# Cities of North America



## ToyToy (May 4, 2005)

*City of North America*

I am a city fan, a skyscrapers fan and it's my first topic.

However, i try to learn english because i'am a french people. I live in Montreal.

1) What is the 10 biggest city in north américa? ( City prosper and surburban aera)

2) What is the most cultural city in north america?

3) what is the city who have a better seaport, airport, a industrial center? (Canada and USA)


----------



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

For the US it goes something like this.
1. NYC
2. LA
3. Chicago
4. Houston
5. Philadelphia
6. Phoenix
7. San Diego
8. San Antonio
9. Dallas
10. Detroit


----------



## DrJoe (Sep 12, 2002)

With Canada

1. NYC
2. LA
3. Chicago
4. Toronto
5. Houston
6. Montreal 
7. Philadelphia
8. Phoenix
9. San Diego
10. San Antonio


----------



## pwright1 (Jun 1, 2003)

How did Montreal climb the charts all of a sudden? Is that right? I was just reading about Canada's largest cities and it said Montreal's 2001 population was 1,039,400. Now all of a sudden I read another publication and it says Montreal's population is 1.8million. Nearly 800,000 more people in 4 years. Which one is correct?


----------



## NWside (Oct 1, 2003)

Don't forget about Mexico City...


----------



## malek (Nov 16, 2004)

pwright1 said:


> How did Montreal climb the charts all of a sudden? Is that right? I was just reading about Canada's largest cities and it said Montreal's 2001 population was 1,039,400. Now all of a sudden I read another publication and it says Montreal's population is 1.8million. Nearly 800,000 more people in 4 years. Which one is correct?


because of mergers with smaller cities.

Toronto was something like 500k originally, now its 2.4M (city only).


----------



## pwright1 (Jun 1, 2003)

Oh ok. That explains it. I kind of thought the same thing about Toronto too. I knew I wasn't going crazy. Thanks for the info Malek.


----------



## JARdan (Aug 21, 2004)

pwright1 said:


> How did Montreal climb the charts all of a sudden? Is that right? I was just reading about Canada's largest cities and it said Montreal's 2001 population was 1,039,400. Now all of a sudden I read another publication and it says Montreal's population is 1.8million. Nearly 800,000 more people in 4 years. Which one is correct?


MTL's metro is well over 3 million. It's about 3.7million, actually.

...Sorry, I misread your post. The population of Montreal is just over 1.8 million.


----------



## Azn_chi_boi (Mar 11, 2005)

http://www.mongabay.com/igapo/North_American_cities.htm 

all about the north american cities...and their population rank


----------



## sukh (Sep 30, 2004)

^^^That table is old and inacurate.


----------



## Azn_chi_boi (Mar 11, 2005)

How can the table be old? Its 2005 updated...

like NYC have 8,103,700


----------



## DrJoe (Sep 12, 2002)

The problem with that is Canadian cities are screwed over. Toronto's "urban area" on that list doesnt even include Hamilton for some reason which is obviously part of Toronto's urban area. Its pretty clear they included San Francisco, etc in LA's urban area. The city population thing looks like its probably right though.


----------



## r2 (Jun 27, 2004)

DrJoe said:


> The problem with that is Canadian cities are screwed over. Toronto's "urban area" on that list doesnt even include Hamilton for some reason which is obviously part of Toronto's urban area. Its pretty clear they included San Francisco, etc in LA's urban area. The city population thing looks like its probably right though.


oh GOD not this again


----------



## DrJoe (Sep 12, 2002)

^ lol I knew someone would say that. Seriously though, no Golden Horseshoe talk or anything. Toronto's "urban area" is the Toronto CMA + Hamilton...end of story, its quite simple.


----------



## malek (Nov 16, 2004)

Azn_chi_boi said:


> How can the table be old? Its 2005 updated...
> 
> like NYC have 8,103,700


Its not accurate because the number you see in that table of Montreal is before the mergers.

Now its around 1.8M


----------



## pwright1 (Jun 1, 2003)

For Montreal and Toronto when did all this merging take place?


