# What special roles do these cities play for the US?



## edsg25 (Jul 30, 2004)

I hope I can get my point across here, since it is an usuaual one (even for me):

Certain cities in the United States serve special roles for our nation. Sure they are special in and of themselves, but they also play a truly national role.

Below is a list of cities that may play special roles for the US:

Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Miami, New Orleans, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles.

What gives them their special qualities.

Examples:

Miami: Miami is our best connection to Latin America and offers a necessary bridge between that region and the United States. 

Boston: Boston is most prominent in the start of our nation, with so much of the late colonial/start of the revolution era playing out in this city. It also tends to be one of the places in our country where history really stuck. Boston takes a leadership role in the US in higher education.

Chicago: Chicago serves the role of showing how an American city, removed fromt he coast and removed from European colonization, can rise to global status strictly on its American roots. Chicago serves as being the most American of America's great cities, the one whose lusty history is truly the history of the United States

San Francisco: America's most charming and beautiful city. In recent years, it has been the city most associated with tolerance and the liberal cause.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

New York: business, finance, economics, tourism, industry
Los Angeles: industry, trade, tourism
Chicago: business, finance, trade (agricultural)
Kansas City: agriculture
San Francisco: trade, finance, tourism
Miami: trade, tourism
Houston: trade, industry
Pittsburgh: industry


----------



## SHiRO (Feb 7, 2003)

Thanks for opening up these threads which actually want to discuss cities! kay:


----------



## Ya Mar (Nov 15, 2005)

You have to put Vegas on the list. 100 years ago it was a desert, today it is America's fastest growing city and the home of SIN. And you know how much I love a good SIN CITY.


----------



## John-Claude (Jan 6, 2005)

Historically, San Francisco has always been an important city for the US, especially when it comes to developing the Western states in the 19th century. I'm talking about the gold rush here. Thus, SF has become an important trading city that linked the not-yet-so-developed West with the rest of the Union. And today, there is the Pacific Stock Exchange and - if I remember correctly - one local division of the Federal Reserve network. And then, when silicon was found in ... well.. Silicon Valley (duh?  ), the industrial importance of the bay region steadily grew.
So, I think San Francisco is one of the most important cities in US history.


----------



## Effer (Jun 9, 2005)

Chicago has showed that a inland global city can also play a important role in the intrernational economy and community.


----------



## ranny fash (Apr 24, 2005)

boise, idaho is easily the most important city in the us.


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

I think it's interesting how few important and/or famous cities there are in the massive American interior. The only big one that pops to mind is Chicago, which to me anyway has always seemed a very very distant third power center to the NE and California. And growing up in a relatively well-off NYC suburb, most of the people I knew had a condescending attitude toward anything away from the coasts (well except for resorts like Aspen, Santa Fe etc).

Strange how in a country as wealthy, large and for a long time as relatively economically self-sufficient as the USA has so few really important cities located away from its oceans.


----------



## ♣628.finst (Jul 29, 2005)

brooklynprospect said:


> I think it's interesting how few important and/or famous cities there are in the massive American interior. The only big one that pops to mind is Chicago, which to me anyway has always seemed a very very distant third power center to the NE and California. And growing up in a relatively well-off NYC suburb, most of the people I knew had a condescending attitude toward anything away from the coasts (well except for resorts like Aspen, Santa Fe etc).
> 
> Strange how in a country as wealthy, large and for a long time as relatively economically self-sufficient as the USA has so few really important cities located away from its oceans.


No. Consider Minneapolis-St. Paul in Minnesota. My favourite large city in US.
It's an industrial and business hub of Northern Midwest, second to Chicago.

Des Moines, IA. That's also great.


----------



## ReddAlert (Nov 4, 2004)

xantarcx said:


> No. Consider Minneapolis-St. Paul in Minnesota. My favourite large city in US.
> It's an industrial and business hub of Northern Midwest, second to Chicago.
> 
> Des Moines, IA. That's also great.


