Tuesday, April 17, 2007
The world's most important capital city
Which is the world's most important capital city? Important in what respect? (you may ask) You choose the context as you state your reason for the choice. I listed my opinion of the 10 most important cities in order, on the above poll. For the context, read between the lines.>
World's Most Expensive Street Rents
New York's Fifth Avenue Charges World's Highest Rents
Oct. 26 (Bloomberg) -- Rents on New York's Fifth Avenue rose 38 percent during the past year as retailers such as Abercrombie & Fitch Co. competed for space on the world's most expensive shopping street, Cushman & Wakefield Inc. said.
Prime rents were $13,993 per square meter a year at the end of June, up from $10,226 a year earlier, New York-based Cushman & Wakefield said in a report published today. Rents in Causeway Bay in Hong Kong jumped 90 percent to $11,653, leapfrogging Avenue des Champs-Elysees in Paris as the second-most expensive street.
"The international race for space is continuing unabated,'' Darren Yates, the head of U.K. market analysis at Cushman & Wakefield who wrote the report, said in a statement. "A growing number of global brands are vying for limited space on the pavements of the world's top shopping destinations.''
LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA, which has a Fifth Avenue store, and Cie. Financiere Richemont AG are among luxury-goods companies opening new stores as the 134 billion-euro ($162 billion) industry rebounds from a slump in the second half of 2003. The global luxury-goods market will grow about 7 percent this year, fueled by consumers with more money to spend in the U.S. and Asia, according to a Bain & Co. study from this week.
London Rivalry
New Bond Street toppled Oxford Street as London's most expensive shopping street for the first time in 20 years after rents rose 25 percent in local currency terms to $6,753 per square meter a year. Oxford Street rents increased 5.3 percent to $5,788.
New Bond Street remains in fourth place, according to real- estate services provider Cushman & Wakefield, which considers only the most expensive street in each of the 47 countries it surveys to compile a global ranking. The report covered 237 streets and malls. Rents rose by 8 percent on average.
Madison Avenue and East 57th Street in New York are more expensive than either Avenue des Champs-Elysees, where rents are $8,024, or New Bond Street, said Cushman & Wakefield.
Prime rents on Madison Avenue are $10,764, while East 57th Street's top price is $8,073. Abercrombie, a New Albany, Ohio-based casual-clothing retailer catering mainly to teenagers, is opening a 34,000-square-foot store on the corner of 5th Avenue and 56th Street.
"The hottest stretch of Fifth Avenue is north of 49th Street,'' Gene Spiegelman, executive director of retail services at Cushman & Wakefield in New York, said in the statement. ``We are seeing luxury brands being joined by the popular fast-fashion brands, all in search of global brand recognition.''
Zurich, Moscow
Zurich's Bahnhofstrasse leapt into the top ten cities after rents in Switzerland's largest city jumped 47 percent to $3,513. Moscow's Tervskaya street was the only one to drop out of the top 10, falling to 11th place from seventh as rents fell 2.9 percent to $3,400.
Rents on Krasta in the Latvian capital of Riga fell 38 percent to $363 per square meter a year, the cheapest in the survey. Beirut is the most expensive city in the Middle East, costing $1,500 in the city center.
The following is a table of the 10 most expensive shopping streets by city. Rents quoted are in dollars and are calculated per square meter per year. The 2004 ranking is in brackets.
Oct. 26 (Bloomberg) -- Rents on New York's Fifth Avenue rose 38 percent during the past year as retailers such as Abercrombie & Fitch Co. competed for space on the world's most expensive shopping street, Cushman & Wakefield Inc. said.
Prime rents were $13,993 per square meter a year at the end of June, up from $10,226 a year earlier, New York-based Cushman & Wakefield said in a report published today. Rents in Causeway Bay in Hong Kong jumped 90 percent to $11,653, leapfrogging Avenue des Champs-Elysees in Paris as the second-most expensive street.
"The international race for space is continuing unabated,'' Darren Yates, the head of U.K. market analysis at Cushman & Wakefield who wrote the report, said in a statement. "A growing number of global brands are vying for limited space on the pavements of the world's top shopping destinations.''
LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA, which has a Fifth Avenue store, and Cie. Financiere Richemont AG are among luxury-goods companies opening new stores as the 134 billion-euro ($162 billion) industry rebounds from a slump in the second half of 2003. The global luxury-goods market will grow about 7 percent this year, fueled by consumers with more money to spend in the U.S. and Asia, according to a Bain & Co. study from this week.
London Rivalry
New Bond Street toppled Oxford Street as London's most expensive shopping street for the first time in 20 years after rents rose 25 percent in local currency terms to $6,753 per square meter a year. Oxford Street rents increased 5.3 percent to $5,788.
New Bond Street remains in fourth place, according to real- estate services provider Cushman & Wakefield, which considers only the most expensive street in each of the 47 countries it surveys to compile a global ranking. The report covered 237 streets and malls. Rents rose by 8 percent on average.
Madison Avenue and East 57th Street in New York are more expensive than either Avenue des Champs-Elysees, where rents are $8,024, or New Bond Street, said Cushman & Wakefield.
Prime rents on Madison Avenue are $10,764, while East 57th Street's top price is $8,073. Abercrombie, a New Albany, Ohio-based casual-clothing retailer catering mainly to teenagers, is opening a 34,000-square-foot store on the corner of 5th Avenue and 56th Street.
"The hottest stretch of Fifth Avenue is north of 49th Street,'' Gene Spiegelman, executive director of retail services at Cushman & Wakefield in New York, said in the statement. ``We are seeing luxury brands being joined by the popular fast-fashion brands, all in search of global brand recognition.''
Zurich, Moscow
Zurich's Bahnhofstrasse leapt into the top ten cities after rents in Switzerland's largest city jumped 47 percent to $3,513. Moscow's Tervskaya street was the only one to drop out of the top 10, falling to 11th place from seventh as rents fell 2.9 percent to $3,400.
Rents on Krasta in the Latvian capital of Riga fell 38 percent to $363 per square meter a year, the cheapest in the survey. Beirut is the most expensive city in the Middle East, costing $1,500 in the city center.
The following is a table of the 10 most expensive shopping streets by city. Rents quoted are in dollars and are calculated per square meter per year. The 2004 ranking is in brackets.
Code:>
City Street 2005 Rent 2004 Rent New York Fifth Avenue 13,993 10,226 (1) Hong Kong Causeway Bay 11,653 6,126 (3) Paris Avenue des Champs 8,024 7,648 (2) Elysees London New Bond Street* 6,753 5,564 (4) Tokyo Ginza 5,578 3,348 (9) Dublin Grafton Street 4,423 4,103 (5) Sydney Pitt Street Mall 3,807 3,449 (8) Seoul Myeongdong 3,764 3,241 (10) Munich Kaufingerstrasse 3,632 3,577 (6) Zurich Bahnhofstrasse 3,513 2,395 (13)>* Oxford Street was London's most expensive street in 2004>
Which city combination do you think is the most important in the world?
Which City combination do you think is the most important in the world?
Shanghai + Hong Kong + Taipei + Beijing = 50 million pop
Tokyo + Seoul = 50 million
Singapore+Kuala Lumpur + Bangkok + Jakarta = 40 milion
New York + Toronto + Mexico City = 48 million
Sao Paulus + Buenos Aires + Santiago = 42 million
London + Paris + Berlin+ Rome + Moscow =50 million
New Delhi + Bombay + Dhaka + Islamabad = 48 million
pop = population>
Shanghai + Hong Kong + Taipei + Beijing = 50 million pop
Tokyo + Seoul = 50 million
Singapore+Kuala Lumpur + Bangkok + Jakarta = 40 milion
New York + Toronto + Mexico City = 48 million
Sao Paulus + Buenos Aires + Santiago = 42 million
London + Paris + Berlin+ Rome + Moscow =50 million
New Delhi + Bombay + Dhaka + Islamabad = 48 million
pop = population>
London,Home Counties and Thames Valley Population
Greater London 7,465,000
Berkshire 803,657
Bedfordshire 388,600
Buckinghamshire 958,000
Essex 1,318,400
Hertfordshire 1,033,977
Hampshire 1,600,000
Kent 1,329,718
Surrey 1,200,000
Sussex 1,100,00
Oxfordshire 605,488
Total Population 17,809,932
These are just the nearest counties surrounding London, but there are other counties with in easy communting distance such as Cambridge which have been excluded.>
Off Shore Skyscrapers
What do you guys think about off shore suburbs skyscrapers built on piers sticking out of the ocean.I think that they would be alot cooler that traditonal suburbs.kind of like oil platform like this.
>
>
Raising New Orleans
I listened to a discussion about raising the portions of New Orleans that are below sea level to above sea level on a the radio the other day.
The question was: could land fill be used to accomplish the task. Not surprisingly, the number of truck loads of fill and the ability to truck them to New Orleans from across the country made this one a financial and logistical mission: impossible.
But it did get me thinking. Are there other alternatives. I came up with one that I would like to throw out here. I'm no engineer, so I have no idea about practicality, but at least this one is good for brain storming:
Is if possible to create a device that crosses the Mississippi north of New Orleans (but still allows for shipping to go through) that would trap all that wonderful and abundanat silt heading down the river to the gulf, so that it could be used to raise New Orleans?
Look, this one may be a bit "over the top" (literally), but desperate times deserve desperate measures. Is this one even a remote possiblity?>
The question was: could land fill be used to accomplish the task. Not surprisingly, the number of truck loads of fill and the ability to truck them to New Orleans from across the country made this one a financial and logistical mission: impossible.
But it did get me thinking. Are there other alternatives. I came up with one that I would like to throw out here. I'm no engineer, so I have no idea about practicality, but at least this one is good for brain storming:
Is if possible to create a device that crosses the Mississippi north of New Orleans (but still allows for shipping to go through) that would trap all that wonderful and abundanat silt heading down the river to the gulf, so that it could be used to raise New Orleans?
Look, this one may be a bit "over the top" (literally), but desperate times deserve desperate measures. Is this one even a remote possiblity?>
THE CONCRETE JUNGLE: street scenes of your city!
I wanna see some street and urban scenes of your city!
By the way, for people posting images, if possible can you limit them to 6 images per post!
Here's from Hong Kong
>
By the way, for people posting images, if possible can you limit them to 6 images per post!
Here's from Hong Kong
>
Lisbon's 1755 Earthquake a Warning for Today
Lisbon's 1755 earthquake a warning for today
By Barbara Cornell
Wed Oct 26, 2:43 AM ET
LISBON (Reuters) - The aftershocks of a truly epic earthquake are measured not by magnitude or distance but by centuries.
Exactly 250 years after one of the world's most devastating quakes transformed regal Lisbon into a ghost town, experts from around the world will gather to find a prologue for the future.
The earthquake that hit Lisbon on November 1, 1755, rang Paris' church bells and triggered a tsunami from Norway to North America. It sent shockwaves through Enlightenment Europe, changing forever the way earthquakes were perceived and handled.
"We have to call attention to the authorities and the population in general that this past event, this terrible event, may come again," said Carlos Sousa Oliveira, president of the Portuguese Society for Earthquake Engineering.
"We don't know when. It might not be as strong. But we have to prepare to face it."
About 200 seismologists, engineers, architects, urban planners, historians, and even philosophers are expected at a four-day conference here, beginning on the November 1 anniversary.
Experts will present testimony from this month's killer South Asian quake and lessons from recent disasters, such as northwestern Turkey in 1999 and the Indian Ocean in 2004.
They will discuss research and preparedness in earthquake-prone countries, like Japan, Italy and Russia, and try to raise awareness of danger elsewhere.
