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 am from Chicago.
First of all, I actually agree with you that Chicago offers more, i.e. arts and culture-wise.
Philly is OK for the arts, and in my opinion it benefits from proximity to NYC (it's literally 70 minutes by train), but I STILL agree with you there.
However.
There are giant swaths of Chicago I wouldn't want to be in. A lot of the entire south and southwest side are dangerous.
In Philly, there are some ****ty sections of North Philly and West Philly, but the amount of area these neighborhoods cover is smaller than the bad parts of Chicago. The amount of city you have to avoid in Chicago is more significant compared with the amount of city you have to avoid in Philly. Similarly, there aren't more run-down areas in Philly than there are in Chicago.
Neither city is particularly a place I'd want to be to feel safe. Philly and Chicago both have good parts and dangerous parts. I don't think it's fair to say one is strikingly more filled with dangerous, dilapidated areas than the other.
Overall, I think you're probably right Chicago is better objectively
Preferring philly is just a subjective preference.
You cannot possibly be from Chicago and post this. Kenwood, Hyde Park, Bronzeville, Beverly,Bridgeport, Pilsen, Mount Greenwood, Ashburn, the Southeast side, Archer Heights, Ford City are all parts of the South Side and Southwest Side that are nice, in many cases beautiful. Your ignorance of this fact show that 1) you are not from here, or 2) you don't know the city, or both. The bad parts of Chicago do not look as run down as the bad parts of Philly.
No comparison for me, although Philly's historic areas are interesting. Chicago is much cleaner, has much more affluent areas in the city, and just feels more kept up.
You cannot possibly be from Chicago and post this. Kenwood, Hyde Park, Bronzeville, Beverly,Bridgeport, Pilsen, Mount Greenwood, Ashburn, the Southeast side, Archer Heights, Ford City are all parts of the South Side and Southwest Side that are nice, in many cases beautiful. Your ignorance of this fact show that 1) you are not from here, or 2) you don't know the city, or both. The bad parts of Chicago do not look as run down as the bad parts of Philly.
No comparison for me, although Philly's historic areas are interesting. Chicago is much cleaner, has much more affluent areas in the city, and just feels more kept up.
We are really splitting hairs with arguments like this, I don't even think its a point worth debating since both cities have some pretty horrible area. Both cities also have a lot of very nice areas, but the built environments are different. For example, Philadelphia doesn't really have a neighborhood comparable to Lincoln Park, whereas Chicago doesn't really have a neighborhood comparable to Society Hill.
We are really splitting hairs with arguments like this, I don't even think its a point worth debating since both cities have some pretty horrible area. Both cities also have a lot of very nice areas, but the built environments are different. For example, Philadelphia doesn't really have a neighborhood comparable to Lincoln Park, whereas Chicago doesn't really have a neighborhood comparable to Society Hill.
Honestly I think Philly ad a whole is slightly more eglitarian. They don’t have as much swanky areas nor the Uber-rich near north side areas but also doesn’t have the same amount of very very poor, very very rundown neighborhoods.
Lots more slightly upscale and slightly rundown places though.
You cannot possibly be from Chicago and post this. Kenwood, Hyde Park, Bronzeville, Beverly,Bridgeport, Pilsen, Mount Greenwood, Ashburn, the Southeast side, Archer Heights, Ford City are all parts of the South Side and Southwest Side that are nice, in many cases beautiful. Your ignorance of this fact show that 1) you are not from here, or 2) you don't know the city, or both. The bad parts of Chicago do not look as run down as the bad parts of Philly.
No comparison for me, although Philly's historic areas are interesting. Chicago is much cleaner, has much more affluent areas in the city, and just feels more kept up.
I wouldn't be so critical and accuse him from not being from Chicago. Unfortunately, if you sampled many (if not the vast majority) of people from Chicago, they would probably assume the same, that much of the South Side is dangerous. It is ignorance and it is evidence of Chicago's segregation.
I would say that it is a little bit of #2. If you ask many people who live in the downtown core neighborhoods or in the North Side or the surrounding Chicagoland suburbs, they would probably make the same generalizations. It doesn't make it right, but unfortunately, again it points to the segregated structure of the city. I am guilty of it as well. Outside of Hyde Park, I have not really been to the South Side in all of my years in Chicago.
I have definitely been to Pilsen (which I believe is actually Near West Side). Many people throughout the city know and enjoy Pilsen, as being one of the epicenters of Latino Culture in Chicago, and the authentic food, arts, culture, and the fact that it is an up-and-coming trendy neighborhood.
But when it comes to the South Side, it is a big mystery to many. Many only know the negative stereotypes they here about it, which is unfortunate. Again, many people from (or at least who are currently living in) Chicago hold the same views of it. I'm sure there are a lot of nice places in the South Side.