----------



## LooselogInThePeg (Nov 20, 2004)

The table may be updated but it is definitely innaccurate. I can only really speak with any certainty concerning the Canadian cities but I would guess that there are others that haven't been updated.
However, the LA figure is roughly correct and doesn't include San Francisco or San Diego. 
In terms of actual , physically built-up area, no DrJoe is correct as well. You could drive from Oshawa to Hamilton and barely catch sight of any undeveloped land. You would probably not even notice that there was any there if you passed it there's so little there. Only two spots spring to mind actually and they are both small and being filled in rapidly anyway.


----------



## Azn_chi_boi (Mar 11, 2005)

malek said:


> Its not accurate because the number you see in that table of Montreal is before the mergers.
> 
> Now its around 1.8M


I'm sorry, I didn't read the top, (of that website I linked)


"The table below includes cities with populations exceeding 100 000 people. All figures are estimates for 2002"

the 2005 thingy is a link...


----------



## canada_habs2004 (Nov 3, 2004)

The most cultural city in North America is probably New York City. I know Toronto is the most MULTIcultural.


----------



## tocoto (Jan 18, 2003)

^^You live near two of the most impressive cities in the world in NY and Chi.


----------



## Jaye101 (Feb 16, 2005)

canada_habs2004 said:


> The most cultural city in North America is probably New York City. I know Toronto is the most MULTIcultural.


Closes to TORONTO!! 

What's the difference


----------



## wecky (Feb 21, 2005)

_*NYC
San Francisco
Chicago
Toronto
Los Angeles
Miami*_


----------



## tocoto (Jan 18, 2003)

That one of the smallest world cities (Toronto), that has only become significant in the past 20 or 30 years, and which is part of one of the the most homogenous countries in the world, is the most multicultural city in the world sounds like pure BS IMO.


----------



## Homer J. Simpson (Dec 2, 2003)

^Why is that so surprising?

I think you do not now all that much about Toronto.


----------



## You are to blame (Oct 14, 2004)

tocoto said:


> That one of the smallest world cities (Toronto), that has only become significant in the past 20 or 30 years, and which is part of one of the the most homogenous countries in the world, is the most multicultural city in the world sounds like pure BS IMO.


how is canada homogenous do you know anything about the country.

For your info *60%* of torontoians were not born in Canada, and about 1/3 of all canadians were not born here either me included.


----------



## Homer J. Simpson (Dec 2, 2003)

^Me too, one of my parents is Canadian born but not the other. Both parents didn't grow up in Canada too.


----------



## Azn_chi_boi (Mar 11, 2005)

With that said, Toronto is one of the most multicultural, if not the most.


----------



## italimex (May 28, 2005)

Mexico City


----------



## HighSpeedTrain (Jul 6, 2005)

Mexico City and New York are the most cultural IMO.


----------



## HirakataShi (Feb 8, 2004)

Toronto was amalgamanted with Scarborough, East York, North York, York and Etobicoke in 1997.

Montreal in 2002 I think (part of the reason why the PQ was defeated in the recent Quebec elections).


----------



## nimbyhater (Oct 6, 2004)

i know that miami has about 60-70% of its residents born out of the country... givin Toronto a run for its money in terms of being the most multi cultural city... but still has a long way to go before it reaches toronto in terms of culture... but at the rate that miami is going... who knows

and i belive miami is 6 in terms of metro population in the us after ny, chicago, la, houston and san fran


----------



## jon jon (May 5, 2005)

Don't listen tocoto. He's never lived in Toronto, or Canada for that matter. Anyone who lives here knows it is one of the least homogenous places in the world.


----------



## hngcm (Sep 17, 2002)

1. Mexico City
2. New York City
3. Los Angeles
4. Chicago
5. Toronto
6. Havana
7. Santo Domingo
8. Houston
9. Guadalajara
10. Ecatepec


----------



## Wallbanger (Mar 8, 2005)

1) New York City (Its New York)
2) Toronto (Worlds most multi cuntural City)
3) Mexico City (I would think so)
4) Los Angeles (Its LA)
5) Chicago (I would think of it being one of the most diverse cities in NA)
6) Miami (Probably second to Toronto)
7) Havana (Same as Miami.. just more Cubans)
8) San Francisco (I dunno why.. just seems right)
9) Montreal (2nd largest french speaking city in the world)
10) Vancouver (Largest Asian percentage in NA)


----------



## -Corey- (Jul 8, 2005)

New York
Los Angeles
Chicago
San Diego
San Francisco
Las Vegas
Miami
Seattle


----------



## TexasBoi (Jan 7, 2004)

As far as culture, I think some of you all are leaving Houston out. It is a very diverse city. Not as diverse at NY, LA, and TO and maybe Chicago but up there with the rest. The reason why I said maybe Chicago is because percentage wise both makeups for the city look pretty much the same.