"People living in Portugal have no idea of the risk. They are not aware of the risk because earthquakes have a long return period, meaning they can take hundreds of years to happen again," said Alfredo Campos Costa, an earthquake engineer working in seismic risk assessment research.
Experts concede that knowledge means little unless it is applied, and that the most potent argument for change, such as designing safer buildings, is the memory of previous disasters.
"It's folk memory rather than regulation that decides how people build," said Robin Spence, a professor of architectural engineering at Cambridge University and president of the European Association for Earthquake Engineering.
FIRST MODERN DISASTER
Before the conference, experts will hold a one-day workshop on October 31 to draw up a Europe-wide strategy to deal with the risk of quakes.
"We don't know exactly what are the most prone areas in terms of seismic risk and worse, we don't know how to mitigate this risk," said Campos Costa.
"If something happens like the 1755 earthquake today ... all of Europe is going to pay because we are all united at the economic level ... Europe is nowadays like a city," he added.
The 1755 earthquake, which also devastated Morocco and claimed around 70,000 lives, shattered the prevailing optimism that this was the best of all possible worlds.
Scientists say it was the first modern disaster, with coordinated emergency responses and a reconstruction plan that was drawn up with a possible, future disaster in mind.
"The event and the administrative organization afterwards can be regarded as the beginning of seismology, because it was the first time that a government took responsibility for disaster management," said Karl Fuchs, a geophysics professor and former director of the Geophysical Institute at the University Fridericiana at Karlsruhe, Germany.
BURNING CANDLES, BROKEN BUILDINGS
The earthquake struck on a sunny Saturday in Lisbon, one of Europe's richest cities and an international trading center.
Tremors, so violent that they stirred waters off Finland, toppled buildings and set off a devastating tsunami that swept through the city's center. Fires, blamed on church candles, burned for six days. Aftershocks continued for nine months.
The earthquake, estimated at 8.75 on the Richter scale, knocked down all but 3,000 homes and ruined 53 palaces, 32 churches and 46 monasteries and convents. Today the skeleton of the Convento do Carmo still haunts the Lisbon skyline.
The quake's epicentre and magnitude are still debated. But what is certain is how quickly the authorities responded.
"Bury the dead and feed the living," are words attributed to Sebastiao Jose de Carvalho e Melo, the Marques de Pombal who was Portugal's virtual dictator at the time and whose statue gazes from a major traffic circle toward the city he rebuilt.
Under his direction, Lisbon immediately took such steps as erecting gallows to deter looters and salvaging building materials from debris.
Assessment questionnaires -- asking people how many shocks were felt, what kind of damage was caused -- were sent out. Some of the questions are the same as those used today.
Pombal is mostly remembered for a construction plan for Lisbon's Baixa neighbourhood which created a grid of level streets and uniform buildings using construction techniques designed to resist both earthquakes and fire.
Although recent disasters show man's science is still unable sometimes to cope with nature's ferocity, the Lisbon conference will show how far seismology has come since the 1755 quake.
"In Japan, almost all scientists have given up predicting future earthquakes," said Takashi Furumura, a seismologist at the University of Tokyo's Earthquake Research Institute.
He uses supercomputers to see how the ground shifts during quakes. Since many population centres are in sedimentary basins, his research can help cities detect how vulnerable they are.
The idea, Furumura said, is to anticipate ground movement before a seismic wave hits and oscillate buildings in the opposite direction so the motion cancels out.
"It's a dream," he said, "but who knew we could go to the moon?">
By Barbara Cornell
Wed Oct 26, 2:43 AM ET
LISBON (Reuters) - The aftershocks of a truly epic earthquake are measured not by magnitude or distance but by centuries.
Exactly 250 years after one of the world's most devastating quakes transformed regal Lisbon into a ghost town, experts from around the world will gather to find a prologue for the future.
The earthquake that hit Lisbon on November 1, 1755, rang Paris' church bells and triggered a tsunami from Norway to North America. It sent shockwaves through Enlightenment Europe, changing forever the way earthquakes were perceived and handled.
"We have to call attention to the authorities and the population in general that this past event, this terrible event, may come again," said Carlos Sousa Oliveira, president of the Portuguese Society for Earthquake Engineering.
"We don't know when. It might not be as strong. But we have to prepare to face it."
About 200 seismologists, engineers, architects, urban planners, historians, and even philosophers are expected at a four-day conference here, beginning on the November 1 anniversary.
Experts will present testimony from this month's killer South Asian quake and lessons from recent disasters, such as northwestern Turkey in 1999 and the Indian Ocean in 2004.
They will discuss research and preparedness in earthquake-prone countries, like Japan, Italy and Russia, and try to raise awareness of danger elsewhere.
"People living in Portugal have no idea of the risk. They are not aware of the risk because earthquakes have a long return period, meaning they can take hundreds of years to happen again," said Alfredo Campos Costa, an earthquake engineer working in seismic risk assessment research.
Experts concede that knowledge means little unless it is applied, and that the most potent argument for change, such as designing safer buildings, is the memory of previous disasters.
"It's folk memory rather than regulation that decides how people build," said Robin Spence, a professor of architectural engineering at Cambridge University and president of the European Association for Earthquake Engineering.
FIRST MODERN DISASTER
Before the conference, experts will hold a one-day workshop on October 31 to draw up a Europe-wide strategy to deal with the risk of quakes.
"We don't know exactly what are the most prone areas in terms of seismic risk and worse, we don't know how to mitigate this risk," said Campos Costa.
"If something happens like the 1755 earthquake today ... all of Europe is going to pay because we are all united at the economic level ... Europe is nowadays like a city," he added.
The 1755 earthquake, which also devastated Morocco and claimed around 70,000 lives, shattered the prevailing optimism that this was the best of all possible worlds.
Scientists say it was the first modern disaster, with coordinated emergency responses and a reconstruction plan that was drawn up with a possible, future disaster in mind.
"The event and the administrative organization afterwards can be regarded as the beginning of seismology, because it was the first time that a government took responsibility for disaster management," said Karl Fuchs, a geophysics professor and former director of the Geophysical Institute at the University Fridericiana at Karlsruhe, Germany.
BURNING CANDLES, BROKEN BUILDINGS
The earthquake struck on a sunny Saturday in Lisbon, one of Europe's richest cities and an international trading center.
Tremors, so violent that they stirred waters off Finland, toppled buildings and set off a devastating tsunami that swept through the city's center. Fires, blamed on church candles, burned for six days. Aftershocks continued for nine months.
The earthquake, estimated at 8.75 on the Richter scale, knocked down all but 3,000 homes and ruined 53 palaces, 32 churches and 46 monasteries and convents. Today the skeleton of the Convento do Carmo still haunts the Lisbon skyline.
The quake's epicentre and magnitude are still debated. But what is certain is how quickly the authorities responded.
"Bury the dead and feed the living," are words attributed to Sebastiao Jose de Carvalho e Melo, the Marques de Pombal who was Portugal's virtual dictator at the time and whose statue gazes from a major traffic circle toward the city he rebuilt.
Under his direction, Lisbon immediately took such steps as erecting gallows to deter looters and salvaging building materials from debris.
Assessment questionnaires -- asking people how many shocks were felt, what kind of damage was caused -- were sent out. Some of the questions are the same as those used today.
Pombal is mostly remembered for a construction plan for Lisbon's Baixa neighbourhood which created a grid of level streets and uniform buildings using construction techniques designed to resist both earthquakes and fire.
Although recent disasters show man's science is still unable sometimes to cope with nature's ferocity, the Lisbon conference will show how far seismology has come since the 1755 quake.
"In Japan, almost all scientists have given up predicting future earthquakes," said Takashi Furumura, a seismologist at the University of Tokyo's Earthquake Research Institute.
He uses supercomputers to see how the ground shifts during quakes. Since many population centres are in sedimentary basins, his research can help cities detect how vulnerable they are.
The idea, Furumura said, is to anticipate ground movement before a seismic wave hits and oscillate buildings in the opposite direction so the motion cancels out.
"It's a dream," he said, "but who knew we could go to the moon?">
Can US afford to NOT have a major city at mouth of the Miss?
We talk about rebuilding New Orleans in terms of, well, New Orleans. We ask, is it insane to rebuild a city below sea level that is a threat to flood like it did during Katrina again? We look at a city that was by-passed by the growth and progess of other southern cities and wonder if NO was on the way out even before Katrina. And we rightfully question what type of city could be built on the very toxic site that NO has become.
We ask a lot of questions about New Orleans, but few about the United States.
Maybe the most important question is this: CAN THE UNITED STATES AFFORD TO NOT HAVE A MAJOR PORT CITY AT THE MOUTH OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER?
Of course that question is the same as "Can the US afford to not have New Orleans?" Despite being below sea level in many places, there is no option for another site for the harbor. Upstream will not provide the depth needed for gulf and ocean traveling ships, downstream is a marshy imposibility. New Orleans marks the spot....the X....and it is the only viable place for the port.
The incredible bounty of the interior of the US, the vast interior of the US, that huge Mississippi River basin, stretching from Pennsylvania to Montana with so many places inbetween is totally dependent on large scale shipping that heads for the port of New Orleans. No amount of trucks or trains could handle this commerce.
And like it was vritually throughout US history, our nation is totally dependent on New Orleans for its commerce to survive. The US and France cared little about the lands of the Lousiiana Purchase; it was the city of New Orelans that was the desired prize. Still is.
And I cannot imagine a port facility like NO being rebuilt as a small city, far shrunken in size. A major city is needed.
So maybe those levees that wouldn't be fixed to prtoect a failed venture like New Orleans will have to be fixed to protect the US far more than NO itself.>
We ask a lot of questions about New Orleans, but few about the United States.
Maybe the most important question is this: CAN THE UNITED STATES AFFORD TO NOT HAVE A MAJOR PORT CITY AT THE MOUTH OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER?
Of course that question is the same as "Can the US afford to not have New Orleans?" Despite being below sea level in many places, there is no option for another site for the harbor. Upstream will not provide the depth needed for gulf and ocean traveling ships, downstream is a marshy imposibility. New Orleans marks the spot....the X....and it is the only viable place for the port.
The incredible bounty of the interior of the US, the vast interior of the US, that huge Mississippi River basin, stretching from Pennsylvania to Montana with so many places inbetween is totally dependent on large scale shipping that heads for the port of New Orleans. No amount of trucks or trains could handle this commerce.
And like it was vritually throughout US history, our nation is totally dependent on New Orleans for its commerce to survive. The US and France cared little about the lands of the Lousiiana Purchase; it was the city of New Orelans that was the desired prize. Still is.
And I cannot imagine a port facility like NO being rebuilt as a small city, far shrunken in size. A major city is needed.
So maybe those levees that wouldn't be fixed to prtoect a failed venture like New Orleans will have to be fixed to protect the US far more than NO itself.>
the rhein ruhr metro and the london metro ( i will not understand) please help !
this are real curious for me, when i take a look on google there are some sites they say london metro counts only 11-13 million and the rhein ruhr counts around 6 million , but there are other sites they say that the london metro counts around 18 million and the rhein ruhr counts around 12-13 million inhabitans , whats really i think that the 6 mllion figures only counts the inner rhein ruhr cites like duisburg - essen - dortmund , Wuppertal , remscheid and recklinghausen and hagen , and the other with 12 million are including cologne , bonn , möchengladbach , aachen stollberg , hamm, wesel , leverkusen . also alo including the famous "rheinland " ;-) ;ok but what is with the stats for i will understand on other hand d there are a big rural area between the southern english coastal cities and greater lon london what counts 18 mil lion 
: are they including the south english cost with brighton , portsmouth , exeter .. okay than don , this are not the fact by rhein ruhr !? please help whats are realistic with this figures whats are not ???>
: are they including the south english cost with brighton , portsmouth , exeter .. okay than don , this are not the fact by rhein ruhr !? please help whats are realistic with this figures whats are not ???>
Beijing Concept
I love Beijing alot,
I miss Beijing,
Beijing Beijing
I live in New York, I miss Beijing,
I can choose both,
tell me what do you think about Beijing and NYC.....>
I miss Beijing,
Beijing Beijing
I live in New York, I miss Beijing,
I can choose both,
tell me what do you think about Beijing and NYC.....>
Top Ten Countries with the best cities!
