# Third City of the English-Speaking World



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

Which is it now? Which might it be in the future? And why?

I'm assuming most people wouldn't argue that the first two would be NY and London.


----------



## DarkFenX (Jan 8, 2005)

I choose Chicago.


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

Washington - political influence


----------



## VansTripp (Sep 29, 2004)

LA


----------



## James Saito (Nov 6, 2002)

Singapore


----------



## dewback (Jun 28, 2005)

Blink182 said:


> LA


I am not so sure about picking Los Angeles. Sure, most North American metropolitan areas are quite diverse, but LA always has been the least English speaking one of them except Miami.


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

dewback said:


> I am not so sure about picking Los Angeles. Sure, most North American metropolitan areas are quite diverse, but LA always has been the least English speaking one of them except Miami.


If you're comfortable making minimum wage or less, Spanish is just fine in LA. Actually when I lived there I hardly got a chance to practice Spanish. All the Spanish-speaking immigrants I dealt with spoke English better than I spoke Spanish.

And from a business standpoint, Mandarin, Japanese and Korean are all more useful in LA than Spanish, considering the huge amount of trade LA does with Asia.

Truth is, Spanish is just the language of the bottom rung of the working class in California.


----------



## algonquin (Sep 24, 2004)

I picked Toronto... not that it matters much, pure speculation

funny thing is, Toronto happens to be the third largest centre for english theatre in the world, behind NYC and London. TO actually beat both out for the Lord of the Rings theatre production, which is supposed to be the most expensive theatre production ever. So there you go, for what it's worth...

add the title of most multicultural city of the world (myth or truth, you decide)... it's 2nd place on the Emporis database for NA highrises.... and hey, it's the largest city in Canada, being the _third_ english speaking G8 country...

definetly a candidate!

plus a kick-ass skyline to boot:










cheers!


----------



## VansTripp (Sep 29, 2004)

algonquin said:


> I picked Toronto... not that it matters much, pure speculation
> 
> funny thing is, Toronto happens to be the third largest centre for english theatre in the world, behind NYC and London. TO actually beat both out for the Lord of the Rings theatre production, which is supposed to be the most expensive theatre production ever. So there you go, for what it's worth...
> 
> ...


I'm not sure about Toronto, just your opinion.


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

Toronto is a really cool city (and I love its balanced multiculturalism), but I guess realistically the only two contenders today are LA and Washington (although counting political influence somehow feels like cheating).

This being a skyscraper forum and general urbanist lovefest, Chicago will probably also get a lot of votes.


----------



## VansTripp (Sep 29, 2004)

Am I wrong with LA?


----------



## kiku99 (Sep 17, 2002)

LA


----------



## sean storm (Nov 18, 2004)

TO may be a preferred 'symbolic' choice for all the reasons algonquin stated (primarily it's role as Canada's #1 city; the other reasons like # of highrises and theatre-status is irrelevant poopoo IMO).

however, TO isn't really the logical choice when it boils down to actual statistical might and influence... there are other cities in the english-speaking world that are far more important than TO. clearly, the US would have another city in the top 3 given its superpower status, and those two contenders are either LA or DC. despite LA's enormous hispanic culture/population, its status as the second largest US city and the center of global entertainment can't be ignored.


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

LA is not some Spanish-speaking Mexican city, which seems to be a common stereotype. It has the largest Asian population in the Western World, and the 2nd largest diaspora Jewish population in the world. Most 2nd generation and almost all 3rd generation Latinos are English-dominant, and speak little Spanish. There are a lot of immigrants from Latin America who speak little English, but by and large they occupy the bottom rungs of the economic and social ladder.


----------



## VansTripp (Sep 29, 2004)

brooklynprospect said:


> LA is not some Spanish-speaking Mexican city, which seems to be a common stereotype. It has the largest Asian population in the Western World, and the 2nd largest diaspora Jewish population in the world. Most 2nd generation and almost all 3rd generation Latinos are English-dominant, and speak little Spanish. There are a lot of immigrants from Latin America who speak little English, but by and large they occupy the bottom rungs of the economic and social ladder.


