NYC vs. DC vs. Chicago vs. LA

[Torie]

That's the secret of US cities. There are the big three, which appear at the top of all the lists like the ones noted. After that there is a bunch of second tier cities that leap frog each other depending on the list.

The big three cities are also host to the big three metro areas, and there is a considerable drop off in population from the Chicago metro area to number 4. When it comes to influence, I would have to rate the DC metro number 4 by a substantial margin. Yeah, the Bay Area won't like that.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

That's the secret of US cities. There are the big three, which appear at the top of all the lists like the ones noted. After that there is a bunch of second tier cities that leap frog each other depending on the list.

Yes and no. Chicago, DC-MD-VA, and the Bay Area definitely cluster, and the DC-MD-VA CSA is going to pass Chicago's in population soonish. Regardless, these five definitely are the true global cities of the USA.

The megacities (10+million)
New York, Los Angeles

The heavy-hitters (8-10 million)
Chicago, Washington-Baltimore, San Francisco

The regional centers (4-8 million)
Boston, Dallas-Fort Worth, Philadelphia, Houston, Miami, Atlanta, Detroit, Seattle

The rest (under 4 million)

Of course, this is turning into CityData.

[Very Legal & Very Cool]

1. LA
2. DC
3. NY
4. CHI

Source: been to all

[Technocracy Timmy]

Everybody who voted DC in the poll should be deported to North Korea.

[RINO Tom]

That's the secret of US cities. There are the big three, which appear at the top of all the lists like the ones noted. After that there is a bunch of second tier cities that leap frog each other depending on the list.

The big three cities are also host to the big three metro areas, and there is a considerable drop off in population from the Chicago metro area to number 4. When it comes to influence, I would have to rate the DC metro number 4 by a substantial margin. Yeah, the Bay Area won't like that.

And, I think it is too often ignored that the size of a metro often (stress: often) holds more weight than the size of the city itself when it comes to relevance.  Taking Ohio, for example, you would have Cleveland as BY FAR the biggest city in the state and Cincinnati third.  However, Cincinnati is the biggest metro area in the state (and Cleveland recently dropped to third), and I would argue there is quite a discrepancy between how big they "look" and how cool their skylines/downtowns appear (which often plays a decently important part as far as influence/relevance goes, IMO):

Cincinnati


Cleveland


Obviously, Cincinnati isn't leagues ahead of Cleveland, but it is a SIGNIFICANTLY smaller city; you would be shocked to hear that by looking at those two photos if you didn't already know.  I think the size of the metro is going to determine how many people are traveling into that city (i.e., forcing it to accommodate them) on a daily basis and is often a much more meaningful stat.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I've been to two cities and NY is the most expensive city in America so won't be going there, and LA is much better than Chicago.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

I've been to two cities and NY is the most expensive city in America so won't be going there, and LA is much better than Chicago.

False. San Jose and San Francisco are more expensive.

[Mr. Smith]

Chicago
NYC
DC
LA