Honestly I think Philly ad a whole is slightly more eglitarian. They don’t have as much swanky areas nor the Uber-rich near north side areas but also doesn’t have the same amount of very very poor, very very rundown neighborhoods.
Lots more slightly upscale and slightly rundown places though.
Also, A majority or the uber wealth in Philadelphia is centered in the suburbs.
The city has wealthy areas, but Philadelphia is still different than other major cities because its suburbs have a very high share of the wealth and corporate power. The trend has shifted a little bit as Center City/downtown Philadelphia improves though.
You cannot possibly be from Chicago and post this. Kenwood, Hyde Park, Bronzeville, Beverly,Bridgeport, Pilsen, Mount Greenwood, Ashburn, the Southeast side, Archer Heights, Ford City are all parts of the South Side and Southwest Side that are nice, in many cases beautiful. Your ignorance of this fact show that 1) you are not from here, or 2) you don't know the city, or both. The bad parts of Chicago do not look as run down as the bad parts of Philly.
No comparison for me, although Philly's historic areas are interesting. Chicago is much cleaner, has much more affluent areas in the city, and just feels more kept up.
Stop it. Literally stop it.
I am from chicago and I'm well-aware of there being nice neighborhoods on the south and southwest sides.
There are, quite frankly, more south and southwest side neighborhoods where you wouldn't want to be than the opposite. Period.
The bad parts of Chicago look like absolute trash and so do the worst parts of Philly.
Please don't accuse me of not being from Chicago or knowing it. Thanks
We are really splitting hairs with arguments like this, I don't even think its a point worth debating since both cities have some pretty horrible area. Both cities also have a lot of very nice areas, but the built environments are different. For example, Philadelphia doesn't really have a neighborhood comparable to Lincoln Park, whereas Chicago doesn't really have a neighborhood comparable to Society Hill.
I voted for Philly but he does have a point. Philly bad parts are largely unrivaled outside of the Norrtheast.
Thats not splitting hairs.Chicago and Philly have nicer areas and they look different only in the architectural styles and layout.You can still clearly see they are places of affluence where as Phillys bad side in the North is like a bomb went off. When one says Detroit,they have a picture of what total destitution looks like. Thats North Philly.
Chicago high crime areas are similar to those in the South where they look nicer than they are.
Stop it. Literally stop it.
I am from chicago and I'm well-aware of there being nice neighborhoods on the south and southwest sides.
There are, quite frankly, more south and southwest side neighborhoods where you wouldn't want to be than the opposite. Period.
The bad parts of Chicago look like absolute trash and so do the worst parts of Philly.
Please don't accuse me of not being from Chicago or knowing it. Thanks
You have to understand that when you label the area as you did even knowing that there are good areas you are only perpetrating the myth or notion that anyone who lives are from the SOuthside is of a lower class or background.
It helps keep even those good areas from staying good or improving in value.
I spent my summers with my aunts in uncles in Chicago and Philly so I feel a connection to both cities.I picked Philly because of the cold and I felt Chicago less of what I like about Philly
I voted for Philly but he does have a point. Philly bad parts are largely unrivaled outside of the Norrtheast.
Thats not splitting hairs.Chicago and Philly have nicer areas and they look different only in the architectural styles and layout.You can still clearly see they are places of affluence where as Phillys bad side in the North is like a bomb went off. When one says Detroit,they have a picture of what total destitution looks like. Thats North Philly.
Chicago high crime areas are similar to those in the South where they look nicer than they are.
Have to agree--Philly's bad areas are among the worst in America. They are truly wretched-looking places, and that's from an aesthetic point of view, never mind bringing up any socioeconomic issues..
I voted for Philly but he does have a point. Philly bad parts are largely unrivaled outside of the Norrtheast.
Thats not splitting hairs.Chicago and Philly have nicer areas and they look different only in the architectural styles and layout.You can still clearly see they are places of affluence where as Phillys bad side in the North is like a bomb went off. When one says Detroit,they have a picture of what total destitution looks like. Thats North Philly.
Chicago high crime areas are similar to those in the South where they look nicer than they are.
South side Chicago's worst areas can resemble deserted urban prairies and resemble Detroit. North Philly's worst areas are very bad and have less greenery but at least they're more dense and have more signs of urban life (more corner stores, more people visible thanks to having a more walkable urban environment and having stoop/step culture thanks to a superior built to the curb urban environment) than South side Chicago's slums. Chicago worst slums often look like Detroit due to the obvious mutual midwestern attributes, and Philly's does not and you're delusional if you believe otherwise.
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.