Post your list and some of the better cities in the country.>
Your city outskirts or suburbs
I wanna see images of scenery or views right outside your city. Or to say, the outskirts or suburbs.
Some images right outside the Hong Kong city center
>
Some images right outside the Hong Kong city center
>
Will Metro-Miami pass Chicagoland in highrises?
The totals of the Miami and Chicago Metros according to Emporis:
Miami Metro(pop 5,361,723)
Completed: 945
U/C: 130
Approved: 137
Proposed: 88
Total: 1300
Chicago Metro(pop 9,608,458)
Completed: 1145
U/C: 31
Approved: 40
Proposed: 86
Total: 1302
Momentum is on Miami's side. Do you think South Florida will Pass Chicago-land for second most highrises in the U.S.?>
Miami Metro(pop 5,361,723)
Completed: 945
U/C: 130
Approved: 137
Proposed: 88
Total: 1300
Chicago Metro(pop 9,608,458)
Completed: 1145
U/C: 31
Approved: 40
Proposed: 86
Total: 1302
Momentum is on Miami's side. Do you think South Florida will Pass Chicago-land for second most highrises in the U.S.?>
Favorite American City (besides the ones inside)
What is your favorite American city besides NYC, Chicago, L.A., Miami, Seattle, Boston, and San Francisco?
You can make a top ten if you wish.>
You can make a top ten if you wish.>
The amazing density of NYC!!!
The density of the New York City area is amazing. Consider the following populations that are located within 25 miles of the New York City border:
Population (Approx) Square Kilometers (Approx)
NYC 8M 780
Hudson Cty/NJ 610,000 162
Essex Cty/NJ 796,000 336
Union Cty/NJ 530,000 273
Bergen Cty/NJ 897,000 606
Passaic Cty, NJ 498,000 510
Nassau Cty, NY 1.3M 1,200
Westchester, NY950,00 1,300
By contrast, in London:
Greater London 7M 1,600
Kent 1.3M 3,700
Essex 1.3M 3,700
Herts 1M 1,600
Buckinghamshire 479,000 1,900
Surrey 1M 1,670
In Tokyo, the figures are:
12,527,115 (8,444,531 in 23 wards) 2,187.08 km²
Shanghai:
10 million 2700/km²
Chicago:
2,896,016 606.1 km²
Mexico City:
8,605,239 (D.F.) 1,547 km² (D.F.)
Singapore:
4,017,700 692.7 km²
Seoul, however, is dense beyond belief:
10,276,968 607 km²>
Population (Approx) Square Kilometers (Approx)
NYC 8M 780
Hudson Cty/NJ 610,000 162
Essex Cty/NJ 796,000 336
Union Cty/NJ 530,000 273
Bergen Cty/NJ 897,000 606
Passaic Cty, NJ 498,000 510
Nassau Cty, NY 1.3M 1,200
Westchester, NY950,00 1,300
By contrast, in London:
Greater London 7M 1,600
Kent 1.3M 3,700
Essex 1.3M 3,700
Herts 1M 1,600
Buckinghamshire 479,000 1,900
Surrey 1M 1,670
In Tokyo, the figures are:
12,527,115 (8,444,531 in 23 wards) 2,187.08 km²
Shanghai:
10 million 2700/km²
Chicago:
2,896,016 606.1 km²
Mexico City:
8,605,239 (D.F.) 1,547 km² (D.F.)
Singapore:
4,017,700 692.7 km²
Seoul, however, is dense beyond belief:
10,276,968 607 km²>
Midsize and smaller cities- REPRESENT!
Guys, we need to start paying attention to midsize cities as well- let's showcase our own cities that are less than a million people... there are lots of neat developments even in smaller cities these days... let's promote even better development by treating our local developments like the bigger ones in bigger cities.
For example, an 80-storey tower is to a large city, what a quality 12-floor project is to a smaller cities, often.
Let's represent! If you notice my Waterloo, Ontario, Canada threads, you will see what I mean...
-SP!RE>
For example, an 80-storey tower is to a large city, what a quality 12-floor project is to a smaller cities, often.
Let's represent! If you notice my Waterloo, Ontario, Canada threads, you will see what I mean...
-SP!RE>
Boston, San Francisco: unique relationship?
For two cities on opposite coasts and as different as Boston and San Francisco, don't they share an almost spookly similiarity and relationship, as well?
In the US, it's almost like their relationship is unique:
small, compact, dense peninsular central city that is part of a large metropolitan area
similiar status among global cities
major vibrant downtown areas that tend to be smaller versions of what you find in New York and Chicago
out-of-sight real estate prices
unique personalities (not your run-of-the-mill cities)
incredible strength in the fields of education (Cal, Stanford, Harvard, MIT) and the technology that feeds off of it
Boston's relationship with NYC is quite similiar to SF's relationship to LA
traditonal, yet cutting edge>
In the US, it's almost like their relationship is unique:
small, compact, dense peninsular central city that is part of a large metropolitan area
similiar status among global cities
major vibrant downtown areas that tend to be smaller versions of what you find in New York and Chicago
out-of-sight real estate prices
unique personalities (not your run-of-the-mill cities)
incredible strength in the fields of education (Cal, Stanford, Harvard, MIT) and the technology that feeds off of it
Boston's relationship with NYC is quite similiar to SF's relationship to LA
traditonal, yet cutting edge>
Manhattan has the highest average salary in the US
From NY1.com:
PS: I had seen something last year re: the average salary of Manhattanites at about $112,000. Perhaps that was just Manhattan workers whereas this relates to Manhattan residents. Anyway, one would live an EXTREMELY MEAGER existence on $73,000 in NYC.
Here's the article:
Manhattan Has Highest Average Salary Of Any County In The U.S.
August 08, 2005
If you work in Manhattan, the next time you complain about your paycheck you may want to stop your griping.
According to figures from the 2003 Census, Manhattan has the highest average salary of anywhere in the country - an average of $73,000 a year.
The number, of course, is skewed by the large salaries of Wall Street bankers and other high earners.
Brooklyn and Queens also made the list of America's top 30 counties with the most companies. According to the Daily News, businesses in Queens pay an average of more than $36,000, while in Brooklyn it's more than $32,000.
The Bronx and Staten Island didn't make the top 30.
If you're wondering where the lowest average salary is, it's Riverside County, California, east of Los Angeles, where the average workers makes $29,000.>
PS: I had seen something last year re: the average salary of Manhattanites at about $112,000. Perhaps that was just Manhattan workers whereas this relates to Manhattan residents. Anyway, one would live an EXTREMELY MEAGER existence on $73,000 in NYC.
Here's the article:
Manhattan Has Highest Average Salary Of Any County In The U.S.
August 08, 2005
If you work in Manhattan, the next time you complain about your paycheck you may want to stop your griping.
According to figures from the 2003 Census, Manhattan has the highest average salary of anywhere in the country - an average of $73,000 a year.
The number, of course, is skewed by the large salaries of Wall Street bankers and other high earners.
Brooklyn and Queens also made the list of America's top 30 counties with the most companies. According to the Daily News, businesses in Queens pay an average of more than $36,000, while in Brooklyn it's more than $32,000.
The Bronx and Staten Island didn't make the top 30.
If you're wondering where the lowest average salary is, it's Riverside County, California, east of Los Angeles, where the average workers makes $29,000.>
The Making of Modern Asia
The Making of Modern Asia
From the end of empire to the rebirth of China, from the streets of Tokyo to the beaches of Thailand, a journey through Asia's history stops at specific times and places. Reflections on those moments combine to form the theme of this year's summer double issue, which is introduced here by KISHORE MAHBUBANI, one of Asia's leading thinkers on its past—and future
TIME Asia Magazine, issue dated August 15-August 22, 2005 Vol. 166, Nos. 7/8
The 21st century has opened and will close with two puzzles about the rise of Asia. Today, the puzzle is why Asian societies, long in the doldrums, are now successful. At the century's close, by contrast, historians will want to know why Asian societies succeeded so late, taking centuries to catch up with a Europe that they had outperformed for millenniums. Neither puzzle is—or will be—easy to solve.
As a child of a poor Indian immigrant family growing up in the 1950s in the British colony of Singapore, neither I nor my classmates could have even conceived the notion that an Asian century would begin in our lifetimes. We believed that London was the center of the universe; one friend used to tell me that the streets there were paved with gold. Both India and China seemed doomed to eternal poverty. Today, it is clear that the Asian century has begun. What remains unclear, however, are the factors that caused this enormous change. There was, for example, the exhaustion of the European colonial powers after two destructive World Wars, and the consolidation of nationalist sentiments, forged in the anticolonial struggles. There was the rise of the U.S. as the most benign power in human history, creating a new world order that allowed potential rivals to emerge. There were the pressures of cold war competition, which forced the U.S. to encourage the economic success of its allies, especially Japan and the four Asian tigers. Then there were accidents with profound, if unanticipated, consequences, like the Sino-Soviet split, which drove China into the U.S. camp and facilitated Deng Xiaoping's fateful decision to explain why China needed the "Four Modernizations," and financial accidents, like the Plaza Accord of 1985, which caused a rush of Japanese investments into East Asia. There was the cultural attraction of the U.S., which lured hundreds of thousands of young Asians to study there—when they returned home, these Asians provided the yeast for a new cultural confidence in their own societies. Finally, there was globalization, which provided a tremendous boost to Asian economies, especially to China's and India's.
All of these forces for change can be thought of as benign. Yet in paradoxical ways, tragedies, too, contributed to Asia's rise. The Korean War was painful and destructive. But it led to a strategic American decision to encourage the rebuilding of Japan's economy and society—although this sadly swept under the carpet the dreadful record of Japan's actions in World War II. Japan's economic success in turn inspired the four tigers. The Vietnam War was equally painful. But the U.S. decision to hold the line in Indochina allowed Southeast Asian countries to become dynamos, rather than dominoes. The historical verdict on U.S. involvement in Vietnam is unfair: despite the ignominious retreat by the U.S. from Saigon, Vietnam ultimately applied to join the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
The Vietnamese decision to invade Cambodia in December 1978 also triggered some happy, if unintended, consequences. Apart from ending the genocide of Pol Pot, it solidified the Sino-American relationship and gave ASEAN new political resolve. One of the least appreciated contributions to the rise of Asia has been the magic provided by ASEAN in delivering political stability and harmony to Southeast Asia. Despite having greater ethnic, religious, linguistic and cultural diversity than Southeast Europe, the region remained an oasis of peace in the 1990s while the Balkans erupted into a frenzy of ethnic and religious killings. ASEAN saved Southeast Asia, especially during the 1997 Asian financial crisis, which could have led to political havoc in the region. And it is at the heart of the alphabet soup of regional processes that have provided the foundations for even wider regional cooperation. The first-ever Asia-wide summit will be held in Kuala Lumpur in December this year, bringing together the 10 ASEAN leaders with those of China, India, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and Australia. It will be a truly historic meeting. ASEAN made it possible.
