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.
But when the one main quality people seem to mention is that it is close to other cities, then that says something about the city, don't you think?
Not at all. It’s simply called wanting to have options and or the ability to see, explore and do new things. There doesn’t have to be an inherent lacking in the “lesser” city for one to want to be in close proximity to other cities.
C-D isn’t real life. 99% of these cities residents don’t think this way...
Not sure really what you are getting at here. Chicago is just a beautiful city that is the capital of the six state Midwest region, home to many Fortune 500 companies, 2 of the top 10 universities in the country, a top 10 ranked world class city, and a city that rightly stands on its own without thought to either coast. I will take a page from you and post this video showing just what a gem the city is.
(video snipped)
Ahem.
The Midwest is split in two by the Mississippi River: five states to its east (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin), seven to its west (Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota*, Missouri, Nebraska, North and South Dakota).
Chicago is the undisputed top dog of the entire 12-state region, but the two halves of the Midwest have slightly different characters: east of the Mississippi, there's more industry, especially around the Great Lakes, while west of it, agriculture is emphasized more, though you will find industrial activity in all seven of those states.
*The Mississippi's headwaters lie entirely inside Minnesota and the river flows through the state (and the Twin Cities) before becoming the southernmost part of the Minnesota-Wisconsin border. But since the bulk of the state's land mass either lies west of it or isn't really affected by it, it counts as a west-of-the-Mississippi Midwestern state.
Philadelphia is being lessened. Proximity to other cities is hogwash and only applies to Philadelphia. I've yet to see on here or in real life anyone boost Chicago for being so close to Milwaukee and Indianapolis.
The argument I have seen often against Chicago is the opposite: its remoteness in relation to other cities.
So again, why isn't the same applied whenever mentioning NYC and DC's positive attributes?
If one were to compare living in D.C. to say a Midwestern city, I am sure it is something many would consider. My family and friends who live in D.C. love to make trips to Shenandoah, Philly, and NYC on the weekends. In regards to NYC, I mean I guess most people would consider it the "main" attraction of the East Coast (and the main attraction of the USA for that matter). But New Yorkers love to get out of dodge. The Catskills and ADK are filled with them on summer weekends, and I know of plenty of New Yorkers who travel to Boston, Philly, and D.C. as a getaway. No shade to the Midwest, but I am sure these New Yorkers would say they prefer its location over Chicago's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AshbyQuin
Philadelphia is being lessened. Proximity to other cities is hogwash and only applies to Philadelphia. I've yet to see on here or in real life anyone boost Chicago for being so close to Milwaukee and Indianapolis.
Well, no shade to those cities or the Midwest whatsoever, but your average person who enjoys a good day trip is more likely to prefer the proximity to other truly major cities, mountains, beaches, Amish Country, etc. over what Chicago has. And I am not saying Chicago doesn't have some nice accessible day/weekend trips, but we're in a different tier here in Philadelphia.
This ongoing "debate" on city-data is kind of odd to me. I really don't understand people's attachment to this made up rule that one can only consider literal city or metro limits. I think something people confuse is that although proximity to hiking, beaches, other cities, etc. is not a reflection of a city's quality in itself, it has a very real bearing on the quality of life for many (most? all?) of the city's residents. It is simply a matter of whether you want to compare cities on a literal city limit vs. city limit level (which, in my estimation is not an accurate reflection of lived experiences), or you want to consider the holistic lived experience of living in a particular city. I'd say the latter is a better reflection of reality.
Back when I was younger and settling on a city to grow my career, I was deciding between Chicago, Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh. Were I considering only city limits, I honestly would have chosen Chicago. Obviously, Chicago is the bigger city and more grandiose on many levels. But I knew that what a city had to offer me just within its limits would not be an accurate reflection of my lived experience. I chose Philadelphia because it offered most of what Chicago has to offer re: urbanity, transit infrastructure, institutions, "high culture," etc., albeit on a smaller scale. The smaller scale was worth it to me, because I am somebody who loves affordable and easily accessible day trips. As Duderino put it, the "synergy" of the East Coast is what really sealed the deal.
Last edited by Muinteoir; 04-28-2021 at 05:59 AM..
