# High-rise Capital of the World: China, Brazil, or USA?



## Rwarky (Apr 19, 2005)

*China, Brazil, and the United States have something distinctly common, lots of high-rise buildings (examples: skyscrapers, apartment buildings and condos, etc). In your mind and if possible, with facts, which nation can call itself highrise capital of the world?*


*Definitions for High-rise:*

1) being multistory and equipped with elevators.

2) of, relating to, or characterized by high-rise buildings.


*and*


*Definition for Capital:*

3) chief in importance or influence 


Source: www.m-w.com


----------



## nomarandlee (Sep 24, 2005)

The U.S. I would say. It has what is generally regarded as two of the best three skylines in the world. Two cities which truely reflect the history and embodement of the skyscraper (NYC and Chicago). Many of its even mid-size cities have pretty good skylines. American skyscrapers have the greatest diversity, sizes, ages, and charhecter in my opinion (Chinas cities have some good charecher but they all look modern and generally have a same feel about them where in the U.S. there is more variation between cities I feel)


----------



## BMXican (Jul 28, 2002)

well...when it comes to quantity it's probably china.

the US may be the home of the highrise/skyscraper, but only a handfull of cities have many of them. in brazil or china you have dozens of cities with literally thousands of highrise buildings.


----------



## vid (May 29, 2004)

A multi-storied building has to be 500' high to be considered a skyscraper. Brazil has a nationwide land use policy that prohibits buildings form being any taller than that. Aside from a few exceptions, Brazil has very few skyscrapers.

If we follow the definition above, a multistoried building with an elevator, the 2 story Library downtown is a highrise. A highrise is any building 12+ stories, or 35m+ (either works.)

Highrise stats, "© Emporis December 2005". 
USA: 18,895 highrises (http://www.emporis.com/en/bu/sk/st/ma/ct/co/?id=100007)
China: 12,061 highrises (http://www.emporis.com/en/bu/sk/st/ma/ct/co/?id=100004)
Brazil: 9,620 highrises (http://www.emporis.com/en/bu/sk/st/ma/ct/co/?id=100003)
(http://www.emporis.com/en/bu/sk/st/ma/ct/)

Remember that Emporis is a work in progress, and data on most countries, especially China, are incomplete.


----------



## ReddAlert (Nov 4, 2004)

Of course China will because it has billions of people, millions moving into urban centers each year. However, if we are talking about quality. Ahem...the U.S. blows Brazil and China off the map.


----------



## bjfan82 (Dec 13, 2004)

USA because a) we invented skyscrapers, b) skyscrapers are as American as apple pie c) we have more cities with more high rises than any other country


----------



## malec (Apr 17, 2005)

I have to say the USA. A capital city doesn't have to have the largest population in a country. China have more towers now but the ones in the US are more famous. When most people think of skyscrapers they think of USA.


----------



## vid (May 29, 2004)

ReddAlert said:


> Of course China will because it has billions of people, millions moving into urban centers each year. However, if we are talking about quality. Ahem...the U.S. blows Brazil and China off the map.


True, but there are some countries that are making much more structurally sound skyscrapers. Look at Torre Mayor in Mexico City. There was an earthquake, and people in the building barely even noticed it.


----------



## Lanier (Dec 19, 2005)

I think China would have the High-rise Capital of the World:


----------



## Accura4Matalan (Jan 7, 2004)

Chinaaaaaaaaaaaaaa


----------



## conquest (Jul 27, 2005)

well colombia is not far behind
but i'll go with china


----------



## gronier (Mar 2, 2005)

China


----------



## tigidig14 (Mar 5, 2005)

estados unidos, 

amigos


----------



## Handsome (May 2, 2005)

photo by Xiaobai


----------



## BrunoFoca (Dec 5, 2005)

Only São Paulo have 42.000 High Rises according to City hall.
In all Brazil Emporis have less than 10 people, so this data is wrong (China too).


----------



## HoustonTexas (Nov 30, 2004)

We invented it, and perfected it. Now China might have some game, but the only thing Brazil has is Sao Paulo, and Recife.


----------



## Æsahættr (Jul 9, 2004)

The first high-rises originated in London...?

I would have to say China, as most of their urban population lives in high-rises as opposed to the USA.


----------



## HoustonTexas (Nov 30, 2004)

lotrfan55345 said:


> The first high-rises originated in London...?
> 
> I would have to say China, as most of their urban population lives in high-rises as opposed to the USA.


Not Steel Frame to make them truely skyscrapers...


----------



## skyscraper_1 (May 30, 2004)

For Highrises China wins, For Skyscarpers China only has a few cities with a lot of Supertalls, therefore USA wins that catargory.


----------



## BrunoFoca (Dec 5, 2005)

HoustonTexas said:


> We invented it, and perfected it. Now China might have some game, but the only thing Brazil has is Sao Paulo, and Recife.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH
Are you joke?

Only in São Paulo State i remember of:
Guarulhos, Campinas, Santos, São Vicente, Praia Grande, São Bernado do Campo, Santo André, São Caetano.


In the rest of country: Rio de Janeiro, Niteroi, Belo Horizonte, Porto Alegre, Curitiba, Florianopolis, Camburiu.
This is just the cities i remember now multiplies for 10 and for 3 and perhaps it´s close to the real number.


----------



## allan_dude (Apr 14, 2005)

brazilian skyscrapers are too boxy and all look same.


----------



## PanaManiac (Mar 26, 2005)

allan_dude said:


> brazilian skyscrapers are too boxy and all look same.


The issue here, dude, is not quality, but _quantity!._


----------



## touchring (Mar 25, 2005)

Depends on whether you include Taiwan and Hong Kong as part of China - if so, China beats USA hands down, whether you go by quality or quantity. In terms of quality, HK skyscrapers are several times better than new york's.

If you exclude Taiwan and Hong Kong, China might probably take another 5 years to compete with USA.

