Boston, a boring, average town (about 4 million inhabitants in the metro area overall) with almost nothing of interest, whose strict 9-to-5 time schedule (I once was amazed to find a Dunkin Donuts shop at the Boston Common that closed after 9 PM!) and draconian rules would suit Bin Laden and the Taliban just fine, has confusing street filled with drivers without the skills, busy places and that empty right after 9 PM, posesses no culture beyond the usual Harvard-style yuppies, and has attractions like Harvard, the Cheers bar at Beacon Hill, the Faneuil Hall Marketplace, Filene's Department store, the John Hancock Tower, and...umm... nothing else, so it puzzles me why they have such tall hotels in Boring Beantown... (I traveled there once, so I know how evil it is)
or...
New York, a monster-size metropolis (population of 20 million+ if you include its suburbs) with 19,000 restaurants of all kinds of meals, more than 400 skyscrapers exceeding 300 feet in height,(some of them are tall hotels always filled to capacity even during recessions), a cultural, ethnic, economic, political, and social diversity that is too complicated to describe here, and a 24-hour time schedule matched only by the Las Vegas Strip? And did I mention attractions like Rockefeller Center, South Street Seaport, Central Park, Greenwich Village, Union Square Park, the art galleries at Soho, Macy's Herald Square, FAO Schwartz, Wall Street, Times Square and all its theaters, Grand Central Station, the corporate towers at Park Avenue, the Citicorp Building, the UN Headquarters, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Guggenheim Museum, Brooklyn Heights, Coney Island, Yankee Stadium, Kennedy Airport, and so on.
So, what city is the "Hub of the Universe"?
― Jason M, Sunday, 17 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
I have never been to either. But why compare the two?
― Ally C, Sunday, 17 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Ron, Sunday, 17 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Benjamin, Sunday, 17 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
That doesn't mean NYC is the Hub, either. I think that Tokyo, Hong Kong, Cairo, Bombay, Moscow, or Paris could give NYC a run for the money.
― Tadeusz Suchodolski, Sunday, 17 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
And my list of competitors to NYC is by no means exclusive. Matter of fact, I would add Berlin and Mexico City to that list.
― Ned Raggett, Sunday, 17 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Momus, Monday, 18 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― mike hanle y, Monday, 18 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― anthony, Monday, 18 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― geeta, Monday, 18 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
Though, for the record, Boston has never claimed to be New York, you're right. That doesn't stop an awful lot of Bostonians I've met (Dan and Ian excluded) from claiming Boston is far superior, when clearly it isn't - I mean, you can't even fucking buy cigarettes after 10pm, what the hell?
― Ally, Monday, 18 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― nathalie, Monday, 18 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Pete, Monday, 18 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Ronan, Monday, 18 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Mandee, Monday, 18 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
Jason, that's not quite so true, anymore. NY IS a tad battered, at present;> To call it the "hub of the universe" would just draw unfair comparisons. Sure, tis one of the largest cities on the East Coast, but I can think of a few others worldwide that are pretty cool: Crete, San Francisco, Paris, Dublin, London....All these places have benefits to 'em.
Feel free to jump in your car and drive to Philly (even), when Boston irritates you.
― Nichole Graham, Tuesday, 19 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Jason M, Wednesday, 20 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
Now, yes. Later?
― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 20 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)
― Tadeusz Suchodolski, Wednesday, 20 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)