If one were to compare living in D.C. to say a Midwestern city, I am sure it is something many would consider. My family and friends who live in D.C. love to make trips to Shenandoah, Philly, and NYC on the weekends. In regards to NYC, I mean I guess most people would consider it the "main" attraction of the East Coast (and the main attraction of the USA for that matter). But New Yorkers love to get out of dodge. The Catskills and ADK are filled with them on summer weekends, and I know of plenty of New Yorkers who travel to Boston, Philly, and D.C. as a getaway. No shade to the Midwest, but I am sure these New Yorkers would say they prefer its location over Chicago's.
ADK? Do you mean "the Adirondacks" here?
Add to these the Pocono Mountains in northeastern Pennsylvania, which have become a popular vacation/second-home destination for both New Yorkers and Philadelphians because they're convenient to both cities (about 2 hours from Manhattan and 2.5 from Center City Philadelphia). And in the case of the New Yorkers, I think their housing dollar goes farther in the Poconos than it does in the Catskills to boot. Philadelphians definitely get a far greater bargain buying a vacation home in the Poconos than they do buying one at the Jersey Shore.
Keep an eye out for the June issue of PhillyMag, which will include a major feature on the Poconos. I got to spend a weekend at a fantastic B&B a few miles outside Honesdale as an assignment (best assignment I've ever gotten).
Quote:
Well, no shade to those cities or the Midwest whatsoever, but your average person who enjoys a good day trip is more likely to prefer the proximity to other truly major cities, mountains, beaches, Amish Country, etc. over what Chicago has. And I am not saying Chicago doesn't have some nice accessible day/weekend trips, but we're in a different tier here in Philadelphia.
Given that New York City is the statistical outlier among U.S. cities — not even #2 Los Angeles really comes close to it — I can understand why some Philadelphians regard people citing its closeness to other cities as a slight against the city, and certainly the responses some on this C-D forum have given suggesting that it does mean the city doesn't stand on its own don't assuage their worries.
But your point about nearby getaways is actually a very good one. There's a reason our local tourism-promotion agency, Visit Philadelphia, spends heavily on advertising in the New York market: New Yorkers make up the largest single bloc of visitors to Philadelphia precisely because it's close enough for a day or weekend trip. (And some of those visitors, I assure you, have in all likelihood become residents.)
Draw a circle representing a two-hour drive from any large Midwestern city and you will discover that no other large Midwestern city falls within it, save for the three large cities in Ohio (Cincinnati, Columbus, Cleveland). Indianapolis falls just outside the circles drawn from both Columbus and Chicago (the fourth of the "four Cs"), and all of the large Midwestern cities on the other side of the Mississippi are more than two hours away from any other large metro (these number three: St. Louis, Kansas City, Minneapolis/St. Paul).
When I was a kid, a "day trip" to a nearby large city meant getting up around 5:30 a.m, packing a meal, hitting I-70 around 6, stopping to eat the meal on the way to St. Louis, and arriving in St. Louis around 10 a.m. Then, except for the meal, repeat the sequence in reverse, starting around 6 p.m.
That's more of a chore, and it allows less time to see and do things, than a two-hour trip from Washington to Philadelphia or a 90-minute trip from Philadelphia to New York. Proximity to other large cities can indeed be an asset in itself and a reason to choose one city over another.
I note here that Boston becomes the Northeast Corridor outlier in this regard: it's four hours from there to the next nearest big city, New York. Day trips there mean trips to the smaller cities surrounding it (Springfield, Hartford, Providence, Portland, Manchester, Portsmouth) or the vacation destinations nearby, in particular Cape Cod.
When some say Oh Chicago lacks bigly outside the metro and why we did not choose it. I grin.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by AshbyQuin
Philadelphia is being lessened. Proximity to other cities is hogwash and only applies to Philadelphia. I've yet to see on here or in real life anyone boost Chicago for being so close to Milwaukee and Indianapolis.
