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 vote Chicago. Philly is a great city too, just not on Chicago's level.
That being said, I would rather live in Philly over Chicago if I had to pick between the two, due to location (aka close to NYC and ocean beaches) and my hate for cold windy weather.
Chicago is "the second city" for a reason. Because we are second to NYC. Philly isn't even the second best city on the east coast. A lot of people leave out jobs too. Chicago hands down has better jobs with all the huge corporations, financial, and consulting jobs. Living in Chicago I met so many successful people with high paying careers, while in Phillly people seemed less concerned with their careers and there were just less people with awesome jobs. The buildings are also nicer and newer in Chicago. Philly is close to the ocean. SO what. Chicago has the lakefront and lake michigan which is nicer and closer. Chicago doesn't even think about Philly. We are in a different league.
All philly has better is that it is on the east coast and close to other great cities and things, but if you plopped Chicago where Philly is then Chicago would be even greater. I also liked how Philly has its neighborhoods closer to downtown and it is a little more dense in the residential neighborhoods like Center City.
Chicago is "the second city" for a reason. Because we are second to NYC. Philly isn't even the second best city on the east coast. A lot of people leave out jobs too. Chicago hands down has better jobs with all the huge corporations, financial, and consulting jobs. Living in Chicago I met so many successful people with high paying careers, while in Phillly people seemed less concerned with their careers and there were just less people with awesome jobs. The buildings are also nicer and newer in Chicago. Philly is close to the ocean. SO what. Chicago has the lakefront and lake michigan which is nicer and closer. Chicago doesn't even think about Philly. We are in a different league.
All philly has better is that it is on the east coast and close to other great cities and things, but if you plopped Chicago where Philly is then Chicago would be even greater. I also liked how Philly has its neighborhoods closer to downtown and it is a little more dense in the residential neighborhoods like Center City.
Highly subjective. IMO Philly is easily the 2nd best city on the East Coast (although personally it is my favorite). I'd also take proximity to the ocean and shoretowns in NJ and DE over being on Lake Michigan-although that is certainly an amazing amenity for Chicago.
Also, Philly and Chicago are much more comparable and in the same league than Chicago or Philly are to NYC.
I never liked the term "second city" anyway-Chicago is Chicago (and Philly is Philly for that matter) and both stand on their own without needing comparisons to NYC.
Chicago is "the second city" for a reason. Because we are second to NYC. Philly isn't even the second best city on the east coast. A lot of people leave out jobs too. Chicago hands down has better jobs with all the huge corporations, financial, and consulting jobs. Living in Chicago I met so many successful people with high paying careers, while in Phillly people seemed less concerned with their careers and there were just less people with awesome jobs. The buildings are also nicer and newer in Chicago. Philly is close to the ocean. So what. Chicago has the lakefront and lake michigan which is nicer and closer. Chicago doesn't even think about Philly. We are in a different league.
All philly has better is that it is on the east coast and close to other great cities and things, but if you plopped Chicago where Philly is then Chicago would be even greater. I also liked how Philly has its neighborhoods closer to downtown and it is a little more dense in the residential neighborhoods like Center City.
Oh oh, reviving this thread again? Hopfully does not get too heated? Both cities are laid out differently. But both are a with a street-grid city. Ironically, I believe Chicago started (in re-building a Second City)? With Philadelphia's original street-grid plan. But both cities evoked, or they evolved theirs then in differing directions and in housing varieties.
Philadelphian's like to note it is - not - a - rust- belt city and NYC or Baltimore/DC are not either. But Ironically again, they can show "grit" even more then Chicago. Even as it is labeled a in - the - rust-belt city.
As a visitor to both. You note improvements definitely, and in gentrification of their cores and surrounding neighborhoods. I will say, one city had core residential living since the city evolved originally. Far more then the other that basically had to add and re-purposed existing buildings to residential and a former warehousing downtown to lift living. Adding a large high-rise living population to high-end skyscrapers. Most outside of NYC in the US.
Some city vs city match-ups can get pretty argumentative. More then others many times? These are two that can and have. Already, on a Lake vs claims of close access to a ocean was made. Just Lake Michigan Chicago has a 26 mile boundary along its Great Lake, and a downtown core against it as a backdrop. The argument is then, but Philadelphia is only a hour on a virtually straight highway to Atlantic City and to areas along the whole Jersey Shore of beach towns. Hopefully, that is not rehashed to argue over?
I doubt if the gap in cores between these cities will change much? As one has had other problems in the news lately. But still gains high marks for its core by business visitors to tourist in reviews and feedback. While the other is increasing in appreciating its Urban core today also with renewal.
But one city you can clearly see has attained a more visually level of elegance and class in stature it has evolved. That true is amazing for a major US city that has kicked much of its Grit and rust-belt attributes "outa da ballpark". Clearly maintaining its Stature, despite other cities growing fast on it in population claims. With claiming to be nipping away at Chicago in a change mode in demographics of the city, but slow population growth overall. But Chicago surely is not giving up any prestige or global standing despite it and without a fight to maintain it.