Of course, other regions in the world benefited from propitious external developments. The U.S. supported allies in other areas of the developing world—for example, Egypt received as much aid as South Korea. But nowhere else has seen the scale of success in Asia. Why is that? Here, the missing piece of the puzzle has to be the cultural fabric of Asian societies.
Cultural confidence is a necessary but not sufficient condition for development. Centuries of European colonial rule had progressively reduced Asian self-confidence. Future generations of Indian citizens will be wondering how 300 million Indians—including my own ancestors—allowed themselves to be passively ruled by fewer than 100,000 Britons. Those as yet unborn will not understand how deeply the myth of European cultural superiority had been embedded into the Indian psyche. Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Indian Prime Minister, once said the defeat of Russia in 1905 by Japan first triggered the idea of independence for India in his mind. That was a remarkable admission; it implied that intelligent Indians could not conceive of governing themselves before Japan, an Asian power, defeated a European one.
Japan's record in World War II was disastrous. But if Japan had not succeeded early in the 20th century, Asia's development would have come much later. Japan inspired the rise of Asia. Even South Korea, which suffered from brutal Japanese colonial rule, could not have taken off so fast without having Japan as a role model. Asia needs to send Japan a big thank-you note. The tragedy, of course, is that such words of gratitude will not be delivered while Japan remains ambivalent about its own identity, torn between Asia and the West.
Even the Chinese should thank Japan. Tokyo's continuous denials of its army's atrocities in World War II will always complicate relations with Beijing. But China would not be where it is today if Deng had not made that fateful decision to move from communist central planning to a free-market system. Deng took this incredibly bold leap because he had seen how well the Overseas Chinese in Taiwan, Hong Kong and even Singapore had done. Those three tigers—and the fourth, South Korea—were inspired by Japan. The stone that Japan threw into Asia-Pacific waters created ripples that eventually benefited China, too.
What makes Asia's rise so irreversible is the simultaneous success of both China and India. Their political paths could not be more different: India is a democracy, while China retains Communist Party rule. The acceptance of free-market disciplines, however, provides a common economic platform. China and India today are united in their cultural confidence, especially among their youth. Both countries have the most optimistic generation of young people they have seen in centuries. Nothing can hold back the dynamism and vigor they will bring to their societies, and to the whole world.
The West got the first whiff of this cultural confidence at the end of the cold war. Basking in ideological triumph, the West prescribed that all societies should immediately become replicas of Western liberal democracies. Many happily followed this prescription. Few succeeded. Some came to grief. The Asian states, especially China, resisted copying the West. This is how the famous "Asian values" debate was sparked. In refusing Western prescriptions, Asians were perceived to be promoting the superiority of their own values. In fact, they were merely arguing that they should be free to choose their own political paths. Lest there be any misunderstanding, Asian intellectuals—including those from China—agree that the ultimate political destination of all societies is democracy. The destination is not in question; only the route and the timing are.
Sept. 11, 2001, removed all traces of political smugness in Western minds and all claims to Western ideological superiority. It made the West aware that the new ideological challenge from Islam was far bigger than the communist one, which future historians will see as a passing shower. Islam has been around for over 1,300 years, penetrating deeply into the souls of 1.2 billion people. Most Islamic societies have yet to find the right balance between modernization and their religious roots. The success of East Asia, especially its Muslim societies, could eventually trigger the modernization of the Islamic world.
Yet questions remain about the sustainability of Asia's success. Asian countries will continue to stumble from time to time. They cannot rely solely on favorable external developments or on Western ideas—though it is these, not Asian ones, that have driven Asia's growth. The economic principles of Asia's rise come from a Scot, Adam Smith. The political ideologies come from Western thinkers, from John Locke to Karl Marx. The international multilateral grid that has served Asia well—including the U.N., WTO, IMF and World Bank—is essentially a Western creation. Asians have benefited enormously from being passengers on the Western globalization bus.
Soon, they will help drive it. Asians cannot be free riders forever. Yet few Asians have given thought to how they will reshape the world order. The world is keen to learn what new responsibilities Asia will take on. So far, the region has remained silent. On the cultural front, too, Asian passivity is surprising. Bollywood, the sole major exception, is growing in strength. But in virtually every other field, Asians have been consumers of Western cultural products, especially American ones. The Asian economies now produce almost 40% of global GDP, but they have only a minority stake in the world's cultural industries, from film to TV, from books to print media. No Asian TV channel currently can match cnn or the BBC. This distorts global perspectives. The world sees Asia through Western eyes. Asians have yet to explain themselves in their own terms to the rest of the world.
But history teaches us that economic growth eventually generates a cultural renaissance. It would be strange for Asian societies, from Iran to South Korea, from China to India, not to rediscover their rich cultural heritage. The high price paid for Asian antiques in Western auction houses is, perhaps, a first hint of this new cultural pride. But a cultural renaissance cannot just rediscover old glories. It has to provide directions for the future. Just as Asian economies have succeeded by drawing on the best practices of East and West, the Asian cultural renaissance (or renaissances) will also see a fusion of Eastern and Western civilizations, allowing the West to feel included in, not excluded from, Asia's rise.
When Asia's growth achieves a certain momentum by the end of the 21st century, Asian minds will inevitably come up with new conundrums. Why did their ancestors take so long to succeed and modernize? Why did Europe and not Asia trigger the Industrial Revolution? How could a few key capitals in Europe and America make decisions that determined Asian destinies? How could London ever have been more important than Bombay, or Paris more important than Beijing? These questions too will come.>
From the end of empire to the rebirth of China, from the streets of Tokyo to the beaches of Thailand, a journey through Asia's history stops at specific times and places. Reflections on those moments combine to form the theme of this year's summer double issue, which is introduced here by KISHORE MAHBUBANI, one of Asia's leading thinkers on its past—and future
TIME Asia Magazine, issue dated August 15-August 22, 2005 Vol. 166, Nos. 7/8
The 21st century has opened and will close with two puzzles about the rise of Asia. Today, the puzzle is why Asian societies, long in the doldrums, are now successful. At the century's close, by contrast, historians will want to know why Asian societies succeeded so late, taking centuries to catch up with a Europe that they had outperformed for millenniums. Neither puzzle is—or will be—easy to solve.
As a child of a poor Indian immigrant family growing up in the 1950s in the British colony of Singapore, neither I nor my classmates could have even conceived the notion that an Asian century would begin in our lifetimes. We believed that London was the center of the universe; one friend used to tell me that the streets there were paved with gold. Both India and China seemed doomed to eternal poverty. Today, it is clear that the Asian century has begun. What remains unclear, however, are the factors that caused this enormous change. There was, for example, the exhaustion of the European colonial powers after two destructive World Wars, and the consolidation of nationalist sentiments, forged in the anticolonial struggles. There was the rise of the U.S. as the most benign power in human history, creating a new world order that allowed potential rivals to emerge. There were the pressures of cold war competition, which forced the U.S. to encourage the economic success of its allies, especially Japan and the four Asian tigers. Then there were accidents with profound, if unanticipated, consequences, like the Sino-Soviet split, which drove China into the U.S. camp and facilitated Deng Xiaoping's fateful decision to explain why China needed the "Four Modernizations," and financial accidents, like the Plaza Accord of 1985, which caused a rush of Japanese investments into East Asia. There was the cultural attraction of the U.S., which lured hundreds of thousands of young Asians to study there—when they returned home, these Asians provided the yeast for a new cultural confidence in their own societies. Finally, there was globalization, which provided a tremendous boost to Asian economies, especially to China's and India's.
All of these forces for change can be thought of as benign. Yet in paradoxical ways, tragedies, too, contributed to Asia's rise. The Korean War was painful and destructive. But it led to a strategic American decision to encourage the rebuilding of Japan's economy and society—although this sadly swept under the carpet the dreadful record of Japan's actions in World War II. Japan's economic success in turn inspired the four tigers. The Vietnam War was equally painful. But the U.S. decision to hold the line in Indochina allowed Southeast Asian countries to become dynamos, rather than dominoes. The historical verdict on U.S. involvement in Vietnam is unfair: despite the ignominious retreat by the U.S. from Saigon, Vietnam ultimately applied to join the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
The Vietnamese decision to invade Cambodia in December 1978 also triggered some happy, if unintended, consequences. Apart from ending the genocide of Pol Pot, it solidified the Sino-American relationship and gave ASEAN new political resolve. One of the least appreciated contributions to the rise of Asia has been the magic provided by ASEAN in delivering political stability and harmony to Southeast Asia. Despite having greater ethnic, religious, linguistic and cultural diversity than Southeast Europe, the region remained an oasis of peace in the 1990s while the Balkans erupted into a frenzy of ethnic and religious killings. ASEAN saved Southeast Asia, especially during the 1997 Asian financial crisis, which could have led to political havoc in the region. And it is at the heart of the alphabet soup of regional processes that have provided the foundations for even wider regional cooperation. The first-ever Asia-wide summit will be held in Kuala Lumpur in December this year, bringing together the 10 ASEAN leaders with those of China, India, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and Australia. It will be a truly historic meeting. ASEAN made it possible.
Of course, other regions in the world benefited from propitious external developments. The U.S. supported allies in other areas of the developing world—for example, Egypt received as much aid as South Korea. But nowhere else has seen the scale of success in Asia. Why is that? Here, the missing piece of the puzzle has to be the cultural fabric of Asian societies.
Cultural confidence is a necessary but not sufficient condition for development. Centuries of European colonial rule had progressively reduced Asian self-confidence. Future generations of Indian citizens will be wondering how 300 million Indians—including my own ancestors—allowed themselves to be passively ruled by fewer than 100,000 Britons. Those as yet unborn will not understand how deeply the myth of European cultural superiority had been embedded into the Indian psyche. Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Indian Prime Minister, once said the defeat of Russia in 1905 by Japan first triggered the idea of independence for India in his mind. That was a remarkable admission; it implied that intelligent Indians could not conceive of governing themselves before Japan, an Asian power, defeated a European one.
Japan's record in World War II was disastrous. But if Japan had not succeeded early in the 20th century, Asia's development would have come much later. Japan inspired the rise of Asia. Even South Korea, which suffered from brutal Japanese colonial rule, could not have taken off so fast without having Japan as a role model. Asia needs to send Japan a big thank-you note. The tragedy, of course, is that such words of gratitude will not be delivered while Japan remains ambivalent about its own identity, torn between Asia and the West.
Even the Chinese should thank Japan. Tokyo's continuous denials of its army's atrocities in World War II will always complicate relations with Beijing. But China would not be where it is today if Deng had not made that fateful decision to move from communist central planning to a free-market system. Deng took this incredibly bold leap because he had seen how well the Overseas Chinese in Taiwan, Hong Kong and even Singapore had done. Those three tigers—and the fourth, South Korea—were inspired by Japan. The stone that Japan threw into Asia-Pacific waters created ripples that eventually benefited China, too.
What makes Asia's rise so irreversible is the simultaneous success of both China and India. Their political paths could not be more different: India is a democracy, while China retains Communist Party rule. The acceptance of free-market disciplines, however, provides a common economic platform. China and India today are united in their cultural confidence, especially among their youth. Both countries have the most optimistic generation of young people they have seen in centuries. Nothing can hold back the dynamism and vigor they will bring to their societies, and to the whole world.
