anyone discussing anything about "alpha world cities".
Maybe you ought to read about global cities
This makes no sense. You don't compute cost of living by looking only at expensive, non-townhomes. You look at the average cost of a home in the area, coupled with other factors. By any measure, New York is a far more expensive city to live in than DC. For instance, cost of living (which takes all factors, including housing, transportation and cost of goods) in Manhattan is nearly twice as expensive as the DC area. Brooklyn is over 50% higher, and Queens is nearly 15% higher.
I've looked and researched several homes in the D.C area you don't necessarily get the same for your money, cost of living is subjective on lifestyle and circumstances, I'm focusing primarily on cost of housing and what you get for you money and not just in terms of square footage.
Of course there are homes in DC that are as expensive as NY. There are homes in Columbus, Ohio that are pricey too. But that's not how cost of living is calculated.
The prices of homes in DC are just as expensive an NY and in some cases more so, look at major real estate indexes.That's a ridiculous argument comparing columbis, ohio look at median sale price or rather the price of middle management housing.
New York may be a lot of things, but "affordable" is not among them.
Never said it was the most affordable place for housing especially, but D.C is just as expensive.
Well now you're changing the subject. The issue that was raised wasn't being a "green" city, it had to do with open spaces and parkland--of which DC has a ton. And of course there is more to NY than Central Park, just like there is more to DC than Rock Creek (such as the National Mall).
In the end, tech2enable, you're pretty much proving the point of everyone in this thread who has accused New Yorkers of having a superiority complex. New York is, far and away, the largest city in the country, and one of the largest in the world. Of course there are going to be superlatives associated with that position. But having the "most" of something does not in itself make a city "superior" to others. As I explained in my other post, there are unique qualities and traits about DC that I simply find more attractive than New York. Hard as it may be to believe at times, but not every soul wishes to inhabit the urban utopia known as New York.
Not necessarily, I am just giving you the facts, I have already differentiated quantity v. quality and variety, I never said that new york was and is a utopia, perhaps people who do not want to admit that D.C doesn't have a lot of what new york has, have a bias or stereotype that way, much like conservatives view liberals in certain ways and stereotypes.
To prove your bias, you are automatically assuming things I never said about utopias, center of the universe, sometimes people can't admit things so they make an assumption that the other person has bias.
Indeed there is, but that's not what we're discussing. You're equating "bigger" with "superiority". A lot of New Yorkers make that mistake, but I hate to inform you that you're off base there. Personally, I find DC uperior to New York in many respects, some of which I mentioned. I'm not going to go to the trouble of copying out your statements and responding to them one-by-one, simply because this "argument" is really quite baseless.
Actually not, I explained several times, that I wasn't doing that, in part because you assumed that I or that people had thought that bigger was better, for instance dallas having more resturants per capita.
Which city is "better" is dependent upon what you want.
EDIT: I meant to add above (but had to step away), no one disputes that New York is the epicenter in the U.S. for such things as the arts, restaurants, fashion, etc. Which is fine as far as it goes. But you can't address only the positive aspects of New York without also addressing the trade-offs. It's not as if people "choose" a city based upon a transit system that isn't as robust as New York's; rather, they choose to live in a city that fits their lifestyle. For an avid outdoor enthusiast, for instance, Denver may be utopia. For a family looking to raise children in an inexpensive city, they may choose to live in Indianapolis. And so on. No one city can be everything to everybody.
I agree that not every city can be everything, which is precisely why I never called new york an utopia, a lot of European cities have a lot than new york doesn't have , certain small cities may have what new york doesn't have in, in America though as far as cities new york has advantages, geographic and political.
For me, I can't imagine being anywhere but DC. I live in a lovely condo in the middle of a beautiful historic neighborhood that has everything I could possibly want--four star restaurants, cafes, jazz clubs, theaters, galleries--blocks from my doorstep. I can walk, ride a bike or take the subway to work. I can stroll through my neighborhood and gawk at the Victorian mansions, or spend an afternoon reading in one of America's great urban parks, just a few blocks from my home. And despite the vibrancy of my neighborhood, it's a relaxed pace of life that suits my wife and I perfectly. It's an ideal life fr us that we would have great difficulty replicating in any other city, and nor would we care to try. (At least for now.)
