How would cities like L.A. be if the suburban nightmare never took place?

[mello]

Pesto when did I ever mention diversity and Metro GDP per capita? I was talking about the built form of two new coastal cities Melbourne/Sydney compared to anther new coastal city Los Angeles. How can anyone dispute that pound for pound the Oz cities blow LA away? That is all. And yes I frequent Ozscrapers on SSC and read the threads that Tayser starts and look at the gorgeous photos that Pallo puts up here.

So my only point is that being a native Southern Californian I wish that it had grown more in the way that the Australian cities have and I don't think it is an apples to oranges comparison imo.

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by pesto

Just plain garbage. Selective use of stats to confuse people is not helpful. Try to be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Your post is exactely what's the problem because it contains outright lies as well as that typical arrogance/ignorance this forum is so well known for and causes people from other parts of the world to avoid it (lets talk about the diversity of this place...)

LA is about 20 percent non-Hispanic whites. This leaves 80 percent, mostly arriving despeately poor, illiterate and with zero skills.

Let me correct that for you:..."This leaves 80 percent, mostly Mexicans"...
Plainly, LA is 20% American white, 10% American black, 40% Mexican, 10% other Latino, 10% Asian and 10% other white. Those numbers shouldn't be too far off. I'm trying my best here to adhere to your almost unworkable and counterintuitive classification of people btw...
Anyway with those % (and the silly racial classification) there's no pretending that there exists some diversity on a whole other level than Sydney's, because both are in the 60-70% range of established groups and the remainer hail from all over the globe to the same extent for both cities. If anything Sydney is less segregated.

Among the whites nearly half are Russia, Iranian, Indian, Middle Eastern. In the schools, well over half speak a language other than English at home. In my old school, it's 99.9 percent.

And what other language is that? Spanish...

And Indians are white now? Does that make them more or less of a minority?
Everyone is a minority and noone is a minority btw. Think about that one...

I don't want to pick on Australia, but their immigration history is well known.

Well known to whom? What exactely is "well known"? By all means elaborate...

Recent relative relaxation to allow "a few Asians with MBA's who hang at clubs and sushi bars" is not what is meant by diversity. Let me know when Melbourne gets 3 million non-Europeans with zero education and provides them with education, health care, necessities and a job.

There are plenty of PPP stats available for metro areas. They all (to the best of my knowledge) show LA/SD about 30 percent higher than Syd/Melb. This reflects the difference in national incomes between Australia and the US as well. Across the board, that is an enormous difference. I won't even count SF and San Jose, which are much higher.

Please provide these stats and please make it so that they indeed back up your initial claim of "much richer". A difference of 10% is not going to cut it as GDP is not an accurate indicator for wealth in the first place, especially not in the case of wastefull but GDP generating countries like the USA (and Australia to a lesser extent).

The problem with "to the best of your knowledge" is that you think you know a lot more then you actually do...

It's also generally a good idea that when you're called out for lying to stop lying instead of making up more lies...

[pesto]

Just fyi, here is a per capita income (PPP) tabulation by PWC, which is very reputable. I can see some technical issues with the numbers, but they are not relevant to this discussion.

http://www.ukmediacentre.pwc.com/ima...DetailsID=1562

Table 3.3 at page 22

LA: 63
Sydney: 49

This is quite consistent with the difference in other commercially-available studies I have seen. Melbourne and SD are too small to be on the list but SD is far higher than Melbourne on any list I have seen.

I am not sure where you are from, but diversity in the US refers to a mixture of ethncities or other groups that have special needs or historical problems. The US is not interested in sorting out Danes from Swedes from Norwegians from Germans from Austrians, etc., since they are not "diverse" for any practical purpose. Typically, the major groups are non-Hispanic white, Hispanic, black, Asian/Pacific Islander. The relevant conclusion here is that LA is 80 percent Hispanic, black or Asian, which are groups that define diversity, along with the non-European "whites" (Indian, Iranian, Arab, Armenian, Pakistani, etc.), which I estimate at 5-10 percent.

I have no issue with being of European background, but you challenged me (rather rudely) on my comment that replacing LA with Sydney would be poorer and less diverse. I think my comment is correct.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by mello

Pesto when did I ever mention diversity and Metro GDP per capita? I was talking about the built form of two new coastal cities Melbourne/Sydney compared to anther new coastal city Los Angeles. How can anyone dispute that pound for pound the Oz cities blow LA away? That is all. And yes I frequent Ozscrapers on SSC and read the threads that Tayser starts and look at the gorgeous photos that Pallo puts up here.

So my only point is that being a native Southern Californian I wish that it had grown more in the way that the Australian cities have and I don't think it is an apples to oranges comparison imo.