It is not merely other North American cities trying to gain in their global standings? It's many in Asia today too, and elsewhere around the world. But the term in decline? Is NOT in either Philladelphia's or Chicago's vocabulary today. No matter who accused them of something.
The mention of Philly not the east coast second city? Will gain a fight. Some note Boston is - or DC? Not claiming it is in population alone statue is meant? But then that does not include Chicago and really not relevant for this thread.
I never liked claiming other cities as a destination in city vs city, but NYC/Atlantic City is superior to Milwaukee/Indiana Dunes.
And I think metro Philly is more beautiful than Chicagoland. I like the green rolling hills, horse farms and colonial houses.
Agree on both counts [NYC/Jersey Shore > Milwaukee, Harbor Country in Michigan (better example than Indiana Dunes)] and that SE PA is beautiful. Blue Hills are literally like the Shire. But overall, as cool as Philadelphia is, Chicago wins this pretty handily.
Agree on both counts [NYC/Jersey Shore > Milwaukee, Harbor Country in Michigan (better example than Indiana Dunes)] and that SE PA is beautiful. Blue Hills are literally like the Shire. But overall, as cool as Philadelphia is, Chicago wins this pretty handily.
Chicago clearly has to stand on its own with its Metro. Both its MSA and CSA are virtually the same. It cannot claim Milwaukee either. Philadelphia likes to claim proximity to the Jersey shore and NYC. While some might downplay a Baltimore/DC technical CSA.
The case always goes to the East has much more to offer in a closer reach to its major cities then especially a Chicago and St Louis. Being in the Midwest and more Great Plains and farms around it. That argument always comes up.
Highly subjective. IMO Philly is easily the 2nd best city on the East Coast (although personally it is my favorite). I'd also take proximity to the ocean and shoretowns in NJ and DE over being on Lake Michigan-although that is certainly an amazing amenity for Chicago.
Also, Philly and Chicago are much more comparable and in the same league than Chicago or Philly are to NYC.
I never liked the term "second city" anyway-Chicago is Chicago (and Philly is Philly for that matter) and both stand on their own without needing comparisons to NYC.
+10 Great post Really all that needs to be said about this comparison!
Highly subjective. IMO Philly is easily the 2nd best city on the East Coast (although personally it is my favorite). I'd also take proximity to the ocean and shoretowns in NJ and DE over being on Lake Michigan-although that is certainly an amazing amenity for Chicago.
Also, Philly and Chicago are much more comparable and in the same league than Chicago or Philly are to NYC.
I never liked the term "second city" anyway-Chicago is Chicago (and Philly is Philly for that matter) and both stand on their own without needing comparisons to NYC.
Second City is probably more referring to a 1st city before the Great Fire of 1871 with a 2nd city that arose again.
Also Chicagoan's compare themselves to NYC far less then Philadelphians's. Philly besides, links itself in likeness to NYC. More then any other city. With Chicago not really at all.
All cities stand on their own also. But perhaps a couple twin cities next to each other like Minneapolis/St Paul and Dallas/Ft Worth. I also see little likenesses between Philly and Chicago. But Philly does claim a likenes to NYC. Chicago links itself to no city. It stands alone in the Midwest. Though it isn't necessarily like other Midwestern cities. I see a lot of differences between Philly and Chicago. But in size.They are able to be compared fairly basically.
Second City is probably more referring to a 1st city before the Great Fire of 1871 with a 2nd city that arose again.
Also Chicagoan's compare themselves to NYC far less then Philadelphians's. Philly besides, links itself in likeness to NYC. More then any other city. With Chicago not really at all.
All cities stand on their own also. But perhaps a couple twin cities next to each other like Minneapolis/St Paul and Dallas/Ft Worth. I also see little likenesses between Philly and Chicago. But Philly does claim a likenes to NYC. Chicago links itself to no city. It stands alone in the Midwest. Though it isn't necessarily like other Midwestern cities. I see a lot of differences between Philly and Chicago. But in size.They are able to be compared fairly basically.
Chicago downtown from in Lake Michigan.
What? Are you kidding me? Philly does not link itself to NYC as a matter of fact they hate being compared to NYC. The city that tried to compete with NYC is Boston. Give me a break....
Chicago is beautiful but you guys really need to get a handle on that crime situation because it's atrocious.
Chicago is "the second city" for a reason. Because we are second to NYC. Philly isn't even the second best city on the east coast. A lot of people leave out jobs too. Chicago hands down has better jobs with all the huge corporations, financial, and consulting jobs. Living in Chicago I met so many successful people with high paying careers, while in Phillly people seemed less concerned with their careers and there were just less people with awesome jobs. The buildings are also nicer and newer in Chicago. Philly is close to the ocean. SO what. Chicago has the lakefront and lake michigan which is nicer and closer. Chicago doesn't even think about Philly. We are in a different league.
All philly has better is that it is on the east coast and close to other great cities and things, but if you plopped Chicago where Philly is then Chicago would be even greater. I also liked how Philly has its neighborhoods closer to downtown and it is a little more dense in the residential neighborhoods like Center City.
Annnnd with that said, you strike me as someone who's never been to Philly so...next.
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.
Really all that needs to be said about this comparison!
