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.
The issue at play is that I was just talking about recognition. Certainly its nipping at the heels of the top 10, and I wouldn't ridicule someone for placing it in theirs. I don't think I suggested it wasn't moving up. My list would be very close to yours, except that I'm inclined to place Seattle above Atlanta, due to it being the unofficial capital of an otherwise unrepresented area (Pacific NW) and the international vibe it's proximity to Asia gives it. Atlanta to me is more of a regional powerhouse.
Regardless, I think you'd have to be one hell of an Atlanta fan to claim its anywhere close to having international recognition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by polo89
ATL has music, the olympics, and MLK. That's enough international recognition.
Atlanta internationally recognized for its music? That's hardly even true for Nashville. Not trying to be snarky here, but is Atlanta really considered a mecca of music even in the US?
MLK is a popular figure, but he's not Gandhi. While the civil rights movement has helped to inspire many acts of civil disobedience, it remains largely a national phenomenon.
Hosting the Olympics does not guarantee international recognition for more than a few years. Additionally, the Atlanta Olympics are widely considered adequate at best.
The issue at play is that I was just talking about recognition. Certainly its nipping at the heels of the top 10, and I wouldn't ridicule someone for placing it in theirs. I don't think I suggested it wasn't moving up. My list would be very close to yours, except that I'm inclined to place Seattle above Atlanta, due to it being the unofficial capital of an otherwise unrepresented area (Pacific NW) and the international vibe it's proximity to Asia gives it. Atlanta to me is more of a regional powerhouse.
Regardless, I think you'd have to be one hell of an Atlanta fan to claim its anywhere close to having international recognition.
Atlanta internationally recognized for its music? That's hardly even true for Nashville. Not trying to be snarky here, but is Atlanta really considered a mecca of music even in the US?
MLK is a popular figure, but he's not Gandhi. While the civil rights movement has helped to inspire many acts of civil disobedience, it remains largely a national phenomenon.
Hosting the Olympics does not guarantee international recognition for more than a few years. Additionally, the Atlanta Olympics are widely considered adequate at best.
Geez man... you're trying to hard.
Did you not get a job you applied for in Atlanta or something!?
I don't understand your argument with Seattle and your bias with Atlanta.
They get recognition for being the unofficial capitol of the Pacific Northwest, yet you don't give Atlanta recognition for being the unofficial capital of the South.... a much larger region in population and economically?
(No offense intended towards Seattle. I like Seattle. It is a deserving city.)
no offense man, but you're digging yourself into a hole.
It's economy is in the top 10 of the US, within the top 40 of the world. It has many homegrown companies working as world-wide conglomerates and attracts attention from foreign companies.
It is an extremely well connected international air hub, which helps drive this business.
It already is an Alpha- city.
Now if someone wants to argue semantics on rankings or one city over another... I understand. But if someone wants to say outright, that a city like Atlanta is completely the opposite...
They just have their head stuck in the sand and don't know what their saying.
As far as many of your other comments... You're just so obtuse and short-sighted.
Take your comment about MLK Jr. He was a man and not a city. Yea, but he was raised here, led a church here, was integrated into the civic community here. He and his prominence in the movement grew with people from this city. He was the leader, but the power rests with the people. You can't cleanly separate those two things so easily.
Now if you want to argue it was more of a nation-only thing, fine, but I'm not letting you get away the other stuff.
As far as the music discussion... I have a few problems with it on both sides....
Yes, Atlanta has made a huge mark on American music and pop music. You're arguments are a bit unfair towards Atlanta.
American pop music is extremely pervasive across the world. Not just a little bit, but extremely!
Atlanta's consumer habits have also made us a trendsetter within the pop music industry, which admittedly has a larger amount to do with the large numbers of people moving here from all over.