----------



## OMH (Aug 21, 2007)

I wouldn't necessarily say that Toronto is the worlds most multicultural city. I know that many people say that but IMO NYC feels more multicultural. In Toronto; for example about 60% of the city population is white, while in NYC its only about 35% (non-Hispanic,including Hispanics its 44%, according to wikipedia: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_City#Ethnic_composition)
Also the number of foreign-born population in Toronto is 46% and not 60% , while in NYC its 36 %, which isn't such a huge difference 
(wikipedia list: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_born#Cities.2FRegions_With_Major_Foreign_Born_Populations)
I mean Toronto IS very Multicultural but IMO it just doesn't have the cosmopolitan feeling of cities like NYC, London or Paris...maybe thats because its smaller or because its not as culturally important (i'm not saying that Toronto isn't a culturally important city, though its definetily not on the same scale as NYC or London, globally seen its only 2nd tier for culture as well as economically IMO)..p.s back to the original question..biggest cities in North America, according to wikipedia: (only city-proper)	Population ↓
1 New York City New York 8,250,567
2 Los Angeles California 3,849,378
3 Chicago Illinois 2,833,321
4 Toronto, Ontario (City) 2,503,281 
5	Houston Texas 2,144,491
6	Montreal, Quebec (Ville) 1,620,693 
7	Phoenix Arizona 1,512,986
8 Philadelphia Pennsylvania 1,448,394
9 San Antonio Texas 1,296,682
10 San Diego California 1,256,951
11 Dallas Texas 1,232,940
12	Calgary, Alberta (City) 988,193 
13 San Jose California 929,936
14	Detroit Michigan 918,849
15 Ottawa, Ontario (City) 812,129 
16 Jacksonville Florida 794,555
17 Indianapolis	Indiana 785,597
18 San Francisco California 744,041
19 Columbus Ohio 733,203
20	Edmonton, Alberta (City) 730,372
p.s I had to add the numbers from the biggest cities in the U.S and from the biggest cities list of Canada together, because for some case there isn't a "biggest cities of North America" list in wikipedia


----------



## ale26 (Sep 9, 2005)

OMH said:


> I wouldn't necessarily say that Toronto is the worlds most multicultural city. I know that many people say that but IMO NYC feels more multicultural. In Toronto; for example about 60% of the city population is white, while in NYC its only about 35% (non-Hispanic,including Hispanics its 44%, according to wikipedia: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_City#Ethnic_composition)
> Also the number of foreign-born population in Toronto is 46% and not 60% , while in NYC its 36 %, which isn't such a huge difference
> (wikipedia list: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_born#Cities.2FRegions_With_Major_Foreign_Born_Populations)
> I mean Toronto IS very Multicultural but IMO it just doesn't have the cosmopolitan feeling of cities like NYC, London or Paris...maybe thats because its smaller or because its not as culturally important (i'm not saying that Toronto isn't a culturally important city, though its definetily not on the same scale as NYC or London, globally seen its only 2nd tier for culture as well as economically IMO)..p.s back to the original question..biggest cities in North America, according to wikipedia: (only city-proper)	Population ↓
> ...


I really don't understand where some of you get your stats but 65% of people in Toronto are white? Are you kidding!? That number is much much less. And Toronto may be smaller than NY, London and Paris and a little less important culturally and economically but it is a very young city. Much younger than those heavy weights. However, Toronto has recently been ranked the 9th or 10th most important city financially and it has the 3rd largest theatre district in the english speaking world after New York and London. 

Sooo many people no very little about Toronto but are very quick to judge. I strongly suggest you educate yourselves before you make ridiculous comments that make you look ignorant and stupid. 

Toronto IS the most multicultural city in the world and it is very cosmipolitan. Ask any PROFFESIONAL organizations and they will all tell you the same.


----------



## AndySocks (Dec 8, 2005)

Toronto may be more multicultural than all NYC, but the borough of Queens alone (which only has around 300K fewer than all Toronto) sure gives it a run for its money. I'm not gonna argue which is more, it's probably subjective, but the two together probably rank up there with most multicultural municipalities on the planet.

