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 think you guys overstate the importance of DCs role as far as power and influence.
This is why DC doesnt top any rankings of importance or connectivity-because in reality, govt has an important role, but it doesnt have the only important role.
Government's role is more auxiliary to business, not more important than it.
In your haste to trumpet your opinion on this topic, you've neglected to include a previous quote of mine in this very thread, which for simplicty's sake I will provide here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14thandYou
DC as a city is an economic powerhouse in its own right, but DC as an institution wields power that is greater than that. There's nothing commensurate to it in LA, Chicago, New York or other cities. That doesn't necessarily mean that it's more or less important than those cities, only that the difference isn't necessarily measurable.
When you get right down to it, all of those rankings lists are arbitrary by nature--particularly when you begin comparing cities around the world. And why I don't feel they provide an adequate basis from which to gauge the relative merits or "importance" of DC versus another U.S. city. As I have previously mentioned, I don't believe anything can.
I've seen your arguments and read your supporting evidence, and remain convinced of my earlier assertion: that it is a fool's errand to compare any U.S. city to the nation's capital, particularly when that capital wields such a significant amount of power domestically and abroad. Consider: Decisions to start wars and military exercises that have enormous global consequences are made here. Laws which govern virtually every aspect of our lives are debated, crafted and implemented here. Regulations and legislation which impact every corner of our own economy, and many aspects of the global economy, are initiated here. And decisions on how to make over $500 billion in private sector purchases, by way of federal government procurement, are made here. No other U.S. entity, whether singular or collective, exerts such influence over our lives in such a vast and exhaustive array of areas. Whether one personally agrees with the power afforded to Washington and the federal government, the scope and reach of that power is undeniable--and beyond that which any other U.S. city can match.
Your statement that "government's role is more auxiliary to business, not more important than it" may in fact be true, but is also precisely the reason why I feel that there is no acceptable comparison to be made here.
In your haste to trumpet your opinion on this topic
Well, I have relied almost entirely on the studies and rankings that already exist to formulate my opinion.
I think that's more valid than just saying what I think and not considering the huge amounts of data that already exist regarding the topic of importance.
Quote:
you've neglected to include a previous quote of mine in this very thread, which for simplicty's sake I will provide here:
okay.
But the title of this thread is: "The more important city: Washington DC VS Los Angeles.
Based on the data and the already existing studies, I would say that the answer is Los Angeles, by quite a bit.
That's not to say that DC is not important. Obviously its very important and has a vital function as the seat of government.
I just don't buy that government is the most important thing, or even the second or third most important thing when it comes to weighing importance.
Apparently most rankings and studies agree with me.
Well, I have relied almost entirely on the studies and rankings that already exist to formulate my opinion.
I think that's more valid than just saying what I think and not considering the huge amounts of data that already exist regarding the topic of importance.
You are welcome to your opinion. And contrary to your claim, I have in fact considered the data provided, and my opinion is that the data is faulty because it does not adequately capture the true scope and impact of the power inherent in DC's position as the U.S. capital. I previously asked, what is measured in terms of "politics" as criteria for a city's supposed importance? What factors are taken under consideration when rating a city's importance based on politics? Does it simply examine which cities have the greatest concentration of political power, or does it undertake a thorough analysis of the extent of the influence and impact that the decisions emanating from the capital exert on our country and the world? If so, how does it do this? Does it examine the economic, political, and sociological impact of the decision to start a war, for instance? Or of the immense economic and sociological impacts of legislation such as the health care reform act? Or of theFed or World Bank's leverage in global financial affairs? Or of the historical and societal implications of Supreme Court decisions?
You can examine things like the earnings of Fortune 500 companies, major industries and international flights...but what is the measurable impact of the recently passed financial industry regulations? Or of trade decisions made on the part of the FTC and WTO? Or of the U.S. federal tax system? Each and every day, your life and mine are impacted in countless ways by decisions, declarations, regulations and legislation that come from DC. And until someone is able to devise a scientific methodology by which to measure the economic and societal impact of these issues on the U.S. as a whole, I will remain skeptical of any surveys which purport to classify the relative importance of political power.
The world depends on many things DC decides to do.
Los Angeles is the pop culture center, but the once-stranglehold it had is rapidly spreading to other cities. I don't think LA will ever lose it's center of pop culture world, but it will not have the near monopoly it use to have on it.
Well, I have relied almost entirely on the studies and rankings that already exist to formulate my opinion.
I think that's more valid than just saying what I think and not considering the huge amounts of data that already exist regarding the topic of importance.
okay.
But the title of this thread is: "The more important city: Washington DC VS Los Angeles.
Based on the data and the already existing studies, I would say that the answer is Los Angeles, by quite a bit.
That's not to say that DC is not important. Obviously its very important and has a vital function as the seat of government.
