U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-30-2009, 02:31 PM
 
0 posts, read 1,540,578 times
Reputation: 10

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AK123 View Post
I know, but apparently some others think otherwise.



Well, that's a subjective thing isn't it? Personally, I'm neutral on how it looks but think having some sort of interesting landmark is better than having nothing.

I was just pointing it out because the argument was made that Paris was "beautiful" in part for the Eiffel. Among all kinds of related foolish arguments.
Actually the Eiffel tower was only brought up because someone posted a bad photograph of it. I live in Houston and even if the Eiffel isn't that stunning it's much much nicer than any Houston has/will ever have. You can not compare the beauty of Paris to the non existent beauty of Houston. It's pretty ugly actually.

The efiffel tower was considered ugly a longggg time ago because of its ungodly size and extravagance (they even proposed to tear it down before it was completed) but when it was up people warmed to the tower and now regard it as beautiful by most. Just as the Empire State Building was considered grotesque due to its massive size when it was built.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-30-2009, 02:57 PM
 
Location: The land of sugar... previously Houston and Austin
5,429 posts, read 13,945,454 times
Reputation: 3659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Americanboy View Post
Actually the Eiffel tower was only brought up because someone posted a bad photograph of it. I live in Houston and ...
Don't feed it
The post you quoted was about Paris only. Not Houston, not Texas, or anywhere else.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2009, 03:55 PM
 
98 posts, read 270,573 times
Reputation: 143
I think the question of livability is a question of smart urban design. I think the point that russianoligarch is trying make is that Paris is a better designed city. It is built on a scale designed around human beings, whereas Houston is built on a scale designed around automobiles. If you compare both cities to the shantytowns of Africa, undoubtedly both are clean and well-kept. But cleaniness is just one factor in the question of livability the way I see it.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2009, 04:15 PM
 
Location: Atlanta ,GA
9,086 posts, read 14,335,584 times
Reputation: 2955
Quote:
Originally Posted by russianoligarch View Post
No, my pictures show hideousness and hurt my eyes.

The cigarette butts on the top of the Eiffel are no doubt left by tourists. Do you think going to the Eiffel is a normal thing for Parisians? Who would see that, anyway? Everyone see's the crappy buildings in Houston, everyone sees and breathes the atrocious air, everyone see's all those terrible billboards and exposed power lines flung throughout the city on a massive scale.

There is nothing livable about residing in a sewer.
A 1935 Auburn Boat tail Roadster is a beautiful car.It's sexy and grand.It exudes status and luxury.It is a beautiful car.It was ahead of it time with many features that were not available in most cars of that day.Yet it has no air conditioning ,very limited room and parts and service is a very daunting and expensive task.A 2008 Cadillac Seville STS is nice and is luxury.It has status ,it says that you are here to compete.Its not grand but it is practical and can fit in any social setting.Its nice enough, but not much uniqueness about it.

Paris is an Auburn.Beautiful,Grand and magnificent.Yet its old.Not too practical in todays world ,but still very relevant and attractive.Its expensive for many people.. Noisy,yes a little dirty yes,crowded yes.Its draw backs are very broad for many people.Is it a place that living is easy?How hard do you have to work to live there?Is its beauty and cultural institutions worth the cost of living?These answers are different for different people.Its not a judgement on people decisions(at least it should not be).

Houston is one of the fastest growing cities in the world.It has to be livable otherwise people would not flock to live there.Some people like modern when it comes to living somewhere.Wide streets and sidewalks.Trees and suburbs with large private lawns where there children can play in their parents view.Yes there is traffic and pollution,but its al relative when you are talking large cities.

Some people simply do not like too much Urbanity.I personally like a balance of urbanity with personal space that is just large enough within reason.I have friends that have apartments in Paris.They love the life that Paris offers.Their apartments are usually old and cramped.Extremely small kitchens,bathrooms and dining areas(or lack of).Yet they can walk every where with out a car,go to some great historical and cultural institutions,and have the all important "cache" of saying ,"I live In Paris".

For me it would never be worth the cost.Again its just an opinion .
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2009, 09:34 PM
 
Location: Midwest
1,005 posts, read 2,602,128 times
Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by redfella View Post
The top 25 most livable cities in the world according to Monocle magazine.

Top 25 Most Liveable Cities 2009 [Monocle]

Note: There are only two cities in all of the Americas that make the list. Both are in Canada.

