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.
It's a tough call. I prefer Boston, just a tad- And as far as sports go, Boston makes a bigger name for itself over Philly. Also, it's basically the only city in New England that's nationally recognizable, whereas Philly is just 1 of the many Mid-Atlantic cities. Boston's just more original, while Philly is often noted for being similar to Baltimore, and "a borough" of NYC
Historically, they're both just as significant as the other.
It's a tough call. I prefer Boston, just a tad- And as far as sports go, Boston makes a bigger name for itself over Philly. Also, it's basically the only city in New England that's nationally recognizable, whereas Philly is just 1 of the many Mid-Atlantic cities. Boston's just more original, while Philly is often noted for being similar to Baltimore, and to a smaller extent NYC.
Historically, they're both just as significant as the other.
It's a tough call. I prefer Boston, just a tad- And as far as sports go, Boston makes a bigger name for itself over Philly. Also, it's basically the only city in New England that's nationally recognizable, whereas Philly is just 1 of the many mid-Atlantic cities.
Historically, they're both just as significant as the other.
But the 4 states of the Mid- Atlantic (DE, PA, NJ, NY) are more than Double the size then instead of 1 nationaly reconized city there are two.
It's a tough call. I prefer Boston, just a tad- And as far as sports go, Boston makes a bigger name for itself over Philly. Also, it's basically the only city in New England that's nationally recognizable, whereas Philly is just 1 of the many Mid-Atlantic cities. Boston's just more original, while Philly is often noted for being similar to Baltimore, and "a borough" of NYC
Historically, they're both just as significant as the other.
More Original? How so? It also depends on who you ask. Like for me Philadelphia's past presence in the music industry( Hip hop, r&b soul etc) trumps Boston. You're gonna have to explain that one a lil further.
More Original? How so? It also depends on who you ask. Like for me Philadelphia's past presence in the music industry( Hip hop, r&b soul etc) trumps Boston. You're gonna have to explain that one a lil further.
I agree, Philly is every bit as unique as Boston, maybe moreso
If anything Philly has less of a glossy image but character and uniqueness are not things it lacks. On the comparison to Baltimore or NYC. To Baltimore, yes some similarities, rowhouses etc even on people but Philly is a different character from Baltimore. on the NYC association. i do think Philly and New York do associate with each other, less so a Manhattan connection and more the city vibes themselves. They do have some similarities again but are by no means the same
Have you spent any time in Philly? Just look around. Yes, it is one of the biggest cities in the country, one of the bset? You got to be kidding
It absolutely is. It's my second or third favorite city in the country (competing with Chicago and exempting Boston since I can't be objective in that sense). What cities would you say are better?
Wasting you time engaging miami11 he's out of controll
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmac9wr
It absolutely is. It's my second or third favorite city in the country (competing with Chicago and exempting Boston since I can't be objective in that sense). What cities would you say are better?
Most South American cities, Los Angeles, and Miami, Chicago.
Most South American how? Demographically?
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.