Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-28-2013, 02:59 PM
 
Location: Scotland
7,964 posts, read 11,800,911 times
Reputation: 4167

Advertisements

Saying Atlanta is on par with Buenos Airies and the like is daft.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-28-2013, 06:41 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
1,704 posts, read 3,420,146 times
Reputation: 2388
Quote:
Originally Posted by TOkidd View Post
I find myself wondering if there are any African cities that can claim world class stature. Cairo is certainly a candidate, but what about sub-Saharan Africa, where massive metropolises are booming, and cities of 10 million or more are not uncommon. Can cities like Johannesburg, Lagos, or Nairobi be considered world class? I'm sure many of us are familiar with the negative aspects of African cities - the poverty, crime, slums, poor planning and infrastructure, sprawl, etc. But other than booming economies, what do Africa's best cities bring to the table? Which do you think come closest to being world class? What about in the future?
Joburg is the only one that would qualify. Lagos, Nairobi, and Cairo are big, and Cape Town is extremely diverse and culturally vibrant, but Johannesburg is the only one that has the size, the culture, and the infrastructure. The most generous population figures (Johannesburg+Germiston+Pretoria) put it at about the size of Istanbul or Buenos Aires. It's toward the bottom of the World Class list, but yeah I'd say it's there, and climbing fast.

I would say something like...

New York, London, Tokyo, Paris
Seoul, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Los Angeles, Toronto, Singapore, Chicago
Sao Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Mexico City, San Francisco, Madrid, Mumbai, New Delhi, Beijing, Bangkok, Sydney
Buenos Aires, Santiago, Montreal, Barcelona, Berlin, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Moscow, Melbourne, Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta
Bogota, Lima, Vancouver, Brussels, Stockholm, Zurich, St. Petersburg, Istanbul, Johannesburg
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2013, 07:09 PM
 
Location: In the heights
36,905 posts, read 38,810,969 times
Reputation: 20929
Quote:
Originally Posted by rongens View Post

Clearly, you've never been to Sydney.

Sydney is more than "beaches" and you'd know this if you visited the place. It's one of the most exciting cities outside of Europe and North America, not just because of it's nightlife activity, but because of it's culture, festivals, interplay with nature (the world's best harbor!) and diversity of architecture. I was surprised at how many heritage and pre-war buildings it has. It's architecture and natural beauty is world class, even though such a term is ludicrous in my opinion. Take a walk.
Sydney is great, but i find the way you qualified it sort of funny. I can think of several cities outside north america and europe that i would put above sydney as well as above many or most cities in north america or europe.

Last edited by OyCrumbler; 07-28-2013 at 08:22 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2013, 07:29 PM
 
Location: St. Louis
136 posts, read 278,820 times
Reputation: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by steel03 View Post

New York, London, Tokyo, Paris
Seoul, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Los Angeles, Toronto, Singapore, Chicago
Sao Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Mexico City, San Francisco, Madrid, Mumbai, New Delhi, Beijing, Bangkok, Sydney
Buenos Aires, Santiago, Montreal, Barcelona, Berlin, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Moscow, Melbourne, Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta
Bogota, Lima, Vancouver, Brussels, Stockholm, Zurich, St. Petersburg, Istanbul, Johannesburg
I'm not American, but even I would put at least 50 American cities before some of the names in that list if I were to rank world class cities. Cities like Boston and Seattle, even St. Louis and Denver, would easily rank ahead of Mumbai, Delhi, Johannesburg and Jakarta in terms of infrastructure, cleanliness, education, beauty (natural or architectural), and ease of travelling for a tourist.

Your list seems extremely biased towards big cities (with consequently a high GDP), even though the per capita GDP of those cities would be extremely low.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2013, 11:51 AM
pdw
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
2,590 posts, read 3,016,778 times
Reputation: 1757
You live in America, so you have an American bias. Boston, Seattle, St Louis and Denver are very regional cities that don't effect the rest of the world to nearly the degree that the cities you are dismissing do. You don't have to be a posh aristocracy to be a world class city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2013, 12:10 PM
 
