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.
In terms of the attributes that make a city cosmopolitan -- the worldliness and urbanity of residents, ethnic and culinary diversity, the arts, national/international significance, and an intangible feeling of sophistication -- which city, Dallas or Seattle, demonstrates greater evidence of these qualities?
Given these criteria, I personally find Dallas more cosmopolitan than Seattle. What are your thoughts?
Ironic, since these are the two cities that Emirates Airlines just announced service to from Dubai.
Well, lets break it down blow by blow:
Urbanity: Seattle, no contest
Ethnic and culinary diversity: Dallas, no contest
The Arts: Seattle
National and International significance: Dallas
Sophistication: Could go either way depending on where you are in each city
Personally, it depends on which definition of cosmopolitan you want to use. If you want the city-data forum definition (which is defined by which city is more urban and liberal), Seattle. In the real world, I would say Dallas because its a more important city and multicultural.
Ironic, since these are the two cities that Emirates Airlines just announced service to from Dubai.
Well, lets break it down blow by blow:
Urbanity: Seattle, no contest
Ethnic and culinary diversity: Dallas, no contest
The Arts: Seattle
National and International significance: Dallas
Sophistication: Could go either way depending on where you are in each city
Personally, it depends on which definition of cosmopolitan you want to use. If you want the city-data forum definition (which is defined by which city is more urban and liberal), Seattle. In the real world, I would say Dallas because its a more important city and multicultural.
Interestingly, according to the 2008 Globalization and World Cities Research Network (GaWC) categorization of global city significance, Dallas is now classified as an Alpha -, on par with Boston, Zurich, and Melbourne, Australia.
Seattle is ranked Beta, on par with Minneapolis, Luxembourg, and Oslo, Norway.
Dallas' downtown is terrible. and the sprawl is as well. But we are talking apples to oranges. The size differences are significant. Dallas (DFW) is way bigger and subsequently far more important financially.
I disagree that Dallas is a bad place to live. But hey, it has more of what I want. I wouldn't mind Seattle either though. Different type of places though. Dallas is extremely hot at times and Seattle is extremely overcast at times. Seattle is more urban though so that's a huge plus in their favor. But Dallas is much larger in both size and population. It's also more diverse
I have a cousin who lives in Dallas but I didn't even actually know about this city until a year ago. I've known about Seattle for a long time though. I think Seattle gets more national and international attention but I think Dallas wins based on size alone.
Those of you stating that there's no comparison between the two are not providing much in the way of evidence to back up your assertions. The reality is that Dallasis a full two rungs ahead (Alpha - vs Beta) of Seattle in terms of global importance, according to GaWC.
If you contest that Seattle is in fact more cosmopolitan, you should provide the evidence.
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.
