NYC vs Chicago - best city? (ranking, statistics, economy, states)

[qworldorder]

Originally Posted by Kobe25

Yes Nyc has Chicago beat in the end but will have trouble against other world cities .

NYC is widely considered the number one city in the world. The only cities that give it serious competition are London, Tokyo and Paris, in that order. Your trolling is reaching epic proportions.

Originally Posted by Kobe25

Nyc metro includes other states Qworld lol

L.A metro doesn't include other states so once again you can't compare different systems on different coasts .Who's going voltron lol,Manhattan went voltron when adding other counties to make it a bigger city,Does size mean better ? no but it does give an advantage in some cases .

Texas is way bigger than California but way less populated so you see my point smart guy.Or should i show you how Manhattan alone stacks up vs other World cities lol

Size & population is very important in being a global city & to be on London's level it annexed for that reason alone.

You're literally trying to compare different systems on different coasts. Literally. You're just mad that people are seeing through your juvenile and nonsensical attempts to increase LAs stature compared to NYC through semantics. So we can only use LAs metro now because it's all in one state? Your arguments just keep getting dumber and dumber.

Originally Posted by Kobe25

News Flash: L.A. Is Actually Bigger Than New York | L.A. Weekly

I can post actual facts to back myself sir,Now read it & weap or accept the truth .

Right, actual "facts" from a third tier L.A. opinion rag. I actually read that article. There's so many caveats and contradictions in it that its ridiculous and renders the whole "argument" moot. I especially loved this contradicting bit:

"Now, you're saying, this is ridiculous: San Diego is no more a part of L.A. than Philadelphia is a part of New York. True. But we're trying to match the breadth given to New York's metropolitan statistical area here. If greater New York stretches into Pennsylvania and White Plains for purposes of counting population, then L.A. can surely reach to San Diego."

If you can't see the blatant problems with this argument here, then I don't know what to tell ya. An article clearly touting LAs physical size in one paragraph still needs to keep adding areas that don't even belong in another? Lol.

[FAReastcoast]

Originally Posted by Kobe25

Qworld, all 5 put together are smaller than L.A city but L.A city proper doesn't include main cities like Beverly Hills, Santa monica, Parts of Hollywood. So we can't go off land size if the land size doesn't include key cities in Los Angeles County, Water & Mountains are included in the L.A area Sq mileage also ,But in reality Los Angeles at it's core is L.A county & La county is ahead of N.y 5 boroughs clearly.

Now far Nyc goes,100 years ago Manhattan was Nyc but it couldn't compete with the giant that's called London so annexation began thus why Nyc is so much bigger than Chicago & now has a similar population to London

You are a very confused individual.

[FAReastcoast]

My brain cannot handle Steeps and Kobe25 posting on the same page

[srsmn]

Originally Posted by qworldorder

NYC is widely considered the number one city in the world. The only cities that give it serious competition are London, Tokyo and Paris, in that order. Your trolling is reaching epic proportions.

I don't think it is "widely considered" to be the best city in the world, actually. I think it is thought of widely as being right on par with London, Tokyo, and Paris.

[KaneKane]

Originally Posted by FAReastcoast

My brain cannot handle Steeps and Kobe25 posting on the same page

Yeah, hard to believe they can just go on and on without any action whatsoever from mods. Especially the latter.

I mean how is that not outright trolling and baiting just to get people all worked up?

[srsmn]

Originally Posted by KaneKane

It certainly says that more people think food in New York is better though. In fact if you took out native and regional populations, I'd bet NYC would have an even have larger lead.

Anyways, so many idiotic trolls in the forum these days. This forum's mod policies have become such a joke. Even reporting them doesn't seem to get you anywhere.

Does it?

It says that the people that award Michelin stars think that that food is better, sure. But that is a small, pretty privileged group, so their standards automatically reflect those privileges, and probably become highly socialized and racialized, as well.

Personally, I do think NYC has better food, so you are preaching to the choir. Suffice it to say, that if one wanted to make an argument that Chicago's food is better, I think they could reasonably do so.