Now my problem with the overall line of argumentation using music is the music industry in the US has done a very good job of generating talent in just about every corner of the US. They do this for marketing reasons. I don't is needs to be relevant to a world city discussion, with the exception of giving LA (and perhaps maybe... NYC? I'm not real sure) credit for fostering such a large worldwide industry within the US
I live here in California so this comes from a West Coast perspective. If I had to choose a Southern city I'd go with Atlanta. When your city has hosted the Summer Olympics, that in and itself puts you right up there. Not to mention the ATL is home to Coke, Delta Airlines, and CNN, some of the world's most recognizable brands. Now I don't know if Miami is considered the South, culturally it is very different from Atlanta and Charlotte, but Miami is well known internationally too. I'd probably pick Miami over Atlanta though. I just think Miami has more going on for itself than the ATL and is a unique city based on what it represents for Latin Americans and the Hispanic world. Miami doesn't look like a typical American metropolis, its skyline looks like it belongs in South America. Whereas Atlanta's skyline could be mistaken for Houston or Dallas, or Charlotte, or Detroit, or Cleveland.
Am I? I'm open to hearing the argument that I'm just bashing Atlanta, but that seems like a stretch. Are you from Atlanta? if that's the case, consider the idea that home-town pride may be skewing your perception. I haven't said anything objectively bad about the city, I'm merely challenging the idea that Atlanta is an "Alpha, internationally recognized city". That to me sounds like Atlanta boosting. Its great when people love their city, but this is about world cities. The Deep South and the Sunbelt do not bring to mind the word "worldly".
Most people just don't have the room in their head to develop clear images about a dozen cities in a foreign country. At most a great country might have one, two, MAYBE three cities that are internationally recognized as Alpha, world powerhouses. That describes places like Tokyo, London, New York City, Paris, Hong Kong. You can't possibly, genuinely believe that Atlanta, Georgia belongs anywhere near those capitals of human civilization. That is comically absurd, bordering on nonsensical. Its a fine city, and many people enjoy it as their home. Lets not get carried away.
I would be interested to hear if you've been somewhere like Europe or Asia and heard people buzzing about Atlanta, Georgia. That has not been my experience traveling abroad. At all. Ever.
Am I? I'm open to hearing the argument that I'm just bashing Atlanta, but that seems like a stretch. Are you from Atlanta? if that's the case, consider the idea that home-town pride may be skewing your perception. I haven't said anything objectively bad about the city, I'm merely challenging the idea that Atlanta is an "Alpha, internationally recognized city". That to me sounds like Atlanta boosting. Its great when people love their city, but this is about world cities. The Deep South and the Sunbelt do not bring to mind the word "worldly".
Most people just don't have the room in their head to develop clear images about a dozen cities in a foreign country. At most a great country might have one, two, MAYBE three cities that are internationally recognized as Alpha, world powerhouses. That describes places like Tokyo, London, New York City, Paris, Hong Kong. You can't possibly, genuinely believe that Atlanta, Georgia belongs anywhere near those capitals of human civilization. That is comically absurd, bordering on nonsensical. Its a fine city, and many people enjoy it as their home. Lets not get carried away.
I would be interested to hear if you've been somewhere like Europe or Asia and heard people buzzing about Atlanta, Georgia. That has not been my experience traveling abroad. At all. Ever.
I don't think anybody thinks Atlanta is a household name worldwide.However it is known somewhat.It has many things that would draw attention more so than the other cities in the South (other than New Orleans).
The Olympic legacy alone is something that many will note as one example.
I host many international people often and my first question usually is :"How well do they know of Atlanta?"Many times its not a lot but its least something like the Olympics,CNN,Coca Cola,Gone With The Wind,its universities, or just the Airport.
As it pertains to the region of major cities in the South,Atlanta has more than a few things that make it stand out from other cities.
London,Tokyo,NYC ,etc it will never be,but it is growing substantially in notoriety every year.
Europe and Asia are not the part of the world.Atlanta is very popular among African nations.Atlanta has the highest percentage of foreign born people from Africa of a major city in the U.S.
Your argument initially sounded as if Atlanta out of the other major cities in the South that were previously metioned were somehow less deserving of recognition than the others.That is why people are objecting to your comments.How is Atlanta less than deserving than the others?
The issue at play is that I was just talking about recognition. Certainly its nipping at the heels of the top 10, and I wouldn't ridicule someone for placing it in theirs. I don't think I suggested it wasn't moving up. My list would be very close to yours, except that I'm inclined to place Seattle above Atlanta, due to it being the unofficial capital of an otherwise unrepresented area (Pacific NW) and the international vibe it's proximity to Asia gives it. Atlanta to me is more of a regional powerhouse.