There's not much need to argue over it.


----------



## BrunoFoca (Dec 5, 2005)

And if you include only São Paulo, Brasil beats USA by far.


----------



## Jay (Oct 7, 2004)

bjfan82 said:


> USA because a) we invented skyscrapers, b) skyscrapers are as American as apple pie c) we have more cities with more high rises than any other country




Agree.


----------



## Rwarky (Apr 19, 2005)

I disagree with forumers who say the U.S. is the best. Yes, there are many tall office building in the U.S., however, there aren't that many high-rise residental buildings here. China and Brazil are equivalent in this department. So I voted a tie, because all three nations are good competitors.


----------



## nomarandlee (Sep 24, 2005)

touchring said:


> Depends on whether you include Taiwan and Hong Kong as part of China - if so, China beats USA hands down, whether you go by quality or quantity. In terms of quality, HK skyscrapers are several times better than new york's.
> 
> If you exclude Taiwan and Hong Kong, China might probably take another 5 years to compete with USA.
> 
> There's not much need to argue over it.



How are Hong Kongs skyscrapers of better quality then New Yorks? I would take a Woolworths, Empire, or Chyrstler building over anything in Hong Kong save BOC.


----------



## acreedor (Dec 27, 2005)

all those boxes in brazil are not skyscrapers... somebody make a diagram comparing the skyline of brazilian cities with those of China or USA at the same scale and you will realize they are liliput.


----------



## BrunoFoca (Dec 5, 2005)

This thread is about HIGH RISES.
High Rises: 
A high-rise is any building 12+ stories, or 35m+ (either works.)

Brazil have more Highrises than USA, only São Paulo City have more high-rises than ALL USA, Brazil have more Highrises than China too, because a highrise is any building 12+ stories, or 35m+ (either works.) and only São Paulo have more than 42.000 high-rises by emporis definition.

Again this thread is about high rises not Skyscraper.
And a high-rise is any building 12+ stories, or 35m+ (either works.).
And São Paulo have more High Rises than all USA.


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

touchring said:


> In terms of quality, HK skyscrapers are several times better than new york's.


That's strictly your opinion. NY scrapers are much nicer than HK's, but that's just my opinion.


----------



## krull (Oct 8, 2005)

USA! Becuase it has so many cities with skyscrapers!


----------



## BrunoFoca (Dec 5, 2005)

China, Brazil, and the United States have something distinctly common, lots of high-rise buildings (examples: skyscrapers, apartment buildings and condos, etc). In your mind and if possible, with facts, which nation can call itself highrise capital of the world?


Again to all the people who cannot read, this thread is about the High-Rises Capital of the world, not skyscraper capital.


----------



## dingyunyang179 (Feb 5, 2005)

Xäntårx said:


> Density:
> 
> Hong Kong
> Brazil
> ...


Chinese mainland,not "China"
Hong Kong is one part of China.


----------



## Xabi (Nov 8, 2004)

China, no doubt.


----------



## dingyunyang179 (Feb 5, 2005)

BrunoFoca said:


> This thread is about HIGH RISES.
> High Rises:
> A high-rise is any building 12+ stories, or 35m+ (either works.)
> 
> .


The number of the High rises in China is number 1 in the world.
i swear to god that nearly each Chinese city (including many city that you may never heard of it)has some High rises.


----------



## Xabi (Nov 8, 2004)

Panamaniac said:


> The issue here, dude, is not quality, but _quantity!._


Is not necessary to make a poll to know the city with more highrises. Visit Emporis or... I don't know, but a poll?

I think that this poll evaluates the quality of the highrises of those three countries. That's a debatable thing!


----------



## rayman (Jan 11, 2004)

Brazil doesnt have anything to do in this list.Why Brazil?? why not Iraq or Iran or whatever haha Brazil is not a skyscraper country so just cut out Brazil out of this list. 
China and USA is more interesting though.USA got NYC and Chicago as their strongest cards and China got Shanghai and Hong Kong. Its really a hard choice so I have to go with a tie on this.


----------



## touchring (Mar 25, 2005)

nomarandlee said:


> How are Hong Kongs skyscrapers of better quality then New Yorks? I would take a Woolworths, Empire, or Chyrstler building over anything in Hong Kong save BOC.


We're not comparing museums, newer and shining buildings are better than older ones, at least for skyscrapers.


----------



## samsonyuen (Sep 23, 2003)

US for sure. Brazil has quite a few, but none of them are particularly beautiful. Same goes for China.


----------



## BrunoFoca (Dec 5, 2005)

Again this thread is about high rises, USA have less High-rises than China, and China have less High-Rises than Brazil.
This thread is about quantity not quality.
If this thread is about Skyscraper or quality i vote in USA but is not about Skyscraper, and is not about quality.

Look this thread, this is not a major city and have more than 500 High-Rises (Population 70.000)
And any brazilian city with more than 70.000 inhabitants have High-rises.
Emporis count of Brazilian High-Rises is very wrong, only São Paulo according to City Hall have 42.000 High-Rises.


----------



## LordMarshall (Jun 26, 2005)

I would have to go with China because of the massive construction craze going in that country. in a few years it wont be recognizable.


----------



## Xabi (Nov 8, 2004)

BrunoFoca said:


> Again this thread is about high rises, USA have less High-rises than China, and China have less High-Rises than Brazil.
> This thread is about quantity not quality.


And it's necesary to make a poll to know a statistic data?


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

touchring said:


> We're not comparing museums, newer and shining buildings are better than older ones, at least for skyscrapers.


Once again, that's strictly your opinion. I'd take an old art deco skyscraper over a new modern one anyday.


----------



## Tazmaniadevil (Dec 23, 2003)

USA for variety and China for newness. As for Sao Paulo, the tallest building in the city was built in 1960 and is around 600 feet tall. Brazil does not belong in this poll. They do not have any supertalls.