I don't know what you mean by native and regional populations, so I'm not going to address it.

Also, are you saying that I am a troll?

[KaneKane]

Originally Posted by srsmn

Does it?

It says that the people that award Michelin stars think that that food is better, sure. But that is a small, pretty privileged group, so their standards automatically reflect those privileges, and probably become highly socialized and racialized, as well.

Personally, I do think NYC has better food, so you are preaching to the choir. Suffice it to say, that if one wanted to make an argument that Chicago's food is better, I think they could reasonably do so.

I don't know what you mean by native and regional populations, so I'm not going to address it.

Also, are you saying that I am a troll?

Racialized? Lol what the hell...Anyways, forget Michelin stars, I'm pretty sure any respectable place with a rating system for this kind of thing usually has more people claiming NYC is superior. Yeah it doesn't make it a fact, but it's a higher quantity that think this for sure.

I'll leave it up to your own intelligence figure out the other two parts of your post.

[qworldorder]

Originally Posted by srsmn

Food is totally subjective. New York certainly has more restaurants, and certainly has more Michelin 5-Star restaurants, but that does not necessarily mean that New York's food is de facto better than Chicago's.

Education, you are comparing NYU and Columbia and a number of others with Northwestern, DePaul, U Chicago, UI-Chicago and a number of others. Some of those universities outrank others in certain programs, some outrank others in other programs. It's mostly a crap-shoot.

In terms of diversity (which I am assuming to mean racial and ethnic diversity), Chicago is a higher percentage African-American and a higher percentage Hispanic/Latino than NYC, although less Asian-American. New York City is around 36% foreign-born, Chicago is only about 22%. If you are talking about "white ethnics," the groups are mostly different, but neither is necessarily better or worse (Chicago has a higher percentage of Germans and Poles; New York has more Italians, Eastern-Europeans, and Jews. Both are demonstrably Irish-American cities).

Shopping I am not going to argue, although I think that could be termed subjective, as well.

Then there are factors that weren't even mentioned....Fine Arts, Architecture, nightlife, weather, location, COL, public transit...not saying that all of these or necessarily any of them would go to Chicago, but it would be worth a debate.

I don't have a dog in this fight, and if you put a gun to my head and ask me which city is better overall, I would probably say New York.

But to act like New York categorically beats Chicago in everything, and what's more, that it doesn't even warrant a debate, well.....that's just silly...

Food is subjective to a degree, but not completely. If it was, you wouldn't have mentioned Michelin restaurants to begin with. More importantly, NYC simply has more options than Chicago when it comes to food. If I want authentic Moroccan, I'm not limited to just two restaurants. There's probably ethnic restaurants that only exist in NYC in this country and nowhere else, if we're being honest.

Education isn't some crapshoot like you claim. On the whole, NYC area schools rank better than Chicago area schools. Not up for debate.

Diversity wise, Chicago isn't seeing NYC. How is Chicago more diverse when it's slightly higher percentage wise Latino population is nearly all Mexican? Where's the Dominicans and Colombians? I could do this with every Census category. NYC has pretty much everyone Chicago has; the reverse isn't true. Queens alone is probably more diverse than Chicago. There's no argument here.

Shopping has already been proven, so need to retread here.

Outside of COL, manageability, and MAYBE architecture, there's really nothing objectively I would put Chicago over NYC. Subjectively, it's all preference, sure, but that's not what most of these threads are about. Otherwise, Smyrna, Delaware is the greatest city in this country. Because I said so

[Fitzrovian]

Originally Posted by srsmn

I don't think it is "widely considered" to be the best city in the world, actually. I think it is thought of widely as being right on par with London, Tokyo, and Paris.

This is probably not true. Ask 100 random people around the world which is the greatest city in the world, a city that is the benchmark for a great global metropolis, and a plurality would likely name NYC (if not the majority). In many corners of the world NYC is still seen as the unofficial "world's capital". Whether it's deserved or not is of course open to debate.

[Fitzrovian]

Delete. Double post.