Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
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, 01:30 PM
 
2,421 posts, read 4,317,326 times
Reputation: 1479

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastphilly View Post
For a traveler visiting a city to take an advantage of it's amenities, schools are the furthest thing for a tourists agenda. I'm looking for world class/world renown iconic structures. Sure SF proper doesn't have any top tier schools but Chicago lacks in iconic structures that's indicative of Chicago. My point is every city besides New York is going to have some weakness when the discussion of world class eligibility is given.
You are talking about tourism. Tourism alone does not = world class. I mean cities like Las Vegas and Seattle have more iconic landmarks than Chicago are you going to tell me that they are more world class?

World class ecnompasses a lot. World class universities, international tourists, diverse residents, diverse economy and global economy, highly rated museums, influential architecture, strong public transportation, etc. I am sorry just because Chicago doesn't have famous tourist traps does not mean it's not world class.

Now if the question was, what cities in the U.S. have world class landmarks, then that's a different story.

 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:30 PM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC (in my mind)
7,943 posts, read 17,250,283 times
Reputation: 4686
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigLake View Post
The obvious world-class cities on your list are: NYC, Chicago and LA. The second-tier of "maybe" world class would be DC and San Francisco. Sorry but Boston is a rung down the ladder and probably not world class.
In terms of great American cultural centers, Boston is near the top of the list, but on a world stage not so much.
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:31 PM
 
2,421 posts, read 4,317,326 times
Reputation: 1479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastphilly View Post
The only area I see DC lacking is the food/dining scene. So yes it doesn't have the complete package. But neither does LA, SF or Chicago.
But LA, SF and Chicago are MUCH closer to having the full package than DC is. DC is more on the level of somewhere like Boston.
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:36 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
2,033 posts, read 1,983,459 times
Reputation: 1437
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigLake View Post
The obvious world-class cities on your list are: NYC, Chicago and LA. The second-tier of "maybe" world class would be DC and San Francisco. Sorry but Boston is a rung down the ladder and probably not world class.
What separates Chicago and LA from San Francisco as them being world class?
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:42 PM
 
2,421 posts, read 4,317,326 times
Reputation: 1479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastphilly View Post
What separates Chicago and LA from San Francisco as them being world class?
I think Chicago and LA, maybe because of their size, are just more impactful in a world view, but really not by very much, just a sliver.
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:42 PM
 
Location: Los Altos Hills, CA
36,655 posts, read 67,506,468 times
Reputation: 21239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastphilly View Post
What separates Chicago and LA from San Francisco as them being world class?
Nothing.

They are bigger than SF but as far as being worldly at very least all three are the same in caliber and amenities. That applies to NY too.
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:51 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
2,033 posts, read 1,983,459 times
Reputation: 1437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicagoist123 View Post
You are talking about tourism. Tourism alone does not = world class. I mean cities like Las Vegas and Seattle have more iconic landmarks than Chicago are you going to tell me that they are more world class?

World class ecnompasses a lot. World class universities, international tourists, diverse residents, diverse economy and global economy, highly rated museums, influential architecture, strong public transportation, etc. I am sorry just because Chicago doesn't have famous tourist traps does not mean it's not world class.

Now if the question was, what cities in the U.S. have world class landmarks, then that's a different story.
No I wasn't. I was talking about Iconic structures/landmarks.

The Eiffel Tower is not a Tourist trap, neither is the Statue of Liberty, neither is Big Ben, neither is Victoria Peak, neither is the Golden Gate Bridge, neither is the Hollywood sign, neither is the White House, neither is Mt. Fuji.

These iconic landmarks are known throughout the world and looking at a photo of these places identifies each city clearly. Chicago doesn't have anything that's "Chicago". Sorry this might offend you but this is every bit as important as whether some university is located inside the city proper.

Every world class city has their landmark that's exclusive to it's city and it's identity is undeniable.
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:51 PM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC (in my mind)
7,943 posts, read 17,250,283 times
Reputation: 4686
Instead of comparing Chicago to SF and LA, how about comparing it to London, Paris, Tokyo and Singapore? Can it compete with those cities?
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:53 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,078 posts, read 15,851,756 times
Reputation: 4049
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigLake View Post
The obvious world-class cities on your list are: NYC, Chicago and LA. The second-tier of "maybe" world class would be DC and San Francisco. Sorry but Boston is a rung down the ladder and probably not world class.
Boston is an incredible city and IMO one of the best in our country has to offer, but world-class it is not. The scope and level of the city is just too limited.
 
Old 07-17-2013, 01:56 PM
 
2,421 posts, read 4,317,326 times
Reputation: 1479
Quote:
Originally Posted by bchris02 View Post
Instead of comparing Chicago to SF and LA, how about comparing it to London, Paris, Tokyo and Singapore? Can it compete with those cities?
It can't but neither can LA or SF. Maybe with the exception of Singapore. Neither can other world class cities like Barcelona, Sydney, Toronto, Rio, Buenos Aires, Milan, etc. IMO there are tiers of world class cities. Cities like London, NYC, Tokyo and Paris make up the first group. The next group where would be cities like Chicago, Barcelona, Sydney, Milan, Toronto, etc.
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