----------



## BrunoFoca (Dec 5, 2005)

Again, this poll is about high rises (A high-rise is any building with 12+ stories, or 35m+), not about supertalls, not about skyscraper, not about quality, not about what country have the most beautifull buildings.
The question is what country have more High rises, is so difficult to people understand a simple question like that?

USA don´t have more high-rises than Brazil or China.


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

^How many times are you gonna say that? :lol:

We get it, Brazil has more, ours are just better!


----------



## BrunoFoca (Dec 5, 2005)

^^
Until the people understand the question.
And yes, the USA high rises are really, really better, but Brazil have many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many more.
But as Brazil has many more high rises, we have a bigger number of beautiful :banana: high rises we only lose in % :tongue3:


----------



## Dallascaper (Jul 19, 2005)

BrunoFoca said:


> ^^
> Until the people understand the question.
> And yes, the USA high rises are really, really better, but Brazil have many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many more.
> But as Brazil has many more high rises, we have a bigger number of beautiful :banana: high rises we only lose in % :tongue3:


But what you don't seem to understand is that simply having the most of something doesn't automatically make you the "capital of..." whatever topic you are talking about. Quantity, quality, leadership (innovation) and perception are all factors in deciding the mythical title of capital. With this in mind, Brazil doesn't necessarily deserve the title of "capital of the high-rises," no matter how many times you attempt to frame the question.


----------



## Marathoner (Oct 1, 2005)

BrunoFoca said:


> ^^
> Until the people understand the question.
> And yes, the USA high rises are really, really better, but Brazil have many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many more.
> But as Brazil has many more high rises, we have a bigger number of beautiful :banana: high rises we only lose in % :tongue3:


According to Emporis, China has more highrises than Brazil because China has HK! And the quality is far far better. Refer to statistics please!

It's common sense! A rapidly developing country with 1.3B population + one most urbanised city in the world (HK) VS a country of 200M population. For numbers, it should be the former one, obvious!


----------



## DarkFenX (Jan 8, 2005)

Dallascaper said:


> But what you don't seem to understand is that simply having the most of something doesn't automatically make you the "capital of..." whatever topic you are talking about. Quantity, quality, leadership (innovation) and perception are all factors in deciding the mythical title of capital. With this in mind, Brazil doesn't necessarily deserve the title of "capital of the high-rises," no matter how many times you attempt to frame the question.


Thank you. In this kind of thread, its is not quantity. You need height and designs. I go with China for futuristic towers and US for variety.


----------



## spyguy (Apr 16, 2005)

Unless the topic creator said so earlier and I missed it, this poll must be about more than just quantity. You don't ask for people's opinions if you already know the data. So you must take into account quality/history/etc. in addition to quantity, otherwise there's no need for this poll and topic.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Marathoner said:


> According to Emporis, China has more highrises than Brazil because China has HK! And the quality is far far better. Refer to statistics please!
> 
> It's common sense! A rapidly developing country with 1.3B population + one most urbanised city in the world (HK) VS a country of 200M population. For numbers, it should be the former one, obvious!


Even if without HK, China would have more high-rises than Brazil. 

Also, Brazil is a rapidly developing country as well! But the country lack world class skyscrapers compared to The US or China!


----------



## PanaManiac (Mar 26, 2005)

Xabi said:


> I think that this poll evaluates the *quality* of the highrises of those three countries. That's a debatable thing!


Wrong! In establishing the criteria for this thread, *Rwarky* did not include quality. Click on page 1 of this thread and read for yourself.


----------



## BrunoFoca (Dec 5, 2005)

Marathoner said:


> According to Emporis, China has more highrises than Brazil because China has HK! And the quality is far far better. Refer to statistics please!
> 
> It's common sense! A rapidly developing country with 1.3B population + one most urbanised city in the world (HK) VS a country of 200M population. For numbers, it should be the former one, obvious!


Brazil is a rapidly developing Country one of the BRIC.

Like i said emporis data for Brazil is wrong, emporis have 3 editors for all Brazil, a country with the same size of USA without Alaska and 200M pop.
São Paulo is the second most urbanised city in the world and 70% of your inhabitants live in High Rises: Almost 9.000.000 people, you really belive than 9.000.000 of people live in 3.000 buildings like Emporis said?
Belo Horizonte have 500KM² of land area with 3.000.000 inhabitants, do you think than all this people live in houses?

And like Panamaniac said, the autor just whant to know what coutry is the World Capital of high rises in quantity.


----------



## Testament (Nov 25, 2003)

China !! no doubt.


----------



## Marathoner (Oct 1, 2005)

BrunoFoca said:


> Brazil is a rapidly developing Country one of the BRIC.
> 
> Like i said emporis data for Brazil is wrong, emporis have 3 editors for all Brazil, a country with the same size of USA without Alaska and 200M pop.
> São Paulo is the second most urbanised city in the world and 70% of your inhabitants live in High Rises: Almost 9.000.000 people, you really belive than 9.000.000 of people live in 3.000 buildings like Emporis said?
> ...


Even suppose Emporis data is incorrect or incomplete (quite possible), China still has more highrises than Brazil. Because China data can also be underrated if Brazil data is underrated. It's reasonable because of the huge population and urbaniszation of China.

BTW, the 7000 highrises number of HK seems to be underrated because I think at least 90% of people (at least 6.1M) in HK are living in highrises. 7000 highrises cannot house 6.1M people supposing the average height is not taller than 30 stories and the number of flats per storey is usually less than 8.


----------



## BrunoFoca (Dec 5, 2005)

In São Paulo the number of flats per storey is a maximum of 5 the average height is 20 stories.

China or Brazil have more High-Rises than USA, but in China (And Hong Kong too) have the commie blocks one huge building with many people living, in Brazil exist only a building like that The Copan.
Anyway


----------



## nomarandlee (Sep 24, 2005)

touchring said:


> We're not comparing museums, newer and shining buildings are better than older ones, at least for skyscrapers.



