# Swoons Over Miami: What distinguishes a global city?



## LtBk (Jul 27, 2004)

miami305 said:


> Yeah and then you wonder why so many people from Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean want to move to Miami and live here....:nuts:...."cheesy place" I wonder where you are from??????


Are there many Europeans moving to Miami?


----------



## Aceventura (May 6, 2007)

LtBk said:


> Are there many Europeans moving to Miami?


I have met people who have moved here from Norway, Denmark, Ireland, England, Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Greece, Serbia, Slovenia, Croatia, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and Turkey. I would not be surprised if there were more native born Russians in my neighborhood than native born U.S. citizens. 



> I'd say Miami's more of a Hemispheric City


I like that! :cheers:


----------



## miamipaintball (Jul 11, 2008)

the reason most move to Miami is to escape the winter cold like my parents, other than that they could care less


----------



## Spookvlieger (Jul 10, 2009)

dmoor82 said:


> Huge Airport,Huge Port,Racially diverse,Huge population,Big Time reputation,Tourist Hotspot,Pro Sports galore,Massive Skyline,DENSE(over 13k/sq mile),good universities,Huge Art's scene,Huge Fashion hotspot,great Weather and Beaches!Huge GDP! In my eyes Miami is a Global City/Metro at The lower end of The Spectrum!


I agree with you on the above things, but: 13k/sqmi is not what you can call DENSE at all.
Brussels where I live near has only 1.5 million people in metro and pop density is 16,857/sq mi over the whole metro area, and it isn't very dense...

+ a huge skyline does not make a city great or global. I can give you numerous cities with a huge skyline that mean notting.


----------



## Spookvlieger (Jul 10, 2009)

*According to wikipedia:*

Definition: A global city (also called world city or sometimes alpha city or world center) is a city deemed to be an important node point in the global economic system. The concept comes from geography and urban studies and rests on the idea that globalization can be understood as largely created, facilitated and enacted in strategic geographic locales according to a hierarchy of importance to the operation of the global system of finance and trade.

The most complex of these entities is the "global city", whereby the linkages binding a city have a direct and tangible effect on global affairs through socio-economic means.[1] The terminology of "global city", as opposed to megacity, is believed to have been coined by the sociologist Saskia Sassen in reference to her 1991 work, "The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo"[2] though the term "world city" to describe cities which control a disproportionate amount of global business dates to at least May 1886 to describe Liverpool by the Illustrated London News.[3] Patrick Geddes used of the term "world city" later in 1915.[4] Cities can fall from being appropriate to such categorization, such as in the case of cities that have become less cosmopolitan, and less internationally renowned in the current era, e.g., Kaliningrad, Russia; Thessaloniki, Greece; and Alexandria, Egypt.

Criteria: 
Economic
Political
Cultural
Infrastructure


In 2008, the American journal Foreign Policy, in conjunction with consulting firm A.T. Kearney and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, published a ranking of global cities, based on consultation with Saskia Sassen, Witold Rybczynski, and others. Foreign Policy noted that "the world’s biggest, most interconnected cities help set global agendas, weather transnational dangers, and serve as the hubs of global integration. They are the engines of growth for their countries and the gateways to the resources of their regions."[31]

In 2010 the index was updated, and the top thirty ranked were:[32]


1 New York City 
2 London 
3 Tokyo 
4 Paris 
5 Hong Kong 
6 Chicago 
7 Los Angeles 
8 Singapore 
9 Sydney 
10 Seoul 
11 Brussels 
12 San Francisco 
13 Washington D.C. 
14 Toronto 
15 Beijing 
16 Berlin 
17 Madrid 
18 Vienna 
19 Boston 
20 Frankfurt 
20 Shanghai 
22 Buenos Aires 
23 Stockholm 
24 Zurich 
25 Moscow 
26 Barcelona 
27 Dubai 
28 Rome 
29 Amsterdam 
30 Mexico City 


*Global Power City Index*
The Institute for Urban Strategies at The Mori Memorial Foundation in Tokyo, Japan issued a comprehensive study of global cities in 2009. The ranking is based on six overall categories, "Economy", "Research & Development", "Cultural Interaction", "Livability", "Ecology & Natural Environment", and "Accessibility", with 69 individual indicators among them.[33] This Japanese ranking also breaks down top ten world cities ranked in subjective categories such as "manager, researcher, artist, visitor and resident."

Rank City Score Best category (position) 
1 New York City 330.4 Economy (1.) Research & Development (1.) 
2 London 322.3 Cultural Interaction (1.) 
3 Paris 317.8 Livability (1.) Accessibility (1.) 
4 Tokyo 305.6 Economy (2.) Research & Development (2.) 
5 Singapore 274.4 Economy (5.) Cultural Interaction (5.) 
6 Berlin 259.3 Livability (2.) 
7 Vienna 255.1 Ecology & Natural Environment (3.) 
8 Amsterdam 250.5 Accessibility (3.) 
9 Zürich 242.5 Ecology & Natural Environment (2.) 
10 Hong Kong 242.5 Economy (4.) 
11 Madrid 242.5 Ecology & Natural Environment (7.) Accessibility (7.) 
12 Seoul 242.1 Research & Development (4.) 
13 Los Angeles 240.0 Research & Development (5.) 
14 Sydney 237.3 Ecology & Natural Environment (9.) 
15 Toronto 234.6 Livability (5.) 
16 Frankfurt 232.9 Accessibility (5.) 
17 Copenhagen 231.7 Economy (9.) Livability (9.) 
18 Brussels 229.9 Livability (8.) 
19 Geneva 229.7 Ecology & Natural Environment (1.) 
20 Boston 226.2 Research & Development(6.) 