By the way, anyone looking at "white" population numbers and dismissing it as homogeneous needs to get out a bit more. White people immigrate to North America from all different countries, too.


----------



## PsychoBabble (Apr 4, 2008)

Oaxaca is on my list as the most cultural place in Norh America.


----------



## Hia-leah JDM (May 7, 2007)

NY and LA not enough Indians or Jamaicans or Pakistinis?!!? You obviously don't know what you're talking about.


----------



## softee (Mar 6, 2003)

> Principal Agglomerations of North America (pop. over 3 million)
> 
> 3 Ciudad de México Mexico City Mexico 22,400,000 incl. Nezahualcóyotl, Ecatepec, Naucalpan
> 4 New York New York USA 21,900,000 incl. Newark, Paterson
> ...


Comparing American and Canadian metro definitions is apples to oranges. In order to fit in properly Toronto would at least have to include Hamilton and Oshawa.


----------



## dhuwman (Oct 6, 2005)

We can't really rank these cities in terms of diversity as we can with, say, population, can we? There's no indicator as to verify how any any of these cities are more diverse than another. Even if there were, how are you going to measure the diversity with statistics? Number of citizens born outside of the respective country? Number of of foreign restaurants in the city? There's no definite rank as to say, for example New York City is #1 and Toronto is #2. The best way probably would be to have it as the top-tier cities, second-tier cities, etc. when it comes to cultural diversity.


----------



## crawford (Dec 9, 2003)

^Monkey, basically your entire post consists of exaggerated numbers. 

Yet another reason why you will never find a non-Toronto forumer agreeing with your claims. 

Toronto is indeed diverse, but there are many other diverse cities, and it is not clear why Toronto would be labeled as "more diverse".

NYC is 44% foreign-born per the most recent U.S. Census estimates, and Toronto is 47% foreign-born per the most recent Statistics Canada estimates. 

This means there are 3.65 million foreign-born residents in NYC, which is nearly 1.5 times the entire population of consolidated Toronto!!

Additionally, the diversity among the native-born is much higher in NYC than in Toronto. This is obvious to anyone who visits the two cities and walks the streets, rides the subways, etc. 

Native-born Toronto is heavily white English Protestant, while Native-born New York could be Italian, Irish, Jewish, African American, Puerto Rican, etc., etc.

Puerto Ricans make up 9% of the city population. If you conservatively estimate that their foreign-born status reflects the city's overall foreign-born status (44%), then the overall citywide foreign-born proportion is higher than in Toronto.

Finally, your examples of unique Toronto diversity prove my point. 

There are far more Jamaicans, Indians and Pakistanis in New York than in Toronto. There are even more Jamaicans in New York than in London. New York has the largest Jamaican population outside of Jamaica. It has the largest Indian and Pakistani populations in North America.

You cannot find an ethnicity that exists in Toronto that is not found in equal or greater numbers in New York, while there are tons of ethnicities in New York that are not present in substantial numbers in Toronto. Where are the Mexicans? Where are the Jews from Uzbekistan? Where can I eat a burek?


----------



## PFloyd (Mar 17, 2007)

crawford said:


> The Toronto forumers seem to not understand why noone else agrees with their "most diverse" assertion. While Toronto is indeed diverse, it's a mystery to me how they come up with their claim.
> 
> 1. Toronto's claim seems to revolve around % foreign born, but it isn't clear that this is the best measure of diversity. Even if it were, the other cities mentioned (New York, LA, Miami, London, etc.) have roughly equal or better numbers. And if % foreign born is the ultimate measure of diversity (it isn't) then some place like Dubai (90% foreign born, but overwhelmingly from two or three countries) should be ranked at the top.
> 
> ...


You obviously do not know much about Toronto, and operate largely on assumptions.

Here, go educate yourself a little bit:
http://www.toronto.ca/demographics/atlas.htm#2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Toronto


----------



## monkeyronin (May 18, 2006)

crawford said:


> ^Monkey, basically your entire post consists of exaggerated numbers.
> 
> NYC is 44% foreign-born per the most recent U.S. Census estimates, and Toronto is 47% foreign-born per the most recent Statistics Canada estimates.


Toronto = 49.98% foreign-born (+ 2.2% non-permanent residents)
http://www12.statcan.ca/english/cen...&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=All&Custom=

Where is this 47% figure from? Mine is from Canada's national statistics agency from the 2006 census.

