Chicago is the REAL 2nd biggest city (Phoenix, Rio: crime, neighborhoods)

[MusicSoundsBetterWithYou]

I've been to LA many times, I've been to Chicago many times. LA is the second biggest city in America and Chicago placed 3rd biggest city in America. And I'm currently in Chicago and I'm just comparing these two cities because of where they are placed.

There's things I like about LA but it just never quite felt like its an actually real city. I KNOW it is and it certainly is but Chicago just feels like an actually urban city for me, I can't quite explain it. When I'm in Chicago, its so much more walkable, bikeable so much easier to get around on foot, the lay out of the city is so much better, the public transportation is INFINITELY better than LA's. The fact that there's TWO, TWO L lines that connect to both of Chicago's airports to the center of the city is incredible and not even NYC has something like that. When I'm in Chicago I never have an issue hanging out with friends and we take the public transportation. If my friends and I want to walk, then we have no issues walking for hours. Stuff that just doesn't feel possible in LA. When I walk around LA, people look at me like I'm out of my element or my family/friends there find it crazy. Just like when I'm in NYC, Boston, DC, Philly, Baltimore, San Francisco; walking in Chicago feels totally normal.

LA, Phoenix, Houston and many other American cities can't really compare to the walkability of Chicago, NYC, Philly, Boston, San Francisco, Baltimore and I would even throw in Seattle and maybe Portland.


So I know by population and size LA may be bigger than Chicago but Chicago is just the REAL number 2 biggest city in America in my opinion. What say you?

[ggplicks]

this is cope, LA is actually much denser than Chicago if you wanna talk about population density. And they're actually expanding public transit and have WAY more bus lanes than Chicago, meanwhile Chicago has been trying to get the red line extended for decades now and it still hasn't broken ground. and we still dont have any real BRT in the city yet.



There is no reason why Chicago has had stagnant/declining population for decades now, meanwhile NY/LA are all at record population highs.



There is no reason why Chicago isn't (at the minimum) back to its record high population of 3.6 million. With right leadership, this city SHOULD still be the 2nd largest in the country at 3.8-4 million people (above LA).



Imagine if the southside (geographically the largest side of the city) didn't have gangs and crimes that destroyed neighborhoods? Which thus, produces ****ty schools that no parent wants to send their kids to, thus population loss.


NYC used to be where Chicago was in the 80s/90s. Rampant crime. **** schools. Crumbling infrastructure. Then they got leadership that wanted change, and statically it is the safest big city in America now. Meanwhile Chicago has far more crime and homicides than NYC with 1/4 of the population.


Chicago's progressive leadership is pro-crime, anti-business, pro-tax, and anti-school. Everything that leads to a corrupt, declining city. Every single crime story on the news is done by some 8 time criminal who got let out on electronic monitoring. When was the last time Cook County gave out a 40+ year sentence? The whole city/county is lax on crime.

[Blowm3]

Seems like OP is fishing for a Chicago d*ckriding thread it seems. Why randomly bring up LA LOL? At least you guys finally stopped bringing up NYC unprovoked.

[Master Jay]

Blowm3, good afternoon and Happy Friday!

By the way, WHAT is duck riding?

[Rusty Nailz]

Originally Posted by ggplicks

this is cope, LA is actually much denser than Chicago if you wanna talk about population density. And they're actually expanding public transit and have WAY more bus lanes than Chicago, meanwhile Chicago has been trying to get the red line extended for decades now and it still hasn't broken ground. and we still dont have any real BRT in the city yet.

Every source says otherwise. LA has about 75% the density Chicago has.

[Losfrisco]

Originally Posted by Rusty Nailz

Every source says otherwise. LA has about 75% the density Chicago has.

It does if you calculate the city limits of each place-which includes literal mountain ranges for Los Angeles within city limits.

If you really want to get excited about a %25 disparity in city density when one city covers over twice the area with mountains, go for it.

[Losfrisco]

Originally Posted by MusicSoundsBetterWithYou

I've been to LA many times, I've been to Chicago many times. LA is the second biggest city in America and Chicago placed 3rd biggest city in America. And I'm currently in Chicago and I'm just comparing these two cities because of where they are placed.

There's things I like about LA but it just never quite felt like its an actually real city. I KNOW it is and it certainly is but Chicago just feels like an actually urban city for me, I can't quite explain it. When I'm in Chicago, its so much more walkable, bikeable so much easier to get around on foot, the lay out of the city is so much better, the public transportation is INFINITELY better than LA's. The fact that there's TWO, TWO L lines that connect to both of Chicago's airports to the center of the city is incredible and not even NYC has something like that. When I'm in Chicago I never have an issue hanging out with friends and we take the public transportation. If my friends and I want to walk, then we have no issues walking for hours. Stuff that just doesn't feel possible in LA. When I walk around LA, people look at me like I'm out of my element or my family/friends there find it crazy. Just like when I'm in NYC, Boston, DC, Philly, Baltimore, San Francisco; walking in Chicago feels totally normal.

LA, Phoenix, Houston and many other American cities can't really compare to the walkability of Chicago, NYC, Philly, Boston, San Francisco, Baltimore and I would even throw in Seattle and maybe Portland.


So I know by population and size LA may be bigger than Chicago but Chicago is just the REAL number 2 biggest city in America in my opinion. What say you?

I say this post still doesn't explain how Chicago could be considered the second biggest city.

[Blowm3]

Originally Posted by Master Jay

Blowm3, good afternoon and Happy Friday!

By the way, WHAT is duck riding?

It’s dick riding, like riding a cock…
Because that’s what it seems like OP is trying to get, like he wants people to gas up Chicago and **** on LA because he doesn’t like the city

[Kmanshouse]

I like Chicago and LA. For totally different reasons.

Chicago feels more like a broad shouldered, full downtown glory city like NYC than LA does.

But LA is clearly #2 in size and recognition etc.

[Rusty Nailz]

Originally Posted by Losfrisco

It does if you calculate the city limits of each place-which includes literal mountain ranges for Los Angeles within city limits.

If you really want to get excited about a %25 disparity in city density when one city covers over twice the area with mountains, go for it.

Rio is located in mountain ranges and it's density is also way higher than Los Angeles and even Chicago's. I serioiusly doubt people familiar with LA and Chicago would say LA is a lot more urban than Chicago.