I understand. Thanks man.


----------



## tayhiromi (Nov 24, 2004)

"It has the largest Asian population in the Western World"

i'm not sure about that... i think there are a few cities with larger asian populations in north america


----------



## Rail Claimore (Sep 11, 2002)

Well, to Toronto's credit, I do believe it's the third largest publishing city in the English-speaking world. Just about all books printed in English these days have four cities: New York, London, Toronto, and Sydney.


----------



## samsonyuen (Sep 23, 2003)

Why not have one of the Indian cities up there? Mumbai, Kolkata, New Delhi, Bangalore and Chennai are all English-speaking (officially, with Hindi). What about HK or even Singapore? In North America, I'd say LA or DC.


----------



## Azn_chi_boi (Mar 11, 2005)

The answer is *Hong Kong*

Since, its not on the poll... its Chicago. 

Then LA, Washington, Toronto, Sydney


----------



## Monkey (Oct 1, 2002)

hkskyline said:


> Washington - political influence


I agree.


----------



## Rigadon (Mar 3, 2003)

I voted LA- but DC makes sense too.


----------



## pottebaum (Sep 11, 2004)

^Well, if you're going to count political influence to that extent, wouldn't that make DC the English world's #1 city instead of NYC (or London)?


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

Washington DC exerts significant influence economically as well. The Federal Reserve is based there. New York has to listen in on what Greenspan has to say.


----------



## centralized pandemonium (Aug 16, 2004)

samsonyuen said:


> English is also the best language to use between different ethnic groups within India. People who speak Gujarati and Hindi can speak to each other in English, this is why it's an official language.



Well that's sorta true. In the Indian forum too, the common language is English. And if we write anything in our mother tounges, we have to translate it into English :yes:. That's actually a sub forum guideline.

http://skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=182984

Take a look at *point 11*.


----------



## lanztrick05 (Oct 22, 2004)

The Philippines is the 2nd Largest English Speaking country. I will go for Birmingham, UK.


----------



## rise_against (Apr 26, 2005)

I dont think LA should be the third english speaking city because i think the city needs to be a city full of culture and sophistication, as well as importance around the world, adn hollywood dosnt count.


----------



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

Chicago sounds about right. LA is has a huge Mexican overlap so I think it is a hybrid city. Toronto would be fourth.


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

philadweller said:


> Chicago sounds about right. LA is has a huge Mexican overlap so I think it is a hybrid city. Toronto would be fourth.


Toronto has more foreign language speakers than LA as a percentage of it's population. So is it not English-speaking? How about NY, another city with a very large number of immigrants, and hence foreign language speakers? Or London??


----------



## sean storm (Nov 18, 2004)

lanztrick05 said:


> The Philippines is the 2nd Largest English Speaking country. I will go for Birmingham, UK.


that's ridiculous. phillipines is NOT the second largest english speaking country. ever heard of tagalog? 

birmingham UK pales in comparison to LA, DC, chicago or toronto. not to mention much smaller in size.


----------



## samsonyuen (Sep 23, 2003)

English is one of the official languages of the Philippines. So it's in the same boat as other countries that has English as an official language (like India or Canada).


----------



## dallas (Jun 11, 2005)

In terms of financial markets it would have to be Chicago, but also HK exerts a major influence (anyone who thinks Sing, is just deluding themselves!) as does LA, being the major center of what would be the worlds 5th largest economy if it was a seperate country.


----------



## Medo (Apr 7, 2004)

Sydney then LA


----------



## Skopie (Jan 17, 2005)

Reluctantly, L.A. As much as I dislike the city, it has such a massive control of western media, and considering how influential media is in society, it cannot be ignored.


----------



## samsonyuen (Sep 23, 2003)

^True. Media is very important, and why I think LA is the third city of the Anglomonde.