My issue was that you were rather blithely wrote-off LA and SD and sort of romanticized what it would be like if Sydney and/or Melbourne were transplanted here instead. I was just pointing out that there would be a LOT of differences, economic, ethnic, historical, social, etc.

Another way of putting it is if Sydney and Melbourne were in Southern California, they would have 4M Mexicans, millions of NY'ers and mid-westerners, different sports, industries, etc. You can't just pick up and move Calcutta to Chicago or SF to Iraq and get the same thing.

[bricky]

Originally Posted by pesto

Just fyi, here is a per capita income (PPP) tabulation by PWC, which is very reputable. I can see some technical issues with the numbers, but they are not relevant to this discussion.

http://www.ukmediacentre.pwc.com/ima...DetailsID=1562

Table 3.3 at page 22

LA: 63
Sydney: 49

This is quite consistent with the difference in other commercially-available studies I have seen. Melbourne and SD are too small to be on the list but SD is far higher than Melbourne on any list I have seen.

I am not sure where you are from, but diversity in the US refers to a mixture of ethncities or other groups that have special needs or historical problems. The US is not interested in sorting out Danes from Swedes from Norwegians from Germans from Austrians, etc., since they are not "diverse" for any practical purpose. Typically, the major groups are non-Hispanic white, Hispanic, black, Asian/Pacific Islander. The relevant conclusion here is that LA is 80 percent Hispanic, black or Asian, which are groups that define diversity, along with the non-European "whites" (Indian, Iranian, Arab, Armenian, Pakistani, etc.), which I estimate at 5-10 percent.

I have no issue with being of European background, but you challenged me (rather rudely) on my comment that replacing LA with Sydney would be poorer and less diverse. I think my comment is correct.

Pakistanis and Indians are counted as Asian by the US Census. And Shiro, as obviously anti-American as he is (seriously, why bother posting on a forum composed 80% of Americans and 15% of Canadians?), does have a point about cities in Australia and Europe being more cosmopolitan these days than a lot of Americans give them credit for. It's not 1990 anymore. 40% foreign born in Sydney is no joke, especially considering that their foreign born population is arguably more diverse than that in LA.

[mello]

Pesto: How is Melbourne too small to show up in your data? It isn't a giant metro area but its not much smaller than Sydney and its downtown core clearly boasts plenty of corporate office space. It seems to be a decent sized player in the world economy.

[staff]

Originally Posted by bricky

seriously, why bother posting on a forum composed 80% of Americans and 15% of Canadians?

It is due to this attitude that pretty much all non-North Americans have left these forums. I seem to recall a time when SSP was a decent place for urban topics even of international nature.

If the SSP forumers want Non-North American forumers out of here, then these forums should probably stick to exclusively discussing North American topics in order to retain some form of authority and not be continuously called out on factual errors by the odd international forumer stopping by.

It is funny how SHiRO is labelled "anti-American" (!) because he is offers a contrasting opinion compared to the narrow-minded amero-centric forum body on SSP.

[Centropolis]

yeah I don't want the forum to be unfriendly to non North Americans.

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by pesto

Just fyi, here is a per capita income (PPP) tabulation by PWC, which is very reputable. I can see some technical issues with the numbers, but they are not relevant to this discussion.

http://www.ukmediacentre.pwc.com/ima...DetailsID=1562

Table 3.3 at page 22

LA: 63
Sydney: 49

This is quite consistent with the difference in other commercially-available studies I have seen. Melbourne and SD are too small to be on the list but SD is far higher than Melbourne on any list I have seen.

Some technical issues? Not relevant?
PWC is not reputable and that "study" is downright amateurish. In this thread you have the real GDP PPP/capita for 2008:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=158615

PWC gets all kinds of numbers wrong, most notably the population ones but it even seems they take LA's CSA GDP and then divide it by 12 million, missing a couple of million people there maybe? They're basically comparing shit to butter, I don't know why you even bring up this study. Was it the first thing you could find on Google?

And again, GDP PPP/capita is not a measure of "wealth" although that seems to be the ongoing narrative here...

I am not sure where you are from, but diversity in the US refers to a mixture of ethncities or other groups that have special needs or historical problems. The US is not interested in sorting out Danes from Swedes from Norwegians from Germans from Austrians, etc., since they are not "diverse" for any practical purpose. Typically, the major groups are non-Hispanic white, Hispanic, black, Asian/Pacific Islander. The relevant conclusion here is that LA is 80 percent Hispanic, black or Asian, which are groups that define diversity, along with the non-European "whites" (Indian, Iranian, Arab, Armenian, Pakistani, etc.), which I estimate at 5-10 percent.