The West got the first whiff of this cultural confidence at the end of the cold war. Basking in ideological triumph, the West prescribed that all societies should immediately become replicas of Western liberal democracies. Many happily followed this prescription. Few succeeded. Some came to grief. The Asian states, especially China, resisted copying the West. This is how the famous "Asian values" debate was sparked. In refusing Western prescriptions, Asians were perceived to be promoting the superiority of their own values. In fact, they were merely arguing that they should be free to choose their own political paths. Lest there be any misunderstanding, Asian intellectuals—including those from China—agree that the ultimate political destination of all societies is democracy. The destination is not in question; only the route and the timing are.
Sept. 11, 2001, removed all traces of political smugness in Western minds and all claims to Western ideological superiority. It made the West aware that the new ideological challenge from Islam was far bigger than the communist one, which future historians will see as a passing shower. Islam has been around for over 1,300 years, penetrating deeply into the souls of 1.2 billion people. Most Islamic societies have yet to find the right balance between modernization and their religious roots. The success of East Asia, especially its Muslim societies, could eventually trigger the modernization of the Islamic world.
Yet questions remain about the sustainability of Asia's success. Asian countries will continue to stumble from time to time. They cannot rely solely on favorable external developments or on Western ideas—though it is these, not Asian ones, that have driven Asia's growth. The economic principles of Asia's rise come from a Scot, Adam Smith. The political ideologies come from Western thinkers, from John Locke to Karl Marx. The international multilateral grid that has served Asia well—including the U.N., WTO, IMF and World Bank—is essentially a Western creation. Asians have benefited enormously from being passengers on the Western globalization bus.
Soon, they will help drive it. Asians cannot be free riders forever. Yet few Asians have given thought to how they will reshape the world order. The world is keen to learn what new responsibilities Asia will take on. So far, the region has remained silent. On the cultural front, too, Asian passivity is surprising. Bollywood, the sole major exception, is growing in strength. But in virtually every other field, Asians have been consumers of Western cultural products, especially American ones. The Asian economies now produce almost 40% of global GDP, but they have only a minority stake in the world's cultural industries, from film to TV, from books to print media. No Asian TV channel currently can match cnn or the BBC. This distorts global perspectives. The world sees Asia through Western eyes. Asians have yet to explain themselves in their own terms to the rest of the world.
But history teaches us that economic growth eventually generates a cultural renaissance. It would be strange for Asian societies, from Iran to South Korea, from China to India, not to rediscover their rich cultural heritage. The high price paid for Asian antiques in Western auction houses is, perhaps, a first hint of this new cultural pride. But a cultural renaissance cannot just rediscover old glories. It has to provide directions for the future. Just as Asian economies have succeeded by drawing on the best practices of East and West, the Asian cultural renaissance (or renaissances) will also see a fusion of Eastern and Western civilizations, allowing the West to feel included in, not excluded from, Asia's rise.
When Asia's growth achieves a certain momentum by the end of the 21st century, Asian minds will inevitably come up with new conundrums. Why did their ancestors take so long to succeed and modernize? Why did Europe and not Asia trigger the Industrial Revolution? How could a few key capitals in Europe and America make decisions that determined Asian destinies? How could London ever have been more important than Bombay, or Paris more important than Beijing? These questions too will come.>
East Coast? Midwest? Westcoast? Where the hell is Toronto.
I know Detroit is in the midwest, and Toronto is pretty close to it. But isn't Buffalo on the eastcoast? What about Montreal? Somewhere I read it was in Atlantic Canada. Does east and west coast, and midwest. exist in Canada?
To me on a map it looks like St Louis is in the Midwest, but all of the gateway to the west shit got me shook.
Let's also establish where these cities are.
Cincinnati
Columbus
Detroit
Louisville
Cleveland
Toronto>
To me on a map it looks like St Louis is in the Midwest, but all of the gateway to the west shit got me shook.
Let's also establish where these cities are.
Cincinnati
Columbus
Detroit
Louisville
Cleveland
Toronto>
Is your city's CBD putting retail on the ground floor?
We all know that ground-floor retail in downtowns can make them far more vibrant, and more interesting to walk along the sidewalks.
Is your city doing a good job of encouraging developers to put retail on the ground floor of projects in the downtown/CBD, and are developers doing this?
Discuss!!!
-SP!RE>
Is your city doing a good job of encouraging developers to put retail on the ground floor of projects in the downtown/CBD, and are developers doing this?
Discuss!!!
-SP!RE>
>
Safe sex Shanghai
'Don't be silly, protect your willy!'
Safe sex Shanghai:
http://www.popculturejunkies.com/mt/...x_shanghai.php
Do you practise safe sex?>
Safe sex Shanghai:
http://www.popculturejunkies.com/mt/...x_shanghai.php
Do you practise safe sex?>
Which cities do you consider laid back and relaxing?
Which cities to you are considered laid back, quiet and relaxing?
Here's mine
1) Los Angeles
2) Sydney>
Here's mine
1) Los Angeles
2) Sydney>
Which Asian Cities Are Likely To Host The Olympics In The Near Future?
Which Asian Cities Are Likely To Host The Olympics In The Near Future?
Are they capable enough to do so? Do they deserve it? Why?
1988 - Asia
1992 - Europe
1996 - U.S.
2000 - Australia
2004 - Europe
2008 - Asia
2012 - Europe>
Are they capable enough to do so? Do they deserve it? Why?
1988 - Asia
1992 - Europe
1996 - U.S.
2000 - Australia
2004 - Europe
2008 - Asia
2012 - Europe>
What does NEW URBANISM mean to you, and do you agree with it?
Give us your definition for 'new urbanism', and tell us if you agree with it. I think it's time for a discussion on this
-SP!RE>
-SP!RE>
Funny NY/London Comp.
A funny, tongue in cheek take on the NY/London rivalry.
Subject to all the flexible quality standards of internet self-publishing.
Banterist: Home > January 2004 > Report From London
[ Email This ] - January 02, 2004
Report From London
London is big city in the southeast of the United Kingdom. It is the capital of the UK. The UK is a member of the European Union, which is a collection of various unhappy European countries mocked and tortured by France and Germany?s shadowy diplomacy. The aim of the EU is to create a significant counterbalance to the economic power of the United States. So far they have created a cute new currency that at least a few of them agree on. And they have a blue flag with a circle of stars. Aside from that, it?s as organized as any collection of countries with independent, incompatible, secret agendas can be. The EU headquarters are located in Brussels, Belgium - one of the blandest cities in the world. Belgians are intolerably boring but they speak more languages than the average American so they are probably smarter.
London is a big city like New York is. However, London is much older and dirtier and therefore has much more history and plague than New York. While New York?s history is pretty much limited to the Indians and the Dutch owning it for a while, London?s is far more interesting. They have Roman ruins for starters. And they had lots of heads being lobbed off for various offenses, like spitting on the sidewalk or buggering the Queen?s brother.
The indigenous people talk like the cast of Monty Python, except for the American guy who was on the show. Although many Londoners? accents may sound the same to an average American tourist, their accents actually identify whether the speaker grew up amidst sewage or is related to a Lord. By someone?s first ?Hello!? you will have immediately formed an opinion on whether or not the conversation will continue.
London does not feel as safe as New York in that there are more stabbings and ass-kickings. In addition, every English male is required to break at least one window a year. This was very evident on New Year?s Day when it seems the lads brought in 2004 by cheering, kissing girls in the area, and punching a window.
London today is kind of like New York under Ed Koch or, God forbid, David Dinkins: sometimes gritty, dirty, rough-and-tumble. The citizens are still awaiting their Giuliani to come and clean up the city and get Disney in there. During my trip a survivalist-loser type shot and killed a cop. There was a rumor that the killer was Canadian, which made me very happy. Later it turned out he was American, which made me very sad. They caught him but everyone was kind of freaked out for a day to have a lunatic American running about the subway system. Many cops in London do not carry guns and instead are armed with rolling pins and incredible self-confidence about their ability to roll an armed assailant into submission.
The most interesting thing I learned on this last trip was that the expression ?one for the road? comes from the fact that criminals (sidewalk spitters and Queen?s-brother-buggerers) on the way to the gallows from Newgate Prison would be allowed a last pint of beer at a pub to boost their morale and make them all Tally Ho! about being hung. The guards would not be drinking and instead would stand ?on the wagon.? This is either very interesting history or 100% horse dung disseminated via the tour guide on the overpriced, open-top double-decker tour bus.
London?s subway is called the ?Tube? while New York?s is called the ?Subway.? The English folks I know there don?t use the ?Tube? much, for fear of some ?Arabs? who they feel are ?fucking insane? and may try to ?kill? people on the ?Tube? for the chance to attend an ?orgy? in their twisted version of ?Heaven.?
London has a beautiful pub culture. They take pride in their bars which are warm, comfortable establishments where one can enjoy a lovely, tepid pint of beer and a chat. You can also have a ?fag? which in London is a cigarette. The word has a totally different connotation in New York, usually meaning a gentleman who reinforces a stereotype by putting on an outrageous accent and getting disowned by his family.
The best way to remember it is this way: In London pubs you can have an English ?fag? and an American ?fag.? In New York pubs you can have an American ?fag? but not an English ?fag? unless you?re talking about an English gentleman who reinforces a stereotype by putting on an outrageous accent and getting disowned by his family. In that case it?s okay. The reason you can?t have English ?fags? in a New York pub is because our Mayor hates them - though he has a soft spot for American ones and gives them private high schools at taxpayer expense.
If there is music in a London pub it tends to be at a very low volume so as to facilitate a conversation. This is unlike pubs in America where the bartender sets his techno mix tape to volume 11 and you?re forced to shout over choruses of Yeah! Dance! Freedom! Party! The fact that Londoners have enjoyed pub conversation since the age of 18 or so rather than shouting over trite lyrics explains why conversations in London tend to be witty and interesting, while many New York conversations are as deep and rewarding as Yeah! Dance! Freedom! Party! allows.
English pubs are extremely enjoyable until 11pm when they close. This age-old early closing results in a lot of last minute binge-drinking before the pub closes. At 10:45p a bell rings advising you that you have only 15 minutes to binge-drink. At 11p, a bartender uses 800-year old clich鳠to ask you to quit the premises. You don?t have to go home but you can?t stay here, people and Get the fuck out, please are good examples.
New Year?s can be enjoyable, though not if two ladies in your party are drugged with Rohypnol. If that happens, their New Year?s Eve will end prematurely when they become paralyzed and incoherent. I?d like to meet any guy who would spike a girl?s drink so he could explain to me the merits of drugging people he doesn?t know whilst I discussed the finer points of inserting finer points in him.
For those lucky not to be secretly drugged, it is customary to await the New Year until you notice half of the pub ? the half with a TV ? celebrating something. At about 12:03 you?ll realize that they are celebrating the New Year. To generalize: bartenders in London may not inform you of important things, like New Year?s, as they are busy serving drinks and remembering the 800-year old clich鳠they plan on using when they ask you to leave the bar.
Musically, there are many differences and similarities to the New York scene. However there will never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever be a #1 hit called Touch My Bum in New York, or the United States for that matter. Ever.
London has great taxi cabs, better than New York taxi cabs for numerous reasons. For starters, their drivers are educated and speak the same language as their customers. They also know the streets by heart, the result of something called ?training? which has yet to be imported into the United States. The cabs have plenty of leg room and can easily accommodate five passengers. The worst part of the taxi experience is the fare meter, which shows you how weak the US dollar really is.
London lacks a few things New York has - such as an overly-regulatory, bureaucratic entity to micro-manage the building of commercial-use toilet stalls. You?ll also notice London has a different take on water pressure. To imagine a shower in London, wet a paper towel with cold water then hold it over your head and squeeze. Congratulations, you have just had your first London-style shower.