*World City Survey*
In 2010 the London based consultant firm Knight Frank LLP together with the Citibank published a survey of world cities.[34][35] The Wealth Report 2010, which includes the World City Survey, assesses four parameters — economic activity, political power, knowledge and influence and quality of life. The list aimed to rank the world´s most influential cities.[36]

Rank City Best category 
1 New York Economic activity 
2 London Economic activity 
3 Paris Quality of life 
4 Tokyo Economic activity 
5 Los Angeles Knowledge and influence 
6 Brussels Political power 
7 Singapore Economic activity 
8 Berlin Quality of life 
9 Beijing Political power 
10 Toronto Quality of life 
11 Chicago Knowledge and influence 
12 Washington, D.C. Political power 
13 Seoul Economic activity 
14 Hong Kong Knowledge and influence 
15 Frankfurt Quality of life 
16 Sydney Knowledge and influence 
17 San Francisco Quality of life 
18 Bangkok Political power 
19 Shanghai Economic activity 
20 Zürich Quality of life 



*GaWC studies*

*Alpha ++ world cities: *
London, New York 

*Alpha + world cities: *
Hong Kong, Paris, Singapore, Tokyo, Sydney, Milan, Shanghai, Beijing 

*Alpha world cities: *
Madrid, Moscow, Seoul, Toronto, Brussels, Buenos Aires, Mumbai, Kuala 
Lumpur, Chicago 

*Alpha - world cities: *
Warsaw, São Paulo, Zürich, Amsterdam, Mexico City, Jakarta, Dublin, Bangkok, Taipei, Istanbul, Rome, Lisbon, Frankfurt am Main, Stockholm, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Athens, Caracas, Los Angeles, Auckland, Santiago 

*Beta + world cities: *
Washington, Melbourne, Johannesburg, Atlanta, Barcelona, San Francisco, Manila, Bogotá, Tel Aviv, New Delhi, Dubai, Bucharest 

*Beta world cities: *
Oslo, Berlin, Helsinki, Geneva, Copenhagen, Riyadh, Hamburg, Cairo, Luxembourg, Bangalore, Dallas, Kuwait City, Boston 

*Beta - world cities: *
Munich, Jeddah, Miami, Lima, Kiev, Houston, Guangzhou, Beirut, Karachi, Düsseldorf, Sofia, Montevideo, Nicosia, Rio de Janeiro, Ho Chi Minh City 

*Gamma + world cities: *
Montreal, Nairobi, Bratislava, Panama City, Chennai, Brisbane, Casablanca, Denver, Quito, Stuttgart, Vancouver, Zagreb, Manama, Guatemala City, Cape Town, San José, Minneapolis, Santo Domingo, Seattle 

*Gamma world cities: *
Ljubljana, Shenzhen, Perth, Kolkata, Guadalajara, Antwerp, Philadelphia, Rotterdam, Amman, Portland, Lagos 

*Gamma - world cities:* 
Detroit, Manchester, Wellington, Riga, Guayaquil, Edinburgh, Porto, San Salvador, St. Petersburg, Tallinn, Port Louis, San Diego, Islamabad, Birmingham, Doha, Calgary, Almaty, Columbus



Miami is missing in a lot of Lists on Wiki, while the little city (compaired to Miami) where I live near is everywhere in it...


----------



## pesto (Jun 29, 2009)

The Wikipedia article sounds like a "vanity page" or "self recognition" article. It sounds like it was posted by the authors of the survey to give the impression that what they produced is of some general significance. 

In any event, I am not sure it is possible to identify a "global city" any better with the description than without.

I remember that "Alpha" list also. It was highly specialized for certain obscure purposes and has no general significance (LA tucked in between Caracas and Auckland, etc.)


----------



## Aceventura (May 6, 2007)

joshsam, Brussels is a one of a kind city and I don't think anyone will dispute it's quality and significance especially when compared to Miami. Who stated it is not possible for a global city to have only 1 million people? Brussels has been a world class and global city for several years now, and has centuries of rich history. I just don't get the comparison of the emerging new city of Miami and the established city of Brussels. It's like comparing apples to orangutans.


----------



## pesto (Jun 29, 2009)

Another aspect of the double counting problem. Assuming there is about as much political clout in US (DC) as in the EU (all the European cities combined), how do you allocate the government points in the EU? For example, if DC is equal to London plus Paris plus Berlin plus Madrid plus Rome plus Brussels plus, etc., politically and if it is economically larger than Brussells, how does it end up below Brussells? Same for Berlin and Vienna and Amsterdam. My guess is that the EU is double counting on political influence.