----------



## Rigadon (Mar 3, 2003)

sean storm said:


> that's ridiculous. phillipines is NOT the second largest english speaking country. ever heard of tagalog?
> 
> birmingham UK pales in comparison to LA, DC, chicago or toronto. not to mention much smaller in size.



Birmingham is not "much smaller in size" than DC. However, depsite it being one of my favourtie cities anywhere, it clearly is no ta contender for this title.


----------



## DeMaFrost (Jun 25, 2004)

hkskyline said:


> Washington DC exerts significant influence economically as well. The Federal Reserve is based there. New York has to listen in on what Greenspan has to say.


Maybe, but the Federal Reserve Chairman of the New York branch of the Fed Reserve yields more power then the head of any other reserve branch. NY pulls some of the economic balance away from DC there.


----------



## Sen (Nov 13, 2004)

isnt Spanish more common in Philippines than English?

India should make everyone learn Hindi.


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

Sen said:


> isnt Spanish more common in Philippines than English?


Almost no one in the Philippines speaks Spanish anymore.


----------



## Sen (Nov 13, 2004)

i've seen conversations in Philphiines forum conducted in Spanish ^^


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

Sen said:


> i've seen conversations in Philphiines forum conducted in Spanish ^^


From a Filipino forum hosted by the government:

"Why are there no Spanish language newspapers in Philippines? Not even one."

"The Spanish language in our country is more like the Latin Language in the whole world which shall we say its already a dead language only a few people are using it anymore..."

"Conclusion:
99.999% of Filipinos do not speak Spanish. Spanish language is dead and they are celebrating the loss of it. 0.001% wants to promote Spanish to official status but can do absolutely nothing !!! '

Just from a Filipino forum, but strongly suggestive that Spanish is not a very important language in the Philippines anymore.

http://www.gov.ph/forum/thread.asp?rootID=47251&catID=25


----------



## Sen (Nov 13, 2004)

^^exactly

you hear people saying "I want to move to London" "I want to move to New York" "I want to move to LA" all the time". You hardly hear this about any other cities on the list.


----------



## Austraarabian (Jan 16, 2007)

Stupid. Of course Sydney. It is probably the most famous city in the world or thereabouts.

LONDON
NYC
SYDNEY
are definetly the most famous english speaking cities in the world in that order. 

Stupidddddddddd - i thought that was VERY obvious.

Probably after that I would say LA then Chicago. Maybe even Auckland after that. 

Keep fighting people.


----------



## forrestcat (Apr 21, 2006)

With Sydney..the coalition of the willing is complete.


----------



## sydney_lad (Dec 6, 2005)

Sydney? hno: 

Chicago is much larger and much more important.


----------



## unixer (Feb 10, 2007)

mumbai. delhi, calcuta?


----------



## micro (Mar 13, 2005)

The English speaking world spans the globe so I would tend to say Singapore or Sydney.


----------



## Sen (Nov 13, 2004)

micro said:


> The English speaking world spans the globe so I would tend to say Singapore or Sydney.


how? I am not argue whether Singapore is part of English speaking world but neither deserves the spot more than Los Angeles.
I am not a big fan of LA it is SO obvious LA is third city in English speaking world, it just has so much influence, I dont see how any people could deny this.
4th spot is up for contention though.


----------



## Booyashako (Sep 11, 2002)

Toronto has more Fortune 500 headquarters than all the listed cities (according to related thread in this section). Just thought I'd put that out there...


----------



## Irwell (May 22, 2006)

I'd have to say LA due to it's massive media exposure. If, however, we're taking into account the impact a city has had on the world as we know it, I'd put Manchester pretty high in the list (though you might say i'm biased). First industrial city, the Communist Manifesto, trade unions, football leagues, the computer, atomic theory, passenger rail, buses, public libraries, suffragettes (votes for women), vegetarianism, commuter towns, meteorology, first law of thermodynamics, precision engineering (true planes), industrial estates, submarines, airline services, professional orchestras, street lighting, municipal parks, IVF... All these and more were first found in Manchester. Can you imagine what the world would have been like without all these things?