I think Detroit is still second.


----------



## ♣628.finst (Jul 29, 2005)

Detroit? It seems it's either 3rd or 4th place in Midwest. Twin cities and Pittsburgh is still very strong.


----------



## DarkFenX (Jan 8, 2005)

Boston-Historical city which provided the spark for the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. Powerhouse of the New England region.
NYC-Commercial capital of the US. Once the captial of US. Immigration destination.
Philly-Historical city with many historical events happening in this city like the signing of Declaration of Independance.
Miami-Gives close ties with the Latino culture.
Washington-Our capital and a city that was built on the Potomac River so it is closer to the South. it convinced the South to help pay off the debts of the north after the Revolutionary War.
New Orleans-At first the refugee city of the French Arcadian has not become a center for jazz culture and African culture.
Chicago-Commercial city with the tallest tower in US. powerhouse of the Midwest and trading port on the Great Lakes.
San Francisco-Our connection of the far eastern culture. Immigration destination for the Pacific countries of the east. 
Los Angeles-Hollywood stars and making of movies. (Hollywood is a different city by LA surrounds it)


----------



## samsonyuen (Sep 23, 2003)

Detroit's still the second largest metro population in the Midwest, by far...It's a motor powerhouse still.


----------



## Azn_chi_boi (Mar 11, 2005)

xantarcx said:


> Detroit? It seems it's either 3rd or 4th place in Midwest. Twin cities and Pittsburgh is still very strong.



Pittsburgh is part of Middle Atlantic Rather than the Mid-West, even though Pittsburgh have closer ties with the Midwest cities than the Atlantic Coast cities.


----------



## edsg25 (Jul 30, 2004)

DarkFenX said:


> Boston-Historical city which provided the spark for the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. Powerhouse of the New England region.
> NYC-Commercial capital of the US. Once the captial of US. Immigration destination.
> Philly-Historical city with many historical events happening in this city like the signing of Declaration of Independance.
> Miami-Gives close ties with the Latino culture.
> ...


What a terrific summary!!


----------



## edsg25 (Jul 30, 2004)

And some others....

Atlanta: the city that, more than any other, allowed the South (the New South) to finally reunite with the rest of the nation and to help that region start reaching for its full potential

Seattle: it keeps us environmentally concerned and helps us maintain a more ratonal, balanced life style

Kansas City: the most middle of our major cities, it has traditonally been most responsible for keeping our beef supply moving

St. Louis: like no other American city, St. Louis joins east with west and north with south. It also creates an historical context for the early national period of the United States the way that Boston does for our colonial history

Dallas: Dallas is the greatest link for bringing the culture of the northeast to the southwest

San Diego: we hope it doesn't grow to LA size because it is the city that embodies the best climate in the US and the one closest to still being able to deliver the image conveyed in the American dream

Minneapolis: actually the Twin Cities as a whole probably is the one that we can best hold as an the standard of how to create a highly functional, highly desirable, high standard-of-living metropolitan area. Minneapolis works.

Denver: it gives the Rockies, our sparsest region, a major city (thus making it like every other region) somewhat by trickery....being on the high plains, just adjacent those mountains.

Honolulu: our connection with Asia would be severely hampered without this mid-ocean gem.

Pittsburgh and Cincinnati: proved that the culture of colonial America could thrieve in the nation's interior. No cities are more associated with the post-revolutionary push across the Appalachians.

Detroit: the ultimate US case study for the 20th c factory city

Baltimore: the standard for how a city can redefine itself in our modern era

Houston: our unquestionable energy capital. As laid back on how it handles business and LA is on its life-style


----------



## edsg25 (Jul 30, 2004)

And more from the original list:

New York: no city is more responsible for the US's role in the world beyond our shores. Also, no American city transends it role as being a part of a much bigger world than New York. NYC is where the US meets the world

Chicago: more than architecture, more than urban planning, no city serves America is the way it builds the ultimate core, the ultimate downtown, the ultimate way of delivering urban delights in a surprisingly pleasant environment. I'm prejudice, I'll admit, but I find (IMHO) Chicago is the city most held up as the "what we'd like to be" when I see other cities trying to redefine thesmelves.

