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.
No way I am going to read this entire thread. LA and Chicago are two of the greatest cities in this CPU try, those that say otherwise are insane.
With that said, LA generally speaking is/was built for the automobile, life sucks if you don't own a car. Many people on this board and real life care about a cities urban core and the amenities it offers. Not how many Mexicans city A has vs. city B
LA's image relies a lot on Hollywood and the entertainment industry. Its also not your typical city as its more or less a string of suburbs. Chicago has a lot of different characteristics. LA doesnt.
100 percent incorrect on all points. In fact, each point is stupider than the one that came before it. I think I was being too nice by saying you are myopic. There's another word that starts with an "M" that seems more fitting.
I will definitely agree that LA is a rank above Chicago in terms of North American cities (although I like Chicago more). I think what is becoming a sore thumb here, though, are those posters that fail to recognize the important aspects of Chicago that also make it one of the most important cities in North America. I mean, when somebody says something as misinformed as "frankly I don't think Chicago stands out in any bodys mind as an economic powerhouse unless you live in the midwest" they are clearly misinformed and arouse a lot of anger.
Ah, the old "lets pretend Asia is one single entity" move. Again, typical.
Los Angeles has great Persian, American, Peruvian, Central American. Some of the best delis in the country are here as well, and the food trucks that Chicagoans desperately wanted for their city? L.A. has the best of them.
Did I not include Indian? Which Chicago comes out on top.
LA has better Viet, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Thai and Mexican. Man, what variety there. A lot of cities have those, like grapico said. Its passe. And its not even like Chicago has poor quality in them. Mexican food in Chicago is probably the best outside predominantly Mexican ethnic cities/regions (CA, NM, TX, etc.) Sure as hell is better than the Mexican on the East Coast.
Chicago bests LA in pretty much everything else aside the cuisine you listed. Shall we look at Michelin rated fine-dining?
Theres a common theme here. You live in LA. You love it there. You boost it. Wonderful. Nobody is changing anyone's minds here.
Its pointless to continue this stupid debate. I will say this, I at least spread the love to other cities (NY, Philly, Minneapolis, Honolulu, etc.) whereas you just seem to think the ****ing world revolves around LA, which is hilarious. It seems like every debate on here with you involves LA being the best, whether its weather, density, food, economy, people, whatever (although you wouldnt gather that from its controversial world rankings). The only thing I think Ive seen you concede to another city was Mexican food, and that was for Mexico City (you dont say?).
Your whole shtick is annoying, dude. Youve been called out on it by many East Coast posters. We get it, you wanna bend LA over and **** it in the ass. Great. Do it in private. No need to come on the internet and spread the STDs around.
Did I not include Indian? Which Chicago comes out on top.
LA has better Viet, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Thai and Mexican. Man, what variety there. A lot of cities have those, like grapico said. Its passe. And its not even like Chicago has poor quality in them. Mexican food in Chicago is probably the best outside predominantly Mexican ethnic cities/regions (CA, NM, TX, etc.) Sure as hell is better than the Mexican on the East Coast.
Chicago bests LA in pretty much everything else aside the cuisine you listed. Shall we look at Michelin rated fine-dining?
Theres a common theme here. You live in LA. You love it there. You boost it. Wonderful. Nobody is changing anyone's minds here.
Its pointless to continue this stupid debate. I will say this, I at least spread the love to other cities (NY, Philly, Minneapolis, Honolulu, etc.) whereas you just seem to think the ****ing world revolves around LA, which is hilarious. It seems like every debate on here with you involves LA being the best, whether its weather, density, food, economy, people, whatever (although you wouldnt gather that from its controversial world rankings). The only thing I think Ive seen you concede to another city was Mexican food, and that was for Mexico City (you dont say?).
Your whole shtick is annoying, dude. Youve been called out on it by many East Coast posters. We get it, you wanna bend LA over and **** it in the ass. Great. Do it in private. No need to come on the internet and spread the STDs around.
Whats next? LA is more dense than Brooklyn?
LA probably does better in almost all parts of Latin America, Southeast Asia, and East Asia. I don't think those are really passe, because a lot of what qualifies as Mexican, Japanese and Chinese food in most cities are sort a bowdlerized version of the actual cuisines and LA does great in all of these and more. Also, I think Mexican in NYC is actually pretty good these days, though that's a much more recent development.
LA from its sheer demographic variety and size does really well, and that it's a coastal city and close to one of the largest center of agricultural production (for everything save for grains which transport fairly well) is why it's such a great food city.
