Atlanta, GA: Truly World Class?

[gwiATLeman]

Originally Posted by Rail Claimore

The decentralization of economically dominant cities in the South is a topic that's been brought up on occasion. I think part of, if not the main, reason for this is simply sheer size, in both area and population. The South has 100 million people spread over an area that's as big as the Northeast and Midwest (including the plains states) combined, with relatively even population density from the Carolinas to east Texas (the noticable dropoff is west of I-35...).

Simply put, it's too big a populated area for one city to practically dominate. Atlanta's influence stops at the Mississippi River, and it's here that the Texas tandem takes over.

To put into perspective how large in area the region is... my hometown in northern Alabama is 3 hours northwest of Atlanta, and a 9 hour drive south from Chicago. Yet, it's 12 hours west to Dallas or Houston, 12 hours south to Orlando, and 11 hours northeast to DC. That should put into perspective just how far it is from say, east Texas to the Carolina coast.

Which is why, in my experience, Texas has never been considered a part of the same region as the Southeast except on this board. Chicago and Philly are closer to Atlanta than either Tx city.

[Rail Claimore]

Originally Posted by gwiATLeman

Which is why, in my experience, Texas has never been considered a part of the same region as the Southeast except on this board. Chicago and Philly are closer to Atlanta than either Tx city.

Well most people would consider east Texas a part of the South, like Georgia and the Carolinas, but I don't know of anyone who'd consider any part of Texas the Southeast. The Southeast ends at the Mississippi River, as far as I'm concerned. New Orleans and Memphis are stretching it.

[Rail Claimore]

Originally Posted by edsg25

let's add another factor, Rail. The antebellum south was an agrarian region as slavery discouraged industry and lowered the value of southern labor. The South that emerged from the Civil War was in shambles and was still stuck with Jim Crow for nearly a century.

In other regions, trade, commerce, immigration, and industrialization allowed certain cities to rise to the top at times when cities were entities unto themselves and had far more control over their own destinies than they do today.

This current era is not nearly as friendly to a city putting things into place and rising to the top. This is a more mature nation today and those cities that rise do so with lss of the pay off from the rise of cities in more formative times in the US.

Thus places like Atlanta, Houston, Dallas, etc., have difficulty emerging from the pact because there is little they can do at this time to be able to truly differentiate themselves from each other. The only southern city that has a real advantage in the 21st century in using its niche to create world class greatness, IMHO, is Miami....which is the beneficiary of being the only true Latin American-US culturally mixing link in the United States today.

The role of the federal government in US economic development post-Depression no doubt has played a role as well. But that role can go in both directions. The South got a lot of federal money through various means for economic development, meaning states could compete more with each other. However, that same fed role can also explain the opposite scenario on the West Coast. LA grew into the megalopolis it is, surpassing SF, through its aerospace industries, a big part of the MIC. When the Cold War ended, LA was economically hurt the most of any major city. The 90's were in many ways, a lost decade for Southern California for a reason.

[triadcat]

Originally Posted by Rail Claimore

Well most people would consider east Texas a part of the South, like Georgia and the Carolinas, but I don't know of anyone who'd consider any part of Texas the Southeast. The Southeast ends at the Mississippi River, as far as I'm concerned. New Orleans and Memphis are stretching it.

Pretty much IMO, Texas has at least as much in common with the Southwest as it does with the Southeast. Eastern TX is Southern, but not the rest of TX........

Being from North Carolina, I even have a hard time thinking Mississippi is "Southeast" because MS is so far southwest from here.....
Plus, the Carolina coast still has a very deep British-colonial look and vibe to it.......and that is something that fades the further west you get. That old British-colonial look/vibe is very "Southeast"

[LoveMiami]

Atlanta is in east coast one of the best cities in the USA
It goes like this
New York
Atlanta
Boston
Miami

[emutiny]

Originally Posted by texasboy

truth of the matter is there are at the most two world class cities in the US, maybe three. the obvious being LA and NYC. A lot of cities in the U.S. lack the culture, identity, and sense of history that makes cities "world class".

your gonna go with la over chicago, miami? comon

[Trae]

Originally Posted by LoveMiami

Atlanta is in east coast one of the best cities in the USA
It goes like this
New York
Atlanta
Boston
Miami

What goes like what?