This is so not true. There are ugly uninspired buildings that are "modern" built just within the last few years and there are masterpieces that are among those beautifull that were built 70 years ago. Age has very little to do with a scrapers beauty.


----------



## spyguy (Apr 16, 2005)

Panamaniac said:


> Wrong! In establishing the criteria for this thread, *Rwarky* did not include quality. Click on page 1 of this thread and read for yourself.


I'm reading it:



> China, Brazil, and the United States have something distinctly common, lots of high-rise buildings (examples: skyscrapers, apartment buildings and condos, etc). *In your mind* and if possible, *with facts*, which nation can call itself *highrise capital of the world*?


From that I see a few things. First, what's considered a high-rise building. Second, use your own opinion as well as some facts to justify them to create a "highrise capital of the world."

Again, there is no need for polls if you're comparing facts. ex. "Which is taller: the Empire State Building or the Burj Dubai?" Well we all know the answer to that, so why does the poll taker need reassurance for such a question? Now when rephrased, "Which is better, keeping in mind both height, quality, and history?" you have something debatable and a need for a poll.


----------



## mac71 (Dec 14, 2005)

I voted for USA as the homeland of skyscrapers, but China will soon take over 
the "High-rise Capital of the World" title.


----------



## tkr (Apr 3, 2005)

WANCH said:


> The only thing that Brazil can boast about their skyline is density but when it comes to quality, forget it. Anyway, Brazilian high-rises like the ones in Sao Paulo are mostly brand and bombed with alot of pichecao tags. The only impressive buildings that I find in the city are the ones with Microsoft!
> 
> On the other hand, most of Shanghai's residential flats are typical of the most high-rise commieblocks that you'll see in this country though alot of luxury flats and condos are sprouting.


Dude, you're ridiculous. You not only just picked up some ugly buildings' pics from Brazil and generalized it, but you also proved to know shit about it. :doh: There are hundreds, maybe thousands, of very nice buildings in Brazil, both modern and classic arquitecture. Don't talk about something you don't know.

I don't think you'd like if people here started generalizing China, would you?


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

shosho said:


> Dude, you're ridiculous. You not only just picked up some ugly buildings' pics from Brazil and generalized it, but you also proved to know shit about it. :doh: There are hundreds, maybe thousands, of very nice buildings in Brazil, both modern and classic arquitecture. Don't talk about something you don't know.
> 
> I don't think you'd like if people here started generalizing China, would you?


I wouldn't really care if they did! True that there are alot of quality buildings in Brazil but give me some scrapers that are as iconic as The Empire State or Jin Mao?


----------



## tkr (Apr 3, 2005)

WANCH said:


> I wouldn't really care if they did! True that there are alot of quality buildings in Brazil but give me some scrapers that are as iconic as The Empire State or Jin Mao?


Okay, now that's ANOTHER story. There are laws preventing high-buildings/skyscrapers in Brazil. (Do you know anything more stupid than such law?) hno:


----------



## Nongkhai_tong (Dec 27, 2004)

I still vote for USA


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

shosho said:


> Okay, now that's ANOTHER story. There are laws preventing high-buildings/skyscrapers in Brazil. (Do you know anything more stupid than such law?) hno:


Well I'm not just talking about height but distinctive architecture. Like the HSBC building in HK for example. It's not as tall as The Jin Mao or The Edifico Italia in Sampa but it earned iconic status!


----------



## Evan (Jul 8, 2004)

BMXican said:


> well...when it comes to quantity it's probably china.
> 
> *the US may be the home of the highrise/skyscraper, but only a handfull of cities have many of them.* in brazil or china you have dozens of cities with literally thousands of highrise buildings.


WTF? You have obviously never been here. That was the dumbest comment I have ever seen. Dude, even small American cities have high rises. Jesus christ, it amazes me some of the shitass comments people will make just to say something.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

True that even small US cities have high-rises. US cities on the other hand are not that vertical compared to most Chinese or Brazillian cities. Though alot of US cities have high-rises downtown and CBDs in it's suburban areas.


----------



## Evan (Jul 8, 2004)

WANCH said:


> True that even small US cities have high-rises. US cities on the other hand are not that vertical compared to most Chinese or Brazillian cities. Though alot of US cities have high-rises downtown and CBDs in it's suburban areas.


Now your comment yes, I can agree with. That other dudes comment was just plain ignorant. 

The United States, for the moment anyway, has stopped building "super tall", although I expect that to change within the next 20 years.

The United States stopped going for "worlds tallest" because the cost of them has become so prohibitive, and even though many of our old cities are landlocked, we still have lots of room to grow outward. I'm not happy about seeing suburban high-rise boxes spreading out across the horizon all over America, but it is happening.

The United States has stopped reaching for the sky, for now. However, I can assure you all, it is only temporary.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Evan said:


> Now your comment yes, I can agree with. That other dudes comment was just plain ignorant.
> 
> The United States, for the moment anyway, has stopped building "super tall", although I expect that to change within the next 20 years.
> 
> ...


I disagree a bit. How about the Fordham Spire in Chicago? It may not be the world's tallest but it's gonna be the future tallest for the country.


----------



## Evan (Jul 8, 2004)

Oh, one last thing I need to comment on, since this is actually a hijack. Even though the US has stopped going for the super tall, for now, there are many cities that are currently in the process of building some impressive buildings. Not so much tall as amazing in design. Atlanta and Charlotte, North Carolina are two such cities. Miami is another.

Don't stop looking to the US as contender for the super tall just yet because our slow down is only temporary. 

BTW, I love some of the buildings in China. Those guys are building some pretty amazing things over there.


----------



## Evan (Jul 8, 2004)

WANCH said:


> I disagree a bit. How about the Fordham Spire in Chicago? It may not be the world's tallest but it's gonna be the future tallest for the country.