You're basically just admitting here how US centric you are, aren't you? So only the "American" (according to you) definition of "diversity" (btw you said "minorities", not "diversity") should count and then maybe, just maybe you could justify your claim of LA having a lot more "minorities". Story of this forum basically...

I have no issue with being of European background, but you challenged me (rather rudely) on my comment that replacing LA with Sydney would be poorer and less diverse. I think my comment is correct.

Your comment is not correct. Sydney is every bit as diverse and wealthy as LA or either city is close enough that it makes no matter.

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by staff

If the SSP forumers want Non-North American forumers out of here

I've come to the conclusion they do. It's just easier that way I think. The notorious America boosters of old have all been banned (mostly for unrelated reasons, proving they were also just assholes), but still new assholes pop up to fill the void. They can never hope to be as good at their job as the oldtimers were, but they don't have to be. We're already past the point of no return, international forumers are never going to come back, they've been cleared out and all people like pesto have to play with are us leftovers and we don't care enough anymore to be bothered that much. Simple comments about LA being more wealthy and diverse than Sydney of all places are enough nowadays to at least get a day or two of relatively mild flaming. Enough to keep things interesting. That is, the rare occasions that we bite...

Anyway, there are still a lot of great people on here. And some great photo threads, although I do understand why you have given up posting yours. Sometimes it's just ridiculous. The below thread has 3 (three!) people commenting, not counting the OP, myself and another native (R@ptor)...

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=199677

[SHiRO]

Before I forget to mention it, I don't even agree that California would have been better of without LA and SD, having Sydney and Melbourne instead. LA and SD are perfectely fine cities, they are what they are and they make Califronia what it is. They're just not more wealthy or diverse than Sydney and Melbourne in any significant way.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by SHiRO

I've come to the conclusion they do. It's just easier that way I think. The notorious America boosters of old have all been banned (mostly for unrelated reasons, proving they were also just assholes), but still new assholes pop up to fill the void. They can never hope to be as good at their job as the oldtimers were, but they don't have to be. We're already past the point of no return, international forumers are never going to come back, they've been cleared out and all people like pesto have to play with are us leftovers and we don't care enough anymore to be bothered that much. Simple comments about LA being more wealthy and diverse than Sydney of all places are enough nowadays to at least get a day or two of relatively mild flaming. Enough to keep things interesting. That is, the rare occasions that we bite...

Anyway, there are still a lot of great people on here. And some great photo threads, although I do understand why you have given up posting yours. Sometimes it's just ridiculous. The below thread has 3 (three!) people commenting, not counting the OP, myself and another native (R@ptor)...

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=199677

Please stick around. The grownups among us can handle the criticism, which is generally true.

[ColDayMan]

Originally Posted by staff

It is due to this attitude that pretty much all non-North Americans have left these forums. I seem to recall a time when SSP was a decent place for urban topics even of international nature.

If the SSP forumers want Non-North American forumers out of here, then these forums should probably stick to exclusively discussing North American topics in order to retain some form of authority and not be continuously called out on factual errors by the odd international forumer stopping by.

It is funny how SHiRO is labelled "anti-American" (!) because he is offers a contrasting opinion compared to the narrow-minded amero-centric forum body on SSP.

They do it for US states as well *cough* Ohio *cough*

But some of us still stick around to fight the good fight .

[Centropolis]

yeah the midwest gets shit on all the time too.

[JDRCRASH]

[pesto]

Originally Posted by mello

Pesto: How is Melbourne too small to show up in your data? It isn't a giant metro area but its not much smaller than Sydney and its downtown core clearly boasts plenty of corporate office space. It seems to be a decent sized player in the world economy.

Ask PWC. As you can see they only cover the larger cities of the world and Melbourne and SD don't make the cut. Probably just missed.

[SHiRO]

And while you are at it also ask them why London only has 8.6 million people, Seoul only 9.8 or the world's second largest city Jakarta only 9.1...Also, why Seattle is there and not Melbourne which is clearly the larger city.

Or I could save you the trouble and tell you that it's just arbitrary numbers and faulty data that "study" is based on.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by SHiRO

Some technical issues? Not relevant?
PWC is not reputable and that "study" is downright amateurish. In this thread you have the real GDP PPP/capita for 2008:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=158615

PWC gets all kinds of numbers wrong, most notably the population ones but it even seems they take LA's CSA GDP and then divide it by 12 million, missing a couple of million people there maybe? They're basically comparing shit to butter, I don't know why you even bring up this study. Was it the first thing you could find on Google?

