bleu
Banned
I think 8.2M refers to New York City, not Chicago.
|
|
|
- Thread starter CITY_LOVER
- Start date
I think 8.2M refers to New York City, not Chicago.
UserNameToronto
Active Member
If this is the case, I stand corrected.
RC8
Senior Member
You speak too much sense. You must be an anti-development communist. People adapt to everything, don't you know?
Re: Chicago and crime:
I don't think you could reach the absurd levels of crime there without the ruling elites being careless and even incompetent. I would be thoroughly ashamed of living in a city as ethnically segregated as Chicago - but generations of people have opted to maintain that status quo.
nfitz
Superstar
What are you talking about? I haven't compared Chicagoland to anything. I compared London to New York City. London to Toronto, and Toronto to New York City.
What has that got to do with my post?
UserNameToronto
Active Member
I thought the 8.2m figure was referring to Chicago. Your post was unclear. I've already apologized (see my post at the top of this page). I would ask that you chill.
Last edited:
bleu
Banned
Not fair to say it is a tie.
We may not want to admit it, but clearly Chicago in general is still a much bigger, wealthier and powerful city than Toronto. Much better architecture. Let's not pretend waterfront is the only thing Chicago has over us.
But both have their edges for sure. Toronto's downtown, although not as pretty, is more livable and feel more like a community. We beat Chicago by 1 mile in terms of safety.
nfitz
Superstar
Chill about what? I simply politely queried what you were talking about, and explained what I'd compared.
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
Better architecture? Are we just counting a very small area of downtown here?
Much bigger? The Chicago Metropolitan Area is over 28,000*km² with a population of about 9.7 million. It's a vast area, including a lot of rural land, stretching into Indiana and Wisconsin, and as far southeast in Illinois as LaSalle ... which is miles and miles of farm fields from Chicago, and is closer to Iowa than Chicago.
The nearest geographical equivalent for Toronto is the Greater Golden Horseshoe, which is a similiar size at 31,600*km² and a population of 8.8 million.
So bigger. Yes, Chicago is bigger. Much bigger? No.
Look also at population growth. That 9.7 million (Chicago 2010) has grown only 1.6 million from 8.1 million in 40 years. Toronto's 8.8 million (2011) has grown 0.7 million from 8.1 million in 5 years, and is forecast to grow to 11.5 million in the next 20.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
I just wanted not to get chewed out lol
RC8
Senior Member
Chicago is not that much wealthier or more powerful than Toronto, but the gross inequality of their income distribution and their segregated neighbourhoods would have you think so.
As well as their architectural heritage as one of the most important cities in the world by far.
As well as their architectural heritage as one of the most important cities in the world by far.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
RC8
Senior Member
You are right regarding economic output, but the problem with the likes of Toronto and other large Canadian cities is that we are pretty much de facto keeping very unproductive regions afloat. The rate at which the Canadian and Ontario governments take money away from Torontonians and spend it elsewhere is shocking. Our city would look very differently if we were allowed to keep more of our money within it.
Glen
Senior Member
Torontovibe
Senior Member
Chicago has more and better tourist attractions/museums/art galleries, which it markets much better than we do in Toronto. We still don't take tourism very seriously. It also has better historic districts, with very impressive buildings. Chicago seems to have a whole lot of collages/universities. I was surprised how many there were, although some of them seemed quite small. Chicago people seem to be very proud of their city (even the bad parts) and wear their hearts on their sleeves, while in Toronto, we seem too embarrassed to even admit we like the place. No city is as hard on itself as Toronto but with all the anti-Toronto stupidity we have to deal with (across Canada) I guess that's not surprising. Those are some of the things I've noticed.
nfitz
Superstar
Okay ... let's stop it there.
The Chicogans (is that what you call them) I know have been deeply ashamed when they had to warn me not to take the subway through certain parts of town, because of they physical danger of being on the train there if not part of the right ethnic group.
Better tourist attractions/museums is all fine ... but it hardly effects the day-to-day lives of the people who live there. Neither does the architecture of a very small part of town. The architecture I've seen there has been from dull 1920s suburban sprawl (and little sign of the kind of refreshment to these areas that we see in Toronto) to really ugly unwalkable and unlivable modern surburban sprawl. There's parts of town where there are literally vacant lots, because the original housing has been knocked down and no one wants to live there.
Whatever advantage they might get, for a bit better architecture in a small part of downtown, and a few more museums (so you say, I've never visited one when I travel there on business) is quickly lost when you look at the entire city, rather than an isolated pocket where the tourists go.