(I first made this topic in City vs. City, but it was locked as it was in the wrong section, so I'll start again
)
This is quite an age old debate, and some people say that it's impossible to discuss as both countries' cities are nothing like each other. However, it is possible to draw parallels respectively between a few cities from the UK and the US. I have compiled a few examples based on several factors: Influence on the country, regional status, relationships with certain other cities and sociology regarding locals. So here we go...
New York = London: Obvious comparison out of the way. Both massive world cities, and often when people think of America, New York is often the first place that springs to mind, likewise with London and the UK. Both are hugely iconic with landmarks that are instantly recognisable, and a big melting pot of culture.
Chicago = Birmingham: The "second city". Both have a history in industry, and therefore have strong working class heritage. However, both kind of get disregarded compared to certain other cities in their respective countries, but despite this, they're both of great importance.
Los Angeles = Manchester: Two sprawling messes comprised of several smaller cities, towns, boroughs and suburbs. Huge media presence, through sports, film and music. Despite the "glamorous" image both have attained, they also have their share of gang problems.
Houston = Glasgow: This is more to do with drawing a comparison between Texas and Scotland. Both might host the most famous accent of their countries, both are separatist minded, both wave their own flags, and both like their whiskey! So the biggest city in Texas is equivalent to Scotland's biggest city.
Boston = Liverpool: Big naval cities with locals that tend to be descended from the Irish diaspora, leaving a huge celtic influence, and are huge on their sports. Speaking of which, the NBA rivalry between the Celtics and the LA Lakers is similar to Liverpool vs. Manchester United.
San Francisco = Leeds: Everywhere you go, you're walking uphill! These are two cities that have acquired a reputation for being quite big on their arts, and both are full of liberal voters. SF's fight with LA for supremacy over California is similar to Leeds and Manchester's battle for reign over Northern England.
Dallas = Edinburgh: Going back to the Texas/Scotland comparison, these two are counterparts simply because they are both the second largest cities in Texas/Scotland.
Philadelphia = Sheffield: Although Pittsburgh, PA is twinned with Sheffield because of them both being steel cities, you could make the same comparison between Sheffield and Philadelphia.
Detroit = Nottingham: Both have strong roots in the working class heritage, and reputations that have been slightly tarnished by gang problems, and gun culture in particular.
Miami = Bristol: Situated on the coast, these two cities are arguably the two biggest cities that are furthest south in their countries. So, closer to the equator, and therefore better weather!
Seattle = Newcastle: Tucked away in far North corners of their respective countries, both had a strong presence in the 90s, with Grunge and Newcastle United.
New Orleans = Brighton: New Orleans and Brighton are both situated on the South coast, and are known for being big party towns!
Atlanta = Cardiff: Similar to Glasgow, Edinburgh, Houston and Dallas, the locals have distinctive accents. Plus Turner Field in Atlanta is a huge, state of the art stadium, a bit like Cardiff's Millennium stadium.
OK, so some of these may have very tenuous links. But it's all a bit of fun, and should make for good debate.
Which comparisons could you draw? Discuss.