I just don't buy that government is the most important thing, or even the second or third most important thing when it comes to weighing importance.
Apparently most rankings and studies agree with me.
You keep relying on rankings and studies, what are those mostly based on? Gasp, economics. I think we all know LA is a million times more important economically than DC. That is not a measure of all aspects of the cities, and if you're gonna argue that LA has more political influence and importance that DC, then it's just not even worth arguing anymore. As just a city, DC is below LA, but DC isn't just a city. It's special, it has aspects to it that no other city can touch, not LA or even NYC. DC as a city is below LA, I'll say that again so no one puts words in my mouth. DC is still more important than LA or any other American city in it's own fields, specifically politics, global/domestic, and the control it exercises over things in our daily lives most people don't even think about.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,034,220 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by missRoxyhart
You keep relying on rankings and studies, what are those mostly based on? Gasp, economics. I think we all know LA is a million times more important economically than DC. That is not a measure of all aspects of the cities, and if you're gonna argue that LA has more political influence and importance that DC, then it's just not even worth arguing anymore. As just a city, DC is below LA, but DC isn't just a city. It's special, it has aspects to it that no other city can touch, not LA or even NYC. DC as a city is below LA, I'll say that again so no one puts words in my mouth. DC is still more important than LA or any other American city in it's own fields, specifically politics, global/domestic.
Actually no they take in dozens of different aspects when ranking a city for many of these studies.
Number of billionaires, appeal to world through tourism, governmental control, political influence, economical influence, economical stability, airport traffic, port of entry, trade & regulations, financial centers, even hosting the Olympics, and everything in between.
If you look up the credentials of many of these studies like Rand McNally and the others you'll see they literally take any aspect that makes a city, well a city and they compare it and place them on importance.
Refer to post # 96 for more details, and have your tab open to Google search page and when you get time look up what they base the studies on. It's interesting to say the least. I stopped trusting GaWC and their rankings but looked it up months ago with a friend so it's just something you need to understand prior to.
PS- you saying Washington DC is more politically influential to the world than Los Angeles is like saying Los Angeles is more economically linked to the world than Washington DC. It's a two way street there.
You keep relying on rankings and studies, what are those mostly based on? Gasp, economics. I think we all know LA is a million times more important economically than DC. That is not a measure of all aspects of the cities, and if you're gonna argue that LA has more political influence and importance that DC, then it's just not even worth arguing anymore. As just a city, DC is below LA, but DC isn't just a city. It's special, it has aspects to it that no other city can touch, not LA or even NYC. DC as a city is below LA, I'll say that again so no one puts words in my mouth. DC is still more important than LA or any other American city in it's own fields, specifically politics, global/domestic, and the control it exercises over things in our daily lives most people don't even think about.
I agree. LA may be more economically important, but DC is more important to the functioning of our country
Actually no they take in dozens of different aspects when ranking a city for many of these studies.
Number of billionaires, appeal to world through tourism, governmental control, political influence, economical influence, economical stability, airport traffic, port of entry, trade & regulations, financial centers, even hosting the Olympics, and everything in between.
If you look up the credentials of many of these studies like Rand McNally and the others you'll see they literally take any aspect that makes a city, well a city and they compare it and place them on importance.
Refer to post # 96 for more details, and have your tab open to Google search page and when you get time look up what they base the studies on. It's interesting to say the least. I stopped trusting GaWC and their rankings but looked it up months ago with a friend so it's just something you need to understand prior to.
I know it's more than just economics, but I'm just making a point. What DC is, can't really be measured that way in my opinion. LA beats DC as a whole in pretty much everything, but, well I guess I'm saying, DC the city is lower, but DC the institution is by itself.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,034,220 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by missRoxyhart
I know it's more than just economics, but I'm just making a point. What DC is, can't really be measured that way in my opinion. LA beats DC as a whole in pretty much everything, but, well I guess I'm saying, DC the city is lower, but DC the institution is by itself.
Well you pretty much did my job already. You answered the question for the thread and you pretty much self explained it.
Lets review at it:
Quote:
Originally Posted by missRoxyhart
I know it's morethan just economics, but I'm just making a point.
Point #2:
Quote:
Originally Posted by missRoxyhart
LA beats DC as a whole in pretty much everything, but, well I guess I'm saying, DC the city is lower
Point #3:
Quote:
Originally Posted by missRoxyhart
DC the institution is by itself.
Summary:
Yes it is by itself, you already described it perfectly even if you didn't mean it that way, in importance Washington DC (I like to spell out the whole name) is lower than Los Angeles. And yes, Washington DC sits by itself at lunch because it's higher than everyone else in importance, and lower than Los Angeles.
I hope you don't mind that I turned this more into taking your point to proving mine type of thing.
What happens in DC will affect LA, NYC, Chicago, and every city in between, on many, many different issues.
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.
