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.
IChicago is probably the Best City in America IMO, especially considering its price. It is the best bargain in the world, with an unmatched waterfront.
Now you're going too far, IMO. Chicago is nowhere near the "best city in America", "best bargain in the world", or "unmatched waterfront".
I can think of dozens of cities that are better, cheaper, or have better waterfronts.
NYC
SF
LA
Boston
DC
Miami
Pretty much every major city in Western Europe
Cities cheaper than Chicago-
Pretty much every city in the U.S. is the same or cheaper excepting NYC, Boston, DC, SF, LA, SD, Seattle, Honolulu
Cities with better waterfronts than Chicago-
Too many to list, but how about NYC, Miami, SF, SD, LA, Honolulu, every major European city on the Mediterranean, Hamburg, Amsterdam, St. Petersburg, Rio, Lima, Sydney and Cape Town?
I like Toronto... don't get me wrong (I live just across the border in New York), but Chicago is its big brother. It is inferior in nearly every aspect other than crime. Chicago is just.... the **** really. Chicago is probably the Best City in America IMO, especially considering its price. It is the best bargain in the world, with an unmatched waterfront.
The big thing that will hamper Toronto is poor city planning going forward. Lack of adequate subway, sprawling overstressed highways, housing bubble brewing, and an inadequate Airport option for U.S. bound flights (although Pearson is huge, half of Southern Ontario shouldn't be crawling to Buffalo to use ours all the time).
I like Chicago a lot as well both Toronto and Chicago are great cities and each has multiple strengths and weaknesses vs the other.. I'm not biased for one in favour of the other to be honest... This comparison isn't Toronto Vs Amman or Chicago vs Bamako... All I know is Toronto's overall stature has risen over the last few decades and Chicago not as much in relative terms.. Chicago has the strong legacy and foundation but Toronto has been on the move and has the momentum.. Time doesn't freeze for sentimentality!
Every city has stresses - particularly those that are growing.. As for Pearson Airport well I work there believe me - the airport is growing at almost 5% a year.. As a matter of fact over the last three years YYZ has posted 4.5-5.0 percent growth and ORD has posted negative growth over the same period. 2014 will be a record year for Pax at YYZ.. The fact that you get overflow travel through Buffalo is simply a testament to how much the Greater Golden Horseshoe is growing. That is a good thing! What is also growing is connections traffic from the U.S through Pearson ie one originates for example in Chicago and takes a flight to Toronto on either Air Canada or a Star Alliance partner like United, than travels onward to International destinations on Air Canada...so it works both ways and we all benefit as a result.
In other words, you have no argument. You're arguing "I can claim whatever, just because".
Obviously every country has its own method of metro area classification. Germany doesn't do metro areas like France, Mexico doesn't do metro areas like Brazil. The variability in data collection procedures across national lines doesn't mean that cities can't be compared across national lines.
I don't think you even read my posts... You can't compare GDP's with complete accuracy if one system of measuring cities inflates the numbers more than another system, so yes variability will absolutely impact comparison - how can it not? I explained to you that if Toronto used a CSA/MSA equivalent (it does not), its population would be about 1.5 - 2 million more than it is now and as such it would have a greater GDP because it is including populations that it currently doesn't unlike for U.S cities which do. Cut off 1.5 - 2 million people in any U.S city's CSA/MSA and see what that'll do to their GDP.
I like how you completely did a runaround with respect to the fact that global cities aren't just relegated to GDP measures either.. Even within the U.S you can see that... S.F and Washington D.C would widely be considered more global than Dallas or Houston yet Houston has a greater GDP than D.C and Dallas has a Greater GDP than S.F and that using apples to apples CSA/MSA metro comparisons (see link below)... So proof right there that just because a city has a marginally larger GDP doesn't mean it is necessarily a more global city - there are more criteria applied to being a global city.
Chicago is much richer than Toronto. It looks, feels, and acts richer.
Toronto is not an outlier in terms of safety within Canada, neither is Chicago within the U.S. In any case, it's irrelevent in a comparison, as if your average person is seeking to move to one city or the other with the aim of being a gangbanging crack warlord. Overall crime rates in typical America are roughly similar to overall crime rates in typical Canada.
It depends on what you mean by what is richer - nice touchy feely stuff like looks, feels and acts richer but.....
Toronto happens to actually have more millionaires and multimillionaires than Chicago.. Chicago on the other hand has more billionaires ie.. those very few that have ALOT of wealth... They actually inflate GDP numbers as well btw but that is another story.. Anyway both cities are clearly affluent
I don't think you even read my posts... You can't compare GDP's with complete accuracy if one system of measuring cities inflates the numbers more than another system, so yes variability will absolutely impact comparison - how can it not?
I read all your posts on this thread, and they're all homer nonsense.
If you truly believe that cities cannot be compared across national lines (without giving any reason why this is the case), then why are you even on this thread? This thread is asking people to compare Toronto to U.S. cities, and you have made such comparisons on this thread.
Now when people actually bring up official data, you claim that comparisons can't be made across national lines. In other words, after having made all sorts of ridiculous comparisons to NYC, London, and the like, once people use actual data to refute your claims, then you clam up and claim all transnational comparisons are bunk.
It depends on what you mean by what is richer - nice touchy feely stuff like looks, feels and acts richer but.....
No, it doesn't. Chicago has higher incomes, more people, and more wealth. It's a richer city by any measure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2
Toronto happens to actually have more millionaires and multimillionaires than Chicago..
No, it doesn't. Chicago has far more millionaires than Toronto, and it isn't even close. Chicago has more millionaires than all but a half-dozen cities on earth. The U.S., in general, has a much higher proportion of millionaires than Canada, and Chicago is much bigger than Toronto.
Obviously a bigger, richer city with greater income inequality will have far more millionaires than a smaller, poorer city with less income inequality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2
btw - Toronto actually is an outlier for safety - even in Canada...
No, it isn't. Toronto's crime rate is not an outlier, and nor is Chicago's crime rate an outlier.
No, it doesn't. Chicago has higher incomes, more people, and more wealth. It's a richer city by any measure.
No, it doesn't. Chicago has far more millionaires than Toronto, and it isn't even close. Chicago has more millionaires than all but a half-dozen cities on earth. The U.S., in general, has a much higher proportion of millionaires than Canada, and Chicago is much bigger than Toronto.
Obviously a bigger, richer city with greater income inequality will have far more millionaires than a smaller, poorer city with less income inequality.
No, it isn't. Toronto's crime rate is not an outlier, and nor is Chicago's crime rate an outlier.
Now I know you really don't know what you're talking about! Toronto is the safest city in Canada, and Chicago is close to one of the deadliest in the US!
I read all your posts on this thread, and they're all homer nonsense.
If you truly believe that cities cannot be compared across national lines (without giving any reason why this is the case), then why are you even on this thread? This thread is asking people to compare Toronto to U.S. cities, and you have made such comparisons on this thread.
Now when people actually bring up official data, you claim that comparisons can't be made across national lines. In other words, after having made all sorts of ridiculous comparisons to NYC, London, and the like, once people use actual data to refute your claims, then you clam up and claim all transnational comparisons are bunk.
Fusion 2's posts on this thread have been very well constructed and very balanced, they are not homer nonsense as you say. He has many great points and information, and if you refuse to believe any of it, then that's your problem. You come across as combative and rude on here, and Fusion 2 comes across as informative and balanced, even in the face of your constant attacks on him and his comments.
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.