25 - Lisbon
24 - Geneva
23 - Hamburg
22 - Kyoto
21 - Amsterdam
20 - Auckland
19 - Montreal
18 - Singapore
17 - Oslo
16 - Fukuoka
15 - Barcelona
14 - Vancouver
13 - Sydney
12 - Madrid
11 - Honolulu
10 - Berlin
09 - Melbourne
08 - Paris
07 - Vienna
06 - Stockholm
05 - Helsinki
04 - Munich
03 - Tokyo
02 - Copenhagen
01 - Zurich
Oh wow, very surprise that no USA city was listed. What are we missing out on out there? Not even a spot for New York or Los Angeles, wow. Really curious of these listed cities now

(After going to link, will most likely research a great amount of the cities listed)

Okay I see now, Honolulu made the list, but still surprise none on the main land.... which is why I repeat:

Oh wow, very surprise that no USA city was listed. What are we missing out on out there? Not even a spot for New York or Los Angeles, wow. Really curious of these listed cities now
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2009, 09:59 PM
 
Location: The Shires
2,257 posts, read 2,031,117 times
Reputation: 1050
Quote:
Originally Posted by russianoligarch View Post

Houston:




Paris:

LOL. OK.

*shakes head *
Let's level the playing field a little here:

Paris:







Houston:



http://www.nationalgeographic.com/traveler/images/48hrs_houston0704/48hrs_houston0704.jpg (broken link)


*shakes head*
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2009, 10:13 PM
 
Location: New York
11,340 posts, read 18,738,646 times
Reputation: 6165
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCreass View Post
Let's level the playing field a little here:

Paris:


Houston:

*shakes head*
Paris looks torn up, that building looks like something from out a ghetto in the United States (except for the European car).

Houston on the other hand is looking beautiful as usual.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2009, 10:20 PM
 
Location: Global citizen
4,193 posts, read 10,955,017 times
Reputation: 1652
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCreass View Post
Let's level the playing field a little here:

Paris:







Houston:





*shakes head*




wow i didnt know paris had a messed up side.

Those were some GREAT pics of houston though.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2009, 10:39 PM
 
Location: Atlanta ,GA
9,086 posts, read 14,335,584 times
Reputation: 2955
Default Also the most EXSPENSIVE!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by timeofseasons View Post
Oh wow, very surprise that no USA city was listed. What are we missing out on out there? Not even a spot for New York or Los Angeles, wow. Really curious of these listed cities now

(After going to link, will most likely research a great amount of the cities listed)

Okay I see now, Honolulu made the list, but still surprise none on the main land.... which is why I repeat:

Oh wow, very surprise that no USA city was listed. What are we missing out on out there? Not even a spot for New York or Los Angeles, wow. Really curious of these listed cities now

I found it interesting to note that the "most expensive cities" are also the "most livable".I wonder who are they livable for? Super models,Musicians,Business,Tycoons?
The number after their rank in livability below, corresponds their rank as "most expensive"

25 - Lisbon 64
24 - Geneva 4
23 - Hamburg 56
22 - Kyoto
21 - Amsterdam 29
20 - Auckland 138
19 - Montreal 103
18 - Singapore 10
17 - Oslo 14
16 - Fukuoka
15 - Barcelona
14 - Vancouver 94
13 - Sydney 66
12 - Madrid 37
11 - Honolulu 41
10 - Berlin 38
09 - Melbourne 92
08 - Paris 12
07 - Vienna 21
06 - Stockholm 79
05 - Helsinki 19
04 - Munich 47
03 - Tokyo 1
02 - Copenhagen 7
01 - Zurich 6

American cities tend to be cheaper.Due to less taxes mainly.However they lack in infrastructure and social welfare.Does it decrease the public welfare without these things.Yes and No.The answer is not so simple.You can live in many of those cities on the aid of the government if you are not able to and in some cases unwilling to work.Either way you pay.You just have to decide how and when you want to pay.Now or later?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2009, 10:52 PM
 
Location: Denver
6,627 posts, read 13,410,493 times
Reputation: 4130
Alright....first people bash someone for showing good pics of Paris and bad pictures of Houston. Then someone shows nice pictures of Houston and shows bad pictures of Paris (evening the playing field). Then for the next 2 pages people show bad pics of Paris and great pictures of Houston.

I understand people were mad because someone chose a rough pic of Houston and a nice pic of Paris...but just to make sure: you're not trying to compare Houston to Paris...right? I hope not, because it would be an outrageously ridiculous comparison. The two shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence. Obviously there are plenty of rough spots in Paris, but what do you expect out of a mega-city? Population-wise, the Paris area is 4 times the size of Houston, so obviously there's going to be some bad areas.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top