----------



## jeicow (Jul 18, 2005)

Just thought that I'd point out that based on Market Capitalization, TO has the largest market of all the players on the thread. 

Ten Largest Stock Exchanges by Market Capitalization (in trillions of US dollars)
*New York Stock Exchange (merged with Euronext) - $15.87 *
Tokyo Stock Exchange - $4.74 
NASDAQ - $4.01 
*London Stock Exchange - $3.94 *
Euronext (merged with NYSE) - $3.86 
*Toronto Stock Exchange - $1.92 *
Hong Kong Stock Exchange - $1.87 
Frankfurt Stock Exchange (Deutsche Börse) - $1.78 
Shanghai Stock Exchange - $1.70 
Madrid Stock Exchange (BME Spanish Exchanges) - $1.26


----------



## tablemtn (May 2, 2006)

If you take the entire Washington-Baltimore metro area into account, it has over 8.2 million people (according to 2006 census estimates). That's actually an 8.4% rise over the 2000 population - much of that has been driven by growth in the northern Virginia suburbs of DC.

However, I'd still have to go with Los Angeles, simply because of the size of California's economy. 

I think Toronto has actually lost influence in Canada over the years due to the rise of Calgary as an important western business hub, and due to Vancouver's port and position on the Pacific rim. 

Manila is a very large metro area, but many people can't really 'speak' english (as opposed to understanding some basic grammar and phrases), and economically, I think it is still secondary to HK and Singapore in SE Asia.


----------



## Evangelion (May 11, 2005)

gotto be LA, then maybe toronto/chicago?


----------



## Irwell (May 22, 2006)

Some people here seem to think that economy is the sole factor in ranking a city, which to be honest I find a rather strange concept.


----------



## tablemtn (May 2, 2006)

It's not the sole factor, but it is a very important factor. A city with a powerful economy gets to export its culture and influence over other areas. Economic power has, for instance, made London quite a bit more powerful and influential than nearby Paris.


----------



## NaptownBoy (Jul 25, 2005)

NYC > London > Chicago > LA > Toronto


----------



## Irwell (May 22, 2006)

tablemtn said:


> It's not the sole factor, but it is a very important factor. A city with a powerful economy gets to export its culture and influence over other areas. Economic power has, for instance, made London quite a bit more powerful and influential than nearby Paris.


But I'd say there are plenty of cities with larger economies than Manchester that have less global reach, even if the sole reason is Manchester United. Global recognition is the important factor and this stretches beyond economics.


----------



## tablemtn (May 2, 2006)

Well, it's possible to have recognition without actually being very important as a city. Venice is one of the most famous cities on earth, but its economy is very lackluster. It doesn't have much importance even within Italy, let alone the world.


----------



## Irwell (May 22, 2006)

tablemtn said:


> Well, it's possible to have recognition without actually being very important as a city. Venice is one of the most famous cities on earth, but its economy is very lackluster. It doesn't have much importance even within Italy, let alone the world.


But does that make Venice any less of an important city? It's a case of where you draw the line i suppose. If we take Manchester as an example, it's got a decent economy right now with some world-famous brands, Manchester United and Durex probably being the most famous, but it's claim would lie in the things it has brought to the world that people don't necessarily think of. Take street lighting as one single example. The concept of municipal street lighting was introduced on Chapel Street in 1847. Can you imagine a world without street lighting?


----------



## Sen (Nov 13, 2004)

are you seriously trying to argue Manchester is anywhere near the 3rd most important city in the english speaking world? back in the day of British Empire it was Liverpool, nowdays Manchester is far down the list after likes of Toronto, Sydney, Vancouver, San Fracisco, and so on...


----------



## wjfox (Nov 1, 2002)

Stop resurrecting these old threads.

City vs City is prohibited.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=451910

:nono:


----------