London?s several newspapers are similar to New York's several newspapers. The left-wing, America-hating Guardian is very much like the left-wing, America-hating New York Times. The Sun, which is for dockworkers, is much like the New York Post, also for dockworkers. But the Sun has boobs on page three, making it a better paper for dockworkers.
Overall, London is a lovely place to visit - especially for the quarter-billion Americans who don?t speak anything other than English.>
Subject to all the flexible quality standards of internet self-publishing.
Banterist: Home > January 2004 > Report From London
[ Email This ] - January 02, 2004
Report From London
London is big city in the southeast of the United Kingdom. It is the capital of the UK. The UK is a member of the European Union, which is a collection of various unhappy European countries mocked and tortured by France and Germany?s shadowy diplomacy. The aim of the EU is to create a significant counterbalance to the economic power of the United States. So far they have created a cute new currency that at least a few of them agree on. And they have a blue flag with a circle of stars. Aside from that, it?s as organized as any collection of countries with independent, incompatible, secret agendas can be. The EU headquarters are located in Brussels, Belgium - one of the blandest cities in the world. Belgians are intolerably boring but they speak more languages than the average American so they are probably smarter.
London is a big city like New York is. However, London is much older and dirtier and therefore has much more history and plague than New York. While New York?s history is pretty much limited to the Indians and the Dutch owning it for a while, London?s is far more interesting. They have Roman ruins for starters. And they had lots of heads being lobbed off for various offenses, like spitting on the sidewalk or buggering the Queen?s brother.
The indigenous people talk like the cast of Monty Python, except for the American guy who was on the show. Although many Londoners? accents may sound the same to an average American tourist, their accents actually identify whether the speaker grew up amidst sewage or is related to a Lord. By someone?s first ?Hello!? you will have immediately formed an opinion on whether or not the conversation will continue.
London does not feel as safe as New York in that there are more stabbings and ass-kickings. In addition, every English male is required to break at least one window a year. This was very evident on New Year?s Day when it seems the lads brought in 2004 by cheering, kissing girls in the area, and punching a window.
London today is kind of like New York under Ed Koch or, God forbid, David Dinkins: sometimes gritty, dirty, rough-and-tumble. The citizens are still awaiting their Giuliani to come and clean up the city and get Disney in there. During my trip a survivalist-loser type shot and killed a cop. There was a rumor that the killer was Canadian, which made me very happy. Later it turned out he was American, which made me very sad. They caught him but everyone was kind of freaked out for a day to have a lunatic American running about the subway system. Many cops in London do not carry guns and instead are armed with rolling pins and incredible self-confidence about their ability to roll an armed assailant into submission.
The most interesting thing I learned on this last trip was that the expression ?one for the road? comes from the fact that criminals (sidewalk spitters and Queen?s-brother-buggerers) on the way to the gallows from Newgate Prison would be allowed a last pint of beer at a pub to boost their morale and make them all Tally Ho! about being hung. The guards would not be drinking and instead would stand ?on the wagon.? This is either very interesting history or 100% horse dung disseminated via the tour guide on the overpriced, open-top double-decker tour bus.
London?s subway is called the ?Tube? while New York?s is called the ?Subway.? The English folks I know there don?t use the ?Tube? much, for fear of some ?Arabs? who they feel are ?fucking insane? and may try to ?kill? people on the ?Tube? for the chance to attend an ?orgy? in their twisted version of ?Heaven.?
London has a beautiful pub culture. They take pride in their bars which are warm, comfortable establishments where one can enjoy a lovely, tepid pint of beer and a chat. You can also have a ?fag? which in London is a cigarette. The word has a totally different connotation in New York, usually meaning a gentleman who reinforces a stereotype by putting on an outrageous accent and getting disowned by his family.
The best way to remember it is this way: In London pubs you can have an English ?fag? and an American ?fag.? In New York pubs you can have an American ?fag? but not an English ?fag? unless you?re talking about an English gentleman who reinforces a stereotype by putting on an outrageous accent and getting disowned by his family. In that case it?s okay. The reason you can?t have English ?fags? in a New York pub is because our Mayor hates them - though he has a soft spot for American ones and gives them private high schools at taxpayer expense.
If there is music in a London pub it tends to be at a very low volume so as to facilitate a conversation. This is unlike pubs in America where the bartender sets his techno mix tape to volume 11 and you?re forced to shout over choruses of Yeah! Dance! Freedom! Party! The fact that Londoners have enjoyed pub conversation since the age of 18 or so rather than shouting over trite lyrics explains why conversations in London tend to be witty and interesting, while many New York conversations are as deep and rewarding as Yeah! Dance! Freedom! Party! allows.
English pubs are extremely enjoyable until 11pm when they close. This age-old early closing results in a lot of last minute binge-drinking before the pub closes. At 10:45p a bell rings advising you that you have only 15 minutes to binge-drink. At 11p, a bartender uses 800-year old clich鳠to ask you to quit the premises. You don?t have to go home but you can?t stay here, people and Get the fuck out, please are good examples.
New Year?s can be enjoyable, though not if two ladies in your party are drugged with Rohypnol. If that happens, their New Year?s Eve will end prematurely when they become paralyzed and incoherent. I?d like to meet any guy who would spike a girl?s drink so he could explain to me the merits of drugging people he doesn?t know whilst I discussed the finer points of inserting finer points in him.
For those lucky not to be secretly drugged, it is customary to await the New Year until you notice half of the pub ? the half with a TV ? celebrating something. At about 12:03 you?ll realize that they are celebrating the New Year. To generalize: bartenders in London may not inform you of important things, like New Year?s, as they are busy serving drinks and remembering the 800-year old clich鳠they plan on using when they ask you to leave the bar.
Musically, there are many differences and similarities to the New York scene. However there will never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever be a #1 hit called Touch My Bum in New York, or the United States for that matter. Ever.
London has great taxi cabs, better than New York taxi cabs for numerous reasons. For starters, their drivers are educated and speak the same language as their customers. They also know the streets by heart, the result of something called ?training? which has yet to be imported into the United States. The cabs have plenty of leg room and can easily accommodate five passengers. The worst part of the taxi experience is the fare meter, which shows you how weak the US dollar really is.
London lacks a few things New York has - such as an overly-regulatory, bureaucratic entity to micro-manage the building of commercial-use toilet stalls. You?ll also notice London has a different take on water pressure. To imagine a shower in London, wet a paper towel with cold water then hold it over your head and squeeze. Congratulations, you have just had your first London-style shower.
London?s several newspapers are similar to New York's several newspapers. The left-wing, America-hating Guardian is very much like the left-wing, America-hating New York Times. The Sun, which is for dockworkers, is much like the New York Post, also for dockworkers. But the Sun has boobs on page three, making it a better paper for dockworkers.
Overall, London is a lovely place to visit - especially for the quarter-billion Americans who don?t speak anything other than English.>
Newspapers
What are everyone's favorite "newspapers" around the world? I put it in quotes because it can include online news sources (like cnn.com, bbc.com, etc.), but it has to be an actual business of news. For example, a site like drudgereport.com, which doesn't actually report its OWN news would not count.
My personal favorites:
NY Times, Chicago Trib, cnn.com, The Onion
Oh, and also, if you want, post an image of what the paper looks like. For example:
>
My personal favorites:
NY Times, Chicago Trib, cnn.com, The Onion
Oh, and also, if you want, post an image of what the paper looks like. For example:
>
Small cities?
Quote:>
>source: en.wikipedia.org
A city with population just 4,729? That's only a medium-sized town.>
| Glendive is a city located in Dawson County, Montana. As of the 2000 census, the city had a total population of 4,729. |
A city with population just 4,729? That's only a medium-sized town.>
$25 Trillion US Land Grab
I read this and thought people here would love to discuss this article.
http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/26/pf/m...ex.htm?cnn=yes
NEW YORK (Business 2.0) - There has been an impressive amount of construction in the United States over the last three centuries: All told, we've built more than 300 billion square feet of homes, offices, factories and other structures.
But according to new studies from the Brookings Institution and Virginia Tech urban planning professor Robert Lang, we're about to pick up the pace -- it will take just 25 years to erect the next 200 billion square feet, which we'll need to accommodate 70 million more people and to replace homes and offices erased by everything from disasters like Hurricane Katrina to plain old obsolescence.
If you think the real estate boom of the past decade was bounteous, peek a little further over the horizon: Researchers estimate that the massive buildout will constitute a $25 trillion development market by 2030, more than twice the size of the U.S. economy today. According to Lang, the bulk of that money will flow into 10 major metro regions that he has christened "megapolitans."
Here are exclusive growth forecasts for each of these regions and -- based on interviews with dozens of regional planners, developers and investors -- identified the savviest angles to play in the near and long term.
Click on link for details of growth projections.
Now comes the fun part.>
http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/26/pf/m...ex.htm?cnn=yes
NEW YORK (Business 2.0) - There has been an impressive amount of construction in the United States over the last three centuries: All told, we've built more than 300 billion square feet of homes, offices, factories and other structures.
But according to new studies from the Brookings Institution and Virginia Tech urban planning professor Robert Lang, we're about to pick up the pace -- it will take just 25 years to erect the next 200 billion square feet, which we'll need to accommodate 70 million more people and to replace homes and offices erased by everything from disasters like Hurricane Katrina to plain old obsolescence.
If you think the real estate boom of the past decade was bounteous, peek a little further over the horizon: Researchers estimate that the massive buildout will constitute a $25 trillion development market by 2030, more than twice the size of the U.S. economy today. According to Lang, the bulk of that money will flow into 10 major metro regions that he has christened "megapolitans."
Here are exclusive growth forecasts for each of these regions and -- based on interviews with dozens of regional planners, developers and investors -- identified the savviest angles to play in the near and long term.
Click on link for details of growth projections.
Now comes the fun part.>
What do you think about Beijing?
Beijing, capital of People's Republic of China
Tell me what do you think about Beijing, and your reasons.>
Tell me what do you think about Beijing, and your reasons.>
(City Proper) High Density Cities vs. Low Density Cities
What do you prefer? High Density Cities (10,000 plus per sq. mi) or Low Density Cities (under 10,000 per sq. mi.)>
Another Google Earth database update - Sept 16, 2005
This is 10 days old bu didn't see it anywhere. Google earth has added and updated more cities and more.
Quote:>
>>
| Today we have published a large collection of high-resolution imagery updates and have also initiated a new significant element of Google Earth -- data layers that index content from National Geographic Magazine about the continent of Africa. National Geographic Content Feature stories and images 500 Megaflyover scenes Sights & Sounds multimedia content Live WildCam in Botswana Global Imagery Updates Very High Resolution Areas Jacksonville, FL 2004; Los Angeles, CA 2003; Oxnard, CA 2004;Tampa/St.Petersburg 2002 New High-Resolution Areas Wilmington, NC; Myrtle Beach, SC; Quito, Ecuador; Caracas, Venezuela; La Paz, Bolivia; Canary Islands; Brussels, Belgium; Rotterdam, Netherlands; Belgrade, Serbia; Vilnius, Lithuania; Riga, Latvia; Kiev, Ukraine; Mumbai, India; Bangalore, India; Hyderabad, India; Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; Hiroshima, Japan; Kobe, Japan; Osaka, Japan; Kyoto, Japan; Nagoya, Japan; Sapporo, Japan; Shanghai, China; Saertu, China; Havana, Cuba; Harare, Zimbabwe; Liverpool, UK; Portsmouth, UK; Middlesborough/Hartlepool, UK; Darwin, Australia Updated or Additional Coverage Areas Nashville, TN; Quebec, Canada; Buenos Aires, Argentina; Sao Paulo, Brazil; Venice, Italy; Milan, Italy; Birmingham, UK; Plymouth, UK; Dublin, Ireland; Frankfurt, Germany; Vienna, Austria; Warsaw, Poland; Ankara, Turkey; New Delhi, India; Taipei, Taiwan; Seoul, South Korea; Pyongyang, North Korea; Stockholm, Sweden; Cape Town, South Africa; Google Earth Community A new forum, National Geographic Content, has been created for placemarks and discussions about the content in the National Geographic layers. This is the place for placemarks of that ibex or hippo that you may be the first to discover! |
Is being former English-colonized countries better than French's?
