Building Boom Set to Vault Toronto Past Chicago in Skyscraper Rankings

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

GDP does not include all forms of government spending. For instance, transfer payments such as social security are not considered. That would change your conclusions, I think, but I disagree with your entire premise altogether anyway and a changed conclusion would still be based on that same faulty premise.

They're not counted directly but they're certainly counted when the recipients spend them.

But of course, transfer payment aren't really a form of deficit spending anyway. As the name suggests, it's transferring money from one place (such as taxpayers) to another (government assistance recipients). Deficient spending comes from governments spending money that they borrow.

[Capsicum]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Surely we are talking about racism, tolerance, ease of assimilation not restaurant choices.

Do you think immigrants, all else being equal, prefer diverse cities (even diverse cities that don't have many of their own ethnic group) over homogeneous cities that don't have many of their own group?

Based on the grounds that at least in the diverse city, they won't "stick out" as much or be tolerated more (for instance, if they speak another language on the bus, others won't think it as strange if they're in a city where people are used to hearing many languages in general even if it's not their own)?

[Northern Light]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

GDP does not include all forms of government spending. For instance, transfer payments such as social security are not considered. That would change your conclusions, I think, but I disagree with your entire premise altogether anyway and a changed conclusion would still be based on that same faulty premise.

I don't know that I had a premise here.

My post was a somewhat sarcastic response to Crawford whose posts always bash. In this Canada-bash, but we all know Detroit-bash, this-bash, that-bash.

I was merely poking at his argument about a migration ponzi scheme by pointing out there are many sources of economic growth that are by their nature transient (one year's immigration or deficit spending) and if we remove any of the other's you can show there's no real growth most years in any developed country.

I'm not suggesting we ought to do the calculation that way. I'm suggesting he raised an argument for the purpose of bashing, that if taken to its logical extreme either fails; or succeeds by making most of the OECD failures.

[Steely Dan]

This thread was 8 billion times cooler when folks were just posting spectacular skyline shots of the 2nd/3rd largest skylines in North America, instead of arguing over stupid fucking bullshit.

I'm going to try to right the ship anyway, likely in vain.



6-24-2019 Chicago Skyline from Helicopter by Craig, on Flickr



Kennedy Expressway - Chicago, IL USA by BartShore, on Flickr



Chicago Skyline by Jamie Bernstein, on Flickr



Chicago by Branden Frederick, on Flickr



Downtown Chicago by Kim Johnson, on Flickr[

[softee]

^ Hear! Hear!

Aerial Toronto by JamesAnok || ThetaState, on Flickr

[dc_denizen]

Kind of interesting that the most intense area for real estate investment in Chicago is in the above pic on the left (west loop) Tons of new buildings, completely transforming the area in 10 years, but few highrises

[skysoar]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

Kind of interesting that the most intense area for real estate investment in Chicago is in the above pic on the left (west loop) Tons of new buildings, completely transforming the area in 10 years, but few highrises

Yes you are right, the West Loop/Fulton area reminds me of Washington D.C downtown and urban core. I believe though that there are several proposals for high-rises in the works so it might be changing slightly. I could be wrong but the BMO tower U.C. is considered part of the West Loop.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Northern Light

I don't know that I had a premise here.

My post was a somewhat sarcastic response to Crawford whose posts always bash. In this Canada-bash, but we all know Detroit-bash, this-bash, that-bash.

I was merely poking at his argument about a migration ponzi scheme by pointing out there are many sources of economic growth that are by their nature transient (one year's immigration or deficit spending) and if we remove any of the other's you can show there's no real growth most years in any developed country.

I'm not suggesting we ought to do the calculation that way. I'm suggesting he raised an argument for the purpose of bashing, that if taken to its logical extreme either fails; or succeeds by making most of the OECD failures.

That view - that our economy is only doing acceptably well thanks to a migration ponzi scheme - is certainly not only his. I've heard it too, in serious contexts; it's not trolling. It's a well supported viewpoint, shared by many here.