If you have ABCD in new york, and you have CD in DC but new york has CD, in case CD being the ideal scenario you described above, then you really can't make an argument, you can get the same and more in new york or Brooklyn or wherever with more variety and choices.
So, yes, accept the accolades your city deservedly receives, but maintain some perspective. Not everyone is striving to live there.
Neither, DC but using the above scenario its hard to make an argument , its like paying the same price for a package A and B in which the other package comes with more choices and varieties while having the same contents as package A, now you may not want that, but since you are paying the same price , its hard to make an argument based on that scenario, so what some people do is make anecdotal statements are accuse package B as having an center of the universe or Utopian argument, it happens in politics a lot.
Perhaps, but see above. As for intellectual energy, that's everywhere , and sometimes intellectual energy doesn't work or produce the results its supposed to especially in D.C, hey politicians come to though after I wrote this.
Again, you can't compare suburbanites to city dwellers, as you keep trying to do. If you go there, then New York's subway serves as a secondary mode of transportation to people who don't live in the city (basically, Manhattan is the only place where you could get everywhere you need without a car, the outer burroughs funnel to Manhattan). You're just blinded by it a little because NY's "urban dwellers" exist on a much larger scale than DC's.
But, from Georgetown through downtown / Penn Quarter across to Capitol Hill and up to Adams Morgan and Columbia Heights and everything in between, I would challenge you to find anywhere in the country that has a higher urban quality of life in a smaller space - transit, nightlife, restaurants, walkability, open space, great jobs... I've traveled, lived, and worked clear across the country and haven't found it yet. Your argument that NY has ABCD and DC has only CD is inherently flawed in this regard. With the extra AB comes looming skyscrapers and intense traffic and dirty, noisy subways and higher prices and an intense urban megalopolis that is difficult to escape. It's just not true that by offering more a city is better. You deny that you are making the bigger is better argument, then you turn around and make it again.
And, intellectual energy is not everywhere. Spend some time in Las Vegas or Cleveland or Queens or anywhere that doesn't have industries built on concepts. That's not to say people are stupid in those cities, but that their careers are not dependent upon ideas. DC's economy depends on politics and information technology. It's just a very self-selected set of industries that places Vegas aren't going to have. I've met rocket scientists and economists and people working to bring peace to the Middle East and all the rest of the non-profit, association, political, and other institutions.
You postulated the argument that New York is a global alpha city, therefore it is superior to DC (I forget DC's designation, but it's perhaps gamma? Whichever one is for cities that barely make the list because they only make a singular contribution to the global environment). There is nowhere in the world like New York, obviously, and this is not an effort to try and compare the two. Rather, it's simply to point out that DC stands on its own for what it is intended to be. Remember, DC was created out of an idea, not as a port or crossroads. It simply doesn't exist for the same reasons NY does.
I just think there is something unique about a city like DC that attracts people from all over the world who are highly educated and highly professional yet not bogged down by being an intensely dense megalopolis with hip clubs coming and going every week. It's much more homogenous than NY with all of its Bronx toughs, fashionistas, and all that, and as such will never be a frontier of art or whatnot. But it creates a very interesting environment for the right type of people who tend to have a lot of common ground from which to engage and not get caught up in superfluous things (like fashion or gambling or whatever drives alot of other economies).
Your argument that NY has ABCD and DC has only CD is inherently flawed in this regard. With the extra AB comes looming skyscrapers and intense traffic and dirty, noisy subways and higher prices and an intense urban megalopolis that is difficult to escape. It's just not true that by offering more a city is better. You deny that you are making the bigger is better argument, then you turn around and make it again.
This pretty much sums it up. Bigger is only better if you're willing to accept the tradeoffs that bigger brings--otherwise it's not better.
If you have ABCD in new york, and you have CD in DC but new york has CD, in case CD being the ideal scenario you described above, then you really can't make an argument, you can get the same and more in new york or Brooklyn or wherever with more variety and choices.
I certainly can make an argument, because as Bluefly noted your comparion is inherently flawed. I don't care if it has every letter A-Z, New York as a city exhausts me. I find it loud, hectic, dirty, overcrowded, expensive and suffocating. I enjoy visiting, but would me miserable if I moved there. Additional restaurants and bars and art galleries don't entice me, because the other factors are so negative.
