Battle of "number two" US cities: LA, Chicago, SF, DC, Houston or Boston? (state, compared)
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.
The thing is, there aren't many people from Boston on this site. That's why I posted earlier that I was so surprised that Boston was getting so many votes. The only Boston people on this board I can think of are lrfox, mattcind, and myself...and I voted for DC! haha. So unless lrfox and mattcind are making up false names in order to boost Boston's stats--which I doubt, neither of them are trolls and I doubt either of them would argue Boston is the second most important city in the country (maybe second best city in the country, but that's a whole new thread )--I'm not sure what explanation there could be.
There's obviously a massive amount of Chicago people here, which explains their dominance in the poll...but there really aren't many Boston people. Honest!
Exactly, I think that it always has to be NYC first, with LA, DC and Chicago battling it out for 2nd. Then Boston slots in right behind that group. If you look back on the posts from the 3 Boston based members on this board as well I do not think any of us has said that it should be second, the only debate was between Boston and Houston.
America has 2 alpha cities- New York & Chicago. That's something you should be proud of.
The accurate statement would be that America has two cities considered by GAWC as alpha cities. GAWC point of view is one of many and changes from year to year. This years Chicago was ranked on the same level as Warsaw Poland but below Toronto.
Exactly, I think that it always has to be NYC first, with LA, DC and Chicago battling it out for 2nd. Then Boston slots in right behind that group. If you look back on the posts from the 3 Boston based members on this board as well I do not think any of us has said that it should be second, the only debate was between Boston and Houston.
^^ In response to the last few posts, how many people have actually spent time in Chicago? How many know about Chicago's history or past?
It doesn't get the media attention that a lot of other cities get. You could argue whether it deserves to be #2 or #3...but I don't think some of you have been to Chicago lately.
It does when something interesting hapopend in the city, vide Obama, Blagoyevich. It doesn't when there is nothing interesting to report on.
BTW, How is Chicago history even relevant to its standing?
LA is clearly number 2, it has the second largest population and the second largest GDP, no talk about history will change that.
If population & the size of GDP were really that important, LA would not be a beta city.
What is beta city? As far as I know it is only a concept that can be argued or disputed. On the other hand, population and GDP are hard data that convey city's size and economical impact.
The thing is, there aren't many people from Boston on this site. That's why I posted earlier that I was so surprised that Boston was getting so many votes. The only Boston people on this board I can think of are lrfox, mattcind, and myself...and I voted for DC! haha. So unless lrfox and mattcind are making up false names in order to boost Boston's stats--which I doubt, neither of them are trolls and I doubt either of them would argue Boston is the second most important city in the country (maybe second best city in the country, but that's a whole new thread )--I'm not sure what explanation there could be.
There's obviously a massive amount of Chicago people here, which explains their dominance in the poll...but there really aren't many Boston people. Honest!
...I live in Boston (Cambridge), and have since 1987, although I grew up in VT.
However, I would never vote for Boston as the #2 city in prominence/influence. I'm not a homer, and I wouldn't do it anyway, because it's just not true.Boston is a top 10 city, but certainly not #2.
Ha. Can you be more specific about the so-called "economical impact"? GaWC rankings might have overlooked that I guess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatusdiavoli
What is beta city? As far as I know it is only a concept that can be argued or disputed. On the other hand, population and GDP are hard data that convey city's size and economical impact.
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.
)--I'm not sure what explanation there could be.
By the way...