Boston: no US city respects the past and tradition the way this one does

LA: you cannot overestimate the role that LA plays as our national laboratory for innovation and change. Its realtively free life style and energy says a lot about where we are...and even more about where we are going

San Francisco: I don't believe there is a city in the country that allows us to have our dreams as San Francisco. I don't believe there is a city or metro area in the nation like SF and the Bay Area that allows us to look in awe at what man and nature have conspired to create. If Chicago is the ultimate city core, the Bay Area is the ultimate metro area.

Washington: brings a grandeur and a sense of monument to the concept of nation perhaps unmatched by any city since ancient Rome. Which may be a scary anology!


----------



## unoh (Aug 13, 2005)

three cities lead USA and world.

New York - economy&finance

Washington - politics

Boston - knowledge


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

unoh said:


> three cities lead USA and world.
> 
> New York - economy&finance
> 
> ...


Also,

LA - Entertainment

SF Bay Area - Tech (IT, biotech, etc)


----------



## mr_storms (Oct 29, 2005)

Its more like SF biotech, San Jose Computer Tech/IT but ya


----------



## goonsta (Sep 11, 2002)

> The world isn't only about electronically moving money around. A modern economy wouldn't function without modern finance, but it also wouldn't function without computer systems, indoor plumbing, cars and trucks, manufacturing, you name it.


Yea, but somehow it would function without food, shelter or clothing. What a logical argument! 

I swear I remember a member with this exact same argument, who's not here anymore. He was memorable because he was the only one. Hey, foolish pride will keep someone arguing to the death, even if their arguments are full of holes.


----------



## JBOB (Aug 26, 2005)

The Budgets that allowed scientist to create the first Digital Computer at the University of Penn in Philadelphia (ENIAC) has led the way for computer advancement.. The Internet definately has brought the world closer to the individual.. With enough money comes ideas ex.. Space exploration, etc... Silicon Valley has taken the reigns to the next level, especially in the last 15 - 20 years prices of computers have gone down.. What goes up does come down but no matter how you look at it and the facts will back this up the majority of U.S. History Advancement credit goes to the N.E. In todays world like a baby the credit can be divided among the rest of the Nation with certain cities standing out more than others, through media, etc.. Correct this if I'm inaccurate but Dollar wise The Northeast is the Wealthiest Area in the Country.

Also, there are two Ivey League Colleges in the Philadelphia Area Princeton and University of Penn. 

I Know this is outdated but if you can get a 2004 version please submit...

2003 
Boston - Personal Income 191 million Per Capita 43k
Baltimore Personal Income 96 million Per Capita 36k
New York Personal Income 763 million Per Capita 40k
Philadelphia Personal Income 214 million Per Capita 37k
D.C. Personal Income 224 million Per Capita 44k

Peace


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

goonsta said:


> Yea, but somehow it would function without food, shelter or clothing. What a logical argument!
> 
> I swear I remember a member with this exact same argument, who's not here anymore. He was memorable because he was the only one. Hey, foolish pride will keep someone arguing to the death, even if their arguments are full of holes.


Ummm.. the "you name it" part of the last sentence was supposed to cover other stuff, like food, shelter and clothing. My point is that finance is not the be all and end all of the world economy. Again, a modern economy wouldn't function without a modern financial system, but as you said, it also wouldn't function without modern agricultural methods, information technology, transportation systems, etc... I would think this is an obvious point.

Also, in the modern world, it seems that change has been driven largely by technology, not by finance or advertising. Life today is different from life 100 years ago (and almost certainly from life 100 years from now) largely because of technological change. This to me anyway makes technological innovation hugely important.


