HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 1:55 PM
FREKI's Avatar
FREKI FREKI is offline
Kicking it Viking style..
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 7,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post
medians and per-capita incomes are also higher here.
Than where?
__________________
FREKI PHOTOTHREADS:
Kingdom of Denmark - Globetrekking
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 3:03 PM
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
What a nice little ego stroke for Americans.

The U.S. is "wealthier" because it has the richest people on earth in Hollywood, Manhattan, Cambridge, Washington, and the Silicon Valley. The big bucks are made largely in the U.S.A. That's all there is to it. However, if you remove that top 3% of overachievers, the U.S. looks a lot more impoverished compared to other developed nations.

Also, when will people get comparing one nation to a geographical region of many nations that have varying laws and cultures is not apples to apples?
When will people stop believing that the U.S. is completely homogeneous?

Sure, we have one currency, one federal system, and mostly the same language, but I think in many ways California and, say, Alabama, are more different than France and Spain or even France and Sweden.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 3:13 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by dimondpark View Post
I have to agree with Shiro about the whole CSA/MSA thing---its not really apples to apples is it? More like apples and oranges.

Would be nice if the world had a uniform system for comparative purposes.
Well... Sounds like they are comparing defined population centers with 150,000+ residents. That much sounds pretty apples-to-apples to me.

However, if I were to pick a flaw, I would start with the seemingly arbitrarily chosen 150,000 population point. What makes that so special? It would bias a place like the U.S., which has operated with porous internal borders for a couple of centuries, versus western Europe which just began to follow suit less than two decades ago. China and Russia are better comparisons to the U.S. for that reason alone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 3:32 PM
SHiRO's Avatar
SHiRO SHiRO is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 15,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Well... Sounds like they are comparing defined population centers with 150,000+ residents. That much sounds pretty apples-to-apples to me.
Except they omit more than half of those for Western Europe giving it just 186 "cities" where almost 400 should be. How is that fair or "apples to apples"?
And even then..., it's 400 by our own metric and not the much less strict American definition of metro area.

So yeah, more GDP is generated by US cities if you pretend that 1/2 of European cities are not cities...
__________________
For some the coast signifies the end of their country and for some it signifies the beginning of the world...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 6:07 PM
Centropolis's Avatar
Centropolis Centropolis is offline
disneypilled verhoevenist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: saint louis
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
When will people stop believing that the U.S. is completely homogeneous?

Sure, we have one currency, one federal system, and mostly the same language, but I thi in many ways California and, say, Alabama, are more different than France and Spain or even France and Sweden.
Heh, working class and country style deep southern and Spanglish are not compatable.
__________________
You may Think you are vaccinated but are you Maxx-Vaxxed ™!? Find out how you can “Maxx” your Covid-36 Vaxxination today!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 6:26 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHiRO View Post
Except they omit more than half of those for Western Europe giving it just 186 "cities" where almost 400 should be. How is that fair or "apples to apples"?
And even then..., it's 400 by our own metric and not the much less strict American definition of metro area.



in the US, Tilburg and Eindhoven might have been lumped together as one metro since they are kinda close. At least the way you drove they seemed close. haha

Same thing with Den Hague and Rotterdam. or Amsterdam/ Utrecht.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 6:44 PM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
When will people stop believing that the U.S. is completely homogeneous?

Sure, we have one currency, one federal system, and mostly the same language, but I think in many ways California and, say, Alabama, are more different than France and Spain or even France and Sweden.
I don't know anybody who thinks the U.S. is homogenous.

With a nation as geographically expansive as the U.S., there are going to be regionalisms which lead to differences between Alabama and California. A place like Denmark is too small for this, but it isn't like this doesn't occur in other European nations. Scotland and England could easily be two countries. Bavaria is very distinct from Hamburg and Berlin. And what about Walloon and Flanders? Or Paris and the South?

The point is there is still a unifying "American" culture, regardless of if you're in suburban Montgomery or on Sunset in L.A. Germany has a unifying culture that is distinct from Poland, though.