Regardless, I think you'd have to be one hell of an Atlanta fan to claim its anywhere close to having international recognition.
Atlanta internationally recognized for its music? That's hardly even true for Nashville. Not trying to be snarky here, but is Atlanta really considered a mecca of music even in the US?
MLK is a popular figure, but he's not Gandhi. While the civil rights movement has helped to inspire many acts of civil disobedience, it remains largely a national phenomenon.
Hosting the Olympics does not guarantee international recognition for more than a few years. Additionally, the Atlanta Olympics are widely considered adequate at best.
I have a feeling that any positive comment made in favor of Atlanta's international recognition would be met with biased statements similar to those above. Someone obviously has an agenda.
Am I? I'm open to hearing the argument that I'm just bashing Atlanta, but that seems like a stretch. Are you from Atlanta? if that's the case, consider the idea that home-town pride may be skewing your perception. I haven't said anything objectively bad about the city, I'm merely challenging the idea that Atlanta is an "Alpha, internationally recognized city". That to me sounds like Atlanta boosting. Its great when people love their city, but this is about world cities. The Deep South and the Sunbelt do not bring to mind the word "worldly".
Most people just don't have the room in their head to develop clear images about a dozen cities in a foreign country. At most a great country might have one, two, MAYBE three cities that are internationally recognized as Alpha, world powerhouses. That describes places like Tokyo, London, New York City, Paris, Hong Kong. You can't possibly, genuinely believe that Atlanta, Georgia belongs anywhere near those capitals of human civilization. That is comically absurd, bordering on nonsensical. Its a fine city, and many people enjoy it as their home. Lets not get carried away.
I would be interested to hear if you've been somewhere like Europe or Asia and heard people buzzing about Atlanta, Georgia. That has not been my experience traveling abroad. At all. Ever.
Okay I see...it's not just Atlanta you have a problem with, but the South in general. Remove your blinders and then you'll be able to discuss this topic with some intelligence. Until then all you apparently see is a bunch of backwoods hick towns with no redeeming qualities. Case closed.
Of course no one in the South has been to Europe! Don't be absurd. Your condescension is noted.
I think you're swinging at enemies that don't exist- I live in Richmond, VA. I didn't suggest he'd never traveled to Europe, I'm asking if when he traveled (anywhere abroad) he got the impression that Atlanta had recognition as an Alpha world city. I haven't. "World city" status certainly isn't the most important determinant for quality of life in a city, its just one very specific standard that this thread was supposed to be based around.
I think you're swinging at enemies that don't exist- I live in Richmond, VA. I didn't suggest he'd never traveled to Europe, I'm asking if when he traveled (anywhere abroad) he got the impression that Atlanta had recognition as an Alpha world city. I haven't. "World city" status certainly isn't the most important determinant for quality of life in a city, its just one very specific standard that this thread was supposed to be based around.
So why did you single out Atlanta and not call out Dallas or Houston? I think Atlanta is easily more known around the world then those cities, but I do agree with you, Atlanta is not an international powerhouse. It's a national powerhouse trying to find it's way towards an international powerhouse, but still has decades, if not a century to go.
But to place Seattle over Atlanta is laughable and it tells me a lot about a bias you towards Atlanta. They don't even have a transit system that's better then Atlanta's. Seattle is a regional powerhouse.
It sounds like we mostly agree about Atlanta. As for Seattle versus Atlanta, I'm repeating myself here, but my response regarding Atlanta was about a very specific topic- international recognition. As I've stated before, If Seattle makes my top ten list at all, its in the bottom spot and Atlanta is nipping at its heels. Neither one belongs in an Alpha world city conversation. But Seattle is a stones-throw away from a foreign nation. Its a coastal city and a major port city in a very inclusive part of the country with a strong history of immigration and tourism. It has a strong connection with Asia, which its closer to than any other major American city (I wouldn't consider Honolulu major). The GDPs are extremely close, despite Atlanta having a substantially larger metro population. Seattle has the larger city population, as well as more recognizable scenery, both man-made and natural.
Last edited by lerner; 03-15-2013 at 10:45 AM..
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.
Your condescension is noted.
