Jump to content

Tiers of US cities


tocoto

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 602
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Whether someone thinks Chicago or LA outrank each other ultimately gets pretty subjective, but for someone to say that Chicago is ahead certainly has a rational basis for making that statement:

1. the number of Fortune 500 companies, for one. Chicago is far and away the no. 2 US city on that list, and certainly far ahead of LA which I believe is below both San Francisco and Houston.

2. banking and market trading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure that items 1 & 2 mean anything.  Charlotte is within a days drive of more consumers and industry than Chicago and it certainly isn't tier 1 or 2.

If Chicago is relying on manufacturing to lay claim to being ahead of LA, then it is in a bad way when you consider the manufacturing job loss and shifting of entire industrys from Chicago to the South and Mexico.  Not a good point to claim on. 

That leaves 4 & 5.  I dont think either means that much, and the growth in business professionals seems to have ended there several years ago.

Not sure that items 1 & 2 mean anything. Charlotte is within a days drive of more consumers and industry than Chicago and it certainly isn't tier 1 or 2.

monsoon, we all know that Charlotte isn't a tier 1, 2, or 3 city. The fact that 50% of North American industry is within one days truck delivery to Chicago is very important for business(es). You can claim that fact 2 is not important as well, but the point of this is location, location, location. Believe it or not, it's still an important factor these days.

If Chicago is relying on manufacturing to lay claim to being ahead of LA, then it is in a bad way when you consider the manufacturing job loss and shifting of entire industrys from Chicago to the South and Mexico. Not a good point to claim on.

Even though Chicago has lost manufacturing jobs, the city still has more manufacturing than southern cities as well as LA. BTW, how much manufacturing has the south lost??

That leaves 4 & 5. I dont think either means that much, and the growth in business professionals seems to have ended there several years ago.

LOL!! We all know how important the medical sector is so to ignore the fact that Chicago is the #1 urban medical center is ridiculous. Look how important the medical sector is to cities like Houston, Boston, and Minneapolis. Also, the business services sector is still growing in Chicago so I don't know what you are talking about.

If you have any sources that prove all this wrong, feel free to post them. I actually took the time research Chicago because I was thinking about moving there. No, I didn't use a Chicago Chamber site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ I'd agree that Chicago is not the #2 banking center; I think NYC, Charlotte, San Francisco, and Boston all have more banking assets than Chicago. However, Chicago is an important financial center because of the fact that the city has the Chicago Board of Trade, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Chicago Mercantile Exchange, and the Chicago Stock Exchange

Charlotte is ranked 2nd in bank assests, which is pretty damn impressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boston is like 24th or 25th in the world right behind Italy or something and that's pretty neat for a city that not long ago was heading in the wrong direction economically.

LA and Chicago are so different it isn't even fair to compare them except to say they are both great cities.

The 2003 rankings had Boston at 22nd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually took the time research Chicago because I was thinking about moving there. No, I didn't use a Chicago Chamber site.

Don't even question it. If you can get a job there, move there. I totally screwed up when my ex convinced me to move back to Charlotte. I'm not divorced. When I was living in Chicago I worked 36 hours a week for a law firm making what I make now working 54 hours a week. I lived 3 blocks from Water Tower and have and probably always will regret quitting my job there and moving back to Charlotte. Don't get me wrong, I love Charlotte, but after living in Chicago I now wish it were my life-long home.

PS, if you move take me with you, lol!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is more to banking than consumer banking. There are private banks, investment banks, etc. Charlotte has become a center of consumer banking. Chicago, Boston, and SF are still major banking centers. For example, State Street Corp., of Boston (previously State Street Bank) is the largest institution (bank) in the world in terms of assests under management with over $1 trillion. Fidelity Investments of Boston also has over 1 trillion in mutual fund assets under management. Putnam, Oppenheimer, Mellon, MFS are all large mutual fund companies based in Boston. BofA has said it will operate its investment bank out of Boston as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the loss of Bank One, Chicago isn't much in the world of banking anymore. It is all either in Charlotte or NYC.

As you said, this isn't about comparing Chicago with the south. It's about comparing Chicago with L.A.

And Chicago is far away a larger banking center than L.A.

As far as trading and markets go--another poster mentioned the fact that Chicago has the "Chicago Board of Trade, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Chicago Mercantile Exchange, and the Chicago Stock Exchange".

L.A. comes nowhere near that influence in international markets.

Now, as I said originally, a person can rationally make the claim that Chicago ranks on an equal footing with L.A. in whatever tier of international cities they want to come up with, and I said that based on the number of F-500 companies, banking and trading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

this is an interesting topic, and being of international decent, i think i can add a different perspective on the matter. The importance of a city is unquantifiable, that is all these GDP numbers, employment, business sectors, can be used to support a theory, but really they are just number babble.

The question is simply one of a sphere of influence.

New York City. Obviously the capital of the world. No argument here, defenitely a Tier 1 city. Ask anybody in the world, and they will say Finance, Empire State Building....etc. etc.

LA - I hate LA, because IMO, its not really a city as it is an overgrown suburb, but its world influence is undeniable. ANYONE who hasn't lived in a cave (and even most of them) for the past 50 years will answer back "hollywood" when you mention LA. That type of cultural influence is unmatched by anything in the world (except perhaps Bollywood, but the fact they call Bombay Bollywood is an excellent example of what i'm talking about here). For this international recognition alone, much to my dismay, in terms of importance LA ranks as a Tier 1 American city.

