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 was over in the European Section of this Forum the other day and was Reading a engaging thread they had about That Big City in England, That Big City in France and That Big City in Italy that's all up in the History Books, and Notice America doesn't have such a Cultured Thread on it's own
So I think this is it, Not Comparing Euros Top Alpha Cities But America's (New York Los Angeles Chicago)
The Only Thing though is that in Europe the #1 Position is sorta debatable and makes for a good read
...In America not so much
The One that Comes in #2 Will be Tantalizing
Most Fascinating Not Necessarily The Best of America's Alpha World Cities
- Most Intriguing
-Best Looking ( city or metro)
-Most Fascinating
No, the US has 7 "Global Alpha Cities', not just 3.
New York
Chicago
Los Angeles
Miami
San Francisco
Washington DC
Houston
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....
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25
I would say the nation that likes to see itself as the A No. #1 King of the Hill, Top of the Heap (which is how its largest city sees itself, too) that is an incredible third in size for both population and area spread over 3000 miles with 330,000,000 folks, must be some kind of a backwater place with only one truly global city.
And maybe we are a backwater. My guess is that a lot of people in London, Tokyo, and Paris think so about a nation that clearly has lost its mind.
What a great country we are! New York is our only global city. LA, our second greatest, is 3000 miles away and only New York is in the same league as London, Tokyo, and Paris.
Yet Europe can put two global cities, London and Paris, a mere 280 miles apart. Where do you get with an approximate 280 miles ride outside of New York? Buffalo.
In a world where the power center has shifted from the North Atlantic to that enormous swath of land from Asia to Europe, the world's true core, we come across comically here in the US as we argue over which one of our cities is the biggest or the best or the most this or the most that. In case you don't recognize it, the rise of the United States and the rise of New York paralleled each other rather nicely. New York's rise to greatness followed the same path as America's. And both indeed truly come of age during the exact same time, the first half of the 20th century, a century whose 1950 midpoint saw the US way up on top of global nations and New York in the post-WWII era with the destruction in Europe and East Asia, way on top of global cities. The US is hardly ascending today. Or standing still. We're backsliding which can't be good for New York. It can't be good for New York to be in a nation where it is the only great city. It can't be great for New York to have to have the mantle of being on top of everything, the world's greatest, more of this and more of that. I would see London as New York's peer. But I don't think London's persona is at all tied into being "the greatest city in the world". For New York, it is part of its persona. For London, not so much.
And it can't be great for New York when it isn't great for cities across America. White collar New York may never have been so great as when blue collar Detroit thrived and pumped out endless automobiles. A diminished Detroit diminished New York.
The US and Europe are both about the same size (of course they beat us on population). According to SnobDudeThink, the US has one truly great global city.
Europe has London, Paris, Rome, Berlin, Amsterdam, Athens, Barcelona, Copenhagen, Moscow, among others.
As far as the three cities on the poll, I'd rate them:
New York: fascinating
Los Angeles: fascinating
Chicago: fascinating
You know, it is nice to be a Chicagoan. We are most secure on how great our city is. People from out-of-town tend to love the place, but, you know, what is more important to us is that Chicagoans love the place. So we can love NY and love LA with no sense of insecurity. Yes, we're loud and boisterous, and maybe a tad obnoxious and the "wait till the Chicago people pipe up" definitely has a ring of truth to it. We are homers. True homers. We are a global city, but luckily not enough of a global city that the place isn't our place anymore. Chicago is still ours in a way that New York isn't for New Yorkers or LA for Angelenos.
And Snobish, you sure gave your hometown the shaft. Los Angeles is an alpha global city by any measure. And as far as I am concerned, the Beast in the East and the Best in the West have a lot in common. LA is not in the shadow of NY.
Don’t get me wrong, I love my home city. But honestly, at the present moment, I don’t think LA is close to the level of NYC. With that said, I do believe LA has way more room to grow than NYC and the gap between LA and NYC will get smaller and smaller in the next 20-30 years. But will LA overtake NYC? No.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,560,868 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
New York is Jordan. L.A. is Lebron. Chicago is Kobe.
Jordan and Lebron have different enough games where fans might prefer one over the other. Do you value scoring or passing? In the NYC (Jordan) vs LA (Lebron) matchup, it's more about whether you prefer a modern marvel of civil engineering to the contrast of a gritty, urban behemoth situated in paradise. There are good arguments on both sides though more favor NYC, just as more favor Jordan in basketball.
Chicago is like Kobe in that it is about an 80-85% facsimile of what NYC (Jordan) is. They do pretty much the same things, only NYC (Jordan) does them all better. Who in their right mind takes Kobe over Jordan?
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,560,868 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpomp
From a global standpoint, many US cities have those characteristics including Boston, Philadelphia, Seattle, etc. BUT from a sheer influence standpoint, I would add Miami and San Fran to the main group due.
Washington DC is the nations capital, and is very important, however, I don't see it in the top group (yet), I know many will disagree with me, but you aren't changing my mind.
Alpha thing is a load of b.s.! When they put San Jose, Costa Rica the same league as Montreal, Canada, credit goes out the window. Guess they go by number of international flights cities have and connections to international countries.
I still don't understand the concept that having a large foreign born population makes a city global? That's really just an American major city characteristic. My visit to Beijing and Jakarta did not reflect diversity at all? Yes, you go to NYC and see a ton of different races and nationalities. But, you also see a ton of races and nationalities in Minneapolis/St. Paul.
Yeah. Cus a city that's 1/3 mexican and 1/3 african american is all Iowans and Wisconsinites
Well if you look at census flows Illinois got more people on a state by state basis from NY/NJ, California, Texas, Florida, etc than it got from Iowa. It got a decent amount from Wisconsin, but still nowhere near as many as from California, around the same amount it got from Texas or Florida.
On a metro basis, the biggest contributors to Chicago were:
1) Asia
2) Europe
3) NYC
4) Central America
5) Africa
6) Champaign (returning metro college kids)
7) Los Angeles
8) St Louis
9) Atlanta
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,560,868 times
Reputation: 5785
A different global list, see NYC's score on the right and the difference in rating:
2014 Globally Integrated Cities Index
North American cities on the list :
1) New York City (61.7)
6) Los Angeles (38)
7) Chicago (36.8)
10) Washington DC (33.4)
13) Toronto (32.4)
21) Boston (28.6)
22) San Francisco (27.2)
29) Miami (25.5)
36) Atlanta (22.7)
38) Houston (22.3)
48) Vancouver (17.5)
50) Dallas (17.4)
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.