[Bond James Bond]

Ugh, if I hear the term "world class" one more time I think I'm gonna barf.

[BlAcKnIgHt08]

world class!

[triadcat]

Originally Posted by Bond James Bond

Ugh, if I hear the term "world class" one more time I think I'm gonna barf.

WORLD CLASS

Sorry, couldn't resist

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by Rail Claimore

The role of the federal government in US economic development post-Depression no doubt has played a role as well. But that role can go in both directions. The South got a lot of federal money through various means for economic development, meaning states could compete more with each other. However, that same fed role can also explain the opposite scenario on the West Coast. LA grew into the megalopolis it is, surpassing SF, through its aerospace industries, a big part of the MIC. When the Cold War ended, LA was economically hurt the most of any major city. The 90's were in many ways, a lost decade for Southern California for a reason.

I do see your point. There is no question that federal money, like jobs and people, shifted to the sun belt during the later part of the 20th century.

I think that was a trend that only could go so far since it was based on a smaller southern population, labor laws that favored less union-oriented southern states, and perhaps a favored status for southern projects among GOP legislators.

Yet none of things could cause one city to emerge among all others in the South at a time when the US has become more mature and developed as a nation. I really do see some of the growth spurts of cities in the 19th century to be a special nature due to their growth in a more formative time. For example, New York needed its position throughout the 19th century to establish the kind of city it is today....just like without the advanatges of antiquity, London, Paris, and Rome would not be n their current positions today.

[Amd1588]

It seems like Atlanta overall got a better reviews in the "World Class" city thread , than Houston.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by Amd1588

It seems like Atlanta overall got a better reviews in the "World Class" city thread , than Houston.

So, what does this mean AMD? Do you believe Atlanta is already a world class city?

[isaidso]

Whether you're a world class city or not doesn't imply better or worse. People get very riled up about this label, but all it really means is whether your city has arrived on the world stage. The whole wording 'world class' is rather off putting to begin with, but if you must, the easiest test is this: if you live in a 'world class' city, you instinctly know it. You don't have to ask the quetion. If you have to ask, you ain't Blanche!

Can anyone spare a Coke?

[Amd1588]

Originally Posted by Trae

So, what does this mean AMD? Do you believe Atlanta is already a world class city?

No not at All. Just that more people may be willing to recognize it as such than say Houston. I however, would never put Atlanta in the elite group of "World CLass" cities. It's not London, Tokyo, or Rio.

[Trae]

I think the reason why this thread seems a bit better than the Houston thread because this one was made back in 2005. That is when there were more quality posters here. This thread was just revived (by you), once the Houston one was made.

How many years do you think it will take Atlanta to become world class AMD?

[Amd1588]

I really don't think you can calculate how long a it will take for a city to become World Class. Alot of what other World Class cities have, cities in the south will never be able to make up for. It's like asking how lond it will take for Atlanta to be as culturally important as Paris. Most other world class cities have been "World Class" for the entire 20th Century, and in the case of Paris even before that! So I think all cities in the south really can do is hope to grow into nice cities.

Also alot of what made other cities world class was immigrants, I don't think we will ever have a wave of immigrants into southern cities how New York and Chicago had in the early 20th century. The culture just is not there to make it possible. I think we will just have to settle with striving to be World Class- Like cities.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by Amd1588

I really don't think you can calculate how long a it will take for a city to become World Class. Alot of what other World Class cities have, cities in the south will never be able to make up for. It's like asking how lond it will take for Atlanta to be as culturally important as Paris. Most other world class cities have been "World Class" for the entire 20th Century, and in the case of Paris even before that! So I think all cities in the south really can do is hope to grow into nice cities.

Also alot of what made other cities world class was immigrants, I don't think we will ever have a wave of immigrants into southern cities how New York and Chicago had in the early 20th century. The culture just is not there to make it possible. I think we will just have to settle with striving to be World Class- Like cities.

So why did you say it would take Houston 75-80 years to become world class?

[CLTNC]

You are World Class when you do not have to ask.

[MobileAL1]

I don't think Atlanta is a "world class" city. It is a regional hub just like Houston and Miami, and every other city except for NYC, LA, and Chicago.