New York = 35.9% foreign-born, in 2000. 
http://www.osc.state.ny.us/osdc/rpt3-2007queens.pdf (found via Wikipedia)

NYC's immigrant population has increased by 8% in the past 8 years? Not impossible, I suppose, but in that case we'd need to add another 2 years growth to Toronto as well. 




> This means there are 3.65 million foreign-born residents in NYC, which is nearly 1.5 times the entire population of consolidated Toronto!!
> 
> There are far more Jamaicans, Indians and Pakistanis in New York than in Toronto. There are even more Jamaicans in New York than in London. New York has the largest Jamaican population outside of Jamaica. It has the largest Indian and Pakistani populations in North America.


Yes. New York is bigger than Toronto. Over 3 times, in fact. Thank you, I had no idea.




> Native-born Toronto is heavily white English Protestant, while Native-born New York could be Italian, Irish, Jewish, African American, Puerto Rican, etc., etc.


LOL! And _I'm_ the one exagerrating my claims? :lol: 

Any numerical data to back that up?


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Westsidelife said:


> I can read, thank you very much.


Well, you clearly said:



Westsidelife said:


> So Toronto has a larger foreign-born population than any other city.


that would indicate that you didn't read what was said, since I haven't said that any where.



PhilippeMtl said:


> It is a weird concept to be so proud about multiculturalism in a city. I think it is nice to have a % of foreign-born population. It is good for some aspects but I am not sure 50 or 60% of immigrant population is a good thing to preserve the original culture of the city...
> 
> Seriously, I don't give a f*ck if my city has more Sri Lankese or Congolese than another city...


What is weird is that a Canadian doesn't view multiculturalism as an accomplishment. Diversity and multiculturalism is the basis of our entire nation. A high foreign born population means that Canada is getting more Canadian all the time, because Canada is a product of the WORLD's people. It means that the 'National Dream' is being realized.

You may not like it, or may feel threatened by it, but a nation with no dominant ethnic group is the eventual goal. This is not only the reality of Canada, but the beauty of it.

Preserving the original culture of a city? You mean preserving YOUR ethnic- specific culture. That attitude has no place in Canada. Have you read our Constitution or our Charter? Your comments seem to suggest that you don't know what country you are living in, or choose to ignore what Canada means in favour of clinging on to your own idea of what you'd like it to be.

Canada is a nation for the World's people. It is our biggest strength, and it's our destiny. It's a shock that anyone living in this country could be so blind to this basic understanding of the country.


----------



## Looking/Up (Feb 28, 2008)

Crawford ... It's interesting how you slam Toronto forumers for their lack of facts when it comes to the cultural diversity of their city, yet your posts are full of unvalidated claims and assertions that can't possibly be proven. Do you honestly think there are no Mexicans in Toronto? Do you 'know' that there are no Jewish people from Uzbekistan in Toronto? Does even having a Jewish person from Uzbekistan automatically make a city more diverse than another? Even if this is just an example to see how creative you cvan be, it still has no point. And why do you believe that having more immigrants in gross-terms outweighs having more immigrants as a total percent of a city's population? It seems that in your own post you lend weight to the argument that Toronto is more diverse as your own information says that Toronto has 3% more foreign-born people. 

And actually, native born Torontonians are not vastly white Protestants. This is simply some unvalidated claim you've created. Living here I can assure you that native-born Torontonians are descended from many of the world's cultures and, beautifully, an ever-growing number are a product of mixed heritages. If you have any facts to support this assertion of yours, I'd be interested in seeing it.

As well, I visited NYC last year. I walked the streets and took the subway and found 'nothing' to lend weight to your assumptions that tourists will 'awake to the light' and discover that NYC is infintely more diverse that Toronto. I'm heading to NYC again in July. Unless something drastic has happened in the past 12 months I'm sure my feelings will remain unchanged.


----------



## softee (Mar 6, 2003)

crawford said:


> You cannot find an ethnicity that exists in Toronto that is not found in equal or greater numbers in New York


It would probably take about 2 minutes to find some stats that prove otherwise, maybe you should try that before you make such baseless claims.