You are HALF RIGHT or is it 1/3 right? They are not saying specifically currently. That Proximity to NYC is a superior trait. READ THE PHILLY FORUM over years....... They are saying the WHOLE REGION proximity to IS a boast-worthy trait. Another HUGGGE one is not specifically mentioned is hour to the Jersey Shore. Also the whole Philly still part of the club of East Coast Cities is understood as a Big positive.
- Chicago is 90 mile core to core to Milwaukee yet Chicago's stretch north has their suburbs come together.
- Chicago is 184 miles core to core to Indianapolis. Really, not where Chicagoan's go for a visit in choices.
- Philadelphia is 94 miles to NYC
- Philadelphia is 102 miles to Baltimore. Probably not big on the radar.
Milwaukee does get some luv from Chicagoan's who will take a trip. Just not tops in All of Wisconsin they choose. Most in Milwaukee and even Chicago WILL SEE or not Argue that Milwaukee is Chicago's mini-me a mini-Chicago is many ways.
Philadelphian's claim Amish Country to its west in southwestern PA. Small quaint cities to find eateries and antique stores to other shops for trips and pretty farming county and much is flat to rolling.
Philadelphian's can be in the Poconos region in 2 hrs or so.....
Lake Geneva resorts area is just over the IL WI Border thru to Madison WI which is in the 2 1/2 hour range and a quaint though fast growing college town. It thru the Wisconsin Dells/Lake Delton area is a playground of sorts, bills itself even today as the Waterpark indoor/outdoor Capital of the World and different older quaint small cities around it like Baraboo and others that all fill with IL tourist for a few days week and weekends . Having relatives in the area in the past... they look forward to fall when the visitors rush dies down to normal for them.
Chicago to the Wisconsin Dells Family playground and quaint towns around it to Chicago is a 2 3/4 hr drive.
Lancaster from Philadelphia and its region of small quaint towns and Amish country is a 1 1/2 drive.
To Hershey is another up to 1/2 hr.
That is just one example that still only giving regions both cities travelers may choose. These getaways still are shared with other cities in their regions..... Minneapolis and Milwaukee also with Chicago. Chicago's may be a bit farther.... and that is not to say too far and adding 1/2 hr to 1 hr average perhaps? But still had plenty trips utilized and HUGE for weekends.
There are plenty of farther points in the woods and more mountainous areas both cities have connections to. I can think of for Philadelphia and the rest of us like. The Poconos is even bigger for New Yorkers.
Potter County for PA thru Philadelphia is known for its camping/fishing/hunting much further northwest from Philly.
Door County for IL WI and Chicagoland is known for its camping/fishing/hunting much further north from Chicago.
For Chicagoland even just around the southern tip of Lake Michigan ... Michigan is full of quaint small cities. Into Central IL has some also they can choose.
In PA here we have the mountains that can be obstacles going East and West. I have no one interstate I can hop on to go directly to Philly. I can make my way to route 81 and head waaaay south to the turnpike of take smaller routes. It is more a hodge-podge choice that adds time or you use going though more small cities and up down round mountains.
Point is.... someone choosing Philly for what it has near it.... is not quite a Seattle or SF.... it is nice though. Chicagoland still has options some STEREOTYPE it as just total flat and Corn fields and it is not.
Not getting into the Beaches in Chicago vs hour to the Jersey shore that has been done soooo many times in this OLD Thread. BEST TO BOAST THE CITIES and METROS.....all the rest is just GOING OFF ON A TANGENT to keep on. IF OTHERS DO..... I might be baited too ....
Clearly as a city is chosen .... mostly for the city and jobs, region can play a role but not a city metro itself. Climate is big for some tipping the cards far more then the stereotype the Midwest has very little or far far less to get out of a city from. SOME MAY CHOOSE PHILLY AS A ALTERNATIVE TO NYC and close to get a fix as needed. Chicago has little luxury there. It IS THE City they may choose to go to get the Big city fix.
Proximity to other large cities can indeed be an asset in itself and a reason to choose one city over another.
Especially in the Northeast, where you can go from DC to Philly, Baltimore to NY, etc. on a train.
No worries about traffic, parking, weather, etc. And the service is frequent, unlike most of the rest of the country.
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.
When some say Oh Chicago lacks bigly outside the metro and why we did not choose it. I grin.....