Fordham yes, the United States has slowed down its upward building, but it hasn't stopped altogether. What I meant was, there are more _high rises _ being built in the States than their are _skyscrapers_. For now anyway.

It's going to be awhile before the US sees another Sears Tower, or World trade Center. The super skyscraper by definition I guess. High rises and smaller skyscrapers however, are being built all over the country as we speak.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

I agree with Atlanta and Charlotte. Charlotte on the other hand doesn't have much of a skyline but they have really tall one.


----------



## Evan (Jul 8, 2004)

WANCH said:


> I agree with Atlanta and Charlotte. Charlotte on the other hand doesn't have much of a skyline but they have really tall one.


Yeah, Charlotte doesn't have much of a skyline yet, but what they do have is nice and pleasing. I give the Charlotte guys a hard time down in the Southeast forum, but it really is a nice, up and coming city. Some very nice buildings they have, although as you say, their skyline is still rather small. The BoA(Bank of America) tower is impressive by anyones definition though.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

The Bank of America tower is indeed impressive but it would look better if it had other high-rises surronding it


----------



## Evan (Jul 8, 2004)

WANCH said:


> The Bank of America tower is indeed impressive but it would look better if it had other high-rises surronding it


heh yeah. The first time I ever saw the tower I was flying into Douglas International Airport, and the first thing I noticed was this enormous tower surrounded by a very small downtown in comparison. hahaha. I was still impressed with its size though.

Charlotte is growing at a very respectable pace though, so I suspect it's downtown will continue to rise so in a few years down the road, the BoA won't look so out of place.


----------



## Modernization (Apr 3, 2006)

When it come to skyscrapers we all know China has the most in quantity. China is definitely the skyscrapers capital of the world. There's no countries in the world can compared to it as right now or in the future.


----------



## Skyman (Jan 4, 2006)

America really loses the title of the skyscrapers capital :bash:


----------



## Modernization (Apr 3, 2006)

sorry, America


----------



## sl64 (May 1, 2006)

I don't understand this whole notion of China having more skyscrapers. Even if you count HK (which is questionable), HK and NY are basically a wash, Chicago beats Shanghai for now, and from then on the US trounces China.


----------



## Skybean (Jun 16, 2004)

Shanghai has way more skyscrapers than Chicago (by Emporis definition or 100m+). By several multitudes. You'd be incredibly ignorant to think otherwise. 

In "questionable", I hope you mean HK is undercounted.

I think if the naysayers visit these cities in China, you will be very surprised.


Beijing


----------



## Modernization (Apr 3, 2006)

sl64 said:


> I don't understand this whole notion of China having more skyscrapers. Even if you count HK (which is questionable), HK and NY are basically a wash, Chicago beats Shanghai for now, and from then on the US trounces China.


China probably has more cities than the U.S. There is no doubt in the future all Chinese cities will be cloggedup with highrise. By just looking at the Beijing's pic I can't even tell the if the CBD in the foreground or background.


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

Of course China has many more. Their cities are filled with hundreds upon thousands of repetitive ugly residentials. In terms of quality they are far behind, imo. Which is why I don't think are the high-rise capital. quality>quantity imo.


----------



## Effer (Jun 9, 2005)

China wins by far in every category!


----------



## Modernization (Apr 3, 2006)

RP1 said:


> Of course China has many more. Their cities are filled with hundreds upon thousands of repetitive ugly residentials. In terms of quality they are far behind, imo. Which is why I don't think are the high-rise capital. quality>quantity imo.


Wrong. China's high rise do not lack in qualities like you've mentioned. IN fact, those residential high rise in Beijing are higher in qualities than those orange-brick aparments in Manhanttan. China's skyscrapers boom is far later than the U.S so their buildings are caught up with latest technology. There is a universal concepts you have to follow when constructing highrise in case you don't know. Buildings codes are the same whereever they built in Europe, in America or Asia. IN fact, many buildings are American engineering, your opinion of qualities are false. And yes China is the high-rise captial. Period


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

Modernization said:


> Wrong. China's high rise do not lack in qualities like you've mentioned. IN fact, those residential high rise in Beijing are higher in qualities than those orange-brick aparments in Manhanttan. China's skyscrapers boom is far later than the U.S so their buildings are caught up with latest technology. There is a universal concepts you have to follow when constructing highrise in case you don't know. Buildings codes are the same whereever they built in Europe, in America or Asia. IN fact, many buildings are American engineering, your opinion of qualities are false. And yes China is the high-rise captial. Period


No, I'm pretty sure I'm right. Overall, American cities have higher quality buildings than China. Of course, that's subjective. What's a nice building to me may not be to someone else. So, like I said before, *IMO*, American skyscrapers are of higher quality. There is nothing wrong about it, period.

You seem to be confused. When I refer to quality, I'm talking aesthetics, looks. Not how sturdy and strong they're built, what codes they have to follow, etc. That's irrelevant to me.

America is on top.


----------



## Modernization (Apr 3, 2006)

RP1 said:


> No, I'm pretty sure I'm right. Overall, American cities have higher quality buildings than China. Of course, that's subjective. What's a nice building to me may not be to someone else. So, like I said before, *IMO*, American skyscrapers are of higher quality. There is nothing wrong about it, period.
> 
> You seem to be confused. When I refer to quality, I'm talking aesthetics, looks. Not how sturdy and strong they're built, what codes they have to follow, etc. That's irrelevant to me.
> 
> America is on top.


American highrise are not higher qualities just because they're on American soil. you're seemed to be confused but it happens all the time to people who lack knowledge about skyscrapers, particularly you. How about :bash: on top your face. end of discussion.


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

Modernization said:


> American highrise are not higher qualities just because they're on American soil. you're seemed to be confused but it happens all the time to people who lack knowledge about skyscrapers, particularly you. How about :bash: on top your face. end of discussion.


