Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Celebrating Memorial Day!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 07-17-2013, 12:55 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
2,033 posts, read 1,983,459 times
Reputation: 1437

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicagoist123 View Post
You can take the bus. The bus is even more accessible than the train.
Be careful using the word "bus". If you care to read a few pages back there are some people on here that look at bus transportation as "Third World" and not worthy of being world class

 
Old 07-17-2013, 12:55 PM
 
632 posts, read 932,674 times
Reputation: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaySwelly View Post
NYC, LA, SF, and Chicago. All have a significant influence on the world outside of the US much larger than any other US city. Plus the amenities that they have are better than the other US cities as well. NYC is obviously a world class city, but if you include Chicago, SF, or LA, then you must include the other two as well.
I agree. Aside from Chicago arguably having better public transportation, what do any of these cities have that the other two don't?
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:01 PM
 
2,421 posts, read 4,317,326 times
Reputation: 1479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd_96 View Post
I agree. Aside from Chicago arguably having better public transportation, what do any of these cities have that the other two don't?
Agreed. They all have world class universities (although SF's are not in city proper), museums, diversity, etc. I think it goes NYC then in the next tier Chicago, LA and SF altogether in the same one. I would say SF is slightly less world class than the other two, but not by that much.
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:02 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
2,033 posts, read 1,983,459 times
Reputation: 1437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd_96 View Post
I agree. Aside from Chicago arguably having better public transportation, what do any of these cities have that the other two don't?
That's exactly my point. We can all agree the NYC is World Class. When you start adding in Chicago in the discussion of World Class, then a solid case can be made for SF, LA and DC as well. Chicago is much closer to those cities than it is to New York and in some areas those others cities will "one up" Chicago on some things.
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:04 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
2,033 posts, read 1,983,459 times
Reputation: 1437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicagoist123 View Post
Agreed. They all have world class universities (although SF's are not in city proper), museums, diversity, etc. I think it goes NYC then in the next tier Chicago, LA and SF altogether in the same one. I would say SF is slightly less world class than the other two, but not by that much.
I agree with this post, but please tell me what "Slightly Less World Class" means? You either are or your not.
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:06 PM
 
2,421 posts, read 4,317,326 times
Reputation: 1479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastphilly View Post
That's exactly my point. We can all agree the NYC is World Class. When you start adding in Chicago in the discussion of World Class, then a solid case can be made for SF, LA and DC as well. Chicago is much closer to those cities than it is to New York and in some areas those others cities will "one up" Chicago on some things.
I dunno about DC though. I feel like it's too homogenous in it's economy and people (I don't mean ethnically or racially). I think most world class cities offer that, complete diversity in all categories. DC to me is just way too government oriented and politically driven.
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:11 PM
 
2,421 posts, read 4,317,326 times
Reputation: 1479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastphilly View Post
I agree with this post, but please tell me what "Slightly Less World Class" means? You either are or your not.
For example while UCLA and USC are in LA proper and UC and NU (half of it) are in Chicago proper, Stanford nor UC Berkeley are. Companies like Facebook, Google, etc aren't techincally in SF. While SF has basketball team it's not in SF nor will the NFL team be either. Meaning when it comes to city proper SF will really only have one professional sports team. The rest are in the bay area. Not saying that you have to have a bunch of sports teams in your city to be world class, just saying that comparing little things like that, Chicago and LA have a slight edge.
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:12 PM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC (in my mind)
7,943 posts, read 17,248,986 times
Reputation: 4686
In my opinion world class cities are unmistakable. Chicago, as great as it is, is considered by many outside the area to be a "mini-New York." It's easy to see this point of view as you could drop any geographically ignorant person in downtown Chicago and convince them they were in New York. A true world class city is not a "mini" anything or a replica of anything. That is why I don't consider Chicago world class. It's very close but its not there. San Francisco and Los Angeles however are not only unmistakable, but they are renowned around the globe for their amenities, beauty, and cultural sophistication. They are both however lacking in the public transit area compared to other world class cities. That in my opinion is the only thing that may disqualify them.
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:14 PM
 
507 posts, read 806,923 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by bchris02 View Post
In my opinion world class cities are unmistakable. Chicago, as great as it is, is considered by many outside the area to be a "mini-New York." It's easy to see this point of view as you could drop any geographically ignorant person in downtown Chicago and convince them they were in New York. A true world class city is not a "mini" anything or a replica of anything. That is why I don't consider Chicago world class. It's very close but its not there. San Francisco and Los Angeles however are not only unmistakable, but they are renowned around the globe for their amenities, beauty, and cultural sophistication.
+1
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:16 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
2,033 posts, read 1,983,459 times
Reputation: 1437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicagoist123 View Post
I dunno about DC though. I feel like it's too homogenous in it's economy and people (I don't mean ethnically or racially). I think most world class cities offer that, complete diversity in all categories. DC to me is just way too government oriented and politically driven.
I have always felt that the number of foreign airlines from all corners of the world serving that city's home airport is a measuring stick of how the city is connected to the world and shows the demand of foreigners abroad wanting to visit the city.

NY
LA
CHI
SF
DC

After these five cities in this order the number of foreign flag carriers from around the world serving other US cities has a significant dropoff.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top