A few example like HK, Singapore or even India(English colonies) comparing to those former french's like cambodia, laos and Vietnam.>
Which cities are MEGACITIES?
Which cities in the world deserve to be called megacities in Your opinion?
One common definition is that megacity is a city with population over 10 million. If so the following would be megacities according to citypopulation.de (metropolitan areas included):
Name English Name Country Population Remarks
1 Tōkyō Tokyo Japan 34,100,000 incl. Yokohama, Kawasaki
2 Ciudad de México Mexico City Mexico 22,650,000 incl. Nezahualcóyotl, Ecatepec, Naucalpan
3 Seoul (Sŏul) Seoul South Korea 22,250,000 incl. Bucheon, Goyang, Incheon, Seongnam, Suweon
4 New York New York USA 21,850,000 incl. Newark, Paterson
5 São Paulo Sao Paulo Brazil 20,200,000 incl. Guarulhos
6 Mumbai Bombay India 19,700,000 incl. Kalyan, Thane, Ulhasnagar
7 Delhi Delhi India 19,500,000 incl. Faridabad, Ghaziabad
8 Los Angeles Los Angeles USA 17,950,000 incl. Riverside, Anaheim
9 Shanghai Shanghai China 17,900,000
10 Jakarta Jakarta Indonesia 17,150,000 incl. Bekasi, Bogor, Depok, Tangerang
11 Ōsaka Osaka Japan 16,800,000 incl. Kobe, Kyoto
12 Kolkata Calcutta India 15,550,000 incl. Haora
13 Al-Qāhirah Cairo Egypt 15,450,000 incl. Al-Jizah, Shubra al-Khaymah
14 Manila Manila Philippines 14,850,000 incl. Kalookan, Quezon City
15 Karāchi Karachi Pakistan 14,100,000
16 Moskva Moscow Russia 13,750,000
17 Buenos Aires Buenos Aires Argentina 13,400,000 incl. San Justo, La Plata
18 Dhaka Dacca Bangladesh 13,100,000
19 Rio de Janeiro Rio de Janeiro Brazil 12,100,000 incl. Nova Iguaçu, São Gonçalo
20 Beijing Beijing China 11,950,000
21 London London Great Britain and Northern Ireland 11,950,000
22 Tehrān Tehran Iran 11,800,000 incl. Karaj
23 İstanbul Istanbul Turkey 11,400,000
24 Lagos Lagos Nigeria 11,000,000
25 Shenzhen Shenzhen China 10,450,000
And this is the list by UN statistical division (urban areas included):
Tokyo Japan 35,0
Mexico City Mexico 18,7
New York United States of America 18,3
São Paulo Brazil 17,9
Mumbai (Bombay) India 17,4
Delhi India 14,1
Calcutta India 13,8
Buenos Aires Argentina 13,0
Shanghai China 12,8
Jakarta Indonesia 12,3
Los Angeles United States of America 12,0
Dhaka Bangladesh 11,6
Osaka-Kobe Japan 11,2
Rio de Janeiro Brazil 11,2
Karachi Pakistan 11,1
Beijing China 10,8
Cairo Egypt 10,8
Moscow Russian Federation 10,5
Metro Manila Philippines 10,4
Lagos Nigeria 10,1
Would You agree wth this list? Do You thnk cities from least developed countries as Dacca and Lagos, being mostly slums without developed urban facilities should be in it. Or would You rather place there more developed world cities like Paris, London and Chicago, even if they do not fullfill the population criteria?>
One common definition is that megacity is a city with population over 10 million. If so the following would be megacities according to citypopulation.de (metropolitan areas included):
Name English Name Country Population Remarks
1 Tōkyō Tokyo Japan 34,100,000 incl. Yokohama, Kawasaki
2 Ciudad de México Mexico City Mexico 22,650,000 incl. Nezahualcóyotl, Ecatepec, Naucalpan
3 Seoul (Sŏul) Seoul South Korea 22,250,000 incl. Bucheon, Goyang, Incheon, Seongnam, Suweon
4 New York New York USA 21,850,000 incl. Newark, Paterson
5 São Paulo Sao Paulo Brazil 20,200,000 incl. Guarulhos
6 Mumbai Bombay India 19,700,000 incl. Kalyan, Thane, Ulhasnagar
7 Delhi Delhi India 19,500,000 incl. Faridabad, Ghaziabad
8 Los Angeles Los Angeles USA 17,950,000 incl. Riverside, Anaheim
9 Shanghai Shanghai China 17,900,000
10 Jakarta Jakarta Indonesia 17,150,000 incl. Bekasi, Bogor, Depok, Tangerang
11 Ōsaka Osaka Japan 16,800,000 incl. Kobe, Kyoto
12 Kolkata Calcutta India 15,550,000 incl. Haora
13 Al-Qāhirah Cairo Egypt 15,450,000 incl. Al-Jizah, Shubra al-Khaymah
14 Manila Manila Philippines 14,850,000 incl. Kalookan, Quezon City
15 Karāchi Karachi Pakistan 14,100,000
16 Moskva Moscow Russia 13,750,000
17 Buenos Aires Buenos Aires Argentina 13,400,000 incl. San Justo, La Plata
18 Dhaka Dacca Bangladesh 13,100,000
19 Rio de Janeiro Rio de Janeiro Brazil 12,100,000 incl. Nova Iguaçu, São Gonçalo
20 Beijing Beijing China 11,950,000
21 London London Great Britain and Northern Ireland 11,950,000
22 Tehrān Tehran Iran 11,800,000 incl. Karaj
23 İstanbul Istanbul Turkey 11,400,000
24 Lagos Lagos Nigeria 11,000,000
25 Shenzhen Shenzhen China 10,450,000
And this is the list by UN statistical division (urban areas included):
Tokyo Japan 35,0
Mexico City Mexico 18,7
New York United States of America 18,3
São Paulo Brazil 17,9
Mumbai (Bombay) India 17,4
Delhi India 14,1
Calcutta India 13,8
Buenos Aires Argentina 13,0
Shanghai China 12,8
Jakarta Indonesia 12,3
Los Angeles United States of America 12,0
Dhaka Bangladesh 11,6
Osaka-Kobe Japan 11,2
Rio de Janeiro Brazil 11,2
Karachi Pakistan 11,1
Beijing China 10,8
Cairo Egypt 10,8
Moscow Russian Federation 10,5
Metro Manila Philippines 10,4
Lagos Nigeria 10,1
Would You agree wth this list? Do You thnk cities from least developed countries as Dacca and Lagos, being mostly slums without developed urban facilities should be in it. Or would You rather place there more developed world cities like Paris, London and Chicago, even if they do not fullfill the population criteria?>
comes judge dred or the blade runner reality
averyone knows about the movie the blade runner and the figure judge dred my quastion can that be reality in 2050 or 2100 !?
it means cities over 4ß million inh. big skyscrpers smog and a lot of more! so are this at 2050 reality yes or no pls vote here and do an statement! i come later back for my state mant !>
it means cities over 4ß million inh. big skyscrpers smog and a lot of more! so are this at 2050 reality yes or no pls vote here and do an statement! i come later back for my state mant !>
Global cities: correlate economics with culture
virtually all statistics defining global (or world) cities are related to economics: business, finance, trade, investment, advertising, research and development, etc.
precious little is based on culture, entertainment, diversity, civic ammentiies.
the question is: is there a correlation between the business prowess of a major city and its ability to generate culture, entertainment, diversity, etc.?
Does a city's global status automatically mean it will attract the elements that make life pleasurable due to its wealth and power? Or can cities far lower economically still create the amenities without being major business centers?>
precious little is based on culture, entertainment, diversity, civic ammentiies.
the question is: is there a correlation between the business prowess of a major city and its ability to generate culture, entertainment, diversity, etc.?
Does a city's global status automatically mean it will attract the elements that make life pleasurable due to its wealth and power? Or can cities far lower economically still create the amenities without being major business centers?>
NYC Pop in 2025: 9.4M
The population of the 5 boroughs of NYC will be 9.4m in 2025, which is the 400th anniversary of the "official" establishment of NY as a city.
From the Feb. 19, 2006 edition of The NY Times:
"By 2025, Planners See a Million New Stories in the Crowded City"
By SAM ROBERTS
Published: February 19, 2006
With higher birth rates among Hispanic and Asian New Yorkers, immigrants continuing to gravitate to New York City and a housing boom transforming all five boroughs, the city is struggling to cope with a phenomenon that few other cities in the Northeast or Midwest now face: a growing population. It is expected to pass nine million by 2020.
Population Boom New York might need an extra million or so slices of cake for its 400th birthday party in 2025.
Estimated today at a record 8.2 million, the population is expected to reach nearly 9.4 million in 2025. But that projected growth poses potential problems that New York is just starting to grapple with: ensuring that there are enough places in which to live, work, attend school and play and that transportation and energy are adequate.
Elaborating on Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's disclosure last month that city planners were drafting a strategy to cope with this expected growth, Daniel L. Doctoroff, the deputy mayor for economic development, said the city could accommodate a million additional people or more, but only if it began planning for their needs now.
"We have the capacity through rezoning and underutilized land to go well over that number," he said. "But you cannot simply divorce the issue of growth from the infrastructure required to support it. It opens up great opportunities only if the growth is smart, if we have the things that make cities worth living in."
Mr. Doctoroff said the strategy would explore opportunities for growth both citywide and in 188 individual neighborhoods. It would determine how land use regulations and other constraints might be altered to create sufficient housing, schools, subway routes and parks, preserve factory jobs and identify sites for less desirable but necessary structures, including power plants.
Last month, the New York Building Congress, a trade group, estimated that proposed development, including the World Trade Center site and the Hudson Yards in Manhattan and the Atlantic Terminal area in Brooklyn, would generate a 21 percent increase in jobs by 2025. That, the group said, would require new sources of electricity.
In his State of the City address last month, Mr. Bloomberg said that he would present a "strategic land use plan" in April. That will explore the potential for growth, identify the constraints and recommend how to provide the housing, transportation, energy and other public works, including parks, to accommodate a larger population, the mayor said.
"Making sure that every community shares in the New York we are building also requires us to look to the future and plan for the future in ways we haven't dared in decades," the mayor said.
Among the goals of the plan, Mr. Doctoroff said, are to produce greater geographic diversity — more jobs in Downtown Brooklyn, Flushing and Jamaica in Queens, the South Bronx, Harlem and the Far West Side — and to preserve manufacturing jobs.
City officials rarely engage in long-range planning, particularly for growth. A short-lived proposal for "planned shrinkage" was advanced in the mid-1970's, sandwiched between a comprehensive statement of urban challenges and potential solutions in 1969 and a candid but still largely optimistic assessment in 1987.
"This will be different," Mr. Doctoroff said. "Much more practical."
New York has ranked first in population among American cities since the first census in 1790. Almost steadily since the 1940's, more people have been leaving the city for other parts of the country than have arrived here from other areas of the nation.