Same is not true for business; this can be reasonably easily meaured by bank clearings for the metro area or several other methods. It should be easy to get a straight-forward ranking.

I'd be interested in seeing how the Europeans would allocate the say, 100 points for government among their various cities and how they would come out against NY and DC, who presumably get most of the 100 in the US (and Chicago and LA, for that matter, which are much larger economies than most European capitals).


----------



## Anderson Geimz (Mar 29, 2008)

WTF are you on about "double counting problem"?

The only problem is comparing US metro areas to European cities/municipalities as so often happens especially when it comes to population or GDP. Or else the inflated US GDP (no, burning up 6 times more energy does not make you wealthier, it generates GDP though...)

There is no double counting of political power because Brussels is not equal to Washington DC in political power. If DC is 100, then London and Paris are both 80, Berlin is 70, Brussels is 70 too but on a different level, Madrid and Milan are 60, The Hague is 50 and so forth...
Are you mathemethically challenged? How would there be a finite amount of "political power" that needs to be divided between everyone?


----------



## mhays (Sep 12, 2002)

"Global city" is a subjective term. It doesn't have to be about economic influence. It can be about cultural influence for example.


----------



## earthJoker (Dec 15, 2004)

Anderson Geimz said:


> There is no double counting of political power because Brussels is not equal to Washington DC in political power. If DC is 100, then London and Paris are both 80, Berlin is 70, Brussels is 70 too but on a different level, Madrid and Milan are 60, The Hague is 50 and so forth...


Interesting, Berlin politically below Paris and London. Just because of the permanent SC seat?


----------



## pesto (Jun 29, 2009)

Anderson: my point exactly. If you sum up the "political influence" numbers of the European cities as you are doing, 80 + 80 + 70... and include all the capitals (plus Milan, which is not even a capital so I'm guessing Frankfurt, Munich, etc. are also included), you get a total of, say, 1000. This implies there is 10 times as much political power and influence in the EU as there is in DC. If you assume that the US and EU are about equal in political power, then the 100 that DC gets should be allocated among the various EU cities to total 100 (or alternatively, NY, LA, Chicago and some others get 50-100 each to reach the EU total of 1000).

You don't get the same problem with economic statistics because there are discreet measurements that apply uniquely to each city. Rankings there are easy to get and there is no doubling. How to weight them is a matter of opinion, of course, but the order should be clear.

btw, I understand your other comments are just an attempt to insult, without any substantive content, but still they are economic nonsense.

Otherwise, as my prior posts indicate, I agree that "global city" is vague beyond hope. And comparing Brussells to Miami is probably the least useful thing I will do today.


----------



## Zhiao (Aug 2, 2010)

dmoor82 said:


> Miami Metro has over 5.4 million people,it boasts America's 4th largest Urbanized area at 5.2 million people only behind NYC,LA,CHI!Miami-Dade County is The Country's eighth most populous County at 2.5 Million people!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami also in 2009 UBS did a study of 73 Global cities' purchasing power and wealth,MIA was The richest U.S. city(4 U.S. cities in study) and The 5th richest city in The WORLD in purchasing power!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBS_AG


That list by UBS is rediculous; they base their ranking on a pitiful sample of 14 occupuations, and completely ignoring banking sector, healthcare, education, legal, etc. Trust me, Miami is not above LA, NYC, and Chicago in wages, even in purchasing power, as Miami is expensive too.


----------



## Zhiao (Aug 2, 2010)

LtBk said:


> Are there many Europeans moving to Miami?


Yes, and in fact there has been a recent migration of Russians to Miami, to the extent that North Miami Beach is now "Little Russia." Go to South Beach, and many of the waitresses are Russian.


----------



## -Corey- (Jul 8, 2005)

Zhiao said:


> That list by UBS is rediculous; they base their ranking on a pitiful sample of 14 occupuations, and completely ignoring banking sector, healthcare, education, legal, etc. Trust me, Miami is not above LA, NYC, and Chicago in wages, even in purchasing power, as Miami is expensive too.


You're right, I'm from San Diego and moved to Miami and is not even close. Miami would't even make the top 10 in the U.S. by GDP nor purchasing power.


----------



## Anderson Geimz (Mar 29, 2008)

pesto said:


> Anderson: my point exactly. If you sum up the "political influence" numbers of the European cities as you are doing, 80 + 80 + 70... and include all the capitals (plus Milan, which is not even a capital so I'm guessing Frankfurt, Munich, etc. are also included), you get a total of, say, 1000. This implies there is 10 times as much political power and influence in the EU as there is in DC. If you assume that the US and EU are about equal in political power, then the 100 that DC gets should be allocated among the various EU cities to total 100 (or alternatively, NY, LA, Chicago and some others get 50-100 each to reach the EU total of 1000).


What a baffeling display of "not getting it"...

Yes the political influence of all European countries put together exceeds the political influence of the single country USA. This can be true even if the US and EU have the same amount of political influence.
Political influence is not a zero sum game...(I thought such would be obvious and that it would be appearant that there are also factors that make combinations of countries less influencial then the sum of their parts).


----------