What does them being on American soil have to do with anything? Where do you come up with this garbage? I like American skyscrapers a whole lot more than Chinese skyscrapers, it has nothing to do them being American. I don't need knowledge on skyscrapers to like some more than others. It's an *opinion*, one you have a hard time accepting. You should get used to it, not everybody worships China like you apparently do. End of discussion.



:stupid:


----------



## Modernization (Apr 3, 2006)

RP1 said:


> What does them being on American soil have to do with anything? Where do you come up with this garbage? I like American skyscrapers a whole lot more than Chinese skyscrapers, it has nothing to do them being American. I don't need knowledge on skyscrapers to like some more than others. It's an *opinion*, one you have a hard time accepting. You should get used to it, not everybody worships China like you apparently do. End of discussion.
> 
> 
> 
> :stupid:


Here's something to mind, if your opinions don't receive recognitions from others than don't post it anywhere especially not this thread making it any longer than it need to be. It doesn't matter to me what you like, it's what you posted is stupid :weirdo:


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

Modernization said:


> Here's something to mind, if your opinions don't receive recognitions from others than don't post it anywhere especially not this thread making it any longer than it need to be. It doesn't matter to me what you like, it's what you posted is stupid :weirdo:


You're truly retarded. The fucking thread is asking what the skyscraper capital of the world is. I'm explaining why the US is. Everyone who has posted in here has given their opinion. Whether you care or not is irrelevant. I doubt many people care what you think, so I wonder what your point is?

Apparently you do care what I like, you're making such a fuss about it. I don't kiss China's ass so you oppose what I think. If my opinion meant nothing to you, you wouldn't have responded.

And once again, there was nothing stupid about it. I believe US has better buildings, and overall claims the title of the skyscraper capital of the world. 127 people agree with me, you're in the minority. Thank you and next.


----------



## Jaye101 (Feb 16, 2005)

You do realize that per capita Canada has 2x the amoount of highrises than the USA?


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

Jaye101 said:


> You do realize that per capita Canada has 2x the amoount of highrises than the USA?


Are you asking me?


----------



## oskarj (Mar 15, 2006)

Modernization said:


> Wrong. China's high rise do not lack in qualities like you've mentioned. IN fact, those residential high rise in Beijing are higher in qualities than those orange-brick aparments in Manhanttan. China's skyscrapers boom is far later than the U.S so their buildings are caught up with latest technology. There is a universal concepts you have to follow when constructing highrise in case you don't know. Buildings codes are the same whereever they built in Europe, in America or Asia. IN fact, many buildings are American engineering, your opinion of qualities are false. And yes China is the high-rise captial. Period


too stupid to comment to imo.


----------



## Modernization (Apr 3, 2006)

RP1 said:


> You're truly retarded. The fucking thread is asking what the skyscraper capital of the world is. I'm explaining why the US is. Everyone who has posted in here has given their opinion. Whether you care or not is irrelevant. I doubt many people care what you think, so I wonder what your point is?
> 
> Apparently you do care what I like, you're making such a fuss about it. I don't kiss China's ass so you oppose what I think. If my opinion meant nothing to you, you wouldn't have responded.
> 
> And once again, there was nothing stupid about it. I believe US has better buildings, and overall claims the title of the skyscraper capital of the world. Thank you and next.


 U.S doesn't claim to the the skyscraper's highrise of the world. It's you who's making stupid judgement and besides, it's not up to you to decide if U.S deserve the title. By reading your posts I found that your way of speaking is very unpolite and you have no other choice than supporting your claim with insults. This apparently means that you seriously need some help. :weirdo:


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

Modernization said:


> U.S doesn't claim to the the skyscraper's highrise of the world. It's you who's making stupid judgement and besides, it's not up to you to decide if U.S deserve the title. By reading your posts I found that your way of speaking is very unpolite and you have no other choice than supporting your claim with insults. This apparently means that you seriously need some help. :weirdo:


Hahaha, oh man, this is gold. I'm getting a real kick outta you. :lol:

It is up to me to decide who deserves the title though, and everyone else who posts in this thread. That's what the thread asks, is it not? You're very confused, maybe you should just quit while you're ahead. No, scratch that, you've already fallen behind. :lol:


----------



## Modernization (Apr 3, 2006)

RP1 said:


> Hahaha, oh man, this is gold. I'm getting a real kick outta you. :lol:
> 
> It is up to me to decide who deserves the title though, and everyone else who posts in this thread. That's what the thread asks, is it not? You're very confused, maybe you should just quit while you're ahead. No, scratch that, you've already fallen behind. :lol:


What i mean is your opinion isn't important anymore. what's more important now is keeping your hands to your pockets and away from the keyboard.
:weirdo:


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

Modernization said:


> What i mean is your opinion isn't important anymore. what's more important now is keeping your hands to your pockets and away from the keyboard.
> :weirdo:


Just keep trying to dig yourself out of that hole, it's working. :lol:

Anyways, I'm done with you. Back on topic please.


----------



## Modernization (Apr 3, 2006)

RP1 said:


> Just keep trying to dig yourself out of that hole, it's working. :lol:
> 
> Anyways, I'm done with you. Back on topic please.


My hole isn't as deep as yours so you want me to lend you a hand out??


----------



## The Cebuano Exultor (Aug 1, 2005)

*After reading...*

After reading your (RP1 and Modernization) comments I would like to take the side of RP1. Modernizatiom, RP1 was just trying to give *his opinion * about the topic of this thread. You do realize that forums are created so that people can exchange their ideas about stuff. If you do not like the opinion of others, you should not pick on that person for his opinion. He was merely sharing his opinion. If you don't like his opinion then so be it. Don't make a fuss and pick on the person. This just ruins the purpose of this forum of allowing a constructive exchange of ideas and opinions. Be more constructive not destructive. Ok.