----------



## goonsta (Sep 11, 2002)

Yes, but ultimately, those basic needs and necessities are functional, so to put technology above that is crazy. With this service, one can arguably call Chicago the capital of agriculture.


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

goonsta said:


> Yes, but ultimately, those basic needs and necessities are functional, so to put technology above that is crazy.


I'm talking about change. People needed to eat, wear clothing and sleep somewhere 10,000 years ago, and they still need to do all those things today. But what accounts for the differences in life over time? I'd say overwhelmingly technological change. I don't just mean IT and biotech - although that seems to be where a large chunk of the progress is being made at the moment - but also agricultural technology (the green revolution, genetically engineered seeds), transport technology (trains, cars, commercial aviation), etc...


----------



## goonsta (Sep 11, 2002)

It works with it, no one side is more important than the other. It's not an inverse relationship though.


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

goonsta said:


> It works with it, no one side is more important than the other. It's not an inverse relationship though.


I agree. My whole point is that NY, London and to a lesser extent places like Tokyo, HK and Chicago aren't the most important or powerful places in the world simply because of their roles as financial centers. There's more to the world than finance. The Bay Area is hugely important because of its role in developing technology that will change how you live. Washington is hugely important because of it's political influence. And don't tell me finance or "business" controls politics, because in America it demostrably does not with this current administration. Religion for instance (evangelicals and assorted conservative Christians) plays at least as strong a role in our political landscape today.

Heck, someone on this site once mentioned that a city like Beijing, which most people here dismiss at gamma or whatever it's ranked as, is massively important, probably more so than Paris or London. After all what happens there intimately affects the daily lives of 1.3 billion people, while London and Paris have far more diffuse and indirect influence.


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

edit.


----------



## Dampyre (Sep 19, 2002)

brooklynprospect said:


> Please, I live in midtown manhattan, got an economics degree from an Ivy League university... but I guess because you grew up in some Chicago hood, you're the expert.


Big deal. You'll need that high-paying salary to pay back those student loans. There are guys in the office with no college degrees that probably make more than you. Anyway, you still grew up in the 'burbs with a provincial attitude.


----------



## Dampyre (Sep 19, 2002)

brooklynprospect said:


> Ha ha... now I know you're talking out your ass. The Bay Area shits on Tokyo when it comes to technological innovation. Not even close. This is not some nationalistic or home-town pride thing. I've actually been to Tokyo twice, have lots of Japanese friends, and greatly prefer it to SF...


Tokyo is still the more technologically advanced CITY. It's no slouch when it comes to innovation either. Everytime I look up there's a more advanced robot or something invented there. 

For my money, Tokyo SHITS on the Bay Area when it comes to importance.


----------



## Dampyre (Sep 19, 2002)

brooklynprospect said:


> And don't tell me finance or "business" controls politics, because in America it demostrably does not with this current administration.


Is that why troops are in Iraq? Looks to me like it's about oil and natural resoures. Lots of money at stake there. Wars and political moves are all about money and resources.

Let me guess, you think it's all about WMD. :lol:


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

Dampyre said:


> Big deal. You'll need that high-paying salary to pay back those student loans. There are guys in the office with no college degrees that probably make more than you.


ha ha that's great... well go ahead and tell yourself whatever you need to hear man... Happy Thanksgiving!


----------



## brooklynprospect (Apr 27, 2005)

Dampyre said:


> Is that why troops are in Iraq? Looks to me like it's about oil and natural resoures. Lots of money at stake there. Wars and political moves are all about money and resources.
> 
> Let me guess, you think it's all about WMD. :lol:


Yes I'm sure the broader business community is really thrilled by the generalized economic mismanagement... Energy companies have influence, but they're a small part of "business", and in general you'd have to be a 'tard not to acknowledge the massive importance of religious attitudes for instance in politics today. It's a pretty sophomoric kind of reductionism to say that "business" or finance controls politics.


----------