----------



## PhilippeMtl (Aug 17, 2005)

isaidso said:


> What is weird is that a Canadian doesn't view multiculturalism as an accomplishment. Diversity and multiculturalism is the basis of our entire nation. A high foreign born population means that Canada is getting more Canadian all the time, because Canada is a product of the WORLD's people. It means that the 'National Dream' is being realized.
> 
> You may not like it, or may feel threatened by it, but a nation with no dominant ethnic group is the eventual goal. This is not only the reality of Canada, but the beauty of it.
> 
> ...


I think you have been brainwashed by Trudeau. My culture has nothing to do with Pakis or Korean and I want to preserve it. It is important for me to preserve my language in a ocean of 300 millions english-speaker. I want my children to speak french and I dont want to be assimilate in my own country. I am a pro-immigration, but I think a quota in essential to preserve the distinct culture of my province. 

It is probably a weird concept for an english-speaker, but for me, it is vital.


----------



## Chicagoago (Dec 2, 2005)

wow, battle of the century going on here.

NEW YORK VS TORONTO

I say if your city isn't at least 47.2% foreign born, it might as well not exist. 


...To a lot of observers I think this has gotten to the level of people fighting that their cookie has 17 chocolate chips, and someone else's only has 16 and a half.


----------



## PhilippeMtl (Aug 17, 2005)

Chicagoago said:


> wow, battle of the century going on here.
> 
> NEW YORK VS TORONTO
> 
> ...


Montreal has more ethiopians than Chicago so we are a better city.

Take that chicagoago


----------



## Looking/Up (Feb 28, 2008)

It's unfortunate that the Montreal participant in this thread has such a narrow view of culture. Like it or not, Canadian culture is not solely a mixture of English and French, but is increasingly incorporating people from around the globe. This isn't a recent trend started by Trudeau's "brainwashing", though, and focusing on people of Pakistani or Korean background because they are of skin colours different from English or French hues as examples of the eroding away of a "Canadian culture" is false. As early, and perhaps earlier than then 1900s, Canada was a land of immigrants for many from Eastern Europe (such as Ukrainians and Polish people). It's a bit depressing that you even ignore the native people of Quebec who were here long before the French colonialists, and who inhabited the area of your own city, Montreal, before France's arrival. And what of the Inuit who continue to live in Quebec's north and have for thousands of years (and what, the French first arrived here roughly 400 years ago?). Are they a threat to 'your' culture? 

What I'm getting at here, Phillippe, is that to think that Canadian culture as not including peoples other than English and French, or even Quebec culture as solely French, is incorrect, and has been incorrect for much longer than 30 years. Your post betrays a level or paranoia that is, unfortunately, quite common. "Your" culture, Phillippe, may have nothing to do with people from Pakistan or Korea, but Canadian culture and Quebec culture has everything to do with these people and many more. Canada, like the United States, Australia and New Zealand, are lands of immigrants, and it is the idea of being a land of immigrants that, at least to me, appears to be our culture. Just because immigrants these days are coming perhaps in increased numbers, or from different places in the world, is no reason to see this as a threat.


----------



## crawford (Dec 9, 2003)

softee said:


> It would probably take about 2 minutes to find some stats that prove otherwise, maybe you should try that before you make such baseless claims.


Please prove your claim. 

Find an ethnicity that exists in sizable numbers in Toronto that does not exist in sizable numbers in New York.

I can go on all day with ethnicities that are well-represented in New York that are tiny or virtually nonexistent in Toronto. How about starting with all of Latin America, most of Africa, and much of Central Asia?


----------



## Xusein (Sep 27, 2005)

Both New York and Toronto are very diverse, let's leave it at that?



crawford said:


> You cannot find an ethnicity that exists in Toronto that is not found in equal or greater numbers in New York


Well, Toronto has a MUCH larger Somali population than New York. 
Just a little nitpick...I'm not disagreeing with your opinions.


----------



## Looking/Up (Feb 28, 2008)

crawford said:


> I can go on all day with ethnicities that are well-represented in New York that are tiny or virtually nonexistent in Toronto. How about starting with all of Latin America, most of Africa, and much of Central Asia?


