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)
View Poll Results: Which do you prefer?
Manila 5 29.41%
Mexico City 12 70.59%
Voters: 17. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-06-2019, 06:33 PM
 
Location: In the heights
20,783 posts, read 22,344,161 times
Reputation: 10755

Advertisements

These were two of the first major cities of the Spanish Empire and the two have a long shared history. Both are also both the capital city and head and shoulders larger than any other metropolitan areas of their respective countries (which are close in population size). The metropolitan population of both are also very similar.

Between the two, what are some similarities you see and what are some notable differences? Of these two, which would you rather visit and which would you rather live in? Are there any interesting cultural similarities that the two share?

Possible points of comparison

- Downtown
- Neighborhoods
- Streetscapes
- Climate
- Economic opportunity
- Cultural contributions
- Food and dining
- Nightlife
- Safety
- Cleanliness
- Transportation / infrastructure
- Weekend escapes
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-07-2019, 02:15 AM
 
90 posts, read 23,578 times
Reputation: 70
This is dumb. One is a city in a 2nd world country with a lot of history still intact. The other is a city in a 3rd world country whose major historical areas were destroyed during WW2. The choice is too obvious
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 09:55 AM
 
Location: In the heights
20,783 posts, read 22,344,161 times
Reputation: 10755
Quote:
Originally Posted by manolopo View Post
This is dumb. One is a city in a 2nd world country with a lot of history still intact. The other is a city in a 3rd world country whose major historical areas were destroyed during WW2. The choice is too obvious
I don’t think it’s too obvious as there are a lot of differences between the cities that play into different preferences. It’s certainly a shame that a lot of Manila’s historic architecture has been destroyed, but some of it still exists. Meanwhile, there are differences in climate and culture that can swing people strongly from one to another.

One thing I found interesting about Manila is just how densely packed parts of it is and notably more so than the most packed part of Mexico City. Another is the focus on interiors and giant malls (I wish at least some focus would be placed on rehabilitating more of the historic architecture and the streetscapes of the older areas).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 11:56 AM
 
714 posts, read 1,136,816 times
Reputation: 398
I think Mexico City would win in every single category, except maybe safety. Mexico City is pretty much the leading example of a megacity in the developing world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 06:04 PM
 
608 posts, read 416,946 times
Reputation: 334
"These were two of the first major cities of the Spanish Empire..."

Source? Perhaps Lima and other cities were larger at that time..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 06:13 PM
 
Location: In the heights
20,783 posts, read 22,344,161 times
Reputation: 10755
Quote:
Originally Posted by joacocanal View Post
"These were two of the first major cities of the Spanish Empire..."

Source? Perhaps Lima and other cities were larger at that time..
Two of the first, which means there were others. The way to say specifically these were the two first would be “the two first” rather than “two of the first”.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 09:27 PM
 
3,576 posts, read 2,709,298 times
Reputation: 2255
Curious to hear more about Manila here. Mexico City is outstanding, in spite of its flaws, perhaps favorite city I’ve visited and I’ve been a lot of places. Make a case for Manila though. What aspects would I want to visit?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 11:00 PM
 
Location: Phoenix
922 posts, read 818,347 times
Reputation: 624
I have not been to Mexico City but I'm from Manila. I don't think Mexico City is that bad in terms of safety, blame the American media.

Some knowledge about Manila:
1. Metro Manila has some 13M population, one of the densely populated cities in the world.
2. It sits between the Manila Bay on the west and Laguna Lake on the east.
3. English is largely spoken language in Metro Manila.
4. Makati City is the financial district of the country and it sit right on the center of Metro Manila.
5. There are first world areas in Metro Manila, one is Makati City (financial district and home to some of the posh hotels), BGC is the new master planned city with prime condominiums, Ortigas Center is the shopping capital, Entertainment City is the gaming and entertainment capital and Manila City being the cultural capital.
6. There's bunch of bars to hang out with live music in Metro Manila.
8. Too many red light districts, some decent ones are in Roxas Boulevard and Quezon Avenue.
9. Filipinas are known to be one of the prettiest women in the world. Bunch of them are in Metro Manila.
10. People in Metro Manila are super friendly.

Flaws of Manila:
1. Bad traffic/poor infrastructure.
2. Not so safe in many areas (outside those I mentioned above), be careful, go out with a local is the safest bet.
3. Poverty and noise in many areas.
4. Beware of scammers too.

To add:
Metro Manila is undergoing massive infrastructure overhaul, worth $180B rolled over 5 years. Hopefully by 2022, the traffic will be less.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 07:58 AM
 
Location: In the heights
20,783 posts, read 22,344,161 times
Reputation: 10755
I’ll add to that above that the term Metro Manila denotes a specific grouping of municipalities that consists of 620 square km / 240 square miles for that 12.8 million people. The larger metropolitan area itself has 20 something million. Metro Manila is super densely packed.

Last edited by OyCrumbler; 01-08-2019 at 08:10 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 04:38 PM
 
90 posts, read 23,578 times
Reputation: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler View Post
I’ll add to that above that the term Metro Manila denotes a specific grouping of municipalities that consists of 620 square km / 240 square miles for that 12.8 million people. The larger metropolitan area itself has 20 something million. Metro Manila is super densely packed.

yeah Metro Manila should be thought of more like a big city with a bunch of burroughs (like NYC) rather than a main city + a bunch of suburbs. And the population density is equal to that of Paris. So it's not like it's overcrowded, it's that the infrastructure isn't there yet.
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

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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top