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.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,558,075 times
Reputation: 5785
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock
I can't stop laughing my ass off at the assertion that Los Angeles isn't close to NY's level, while in the same response documenting that many American cities havent yet peaked. The hilarity...
LA for sure hasn't yet peaked and has gained ground as a global power in a way few cities here have ever done in such a short period. I don't think anybody will argue that Los Angeles is still behind New York, but the gap is without a doubt smaller in reality than CD Land would have one believe...
CD never fails to show its city inferiority complex, no more than when guys disparage LA. It's the #2 city here by a virtual consensus and people really don't like that LA has hopscotched all of the older and earlier developed cities in the nation to get there, some of which arguably have peaked....
Your back! Knew you would come running on this one.
Last thread this was discussed, I provided specifics and metrics to display the difference in what "level" NYC and LA are on, even TODAY in 2019. You provided subjective opinionated response about, how things feel to you on the ground level, yet not supporting this with any data.
Do you have any data today to further, confirm how "hilarious" it is to insinuate that NYC is not at least a level above LA on paper? This is "City-data.com" you know.
The one thing you are right about is that LA hasn't hit it's peak yet.
I'm ready for the Chicago homers here to unleash the kraken on me. But I don't care. I'll say it anyway. I don't think Chicago belongs on a list of "global cities" with New York and Los Angeles. Miami, San Francisco, Houston, and Washington are all economically and demographically more global than Chicago. Don't confuse population size with global significance. A megalopolis full of Iowans and Wisconsinites is not a global city. It's just a really big city full of Iowans and Wisconsinites.
In any case, I answered New York because it is, after all, New York, and even though Manhattan has been turned into a kind of Disneyfied yuppieland where rich white people live in high rises and unmarried 40 year old bankers live with roommates New York is still New York, and the diversity and urban culture is unparalleled in the US and maybe anywhere.
Ugh yeah.. Chicago controls the global CBOT, CME & CCX raw materials stock exchange. You don't even have to be from the city to understand the significance of that
GaWC
NYC is listed as Alpha ++ (something only shared with London)
Chicago, Miami & LA are listed as Alpha
DC, SF & Houston are listed Alpha -
In regards to the original OP question. I'm not taking anything to LA or Chicago as both incredible cities in their own rights but NYC takes the gold simply because it's truly the demographic melting pot like no other city and the sheer economic weigh it holds in from a global perspective
Your back! Knew you would come running on this one.
Last thread this was discussed, I provided specifics and metrics to display the difference in what "level" NYC and LA are on, even TODAY in 2019. You provided subjective opinionated response about, how things feel to you on the ground level, yet not supporting this with any data.
Do you have any data today to further, confirm how "hilarious" it is to insinuate that NYC is not at least a level above LA on paper? This is "City-data.com" you know.
The one thing you are right about is that LA hasn't hit it's peak yet.
To be very clear, I've always said that I think LA is still behind NY. I just don't find the gap to be as substantial as people on here believe; my side of this debate is hardly a hot take and there are plenty of people on both sides of this...
The last time we had this conversation I thought I made it clear that I disagree that a data-driven response paints a complete picture. You're entitled to how you want to view these things, I'm entitled to mine...
I say we just let the two OCEAN coastal cities fight for most stardom. Better they hype each other, then Chicago lessening that the usual posters that usually do. Jump on it here. No use giving them something to dance with to do more of it.
So LA and NYC...... Go at it. Put each other in their place.
To be very clear, I've always said that I think LA is still behind NY. I just don't find the gap to be as substantial as people on here believe; my side of this debate is hardly a hot take and there are plenty of people on both sides of this...
The last time we had this conversation I thought I made it clear that I disagree that a data-driven response paints a complete picture. You're entitled to how you want to view these things, I'm entitled to mine...
It’s hard to gauge how large of a gap people believe there is since the size / magnitude of what “large” means changes from person to person. A data driven response helps supplement the rationale for an argument though. I’m of the opinion that it’s accurate to say that the difference in global clout between the two is very substantial especially when it comes to political and economic clout. NYC is essentially the UN’s home base and as such there are many other international NGOs and other organizations based there. Economically, it’s the more consequential node in the global economy due to its stock exchanges and a very large concentration of international corporate headquarters which is an area where LA is especially lacking relative to its size for a US city.