Here is a link to the 2006 census of Toronto by the Canadian government. Since you obviously have no idea what races are represented in Toronto, please do some research. I went through the ethnicities and there are, in fact, people from Latin America and most of Africa. As for this fixation fo yours on Central Asia, the census does contain a label called "asian" that does not include other nationalities already listed. This might refer to those from Central Asia but I have no way of knowing. I hope this helps.

http://www12.statcan.ca/english/cen...&StartRec=1&Sort=3&Display=All&CSDFilter=5000

While Toronto may not have more of certain ethnic groups in gross terms, that's simply because we are a smaller city in total population. What many Toronto forumers are asserting here is *representation,* not gross numbers. 

For the record, I don't believe Toronto to be truly more diverse than New York or many other urban centres because I don't think these things can be truly measured.


----------



## PFloyd (Mar 17, 2007)

Looking/Up said:


> It's unfortunate that the Montreal participant in this thread has such a narrow view of culture. Like it or not, Canadian culture is not solely a mixture of English and French, but is increasingly incorporating people from around the globe. This isn't a recent trend started by Trudeau's "brainwashing", though, and focusing on people of Pakistani or Korean background because they are of skin colours different from English or French hues as examples of the eroding away of a "Canadian culture" is false. As early, and perhaps earlier than then 1900s, Canada was a land of immigrants for many from Eastern Europe (such as Ukrainians and Polish people). It's a bit depressing that you even ignore the native people of Quebec who were here long before the French colonialists, and who inhabited the area of your own city, Montreal, before France's arrival. And what of the Inuit who continue to live in Quebec's north and have for thousands of years (and what, the French first arrived here roughly 400 years ago?). Are they a threat to 'your' culture?
> 
> What I'm getting at here, Phillippe, is that to think that Canadian culture as not including peoples other than English and French, or even Quebec culture as solely French, is incorrect, and has been incorrect for much longer than 30 years. Your post betrays a level or paranoia that is, unfortunately, quite common. "Your" culture, Phillippe, may have nothing to do with people from Pakistan or Korea, but Canadian culture and Quebec culture has everything to do with these people and many more. Canada, like the United States, Australia and New Zealand, are lands of immigrants, and it is the idea of being a land of immigrants that, at least to me, appears to be our culture. Just because immigrants these days are coming perhaps in increased numbers, or from different places in the world, is no reason to see this as a threat.


Well said.


----------



## softee (Mar 6, 2003)

crawford said:


> Find an ethnicity that exists in sizable numbers in Toronto that does not exist in sizable numbers in New York]


That's not what you said, you said NY would have a number equal to or greater than Toronto's.


----------



## crawford (Dec 9, 2003)

softee said:


> That's not what you said, you said NY would have a number equal to or greater than Toronto's.


There's no difference in these two statements. 

I am still waiting to hear about a Toronto immigrant group that is considerably larger than the equivalent New York immigrant group.


----------



## softee (Mar 6, 2003)

^ Umm.. yes there is a difference between those two statements.

As was previously stated upthread, Toronto has a larger Somali community than NYC.


----------



## Westsidelife (Nov 26, 2005)

isaidso said:


> that would indicate that you didn't read what was said, since I haven't said that any where.


Erm, I was referring to Skybean's post.


----------



## jetstar (Apr 21, 2008)

NWside said:


> Don't forget about Mexico City...


 *mexico city belong to Central America ,why do you guys feel ashamed to say that you belong to CA? as a matter of fact mexico city is closer of guatemala border than usa border there is nothing wrong to admited it* hno:


----------



## dhuwman (Oct 6, 2005)

^^ I thought Mexico belonged *Latin* America, not Central America. There's a big difference. DF is a definitely a North American city.


----------



## jetstar (Apr 21, 2008)

exactly mexico is a latin amercian country who is located in central america,but they don't like to say that mexico they fell ashamed, city like cancun guadalara they are closer to south border than north.


----------



## ACT7 (Oct 3, 2006)

The only ethnic group that Montreal has a higher number than Toronto is Lebanese and likely Algerian...and not by a whole heck of a lot I might add. I should also point out that the Greater Toronto area has 4 China towns, the main one downtown rivals San Fran, at least 2 Little, but big, Italy's (not including Woodbridge which is almost exclusively Italian), the largest Greek Town in North America, two very large Korea Towns, a big Little India, and if you drive down some of the downtown streets for 20 minutes you'll pass 8-10 different, concentrated ethnic neighbourhoods. 
This is not to say that NYC, LA, London, Paris or any other major world city doesn't have large ethnic communities, but there is definitely some ignorance in the world when it comes to just how Toronto stacks up to other cities.