And again, GDP PPP/capita is not a measure of "wealth" although that seems to be the ongoing narrative here...


You're basically just admitting here how US centric you are, aren't you? So only the "American" (according to you) definition of "diversity" (btw you said "minorities", not "diversity") should count and then maybe, just maybe you could justify your claim of LA having a lot more "minorities". Story of this forum basically...


Your comment is not correct. Sydney is every bit as diverse and wealthy as LA or either city is close enough that it makes no matter.

The last comment is just wrong; see above. Even you know it's unsupportable.

Well, if GDP isn't a good measure of wealth, then there are an enormous number of huge companies making terrible market-size and investment decisions. The "for-pay" studies use those numbers, only more tightly focused on product lines and specific industries and demographics in various countries or cities. I hope you're not signing up for the "happiness" quotients that France and other rapidly declining economies were pushing (and ridiculed for) a few years back.

Seriously, the idea that the US is richer than Australia (or Europe or Japan) is NOT controversial. It's well recognized academically and in businesses who focus their marketing campaigns to match market income. Thirty years ago the big idea was that these countries were GOING to catch the US soon, but then in 1985 or so (broadly speaking) they slowed and US growth accellerated. The news has been full of this for a couple of decades now. Japan has been largely stagnant for 20 years and Europe has had ups and downs, as has Australia.

Again, I am not critical of Australia (great country, fine people, nice weather) but to say it is as diverse as LA (or NY or London or Paris, etc.) is very odd. Again, it is overwhelmingly white or well-educated Asians. Compare it to LA which has community publications in 230 or so languages (per a UCLA study) and schools where 99 percent do not speak English at home (mostly Chinese, Spanish and American Indian languages). A recent book about LA was called "The Capital of the Third World" which is an exaggeration but gives you the idea.

[bricky]

Originally Posted by pesto

The last comment is just wrong; see above. Even you know it's unsupportable.

Well, if GDP isn't a good measure of wealth, then there are an enormous number of huge companies making terrible market-size and investment decisions. The "for-pay" studies use those numbers, only more tightly focused on product lines and specific industries and demographics in various countries or cities. I hope you're not signing up for the "happiness" quotients that France and other rapidly declining economies were pushing (and ridiculed for) a few years back.

Seriously, the idea that the US is richer than Australia (or Europe or Japan) is NOT controversial. It's well recognized academically and in businesses who focus their marketing campaigns to match market income. Thirty years ago the big idea was that these countries were GOING to catch the US soon, but then in 1985 or so (broadly speaking) they slowed and US growth accellerated. The news has been full of this for a couple of decades now. Japan has been largely stagnant for 20 years and Europe has had ups and downs, as has Australia.

Again, I am not critical of Australia (great country, fine people, nice weather) but to say it is as diverse as LA (or NY or London or Paris, etc.) is very odd. Again, it is overwhelmingly white or well-educated Asians. Compare it to LA which has community publications in 230 or so languages (per a UCLA study) and schools where 99 percent do not speak English at home (mostly Chinese, Spanish and American Indian languages). A recent book about LA was called "The Capital of the Third World" which is an exaggeration but gives you the idea.

Shiro is annoyingly, reflexively, consistently pro "Europe" and anti-American, but even a stopped watch is right twice a day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...%29_per_capita

Here is a list of countries with GDP (PPP) per capita. All three sources of data pretty much agree. Australia is around $40k per capita, and America is at $48k. I would guess that Syndey and Melbourne are above the Australian national average, and metro LA, as a not particularly wealthy region of America, at the American average or perhaps even slightly below it.

Also, one can make an honest case that America tends to overstate its GDP relative to a lot of other developed countries, for several reasons, some of which I'm aware of off the top of my head:

1) heavy spending on prisons and law enforcement in America, which while pumping up GDP, still leave America as more violent and dangerous than any other developed country in the world. Hence if you were to in a sense PPP that number, you would reduce GDP to account for that high expense low results part of the American economy.

2) in a similar way, you could do the same for American health care spending. We spend a lot more, adding to GDP, only to receive worse results. Hence perhaps we should discount a lot of that healthcare spending in the US to get a true idea of economic output.

There are probably other cases like that as well. I might even add military spending, which doesn't seem to improve my life much/at all, and is of questionable value in making the world a safer place. Perhaps there would be more chaos in the world without so much American military spending, but I personally think there wouldn't be. Hence essentially wasted spending.

[M II A II R II K]

Originally Posted by bricky

Shiro is annoyingly, reflexively, consistently pro "Europe" and anti-American, but even a stopped watch is right twice a day.

That's not the case, but is just more likely to jump in when a perceived misconception is posted if Europe is a part of it.