Now, I do believe NYC has continuously lost a substantial amount of ground as far more regional centers with global influence in the US have popped up (and obviously the proportion of people living outside of the NYC metropolitan area in the US has substantially and continuously increased) while the world as a whole has outpaced the US in economic and population growth.
I'm ready for the Chicago homers here to unleash the kraken on me. But I don't care. I'll say it anyway. I don't think Chicago belongs on a list of "global cities" with New York and Los Angeles. Miami, San Francisco, Houston, and Washington are all economically and demographically more global than Chicago. Don't confuse population size with global significance. A megalopolis full of Iowans and Wisconsinites is not a global city. It's just a really big city full of Iowans and Wisconsinites.
In any case, I answered New York because it is, after all, New York, and even though Manhattan has been turned into a kind of Disneyfied yuppieland where rich white people live in high rises and unmarried 40 year old bankers live with roommates New York is still New York, and the diversity and urban culture is unparalleled in the US and maybe anywhere.
I agree that the Bay Area and DC aren’t too far behind Chicago in many respects, but the idea that it’s particularly far from LA right now is interesting as LA isn’t that far above Chicago, DC, and the Bay Area overall and arguably at around the same tier in influence and clout. I also think you’re greatly exaggerating the preponderance of Iowans and Wisconsites and downplaying its much larger native born population, substantial foreign-born population, and large number of domestic transplants from outside those two states. Chicago has a lot of economic might at the top with its bevy of headquarters of companies that operate internationally.
I'm ready for the Chicago homers here to unleash the kraken on me. But I don't care. I'll say it anyway. I don't think Chicago belongs on a list of "global cities" with New York and Los Angeles. Miami, San Francisco, Houston, and Washington are all economically and demographically more global than Chicago. Don't confuse population size with global significance. A megalopolis full of Iowans and Wisconsinites is not a global city. It's just a really big city full of Iowans and Wisconsinites.
In any case, I answered New York because it is, after all, New York, and even though Manhattan has been turned into a kind of Disneyfied yuppieland where rich white people live in high rises and unmarried 40 year old bankers live with roommates New York is still New York, and the diversity and urban culture is unparalleled in the US and maybe anywhere.
Yeah. Cus a city that's 1/3 mexican and 1/3 african american is all Iowans and Wisconsinites
I'm ready for the Chicago homers here to unleash the kraken on me. But I don't care. I'll say it anyway. I don't think Chicago belongs on a list of "global cities" with New York and Los Angeles. Miami, San Francisco, Houston, and Washington are all economically and demographically more global than Chicago. Don't confuse population size with global significance. A megalopolis full of Iowans and Wisconsinites is not a global city. It's just a really big city full of Iowans and Wisconsinites.
In any case, I answered New York because it is, after all, New York, and even though Manhattan has been turned into a kind of Disneyfied yuppieland where rich white people live in high rises and unmarried 40 year old bankers live with roommates New York is still New York, and the diversity and urban culture is unparalleled in the US and maybe anywhere.
I'm abstaining from voting. An argument -- long and detailed -- could be made for any of these three cities on the criterion listed. I have my own feelings about each city. While I generally do not like Los Angeles much, I certainly respect that is holds a very unique position among American -- and global cities. Meanwhile, NY is a beast which dwarfs both LA and Chicago. It's a massive, global city with all the accutrements (sp.). Chicago meanwhile, is an incredibly livable (COL, Midwest) global city with an extremely high ratio -- in my opinion -- of culture, recreation, good living versus to bullsh*t.
Also, sorry LA, you are not close to New York. LA is *much* closer to Chicago in nearly all aspects, than NY. Also, anyone saying that Chicago is not a global city and in the top three in the U.S. (I respect arguments for San Francisco region though, and to a lesser extent, DC region) needs to hand in their City-Data password and relegate themselves to post on the "I need to learn more about Urbanism" message board.
In that order always and forever (or at least in our lifetimes). I don't see anyone interchanging that 3rd spot either. Maybe statistically, but many people on C-D underestimate 'legacy' strength and it's overall influence on general perception.
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.
