# Brooklyns population soon to pass Chicago



## snot (May 12, 2004)

Brooklyn is truly like a city on his own, dense and urban, very European with a nice donwtown that could compete with European capitals.


----------



## Bronxwood (Feb 7, 2010)

Eh, you're pushing it pal. Brooklyn is nothing like a European city. It's classic american urbanism all the way. Downtown Brooklyn is still a work in progress , it's getting much better though but needs more time before it can compete with european centers (in terms of tourism, architectural/historical significance etc) if ever. 
Brooklyn heights is beautiful but its no paris or vienna.

Maybe 80 years ago. Brooklyn demolished entire blocks of core downtown in favor of cadman plaza.

http://www.brownstoner.com/history/...ilding-housing-the-eyes-and-ears-of-the-city/

Other beautiful examples:
http://www.brownstoner.com/history/past-and-present-the-continental-building/


----------



## JMeier (Jan 7, 2016)

isaidso said:


> Someone didn't bother to read what I wrote. It's there in plain black and white. Just because your mind works like an insecure 8 year old doesn't mean the rest of the world resorts to asinine pointless exercises like that.
> 
> *"City populations don't always give an accurate indication of a population because its just a political boundary." - isaidso*
> 
> Whether Toronto is 4th or 9th has zero bearing on its standing, appeal, relevance, etc. And that has zero reflection on me any way. I didn't build Toronto. If you don't like my stir-fry, that's another matter. When you make childish statements like you did, it says far more about yourself than anything else.


Sheema must be a Trump supporter :lol::lol:


----------



## Copperknickers (May 15, 2011)

snot said:


> Brooklyn is truly like a city on his own, dense and urban, very European with a nice donwtown that could compete with European capitals.


Ahem, let's not go that far. No city in North America could ever compete with Rome, Paris, Madrid, or even Budapest, Vienna or Copenhagen. No city in the world to be honest. European cities are totally unique, there is no city like them anywhere else, excepting maybe Quebec City. Small, but with unrivalled culture and history.


----------



## snot (May 12, 2004)

Bronxwood said:


> Eh, you're pushing it pal. Brooklyn is nothing like a European city. It's classic american urbanism all the way. Downtown Brooklyn is still a work in progress , it's getting much better though but needs more time before it can compete with european centers (in terms of tourism, architectural/historical significance etc) if ever.
> Brooklyn heights is beautiful but its no paris or vienna.


Not Paris, Vienna or Barcelona, but smaller capitals. For me downtown felt quite 'European' in urbanity.

Maybe I was there not long enough and my first impression was intense because I didn't expect much of it.
I ment just the urbanity, not culture or history. Brooklyn has a very distinct downtown with a lot of shopping, the main pedestrian shoppingstreet for example for me was very European.
The rowhouse where I stayed in Bedford Stuyvesant is also more a typical European thing (I know common on the east coast) as Brooklyn is not a suburban sprawl as many other US cities.

Brooklyn is defenitely more than just a borough.


----------



## Mr_Dru (Dec 15, 2008)

Very off-topic 

Only the name Brooklyn is European. 

Brooklyn is named after a tiny Dutch village Breukelen.

Breukelen itself is very traditional dutch town with a church and a working windmill.



Breukelen Nyenrode University. Its the elite business university in the Netherlands.


In the area of Breukelen there are lots of castles.


----------



## mazarick (Oct 5, 2016)

Brooklyn is growing but it has become unaffordable for anyone not making a high salary which is actually killing "THE BROOKLYN" we all know and replacing it with this sex in the city posh version of "BROOKLYN"

That is a problem I have with American cities, they tend to go to extremes.

If it's not extremely suburban with a complete lack of public transportation, and totally car dependent (Austin, Raleigh, Atlanta)..... Then it's so urban it is literally urban decay!! (Detroit, Buffalo, Cleveland). And when it's urban livable then it becomes so unaffordable only a few can afford it. (Modern NYC, DC, San Francisco.)

America needs to create a balance, cities shouldn't be so suburban, and they also shouldn't be exclusively for the poor and desperate, or for just the rich. Cities need to be for EVERYONE and offer a little bit of everything!!


----------



## Ivan the Immigrant (May 20, 2014)

A Chicagoan said:


> What the . . . ? Brooklyn's that large? I mean, Chicago has an area of over 227 square miles, and Brooklyn only has 71.


Not to underestimate Brooklyn which is older than both New York and Chicago. It was one of first settlements founded by Duch in Hudson bay area. Village or township of Breukelen was older than New Amsterdam. And it was bigger than Chigago in history I think.

Brooklyn was one of biggest US cities before it was absorbed by nearby New York:








http://cartographersunion.com/products/aerial-map-of-brooklyn-and-manhattan-from-1908


----------