----------



## Modernization (Apr 3, 2006)

The Cebuano Exultor said:


> After reading your (RP1 and Modernization) comments I would like to take the side of RP1. Modernizatiom, RP1 was just trying to give *his opinion * about the topic of this thread. You do realize that forums are created so that people can exchange their ideas about stuff. If you do not like the opinion of others, you should not pick on that person for his opinion. He was merely sharing his opinion. If you don't like his opinion then so be it. Don't make a fuss and pick on the person. This just ruins the purpose of this forum of allowing a constructive exchange of ideas and opinions. Be more constructive not destructive. Ok.


 -I agree, so everytime when someone post something, leave it alone. Don't quote and try to sound like you're smarter.This is a matter of opinions,so if you think something different, there's no need to quote from some previous posts . That means you disrespect others' opinion and claim yours to be better. What you'll need is some data to prove your point. Your own preference about things may not agree with everyone nevertheless it may cause more tensions to the trash talking.


----------



## sl64 (May 1, 2006)

"In "questionable", I hope you mean HK is undercounted."

No, I mean that it's questionable to say "China has more skyscrapers, just look at HK" when a lot of the skyscrapers were built before HK was a part of China, and because HK is still somewhat seperate from the rest of China, both in terms of wealth and liberty.

As for my ignorance in not realizing Shanghai has more highrises than Chicago, do you have a source? By my own count, Chicago has 240 100m+ towers built or U/C, while Shanghai has 202.

But anyways, I worded my original post incorrectly. The second part, comparing NYC to HK and Chicago to Shanghai, was not just about number but also about quality (in my personal taste), which I didn't mention earlier in the post. My mistake. Let me rephrase:

Chicago has more good skyscrapers than Shanghai, in my opinion, while NY and HK are even.

How's that?


----------



## oliver999 (Aug 4, 2006)

Rizzato said:


> China is a massive, massive, massive country.
> take shanghai for example...theyre about to have a second supertall, and they also have that huge tower on the waterfront... its just amazing.
> 
> I mean I live in the USA so I know the quality of our skylines...
> ...


i totally agree with you.
2 million us city, and 2 million chinese city, i agree us city win skyline.


----------



## tigerboy (Jun 7, 2006)

It was the USA.

It is currently a tie between USA and China with Chicago and NYC rivalled by HK and Shanghai. There is in reality, as everyone who has visited China with an open mind realises a big 4 not a big 3. 

Forests of high rise residential dwelling space doesn't really do it without a proper epic skyline a la Hong Kong or Chicago to act as an image for the nations urban look.

It will be China.


----------



## Humberto123 (Oct 1, 2005)

Quality over Quantity! USA!


----------



## staff (Oct 23, 2004)

^^
Where is this quality of which you speak, in comparission with China for example?


----------



## ludovic (Dec 15, 2006)

Definitely it's USA. America is a motherland of skyscrapers! New York is a skyscrapercity.It's classic. I can't identify the high-rise buildings with other country. American skyscrapers have the longest history, where we can see skyscrapers' evolution. All the cities from the very beginning are projected with skyscraper areas.
As to China...chaos of high -rise.


----------



## will.exe (Aug 9, 2006)

staff said:


> ^^
> Where is this quality of which you speak, in comparission with China for example?


There are many beautiful buildings planned and under construction in China, but for now the US still takes the cake. China will overtake them in the very very near future, though.

While China and Brazil have far more skyscrapers than the US and far denser skylines, highrises in the US tend to be more interesting. I think its because in China and Brazil, highrises are more practical, built to accomodate millions of middle class apartment dwellers, but in the US highrises are more of a novelty. Hence the vast majority of them are less "functional", so to speak.


----------



## Huppoe (Jan 5, 2007)

History is with USA, yes, but the uncountable amount of high-rises that are being built up in China will make China the high-rise capital of the world, if it isn't already with it's metropolic cities like Shanghai. I personally like the general high-rise architecture in China more amusing than American and Brazilian. China's economy is rising with their population of 1,3 billion and that ain't the only thing rising, there's going to be loads and loads of huge buildings when the money really starts flowing in like in no country before.


----------



## GRmama (Jan 4, 2007)

Of course China


----------



## Humberto123 (Oct 1, 2005)

Most of China highrises are cartoonish looking unless they were designed and built by serious foreign architects.


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

Brazil really isn't a contender here imo. Sure, there's plenty of high rises there, but how many notable ones? 

Of course China has more skyscrapers than the USA, but how many of those are repetitive commie blocks? How many skyscrapers can China claim that date back to the early 20th century. Not many, that's what gives the USA the edge here imo.


----------



## CULWULLA (Sep 11, 2002)

you left out dubai.


----------



## Krazy (Apr 27, 2004)

^^ ditto


----------



## skyspy001 (Dec 20, 2006)

CULWULLA said:


> you left out dubai.


are you kiding?

to compare a small city with three big States?

to compare a city of only less 1000 high-buildings with a country?


----------



## Cristovão471 (May 9, 2006)

I think your all wrong in your own ways


----------



## qwazy (Dec 26, 2006)

yes dubai. when all the projects in dubai are completed in a few years time. i think it'll be dubai. the two tallest towers in teh world. burj dubai and al burj. and they have single project developments that are bigger than manhattan.


----------



## skyspy001 (Dec 20, 2006)

qwazy said:


> yes dubai. when all the projects in dubai are completed in a few years time. i think it'll be dubai. the two tallest towers in teh world. burj dubai and al burj. and they have single project developments that are bigger than manhattan.


i REALLY doubt the ambitious of dubai. maybe they really have no idea of what is a Metropolis and waht is a city?


