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.
I really don't think Philly lives in the shadow of Boston - they are pretty far away and with NYC in between, there really is not much connection. and Philly is larger than Boston. Somewhat the shadow of DC is more likely.
Yeah. With all due respect to Boston, which is my current area (I'm a Philly-area native), Philadelphians tend to look to Boston as an aspirational peer (at least, in the economic sense; Philly holds its own fantastically in the culture and urban amenities department), as opposed to a place that "overshadows" their city.
But New York and DC share a similar supersized overpowering dynamic in the Northeast that even affects Boston to some extent. That's another thread, however.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieOlSkool
Lol
Ps I am from Chicago but I would pick Philly over my hometown. But most Americans and others probably would pick Chicago over Philly (cope if you need to by telling yourself they wouldn't but they really would)
I think that's fair. Chicago longer ago earned a great reputation for having a safe, clean and prosperous urban core (although like Philly, its crime reputation needs work). Conversely, the news about Philly's urban core prosperity is still not entirely in the American/global consciousness.
But the way I look at it is that Philly has really only relatively recently started its renaissance (revitalization really started gaining traction in the early 2000s). By comparison, it declined for nearly half a century. For being in recovery mode for, at most, 15 years, it's made fantastic strides. Time is on its side.
Put Philly in the Midwest and it still has to compete with Chicago and it would lose
I disagree, because Chicago and Philly are so different. If anything, Chicago and Philly would be like NYC and Boston are in the East, which are the two cities that Philly usually get skipped over in favor of. Now, I DO think that if Chicago and Philly were in the Midwest and became the NYC and Boston of the Midwest, then Minneapolis would automatically become to Chicago and Philly what Philly is to NYC and Boston.
I disagree, because Chicago and Philly are so different. If anything, Chicago and Philly would be like NYC and Boston are in the East, which are the two cities that Philly usually get skipped over in favor of. Now, I DO think that if Chicago and Philly were in the Midwest and became the NYC and Boston of the Midwest, then Minneapolis would automatically become to Chicago and Philly what Philly is to NYC and Boston.
All I know is that town was too gangsta for young Will Smith, he was sent cross country to live at uncle Phil's.
Philadelphia, like any other big city, has its pockets of urban blight, gangs, and crime. However, you can not characterize the entire city, nor metro area from that. Either Will Smith's Mom was too scared, or he was that thing that Trump said he could grab.
I disagree, because Chicago and Philly are so different. If anything, Chicago and Philly would be like NYC and Boston are in the East, which are the two cities that Philly usually get skipped over in favor of. Now, I DO think that if Chicago and Philly were in the Midwest and became the NYC and Boston of the Midwest, then Minneapolis would automatically become to Chicago and Philly what Philly is to NYC and Boston.
Yea, "so different" is a stretch. Dallas and Philadelphia? Now that relationship would qualify as so different.
There are some similarities hidden in their neighborhoods. I.e. Wicker Park/Bucktown could very easily be compared to a Northern Liberties or East Passyunk.
But, they are different to be certain. Downtown Chicago proper feels significantly newer and more built up, in part due to it's successes and building boom dating back to the 1960s. Downtown Chicago, between Division and Madison, is much more a Manhattan in feel. Center City has some of that same feel, but on a more limited basis.
I disagree, because Chicago and Philly are so different. If anything, Chicago and Philly would be like NYC and Boston are in the East, which are the two cities that Philly usually get skipped over in favor of. Now, I DO think that if Chicago and Philly were in the Midwest and became the NYC and Boston of the Midwest, then Minneapolis would automatically become to Chicago and Philly what Philly is to NYC and Boston.
It would depend on how close Philly would be to Chicago in that scenario. Put Philly where Milwaukee is and it would definitely be overshadowed. Put it where St. Louis or Minneapolis is and not so much.
For having the worst temper tantrum when things don't go their way during sporting events (Flyers, Eagles, and Phillies) I would say yes. I would say Philly had a reputation in the 70's and 80's that was much worse than today. Overall things have improved slightly.
Philadelphia, like any other big city, has its pockets of urban blight, gangs, and crime. However, you can not characterize the entire city, nor metro area from that. Either Will Smith's Mom was too scared, or he was that thing that Trump said he could grab.
Did you seriously not get the joke, or am I missing the sarcasm?
Philly in the shadow of Boston? (Light chuckle), add that to bizarre things only ever said on city data lol. DC is also a stretch. The only city that arguably suppresses some thunder from Philly is maybe NYC, which is only 45 miles away as the crow flies. With that said, I say that Philly still does keep an increasingly robust mindshare/influence/status/unique identity even with the nation's largest city being an hour and a half away.
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.