Growth in the 1980's and especially the 1990's has been largely driven by immigration. Foreigners are expected to account for much of the growth in the next two decades, growth that, according to the forecasts, would keep New York in first place among the nation's cities and maintain the New York metropolitan region either as the largest or, at least, tied with Los Angeles.
One recent study, by Regina Armstrong of Urbanomics, a consultant to the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council, an intergovernmental planning group, also projects that by 2025, the Bronx will be home to 1.5 million people and Brooklyn to 2.8 million — surpassing their mid-20th century peaks.
Queens will have 2.8 million people, the study says, and Staten Island nearly 600,000 — records for both boroughs. Manhattan, with 1.7 million, will still be short of the more than two million people who lived there early in the last century, many in densely packed tenements. Other projections computed by state demographers suggest that by 2020, Queens will overtake Brooklyn as the most populous borough.
Skip to next paragraph
Population Boom The Urbanomics projections say that among non-Hispanic whites, births will again outnumber deaths beginning after 2010 and that their net migration from the city will peak by 2015 and that the number of black residents will begin to decline in 2015. They also say that after 2010 more Hispanic people will be leaving New York than arriving but that their birthrates will remain high, and that the number from Asia will continue to increase. After 2025, the population is projected to then expand more slowly, to nearly 9.5 million in 2030, for a 16 percent increase since 2005.
Compared to the last five years, according to the projections, between 2025 and 2030 among Asians the total of births over deaths will more than double, and the net migration — people arriving versus leaving — will more than triple.
Population projections are notoriously subject to caveats and variables — no one can predict the impact of terrorism, a possible resurgence in crime, medical advances or epidemics, the global economy or the effects of technological changes on jobs.
Historically, those predictions tend to have overestimated growth, inspired, in part, by the optimism of the moment or to justify the ambitious agendas of developers and utility executives.
"The overall driving concept is that a favorable employment situation in the New York region will attract an increase in population," said Prof. Joel E. Cohen, who heads the Laboratory of Populations at the Rockefeller University.
"I am not saying these projections are better or worse than lots of local area projections. They just should be taken with large grains of salt. Historical analyses of how projections made in the past have done when the future came around have shown much larger errors than anticipated by the people who made the projections."
The latest official census figures actually showed a slight decline in New York State's population. But, on the basis of housing construction, the city has successfully challenged recent city estimates, and the Census Bureau has accepted the city's figure of 8,168,338 as of 2004. New census estimates are due out next month.
While some demographers question how long growth will continue, state and city officials say they generally agree with the overall projections.
"We're in the same ballpark," said Joseph J. Salvo, director of the Department of City Planning's population division.
Robert D. Yaro, president of the Regional Plan Association, said that with nearby suburbs nearly saturated, the city was no longer at as much of a competitive disadvantage. Still, he said, "New York's got to find a place to put another 1.2 to 1.5 million New Yorkers," adding, "One way to keep these forecasts from happening is to make it prohibitively expensive to live and work here.">
From the Feb. 19, 2006 edition of The NY Times:
"By 2025, Planners See a Million New Stories in the Crowded City"
By SAM ROBERTS
Published: February 19, 2006
With higher birth rates among Hispanic and Asian New Yorkers, immigrants continuing to gravitate to New York City and a housing boom transforming all five boroughs, the city is struggling to cope with a phenomenon that few other cities in the Northeast or Midwest now face: a growing population. It is expected to pass nine million by 2020.
Population Boom New York might need an extra million or so slices of cake for its 400th birthday party in 2025.
Estimated today at a record 8.2 million, the population is expected to reach nearly 9.4 million in 2025. But that projected growth poses potential problems that New York is just starting to grapple with: ensuring that there are enough places in which to live, work, attend school and play and that transportation and energy are adequate.
Elaborating on Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's disclosure last month that city planners were drafting a strategy to cope with this expected growth, Daniel L. Doctoroff, the deputy mayor for economic development, said the city could accommodate a million additional people or more, but only if it began planning for their needs now.
"We have the capacity through rezoning and underutilized land to go well over that number," he said. "But you cannot simply divorce the issue of growth from the infrastructure required to support it. It opens up great opportunities only if the growth is smart, if we have the things that make cities worth living in."
Mr. Doctoroff said the strategy would explore opportunities for growth both citywide and in 188 individual neighborhoods. It would determine how land use regulations and other constraints might be altered to create sufficient housing, schools, subway routes and parks, preserve factory jobs and identify sites for less desirable but necessary structures, including power plants.
Last month, the New York Building Congress, a trade group, estimated that proposed development, including the World Trade Center site and the Hudson Yards in Manhattan and the Atlantic Terminal area in Brooklyn, would generate a 21 percent increase in jobs by 2025. That, the group said, would require new sources of electricity.
In his State of the City address last month, Mr. Bloomberg said that he would present a "strategic land use plan" in April. That will explore the potential for growth, identify the constraints and recommend how to provide the housing, transportation, energy and other public works, including parks, to accommodate a larger population, the mayor said.
"Making sure that every community shares in the New York we are building also requires us to look to the future and plan for the future in ways we haven't dared in decades," the mayor said.
Among the goals of the plan, Mr. Doctoroff said, are to produce greater geographic diversity — more jobs in Downtown Brooklyn, Flushing and Jamaica in Queens, the South Bronx, Harlem and the Far West Side — and to preserve manufacturing jobs.
City officials rarely engage in long-range planning, particularly for growth. A short-lived proposal for "planned shrinkage" was advanced in the mid-1970's, sandwiched between a comprehensive statement of urban challenges and potential solutions in 1969 and a candid but still largely optimistic assessment in 1987.
"This will be different," Mr. Doctoroff said. "Much more practical."
New York has ranked first in population among American cities since the first census in 1790. Almost steadily since the 1940's, more people have been leaving the city for other parts of the country than have arrived here from other areas of the nation.
Growth in the 1980's and especially the 1990's has been largely driven by immigration. Foreigners are expected to account for much of the growth in the next two decades, growth that, according to the forecasts, would keep New York in first place among the nation's cities and maintain the New York metropolitan region either as the largest or, at least, tied with Los Angeles.
One recent study, by Regina Armstrong of Urbanomics, a consultant to the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council, an intergovernmental planning group, also projects that by 2025, the Bronx will be home to 1.5 million people and Brooklyn to 2.8 million — surpassing their mid-20th century peaks.
Queens will have 2.8 million people, the study says, and Staten Island nearly 600,000 — records for both boroughs. Manhattan, with 1.7 million, will still be short of the more than two million people who lived there early in the last century, many in densely packed tenements. Other projections computed by state demographers suggest that by 2020, Queens will overtake Brooklyn as the most populous borough.
Skip to next paragraph
Population Boom The Urbanomics projections say that among non-Hispanic whites, births will again outnumber deaths beginning after 2010 and that their net migration from the city will peak by 2015 and that the number of black residents will begin to decline in 2015. They also say that after 2010 more Hispanic people will be leaving New York than arriving but that their birthrates will remain high, and that the number from Asia will continue to increase. After 2025, the population is projected to then expand more slowly, to nearly 9.5 million in 2030, for a 16 percent increase since 2005.
Compared to the last five years, according to the projections, between 2025 and 2030 among Asians the total of births over deaths will more than double, and the net migration — people arriving versus leaving — will more than triple.
Population projections are notoriously subject to caveats and variables — no one can predict the impact of terrorism, a possible resurgence in crime, medical advances or epidemics, the global economy or the effects of technological changes on jobs.
Historically, those predictions tend to have overestimated growth, inspired, in part, by the optimism of the moment or to justify the ambitious agendas of developers and utility executives.
"The overall driving concept is that a favorable employment situation in the New York region will attract an increase in population," said Prof. Joel E. Cohen, who heads the Laboratory of Populations at the Rockefeller University.
"I am not saying these projections are better or worse than lots of local area projections. They just should be taken with large grains of salt. Historical analyses of how projections made in the past have done when the future came around have shown much larger errors than anticipated by the people who made the projections."
The latest official census figures actually showed a slight decline in New York State's population. But, on the basis of housing construction, the city has successfully challenged recent city estimates, and the Census Bureau has accepted the city's figure of 8,168,338 as of 2004. New census estimates are due out next month.
While some demographers question how long growth will continue, state and city officials say they generally agree with the overall projections.
"We're in the same ballpark," said Joseph J. Salvo, director of the Department of City Planning's population division.
Robert D. Yaro, president of the Regional Plan Association, said that with nearby suburbs nearly saturated, the city was no longer at as much of a competitive disadvantage. Still, he said, "New York's got to find a place to put another 1.2 to 1.5 million New Yorkers," adding, "One way to keep these forecasts from happening is to make it prohibitively expensive to live and work here.">
have global cities solidified their position?
Barring either natural destruction or man-made destruction, have we reached a point in history where global cities have nailed down their position....I hate to use this word:.....forever????
Why?
• technology no longer requires a city to be built at certain locations; sea access isn't even needed anymore
• the world has become almost totally networked today; short of something like nuclear disaster, it will stay global. global cities have to be placed around the globe for the network to work. In essence, global cities are as cooperative with each other as they are competitive; each wants to see the system continue...and to work.
• global cities have gathered just too much on the ground to alter their greatness
• global cities no longer represent a group of people who live there; migration in and out is great. therefore the city serfves as a shell in which global business can take place. the globe keeps the sitting going as well as those who live there. cities no longer parallel the rise and the fall of people who live there.
Do you think that we may be living in a new era, unparalleled in world history, where a global city will always retain its role since its role has been determined by the world community which invested enough in the place that other cities cannot compete?>
Why?
• technology no longer requires a city to be built at certain locations; sea access isn't even needed anymore
• the world has become almost totally networked today; short of something like nuclear disaster, it will stay global. global cities have to be placed around the globe for the network to work. In essence, global cities are as cooperative with each other as they are competitive; each wants to see the system continue...and to work.
• global cities have gathered just too much on the ground to alter their greatness
• global cities no longer represent a group of people who live there; migration in and out is great. therefore the city serfves as a shell in which global business can take place. the globe keeps the sitting going as well as those who live there. cities no longer parallel the rise and the fall of people who live there.
Do you think that we may be living in a new era, unparalleled in world history, where a global city will always retain its role since its role has been determined by the world community which invested enough in the place that other cities cannot compete?>
Is Berlin the only megacity in germany ?
when Berlin comes in my mind i think about 3,4 million inhabitans in the city proper and 4,2 million inhabitans in the suburban rail (s Bahn area) you can take the S7 from Potsdam then you can travel to strausberg in the east via charlottenburg its a distance from 60 km !
or you can take the S43 in Königs wusterhausen (an southeastern suburb of berlin and ride to Oranienburg in the far north of berlin , it is also an distance from 55-60 km to ride the S Train !
Berlin is the politcal capital of Germany
Berlin has MTV , Siemens and other big companies
Berlin has a big cultural scene with his Cinemas off and off off scene theatres
Berlin have young districts with large urban life (Kreuzberg 36; Prenzlauer Berg and Friedrichshain )with its restaurants, bars , and coffee shops
So are you agree with me that germanys only Megacity is Berlin !?
Your comments please
>
or you can take the S43 in Königs wusterhausen (an southeastern suburb of berlin and ride to Oranienburg in the far north of berlin , it is also an distance from 55-60 km to ride the S Train !
Berlin is the politcal capital of Germany
Berlin has MTV , Siemens and other big companies
Berlin has a big cultural scene with his Cinemas off and off off scene theatres
Berlin have young districts with large urban life (Kreuzberg 36; Prenzlauer Berg and Friedrichshain )with its restaurants, bars , and coffee shops
So are you agree with me that germanys only Megacity is Berlin !?
Your comments please
>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)