I agree that Chicago is great, but outside of haute cuisine and some European cuisines, Los Angeles probably does a bit better. It's not a huge gap considering what much the rest of the US has. LA's weak spot in comparison to Chicago is not food--it's mass transit, pedestrian-friendly developments, and attractiveness to global corporations (areas where Chicago does very well against LA).
As for the topic at hand, I'd argue that by metro it is:
NYC, LA, Mexico City, DC, and the Bay Area which are the most important with the Bay Area being the most contentious and putting in Chicago in its place is understandable. As for best cities in regards to my personal tastes, I'd drop DC and put in Seattle though Seattle is obviously not as powerful as the rest of the cities.
NYC, LA, Mexico City, DC, and the Bay Area which are the most important with the Bay Area being the most contentious and putting in Chicago in its place is understandable. As for best cities in regards to my personal tastes, I'd drop DC and put in Seattle though Seattle is obviously not as powerful as the rest of the cities.
LA probably does better in almost all parts of Latin America, Southeast Asia, and East Asia. I don't think those are really passe, because a lot of what qualifies as Mexican, Japanese and Chinese food in most cities are sort a bowdlerized version of the actual cuisines and LA does great in all of these and more. Also, I think Mexican in NYC is actually pretty good these days, though that's a much more recent development.
LA from its sheer demographic variety and size does really well, and that it's a coastal city and close to one of the largest center of agricultural production (for everything save for grains which transport fairly well) is why it's such a great food city.
I agree that Chicago is great, but outside of haute cuisine and some European cuisines, Los Angeles probably does a bit better. It's not a huge gap considering what much the rest of the US has. LA's weak spot in comparison to Chicago is not food--it's mass transit, pedestrian-friendly developments, and attractiveness to global corporations (areas where Chicago does very well against LA).
As for the topic at hand, I'd argue that by metro it is:
NYC, LA, Mexico City, DC, and the Bay Area which are the most important with the Bay Area being the most contentious and putting in Chicago in its place is understandable. As for best cities in regards to my personal tastes, I'd drop DC and put in Seattle though Seattle is obviously not as powerful as the rest of the cities.
I lived in NYC and NJ, and the Mexican and Indian is lacking in comparison to the other cities. I know of natives that will tell you that themselves. One of my best friends is from Flushing, hes Viet, and even the Asian cuisine isnt that great. Koreatown is one street! (been there a lot after Ranger games). Flushing I think has better Asian food in general than anything in Chinatown. Most of the Asian food Upstate comes from the goods shipped in from NY Harbor. I even find some Italian food better Upstate than downstate. Those hicks sure know how to make good riggies! (Kidding, seeing as a good part of Upstate is highly concentrated Italians).
Per LA, dont forget American cuisine and fine-dining though, which I find that Chicago is superior. Its outlined in the Michelin guide. Greasy food? Forget about it.
I am going to Seoul to visit my brother next year as well, so itll be good to actually get some authentic Korean food. He laughed when we saw kimbap was ****ing $16 in Koreatown, when it would only be like 3-4,000 won in Korea (3-4 bucks)
Yes. I know people put out the argument that DC just feeds off the rest of the nation, but it's true of pretty much all national/international industries (like, where does the capital for the stock markets come from? where do the profits for the companies and parts of their operations with their headquarters in Houston, Chicago, NYC, etc. come from? are all shareholders in the metro of the headquarters? does all capital come from there?). DC is where the decisions are made and where all the auxiliary industries are located. It's an incredibly important city and the social and organizational infrastructure as well as the human capital there would be an incredibly arduous process if somehow the capital were shifted elsewhere.
I lived in NYC and NJ, and the Mexican and Indian is lacking in comparison to the other cities. I know of natives that will tell you that themselves. One of my best friends is from Flushing, hes Viet, and even the Asian cuisine isnt that great. Koreatown is one street! (been there a lot after Ranger games). Flushing I think has better Asian food in general than anything in Chinatown. Most of the Asian food Upstate comes from the goods shipped in from NY Harbor. I even find some Italian food better Upstate than downstate. Those hicks sure know how to make good riggies! (Kidding, seeing as a good part of Upstate is highly concentrated Italians).
Per LA, dont forget American cuisine and fine-dining though, which I find that Chicago is superior. Its outlined in the Michelin guide. Greasy food? Forget about it.
What about Fort Lee (and its neighbors) and Flushing for Korean food in addition to Koreatown?
NYC might not be the best for Mexican, but it's got a good chance for top 5 within the US (though not North America in general since there's a pretty good argument that very, very few US cities would make the cut once you put them against the cities of Mexico).
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.