Conversely, I find DC significantly more livable because it's NOT any of the qualities I listed above. I have everything I could possibly want practically at my doorstep, in a city I greatly enjoy living in. I recognize that DC isn't for everyone, but New York certainly isn't either.
Again, you can't compare suburbanites to city dwellers, as you keep trying to do. If you go there, then New York's subway serves as a secondary mode of transportation to people who don't live in the city (basically, Manhattan is the only place where you could get everywhere you need without a car, the outer burroughs funnel to Manhattan). You're just blinded by it a little because NY's "urban dwellers" exist on a much larger scale than DC's.
Not true, if half of new york household's don't have a car then they are using mass transit as primary vehicle.
But, from Georgetown through downtown / Penn Quarter across to Capitol Hill and up to Adams Morgan and Columbia Heights and everything in between, I would challenge you to find anywhere in the country that has a higher urban quality of life in a smaller space - transit, nightlife, restaurants, walkability, open space, great jobs... I've traveled, lived, and worked clear across the country and haven't found it yet. Your argument that NY has ABCD and DC has only CD is inherently flawed in this regard. With the extra AB comes looming skyscrapers and intense traffic and dirty, noisy subways and higher prices and an intense urban megalopolis that is difficult to escape. It's just not true that by offering more a city is better. You deny that you are making the bigger is better argument, then you turn around and make it again.
Its not inheritable flawed at all, the AB and CD can be seperated from eachother.
And, intellectual energy is not everywhere. Spend some time in Las Vegas or Cleveland or Queens or anywhere that doesn't have industries built on concepts. That's not to say people are stupid in those cities, but that their careers are not dependent upon ideas. DC's economy depends on politics and information technology. It's just a very self-selected set of industries that places Vegas aren't going to have. I've met rocket scientists and economists and people working to bring peace to the Middle East and all the rest of the non-profit, association, political, and other institutions.
That is not true, the new york metropolitan area has the same intellectual energy as D.C , even in Queens, Brooklyn, north jersey,etc, DC's economy is dependent highly on government to give it the edge, you may be right about Vegas and Cleveland though.
You postulated the argument that New York is a global alpha city, therefore it is superior to DC (I forget DC's designation, but it's perhaps gamma? Whichever one is for cities that barely make the list because they only make a singular contribution to the global environment). There is nowhere in the world like New York, obviously, and this is not an effort to try and compare the two. Rather, it's simply to point out that DC stands on its own for what it is intended to be. Remember, DC was created out of an idea, not as a port or crossroads. It simply doesn't exist for the same reasons NY does.
D.C exists because of government, not because of an idea, growing government fuels D.C.s growth and gives at that extra edge, I will agree that New York doesn't have that government advantage as D.C does but see the milking the cows argument, also the suburbs appear to leech of D.C.
I just think there is something unique about a city like DC that attracts people from all over the world who are highly educated and highly professional yet not bogged down by being an intensely dense megalopolis with hip clubs coming and going every week. It's much more homogenous than NY with all of its Bronx toughs, fashionistas, and all that, and as such will never be a frontier of art or whatnot. But it creates a very interesting environment for the right type of people who tend to have a lot of common ground from which to engage and not get caught up in superfluous things (like fashion or gambling or whatever drives alot of other economies).
I agree its more homogeneous which is why you have less choices and varieties, certain people don't like that especially conservatives who say that people in D.C. are yuppies who wear polo shirts, had a long debate with that person, and his contracting company treated blacks like dirt. Although so called conservatives can be homogenous and close minded.
He says the homogeneous creates have and have not's which seems to be very very true in D.C, as for the distraction argument that probably does hold water, on two fronts while it can be positive not have the distraction, or produce unique results, it can also make a person it be less prepared and not having experience with those situations, not in the personal sense, but since D.C is homogeneous one may need not sort out that distraction, or deal with it and one can avoid the problem of dealing with something the wrong way or making things even worse, again though the suburbs and D.C have an interesting kinda relationship, since D.C is not located in a state and doesn't have full representation.
I certainly can make an argument, because as Bluefly noted your comparion is inherently flawed. I don't care if it has every letter A-Z, New York as a city exhausts me. I find it loud, hectic, dirty, overcrowded, expensive and suffocating. I enjoy visiting, but would me miserable if I moved there. Additional restaurants and bars and art galleries don't entice me, because the other factors are so negative.