Consider for example, this post (from today, no less!) in our Federal Politics discussion thread by a Canadian SSPer who's been a member of this forum for 15 years (and who probably has no idea Crawford and dc_denizen even exist) :

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...12#post8811212

[Nite]

Originally Posted by lio45

That view - that our economy is only doing acceptably well thanks to a migration ponzi scheme - is certainly not only his. I've heard it too, in serious contexts; it's not trolling. It's a well supported viewpoint, shared by many here.

Consider for example, this post (from today, no less!) in our Federal Politics discussion thread by a Canadian SSPer who's been a member of this forum for 15 years (and who probably has no idea Crawford and dc_denizen even exist) :

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...12#post8811212

It is obvious that immigration is good for the Canadian economy. The US has decided to grow its economy through massive government deficits
though which Canada hasn't done. The Canadian government would have to run 100 billion deficit to equal what the US is doing.

[isaidso]

Hogtown



Sunset over the eastend beaches and Toronto skyline by Phil Marion (179 million views - thanks), on Flickr


Tommy Thompson Vantage Point by Franklin McKay, on Flickr


Tommy Thompson Park by Franklin McKay, on Flickr

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by skysoar

Yes you are right, the West Loop/Fulton area reminds me of Washington D.C downtown and urban core. I believe though that there are several proposals for high-rises in the works so it might be changing slightly. I could be wrong but the BMO tower U.C. is considered part of the West Loop.

That is exactly what I was gonna say. And I am wasting people's time by making that point lol

It really does remind me of DC in so many ways.

[Tom In Chicago]

[MODERATOR NOTE] Please refrain from posting YoChicago images. . . they do not play nice with us and have had a long standing policy of not posting images (credited or otherwise) from them. . .

. . .

[isaidso]

Is this roughly accurate and is South Loop part of the 'South Side'?

[Handro]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Is this roughly accurate and is South Loop part of the 'South Side'?

Yes, roughly accurate. No, South Loop is not really part of the 'South Side'.

[edale]

Loving all the pics in this thread! Chicago's core is so pretty and the lake is so blue. Just a perfect backdrop for the skyline. Also, I didn't realize that Lake Ontario was narrow enough in Toronto to see the other side from high up. I assumed it was like Chicago or Cleveland where the lakes feel like inland oceans due the fact you can't see anything on the other side.

[dc_denizen]

Yes the pics of Chicago were nice until they were taken down

What the heck! Why can’t we link to a public Flickr page??

[Steely Dan]

^^ lake ontario is about 30 miles wide at toronto.

lake michigan is about 50 miles at chicago. but it quickly gets wider the further north you go. up at milwaukee it's about 85 miles wide.

from the lakeshore in either toronto or chicago, you can't see the other side of the lake. both have that "ocean illusion" effect.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^^ lake ontario is about 30 miles wide at toronto.

lake michigan is about 50 miles at chicago. but it quickly gets wider the further north you go. up at milwaukee it's about 85 miles wide.

from the lakeshore in either toronto or chicago, you can't see the other side of the lake. both have that "ocean illusion" effect.

Not even from the top of the *iconic* CN Tower? In one of the pics above you can definitely see the other shore. I've also seen pics on this forum of the full skyline of Toronto from the other side of the lake. You can't do that in Chicago (meaning from Michigan, not Indiana) or Cleveland.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by edale

Not even from the top of the *iconic* CN Tower?

oh you can definitely see the other side of the lake from the top of the CN tower on a clear day.

but you can also definitely see michigan from the top of the sears tower too on a clear day, so.....

but as i said, at shore level, the "ocean illusion" effect is the same in both cities.

Originally Posted by edale

You can't do that in Chicago (meaning from Michigan, not Indiana)

i've seen the chicago skyline across the lake from michigan many times.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

oh you can definitely see the other side of the lake from the top of the CN tower on a clear day.

but you can also definitely see michigan from the top of the sears tower too on a clear day, so.....

but as i said, at shore level, the "ocean illusion" effect is the same in both cities.






i've seen the chicago skyline across the lake from michigan many times.

hmm ok, do you have a pic? All I've seen is that blurry, weird refracted shot of Chicago that is more or less an optical illusion. I've never been able to see Michigan from the top of the Hancock or Aon, though I've never been on top of the Sears. Definitely haven't been able to see Canada from the top of the Terminal Tower in Cle either. This is pretty off topic, though I guess that ship sailed a while ago.