Also, lumping Europe, a vast swath of very distinct official nations (not subnational entities), together like the article does and you appear to have no problem with is doing the same thing as your claim of it seeming to make the U.S. "homogenous." Homogenous isn't the term I'd use though. Maybe a single, unified, national identity and culture (with subcultures within?). Europe isn't one country and has much more distinctions and variations than the U.S. (which has a lot of that in it's own right). I'd say Belarus is a lot more different from France than Alabama is from Cali.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 6:51 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
Also, when will people get comparing one nation to a geographical region of many nations that have varying laws and cultures is not apples to apples?
But comparing one nation to one much smaller nation is also not apples to apples.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
The point is there is still a unifying "American" culture, regardless of if you're in suburban Montgomery or on Sunset in L.A. Germany has a unifying culture that is distinct from Poland, though.
As I have before on this forum, I dispute this statement. Germany and Poland perhaps - Poland until fairly recently was behind the Iron Curtain - but I don't find Germany and the Netherlands, Belgium and France, or even France and Germany to be any more different, in many respects, than the Deep South and New England.


And more to the point, this article/study isn't about culture, it's about economies. The EU has a fairly open economy, and Western Europe shares a common urban history. In fact, I would expect the various countries of Western Europe to be much more similar in terms of the percentage of the economy driven by large cities than the various U.S. states are.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 6:55 PM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,480
True, but it is a more apt comparison than comparing a country to a subnational entity.

There isn't a perfect country of comparison to the U.S., otherwise we'd all be sick of hearing the same comparison. There isn't a lot of countries in the same league as the U.S. is in wrt population Those that are do not have the same standards that the developed world does. The closest comparison would be a very small collection of islands called Japan, which still only has 1/3rd the population of the U.S.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 7:02 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,146
You are obsessing over this "national entity" point.

EU countries have a common history and an open economy. That's enough to make them, collectively, comparable to the U.S. for purposes of this study.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 7:11 PM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,480
I'm not obsessing over anything. What is this obsession you (and by that, collectively, Americans on this forum about these topics) have with lumping a very diverse region into one entity just because it is easier to make mindless comparisons to the U.S. with. It is the equivalent of thinking Africa is one country.

What is this European "common history"? AFAIC, what was happening in Sofia wasn't necessarily happening in Lille at points in history. If these places were so homogenous and shared a common history, culture, beliefs, etc., don't you think these places would all just be one country?

Unless you specifically say EU or Western Europe, you have to keep in mind "Europe" includes poor, developing countries such as the Ukraine, Belarus, Bulgaria, and Russia. The U.S. may be poor by Western standards, but no American state is a developing area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 7:27 PM
novawolverine novawolverine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,942
It's fine to lump in all of Europe together if you're making a comparison that puts Europe in a positive light relative to the US.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 7:37 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
I'm not obsessing over anything. What is this obsession you (and by that, collectively, Americans on this forum about these topics) have with lumping a very diverse region into one entity just because it is easier to make mindless comparisons to the U.S. with. It is the equivalent of thinking Africa is one country.

What is this European "common history"? AFAIC, what was happening in Sofia wasn't necessarily happening in Lille at points in history. If these places were so homogenous and shared a common history, culture, beliefs, etc., don't you think these places would all just be one country?

Unless you specifically say EU or Western Europe, you have to keep in mind "Europe" includes poor, developing countries such as the Ukraine, Belarus, Bulgaria, and Russia. The U.S. may be poor by Western standards, but no American state is a developing area.
Thinking of Europe as one entity is like thinking of Africa as one entity?


Some of Europe's "common history" (all encompassing perhaps not the entire continent, but certainly more than any one country):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years%27_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanseatic_League
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years'_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Wars
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II


As for why Western Europe isn't all just one country... dynastic rule. Before the 19th century countries were "property" of kings. They didn't combine them, except through marriage, any sooner than you would combine your land with your neighbor's, even though they were probably at least distantly related. France and Germany are different countries because a Frankish emporer had more than one son, for god's sake.

And incidentally, most of Europe has been one country before, twice (see: Roman Empire, Carolingian Empire), and with the process of European integration that began after WWII, probably will be again some day.

Lastly, the study does say "Western Europe" (look at the graph in the OP), and my definition of "Europe" never includes Russia.