----------



## qwazy (Dec 26, 2006)

skyspy001 said:


> i REALLY doubt the ambitious of dubai. maybe they really have no idea of what is a Metropolis and waht is a city?


what is a metropolis? a big city with a multicultural environment with people of all origins. and thats wat dubai is. in another 15 years time. it'll grow to be the size of london. it already has the cultural mix of cities like london, you will find people of all origins and nationalities living in and visiting dubai.

and wats wrong with dubai's ambitions? its all part of a massive masterplan that is being carried out based on extensive feasibility studies and planning. its not like theyr building all that without thinking about any of it, or about who will stay in or visit the massive new city that is being built


----------



## Sinjin P. (Jul 17, 2005)

United Arab Emirates


----------



## Arpels (Aug 9, 2004)

in terms of numbers I think China is winning, Americas built skrapers for decades but now Asia in general o built more, the question now is not were they born but numbers.


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

Comparing Dubai to the entire countries of China and the USA is ridiculous, calling it superior is another thing entirely.


----------



## ToRoNto g-town (Nov 26, 2005)

^ ha agreeed.. such a STUPID comparison


----------



## Xusein (Sep 27, 2005)

China for amount.


----------



## gladisimo (Dec 11, 2006)

qwazy said:


> what is a metropolis? a big city with a multicultural environment with people of all origins. and thats wat dubai is. in another 15 years time. it'll grow to be the size of london. it already has the cultural mix of cities like london, you will find people of all origins and nationalities living in and visiting dubai.
> 
> and wats wrong with dubai's ambitions? its all part of a massive masterplan that is being carried out based on extensive feasibility studies and planning. its not like theyr building all that without thinking about any of it, or about who will stay in or visit the massive new city that is being built


I disagree. Dubai is a city full of rich, well-to-do expats, offset by poor migrant workers, there's not enough of a middle ground, or true cultural diversity. 

Although there's nothing wrong in and of itself with Dubai's ambitions or its current plans, I really find it a gross epitome of mass consumerism and decadence manifesting itself (first it was clothes, and then cars) and now an entire city. I fear what this means for future cities to come. Skyscrapers should be works of art, not massed produced consumer goods.


----------



## gladisimo (Dec 11, 2006)

BTW, I say US, it's more mature and built up. Give us another 10-15 years and China will take the cake, but for now, it's still just the big three. 

Shanghai is doing a good job growing up, but its not quite there yet in terms of density and aesthetics, give it another 10-15 and it'll probably make it to the big four. At the rate Dubai is growing, as much as I hate to admit it, and as much as I love the Burj Dubai, it'll probably be able to join the big 5, in 10-15 years, assuming it doesn't crash.


----------



## bonivison (Jan 17, 2007)

China will have the most skyscrapers in the near future
But the capital of the world will still be USA
the reason is simple 
Your American developed it
the title belongs to you 

China is huge in area and population
it will be the tops in many aspects
such as economy,skyscrapers,etc.
but everything becomes so tiny when averaged by 1.3 billion people

We need developments
But we donot hope that we are considered as the threat to you 
So,be friendly to us 

PLUS I want to ask WENCH
What do you mean by saying"I even think that HK should be excluded in the list (China)."and"HONGKONG not HONGKONG.China"?
besides ,what are you doing in Taipei 
Are you also deciding separate Taiwan province out from our mainland?
Everyone knows HongKong is the finacial centre of China,
it has returned to mainland for ten years long.
If you think it is a shame to be a Chinese,You can leave HongKong and Taipei,get out of my country.


----------



## bonivison (Jan 17, 2007)

Sorry
I did not mean to convern of politics
but I was angry with him


----------



## YelloPerilo (Oct 17, 2003)

bonivison said:


> Sorry
> I did not mean to convern of politics
> but I was angry with him


He is not Chinese but a Philippino who was born in Hongkong but never saw the need to learn to speak Chinese. Chinese was just to low for him, methink.

I have even met a Philippina who was born in Hongkong but never learnt to use chopstick ... so unsophisticated she is! hno:


----------



## jaetguz (Sep 6, 2006)

But Dubai is an emirate..not a city in CHina, Usa or Brazil...


----------



## danielsale (Dec 28, 2006)

if we're talking about density there's no doubt Brasil. if we are talking about building weith more glasses around, USA and China.


----------



## Quebec16 (Feb 3, 2007)

I voted USA because after all they were the first one to build skyscrapers and they sure do have a lot of them in all cities, I mean they are everywhere, for those who ever goes to the atlantic coast to new york, boston etc... you'll understand


----------



## z0rg (Jan 17, 2003)

Quebec16 said:


> I voted USA because after all they were the first one to build skyscrapers and they sure do have a lot of them in all cities, I mean they are everywhere, for those who ever goes to the atlantic coast to new york, boston etc... you'll understand


The US was the frist country with a skyscraper boom, that's sure. However, skyscrapers (highrises with 12+ floors) existed long before. Then, you cannot find skyscrapers "everywhere" in the US. Normally, you only find them in the CBD excepting in some cities such as Miami, where the amount of residential highrises is huge too . Meanwhile, in China you find skyscrapers in every city over 100,000 inhabitants, and not only in the city center but in every district.


----------



## feverwin (Feb 25, 2006)

bonivison said:


> China will have the most skyscrapers in the near future
> But the capital of the world will still be USA
> the reason is simple
> Your American developed it
> ...


You were too overacting... Besides WENCH is not a Chinese, if I remember correctly, he is a Malaysian living in HK...

And also one thing you should remember China invented gunpower, however defeated by guns... :cheers:


----------



## feverwin (Feb 25, 2006)

YelloPerilo said:


> He is not Chinese but a Philippino who was born in Hongkong but never saw the need to learn to speak Chinese. Chinese was just to low for him, methink.
> 
> I have even met a Philippina who was born in Hongkong but never learnt to use chopstick ... so unsophisticated she is! hno:


Sorry, I didn't see your post, Philippino? I have thought Malaysian...


----------



## khoojyh (Aug 14, 2005)

USA for now
China for future.


----------