So is D.C, you don't think with all the crime, murder rates, high poverty despite massive spending, along with less congressional representation, and not being in a state, and having MD/VA leech off it, I think those factors are enough to make a valid point.
Conversely, I find DC significantly more livable because it's NOT any of the qualities I listed above. I have everything I could possibly want practically at my doorstep, in a city I greatly enjoy living in. I recognize that DC isn't for everyone, but New York certainly isn't either.
It does have those qualities above so you can't make a point or debunk that point.
You really do need to learn how to properly quote text. It makes it hard to follow and even harder to respond. Just put [ quote ] in front of a section and [ / quote ] behind the section (take the spaces out). Then write your comment and do the same for the following section. Then your's will look more like 14thandYou's.
I guess in the end it's just abundantly clear that you probably haven't spent a lot of time in DC proper and keep lumping DC's suburban culture in while conveniently excluding New York's suburban culture.
You're comparing individual houses without looking at the overall cost of living comparison (which is the only valid way to approach your argument, but you're denying that for some reason).
You're talking about this high crime and poverty rate, yet don't seem to realize it's mostly concentrated in a very isolated section of the city while a vast majority of DC is perfectly safe (and I have certainly spent enough time in all 5 buroughs to know that they have plenty enough problems with poverty and crime).
In the end, you're comparing apples to pomagranites with your suburban issues and there's really nowhere to go with it. I guess you've just never had the experience of spending an afternoon wandering through the free museums, catching dinner and a play, then wandering the monuments at night and all the vibrant neighborhoods in and around downtown with their salsa music or jazz quartets or whatever else surging with life at almost all hours. I just don't know what is so lacking beyond some tucked away speakeasy type clubs and restaurants that only NY insiders know. You keep looking at the experience of DC from a very macro perspective and are missing the beauty of immersion that really wins a lot of people over (who, btw, tend to rarely if ever drive).
Anyway, the bottom line is that your fundamental argument - that more options make New York better - simply doesn't hold weight. You're missing our point that we feel we can get everything we could ever want out of a city in what DC offers - great restaurants, international / cosmopolitan nightlife, a vibrant theatre scene, really interesting jobs, really interesting and smart people - without enduring all of the negative aspects of NY that come with simply having more of everything that is already present in DC. For many of us, DC provides that perfect balance between having urban amenities without being overwhelmed by urban infrastructure.
Keep in mind - I really love New York. I have a lot of great experiences there that could only happen there, so this is just an argument about your claims, not against NYC for what it is.
I agree its more homogeneous which is why you have less choices and varieties, certain people don't like that especially conservatives who say that people in D.C. are yuppies who wear polo shirts, had a long debate with that person, and his contracting company treated blacks like dirt. Although so called conservatives can be homogenous and close minded.
He says the homogeneous creates have and have not's which seems to be very very true in D.C, as for the distraction argument that probably does hold water, on two fronts while it can be positive not have the distraction, or produce unique results, it can also make a person it be less prepared and not having experience with those situations, not in the personal sense, but since D.C is homogeneous one may need not sort out that distraction, or deal with it and one can avoid the problem of dealing with something the wrong way or making things even worse, again though the suburbs and D.C have an interesting kinda relationship, since D.C is not located in a state and doesn't have full representation.
How is DC homogeneous? This is one of the most diverse areas in the country. Now I will agree that there is a huge divide between the haves and have nots.
Also how do the suburbs leech off of DC? All suburban areas are dependent on the central city for either jobs or entertainment. For me its entertainment because I fortunately don't work in the District. I would hate to have to pay for parking which is fairly common in the city from what I hear.
I have to agree with others that while I absolutely adore NYC I find it overwhelming at times. There were times on my last trip up there that I felt suffocated and just overwhelmed by all the people. New York is awesome but its also overcrowded and expensive. It's an awesome city but not an easy place to live. Sorry but making comparisons between DC and NYC is inane at best. They are two totally different places. DC is very unique and that's what I like about it.
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.
How is DC homogeneous? This is one of the most diverse areas in the country. Now I will agree that there is a huge divide between the haves and have nots. 