----------



## monkeyronin (May 18, 2006)

dhuwman said:


> ^^ I thought Mexico belonged *Latin* America, not Central America. There's a big difference. DF is a definitely a North American city.


Well its all three. North America is from Panama upwards, and Central America is a subregion of that, between Mexico and Panama, and Latin America is simply a collection of Latin-language speaking countries in America, of which Mexico obviously is one.


----------



## PhilippeMtl (Aug 17, 2005)

ACT7 said:


> The only ethnic group that Montreal has a higher number than Toronto is Lebanese and likely Algerian...and not by a whole heck of a lot I might add.


not by a whole heck of a lot you said....
Algerian : 17 375 Vs 505
Lebanese: 30 470 Vs 9 095

and...

Haitians ( 59 975 Vs 1430)
Morrocan (21 495 Vs 2305)
Berber ( 9750 Vs 145)
Senegalese (1705 vs 65)
Tunisian (4720 Vs 305)
Cameroonian (2055 vs 430)
Peruvian (7785 Vs 3515)
Salvadorean ( 10 585 Vs 9660)
Mexicans ( 7770 Vs 6890)
Armenian (10 255 Vs 9310)
Cambodian ( 5970 Vs 2110)
Belgian ( 10 000 Vs 3640)
Syrian ( 7230 Vs 2820)
Congolese ( 3555 Vs 860)
Rwandan ( 1300 Vs 395)
Burundian (1040 Vs 285)
Ivorian (1015 Vs 140)

+ French from France...

and probably more
Source:http://www12.statcan.ca/english/cen...&StartRec=1&Sort=3&Display=All&CSDFilter=5000

http://www12.statcan.ca/english/cen...&StartRec=1&Sort=3&Display=All&CSDFilter=5000

Please make some research before writing some innacurates things... It shows how you are ignorant about other world cities and cities in your own country...


----------



## trainrover (May 6, 2006)

ACT7 said:


> The only ethnic group that Montreal has a higher number than Toronto is Lebanese and likely Algerian


You left out:

All arabs
persians
russians
roumanians
brazilians

Toronto doesn't feel international coz of its possessing so few arabs -- compared to most big towns . . .

Anyhow, how come this thread's derailed?


----------



## PhilippeMtl (Aug 17, 2005)

trainrover said:


> You left out:
> 
> All arabs
> persians
> ...


except for arabs he is right, but in percentage of population, Montreal has more romanians , please see links on my previous post.

But seriously, who cares?!


----------



## trainrover (May 6, 2006)

PhilippeMtl said:


> But seriously, who cares?!


Exactement.


----------



## lokinyc (Sep 17, 2002)

As New Yorkers, why do we even bother getting into these types of arguments with our neighbors from the frigid north? Aren't we too busy and too enlightened for this?


----------



## krudmonk (Jun 14, 2007)

monkeyronin said:


> Well its all three. North America is from Panama upwards, and Central America is a subregion of that, *between Mexico and Panama*, and Latin America is simply a collection of Latin-language speaking countries in America, of which Mexico obviously is one.


Mexico is not included.


----------



## PhilippeMtl (Aug 17, 2005)

monkeyronin said:


> Well its all three. North America is from Panama upwards, and Central America is a subregion of that, between Mexico and Panama, and Latin America is simply a collection of Latin-language speaking countries in America, of which Mexico obviously is one.



by your reasonment, canada is part of latin america cause french (a latin language) is an official language... :lol:


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

trainrover said:


> But, he's right -- being more citylike than countrylike plus without any separation between the two metro areas (Toronto's and nextdoor Hamilton's), this area of metropoli's been around since the 1970s . . . I even learnt this fact back in a UK state-run highschool.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I will admit I am curious as to why you are always so threatened by Toronto.. With the regularity of Pavlov's Dog you have the knives out at any mention of it. 


As would be expected, this thread has degenerated into yet another City vs City beauty contest.


----------



## monkeyronin (May 18, 2006)

krudmonk said:


> Mexico is not included.


Hmm...the UN defines central America as including Mexico, though it is left out of most other definitions. 




PhilippeMtl said:


> by your reasonment, canada is part of latin america cause french (a latin language) is an official language... :lol:


If we were to be accurate, then Canada is indeed a part of Latin America.


----------