Chicago - Aside from its obvious strengths as a mercantile center, Chicago is another American Tier 1 City. Around the world, when you mention Chicago people know it. "Capone and gangsters", Sears Tower, the preeminent capital of modern skyscraper architecture, and IMO, the original 'blue print' for the modern american city. In 200 years, Houston, Dallas, Miami and all these other sprawl infested cities will someday resemble Chicago, not boston, and not NYC. Just look at a map and you'll see what i'm talking about.

Those are america's tier one cities. Like it or not, those are the 3 cities that any poor foreigner with a chance to visit the USA would want to visit. Not charlotte, not dallas, and certainly not Houston (btw, even with the great outcome, most people coming back to New England from the Superbowl were impressed with how crappy america's 4th largest city is, but thats another thread I think.)

Continuing on this thread of international recognition and cultural influence, I'd be hard pressed not to include Boston. Even with my new england bias, I can not include Boston in the same tier as Chicago and NY (LA sucks as a city IMO), but its international influence can not be denied. Even though many people outside of USA wouldn't necessarily know that Harvard is in the Boston metro, they certainly know what Harvard is. Having spent a good portion of my life in the far east (Seoul, Korea) i can say that the dream of just about all middle class Koreans (and probably chinese, japanese etc.) is for their children to go to harvard or MIT. Someone mentioned the 'international flavor' of cities as a criteria, and to that extent, Boston again must be included.... the insane number of international students alone make this true, nevermind the professionals that make up the increasingly international flavor of the ever expanding Biomedical Technology sector. California has more bio-tech companies, but thats saying something when a neighborhood alone (Kendall Square, Cambridge) actually competes with a State for title of "Capital of Biotech". With respect to the Texas Medical Center, which is one of the world's best, I still don't think it holds a candle to Health sector in Boston. Sure it may be physically the largest, like it seems everything in Texas is, but what does it say about a city's influence when the best doctors at the Texas Medical Center (and not just there, but around the world) were most likely trained in Boston? And it doesn't just end with Healthcare. I don't have numbers, but i'd venture to say that more international heads of state have studied in the Boston area than any other. Again, its a cultural influence thing, and boston is full of it. The Massachusetts State House, located on "Beacon Hill" is the model for the the Capitol Building, on "Capitol Hill" in DC. The first subways, first schools, first police station, first fire station, first telephone call, RADAR, ArpaNet, and yes, even these United States themselves......these types of things aren't quantifiable, and even though they may seem frivolous to some (afterall, the first subway would have been built somewhere) they add to the importance and cultural influence of a city.... in short, even with NASA headquartered in Houston (more astronauts are MIT grads than anywhere else) its cultural influence is suspect, even in texas (where apparently Dallas is still top dog) let alone the country.

So here is my List

Tier 1 (in order)

NYC

Chicago

LA

Tier 2 (no order)

Boston

Philadelphia

San Francisco

Washington, DC (based on my sphere of influence theory, it really should be tier 1 shouldn't it? its just tough to group it there considering the company!)

Tier 3 (Cities in position to move up, but just haven't, YET)(no order)

Miami

Houston

Charlotte

Atlanta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cotuit, I didn't mean to 'slam' LA, i was just stating my opinion..... and i wish I were a politico because then I'd actually have some pull against the strong Boston Nimbyism!

Of course, in Boston, I'd probably never get elected because of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would wholeheartedly agree with you monsoon, all of those cities would rank higher in foreigner's "to visit" list than boston, and thats precisely why boston isn't a tier 1 city. But I rank it at the top of the Tier 2s because I don't there are that many cities in the world, let alone the U.S. that can boast of that much national & international influence.

...even if it does go unnoticed.

But I don't think any of those cities would rank above NY, Chi, and NY. for Tier 1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i thought we were talking about american cities!

tokyo is pretty substantial, and certainly one of the world's Tier 1 cities... and possibly one of the few cities in the world that would rank right up there with NYC in terms of everything.

What are the others?

Tokyo

London

Paris?

Before the chinese takeover, i would have included Hong Kong there too, but now I don't know. And there is probably one of these Tier 1 cities in the middle east as well, although I'm not too familiar with that region. Dubai is my guess. And being a hispanic, i'd have to include a south american city as well.... Buenos Aires would get my vote, although it really probably doesn't belong in the same category.....

btw, thanks for the welcoming remarks. I've been a longtime reader of these forums, and finally decided to jump in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Setting New York's place on the world stage... there is no doubt that Tokyo is a massive and important city, But Tokyo loses to New York big time when it comes to population diversity. Japan is a very homogenous society, while New York is hyper-multi-ethnic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Merper - I agree with most of your points in your assessment and that the "Big 3" belong to a tier of their own, but about your comment that Koreans consider Harvard and MIT to be the most prestigious - why do they single out these two - or did you just list them as examples since you were talking about Boston? ;) But overall would you say that the people you know there are more university prestige conscious than your typical American?

BTW considering that you seem to be a newbie, are you familiar with the GAWC ranking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.