Last edited by 10023; Apr 19, 2012 at 7:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 8:03 PM
tocoto tocoto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Boston
Posts: 361
I don't think cities standing by themselves have much to do with the relative wealth of the USA and EU. Cities and nations as complex political entities with people in them...

an interesting article

http://earlywarn.blogspot.com/2012/0...dp-growth.html

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 8:11 PM
SHiRO's Avatar
SHiRO SHiRO is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 15,728
The title says EU.
The graph says Eurozone.
And the text says Europe.

Which is it?
__________________
For some the coast signifies the end of their country and for some it signifies the beginning of the world...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 8:11 PM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10023 View Post
Thinking of Europe as one entity is like thinking of Africa as one entity?


Some of Europe's "common history" (all encompassing perhaps not the entire continent, but certainly more than any one country):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years%27_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanseatic_League
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years'_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Wars
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II


As for why Western Europe isn't all just one country... dynastic rule. Before the 19th century countries were "property" of kings. They didn't combine them, except through marriage, any sooner than you would combine your land with your neighbor's, even though they were probably at least distantly related. France and Germany are different countries because a Frankish emporer had more than one son, for god's sake.

And incidentally, most of Europe has been one country before, twice (see: Roman Empire, Carolingian Empire), and with the process of European integration that began after WWII, probably will be again some day.

Lastly, the study does say "Western Europe" (look at the graph in the OP), and my definition of "Europe" never includes Russia.
Yes, you don't need to snootily laugh either. Europe isn't one country. Africa isn't one country. I've seen people on this very website mock people who think of Africa as one country. Yet it seems a-ok to do this with Europe.

Yeah, there were times when certain countries in Europe were together, but it was never the entire continent, and these things happened so long ago that since then distinct cultures were able to develop. You're telling me the only distinction between France and Germany as distinct nations in their own right is because of a king's son? I'd think at some point, the two would've separated anyway. Both countries don't even share the same language family, nor art and architecture, history (one was Roman, one wasn't, for example), and culture.

A lot of common history is shared between nations in a geographical area. That doesn't mean each country doesn't still have it's own story and distinction, otherwise they wouldn't exist. There'd be no incentive to, no nationalism. China and Japan shared a few good moments, but they are hardly the same place.

You also seem to like brushing over the fact that there are some poor, developing nations in this "Europe" that the U.S. doesn't have. That in and of itself makes this not a very apt comparison. Or should we compared the U.S. to Indonesia as well? Yeah...that sounds like a fair comparison.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 8:46 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,146
You're either missing the point or willfully ignoring it.

There are no "poor, developing countries" in the European Union. France and Germany are not China and Japan. This is an economic study, and the EU is tightly integrated economically.

How much time have you spent in France and Germany, btw?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 9:00 PM
SHiRO's Avatar
SHiRO SHiRO is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 15,728
While I agree that in this case the EU (or Western Europe even better) is perfectely comparable to the US, of course there are poor and developing countries in the EU. Bulgaria and Romania for starters.

Everyone knows that the EU is not a country. Everyone also should know there indeed is a unifying European culture and history which should (and does imo) provide for an ever more closely integrated union (other driving forces being economics and politics) in a time of globalisation where the nation state becomes less important.

All this has no bearing on the original report however, it seems we're getting a little off topic.
__________________
For some the coast signifies the end of their country and for some it signifies the beginning of the world...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 9:12 PM
SHiRO's Avatar
SHiRO SHiRO is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 15,728
The report claims that

1. US cities provide for a larger % of GDP than European cities.
well, only if you exclude about 1/2 of the European cities and count them as rural.
It's also unclear what they are counting with the cities they do include. city limits? urban area? metro area? if so, by what measure?


2. the US is "wealthier" because of that
GDP =/= wealth
__________________
For some the coast signifies the end of their country and for some it signifies the beginning of the world...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2012, 9:21 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 21,146
To be clear, I'm aware that Bulgaria and Romania are in the EU, and I guess the IMF does define them as "developing countries" (along with Argentina, Poland and some other places that aren't really that poor). Yes they are poorer than countries in Western Europe, but not nearly so enough to justify the Africa comparison. They were also both once part of the Roman Empire, share the same cultural heritage from classical Greece, etc.

Otherwise agreed with what SHiRO says above (yes that's right).

But ok, moving on...
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:58 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.