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.
If you think that even the nice parts of Chicago outside of downtown look rundown, then boy are you in for a surprise when you see some of the other major American cities, including NYC.
Same goes for the attractions that Chicago has versus most other cities.
NYC isn't that rundown anymore. Even the traditional rundown areas have been lately spruced up and others are in the plans. There are many ugly areas but truly rundown are few and far between.
NYC isn't that rundown anymore. Even the traditional rundown areas have been lately spruced up and others are in the plans. There are many ugly areas but truly rundown are few and far between.
The poster thinks Chicago is rundown outside of downtown. If Chicago's nice neighborhoods, like Lincoln Park, are rundown in his/her opinion, then yes, most of NYC would be too.
Chicago obviously has some areas that probably look worse than anything NYC has due them being formerly industrial/population loss, but it's absurd to think the only non-rundown part of the city is downtown.
The poster thinks Chicago is rundown outside of downtown. If Chicago's nice neighborhoods, like Lincoln Park, are rundown in his/her opinion, then yes, most of NYC would be too.
Chicago obviously has some areas that probably look worse than anything NYC has due them being formerly industrial/population loss, but it's absurd to think the only non-rundown part of the city is downtown.
Wel anybody who thinks looking at Google Maps and Youtube video and then make remarks like they have been there(but never have) is indeed and absurd individual.
That's not what I said. Cities like New York or Orlando get a huge amount of tourists, I specifically said Detroit gets a fair amount. You implied Detroit gets no tourism, and that is not true. If you read the link I provided, you would have seen even people from Australia come to take pictures of urban decay in Detroit and to experience what it is like to be in the hood.
If one's sole purpose for visiting Detroit is to gawk and take pictures like the lily white hipsters from the suburbs do, the population would rather you just stay the hell out. It's been done, there's nothing new to see. Stay home and check out your "ruin porn" on the net, instead of taking pleasure in the city's misfortune in person.
Last edited by Magnatomicflux; 12-13-2014 at 10:40 PM..
The poster thinks Chicago is rundown outside of downtown. If Chicago's nice neighborhoods, like Lincoln Park, are rundown in his/her opinion, then yes, most of NYC would be too.
Not really. NYC is a lot more gentrified and affluent than Chicago, and doesn't have abandoned ghettos like Chicago.
There are obviously bad areas in NYC, like in every city on earth, but they don't look similar to the slums in Chicago.
And Lincoln Park is basically the nicest neighborhood in Chicago. Obviously Lincoln Park isn't a slum.
If one's sole purpose for visiting Detroit is to gawk and take pictures like the lily white hipsters from the suburbs do, the population would rather you just stay the hell out. It's been done, there's nothing new to see. Stay home and check it out on the net, instead of taking pleasure in the city's misfortune.
So true.......your loyalty to Detroit is impressive Mags
Lol I'm taking a trip to the area in the very near future......
I've met quite a few people from there who have given me the inside scoop on the Detroit area.....
Every one from there is just so damn cool
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,283,359 times
Reputation: 1483
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101
Not really. NYC is a lot more gentrified and affluent than Chicago, and doesn't have abandoned ghettos like Chicago.
There are obviously bad areas in NYC, like in every city on earth, but they don't look similar to the slums in Chicago.
And Lincoln Park is basically the nicest neighborhood in Chicago. Obviously Lincoln Park isn't a slum.
You forgot to add NOLA and extremely affluent too⤴....LOL and there ARE PLENTY VERY NICE neighborhoods throughout Chicago especially ALL the North side From gentrified near west and northwest neighborhoods to block after block of Cottage to all the Craftsman brick Bungalow neighborhoods for mile after mile on NICE FRONT LAWN streets with alleys in back and garages. Few Row after solid Row ones as in the East but for some lovely Victorian and Greystone varieties in Fashionable Lincoln Park and Lakeview examples, though the main streets are rows of retail and businesses and apartment bldgs. The neighborhoods open up to front lawns and trees. NYC is NYC obviously..... But we should give other cities their due.
SLIGHTS ALL THE TIME ARE SURELY YOUR FORTE....NOLA especially when Chicago is in the mix.
Not really. NYC is a lot more gentrified and affluent than Chicago, and doesn't have abandoned ghettos like Chicago.
There are obviously bad areas in NYC, like in every city on earth, but they don't look similar to the slums in Chicago.
And Lincoln Park is basically the nicest neighborhood in Chicago. Obviously Lincoln Park isn't a slum.
I already said that Chicago's worst areas are worse than NYC's, but, when it comes to a general city street, this huge difference you think exists frankly doesn't. I have visited friends who live on the Upper East Side, Astoria, and Harlem, and the only one who lives in area that isn't rough looking is the friend who lives on the Upper East Side, although having to pile your trash on the sidewalk still comes across as outrageous to me. Anyway, the other two are still paying a great deal of money to live where they live, but that doesn't mean that their areas look good. Just because it takes a lot to live in NYC, and you're in an area that is (relatively) safe, doesn't mean that it's going to look nice/not rundown. Rundown does not necessarily equal ghetto.
Also, the poster I quoted, would think that Lincoln Park looks rundown. That was the whole point of my post since the poster thinks Chicago is rundown outside of downtown. So, by their definition, Lincoln Park would be rundown.
As a European... I think Drro .... meant some who might come to the US to visit especially after a few visits of the popular places? May want to see other aspects of the US? They may chose Chicago just because they have a Al Capone era interest alone? Even though it offers much more and downplays that part of its history. Or Detroit because of Motown? Memphis for Elvis. Dallas from the old TV show and to check out things seen in old Western movies and Cowboys LOL? Atlanta ...yes for Gone with the wind interest.
I had a boss from the UK. We had an office in Norwalk, CT. When he had his first opportunity to take a vacation in the US, he went to NW Mississippi to experience roots blues. Told me he'd actually walk around some neighborhoods and if he saw a guy playing on a front porch he'd go up and ask to sit down and listen. Had a grand old time.
I imagine, at least for Europeans, Boston, DC and Philly are of interest for history as much as anything. NYC is NYC. LA is Entertainment. Anyway, I voted Seattle. I too would rather go up to Vancouver.
Surprisingly, here in Pittsburgh, we get a decent number of tourists from northern Europe, and they love the place.
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.
