Most worldly city between Boston, Philadelphia, and Chicago? (live, law)
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.
You haven’t given Chicago anything to stand on...other than scale-which has already been rightfully acknowledged..
About being more worldly? That was covered, by some, at the beginning of the thread, where ethnicity wasn't the only thing discussed. Are you insecure about Boston? Please look for posts, that do discuss what Chicago offers...I'm not going to repeat everything already said.
Enean, you truly haven’t made an argument for Chicago in this thread. Honestly-no one has really. We’re just all going odf scale.
You seem both surprised and embarrassed that a city so much smaller than Chicago could be more international and perhaps just as worldly. I’m certainly not insecure I’ve argued in Chicago’s behalf more than you.
Last edited by BostonBornMassMade; 05-04-2020 at 12:47 PM..
The thread is indeed about much more than simply racial makeup, but as if Chicago is a slouch there? BostonBorn, do you really think Chicago is just white people from the Midwest and some black people? It isn't, and this is simply an ignorant view. I would say Boston and Chicago are fairly similar in many ways when it comes to international influence/relevance. Neither are massive standouts, but both are respectable. Both cities bring in international students via their respective schools, have diverse art scenes, history, ethnic neighborhoods, ethnic food..... and of course an international economy.
You are both riding extremes very hard. There are arguments in both cities' directions.
The thread is indeed about much more than simply racial makeup, but as if Chicago is a slouch there? BostonBorn, do you really think Chicago is just white people from the Midwest and some black people? It isn't, and this is simply an ignorant view. I would say Boston and Chicago are fairly similar in many ways when it comes to international influence/relevance. Neither are massive standouts, but both are respectable. Both cities bring in international students via their respective schools, have diverse art scenes, history, ethnic neighborhoods, ethnic food..... and of course an international economy.
You are both riding extremes very hard. There are arguments in both cities' directions.
Not really . Chicago is more diverse racially. This is about immigration and ETHNIC make up of the two cities.
The floor has been offered for anyone to illustrate why Chicago is more worldly than Boston. I don’t know enough about Chicago to say. It’s just no one has tried to actually answer that question.
I agree. Diversity does not necessarily make a place worldly or cosmopolitan. In fact, I know many immigrants and 2nd gens who are far from worldly.
Having a sizable immigrant/foreign-born population is definitely a significant feature in a worldly or cosmopolitan place as that population contributes another cultural dynamic from another part of the world to the city. Nobody is arguing that it is the ONLY feature of a worldly or cosmopolitan city but it would be equally ridiculous to say that it is not a feature at all.
Not really . Chicago is more diverse racially. This is about immigration and ETHNIC make up of the two cities.
The floor has been offered for anyone to illustrate why Chicago is more worldly than Boston. I don’t know enough about Chicago to say. It’s just no one has tried to actually answer that question.
I guess I would need to see more about what Boston has more of, than Chicago. There has already been a comparison done at the beginning of the thread. If that's not enough, then I guess we both need to see more, than just immigrants. (It's already been discussed, you know).
I guess I would need to see more about what Boston has more of, than Chicago. There has already been a comparison done at the beginning of the thread. If that's not enough, then I guess we both need to see more, than just immigrants. (It's already been discussed, you know).
Chicago has much more ethnic and international diversity than Boston, but that is in terms of raw numbers, which goes back to the point about scale. When you look at percentages, it is much more even.
Worldly is a broad term too. Theater, Art Museums, Prestigious Universities, Ethnic/International Populations. Again, I think Chicago beats Boston on all of these categories if you are adding up raw numbers, simply because it's a much bigger city; but if you look at it in terms of scale, I don't see how you can definitively say Chicago is more worldly. They are about even IMO.
If no one after 13 pages can really put in a comprehensive argument for Chicago-or any argument at all, beyond scale- then clearly this is pretty damn close between Chicago and Boston with Philly just behind.
I 100% thought someone would come in with a killer argument in favor of Chicago within the first 4 pages-I was wrong.
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.