Location: St. Louis
136 posts, read 278,820 times
Reputation: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdw View Post
You live in America, so you have an American bias. Boston, Seattle, St Louis and Denver are very regional cities that don't effect the rest of the world to nearly the degree that the cities you are dismissing do. You don't have to be a posh aristocracy to be a world class city.
Do you consider Jakarta or Delhi to be "more world class" than Boston or Seattle (or Berlin and Vienna, since you think I have an American bias)? I'm not sure what your idea of a world class city is, and I'm not sure why you would bring up the concept of a "posh aristocracy", but I would like you to elaborate on your comment. I have listed the things in my previous post that I expect from a world-class city; I would like to know why you think I'm merely dismissing the cities that I listed. I am extremely familiar with Mumbai, Denver and St. Louis, and reasonably familiar with Boston, Seattle, New Delhi and Jakarta, so I stand by my comment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2013, 01:48 PM
pdw
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
2,590 posts, read 3,016,778 times
Reputation: 1757
The American cities you mentioned are regionally significant, the cities you are dismissing are globally significant. Gentrification essentially turns a city into a posh aristocracy, so that's why I said that. It effects most major cities in the developed world, but thankfully, in the developing world the large cities have mostly deflected this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2013, 02:58 PM
 
Location: In the heights
36,905 posts, read 38,810,969 times
Reputation: 20929
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdw View Post
The American cities you mentioned are regionally significant, the cities you are dismissing are globally significant. Gentrification essentially turns a city into a posh aristocracy, so that's why I said that. It effects most major cities in the developed world, but thankfully, in the developing world the large cities have mostly deflected this.
He's obviously using a different idea of world class city though since he's mentioned per capita spending and cited as rationale the standard of living available to most people in those parts. Judging by that metric isn't so much an American thing as it is just a different standard--and a standard that doesn't just set American cities apart but those of most developed countries.

What you're going on is an entirely different point of view that doesn't have much to do with an anti or pro American prejudice--what you're trying to talk about is global significance and clout. In that case, going by that metric does put American cities in an inordinately, especially for their sizes, strong position due to economic influence and clout. Boston, and Seattle to a much lesser extent, would then be placed against much larger cities simply because they are such large players in the global economy and in Boston's case especially has institutions that have very directly steered the course of various governments around the world. In that sense, the national capitals listed are actually much more regional in scope as their scope of influence is often limited to mostly just the citizens within the country (and sometimes not even so much that) and the affairs of the immediate region.

Also, if you want to talk about regional bias, then there's still this hilarious post
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdw View Post
How are Toronto and Vancouver listed but not Montreal? I can maybe understand putting Toronto and not Montreal, but you put Vancouver as well. Montreal was our biggest city here in Canada until only 15 years ago, and it's still the most "established" city (if that makes sense). I'm not saying which city is better or anything, but Toronto and Vancouver are still new, growing, reshaping their identity. World class shouldn't mean how expensive or fast-growing a city is, it should be about its importance in history and culture. Montreal is probably the only major English-French bilingual city in the world, for example. Putting Dubai, Shanghai and Beijing on there is ridiculous. What do those cities have, besides extreme wealth disparity and autocracy?
oh yea, really amazing place in history and culture for Montreal in place of Shanghai and Beijing. Also, it's great that extreme wealth disparity is a barometer here, but somehow disappears in a comparison against US cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2013, 04:04 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
1,704 posts, read 3,420,146 times
Reputation: 2388
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewStLouisan View Post
I'm not American, but even I would put at least 50 American cities before some of the names in that list if I were to rank world class cities. Cities like Boston and Seattle, even St. Louis and Denver, would easily rank ahead of Mumbai, Delhi, Johannesburg and Jakarta in terms of infrastructure, cleanliness, education, beauty (natural or architectural), and ease of travelling for a tourist.

Your list seems extremely biased towards big cities (with consequently a high GDP), even though the per capita GDP of those cities would be extremely low.
Nah, they're just non-Western, that's all. World class non-Western cities. Doesn't mean they don't have their share of problems. Plenty of huge cities that aren't world-class. I don't really feel like arguing about it to be honest, this is not really a part of anyone's life that matters very much.

Seattle is not a world-class city, though, no matter how much every single person who has ever lived in Seattle throughout all of human history would like to think it is. There's been so much Seattle boosting lately in this forum, my goodness.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2013, 04:18 PM
 
Location: Leipzig, Germany
84 posts, read 89,429 times
Reputation: 24
Aberdeen Scotland, Grenoble France, or Leipzig Germany is each a first-class city that I'd put on the list
And maybe we should add Norwich England and Turin Italy

Last edited by BoCosmo; 07-31-2013 at 04:42 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top