360
Can anyone confirm? (piefed.cdn.blahaj.zone)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world
108 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 3 months ago* (12 children)

Oh no Chicago is massive. Has Willis/Sears tower which was once the tallest in the world. Is a major financial hub for thr stock exchange. Has a massive arts and good culture. Has O'Hara International Airport with flights all over the world. Many films and TV shows at there or in its suburbs.

It doesn't have as many familiar landmarks as San Fran, maybe. And San Fran is has gotten more important with the rise of Silicon Valley which shares the bay area. But Chicago is a big deal in the US, for sure.

Minneapolis really only matters within the midwest.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    It was a big deal back when railroad connections meant something. Now, its a corrupt rat warren of institutionalized racism, corporate tax havens, and the goofiest accent north of oaklahoma. You guys dont even make good pizza.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    Railroads still mean plenty. How do you think most goods get around?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (9 children)

    Boats. Have you seen boats? Big metal things that float?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (8 children)

    Yeah dude. Boats for water, then straight onto trains for land, then trucks for the last leg. Not getting a lot of boats to Indianapolis.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    Indianapolis is tiny and irrelevant. All the big boy cities have ports. Chicago even has some of its own. They just dont matter anymore. I give it less than 40 years before what remains of our rail system degrades to the point that its just not safe to transport anything by train anymore. Boats will never have that problem. Its a lot easier to move a port than move 1000 miles of rail.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Indianapolis is the 16th largest US city by population. Nearly a million people live in the city proper, and 2.2 million living in the city and surrounding metro area. What do you mean it is tiny? More people live there than San Francisco, Seattle, Denver and Nashville.

    And regardless most of the country is tiny, and none of it is irrelevant. Without those "tiny" "irrelevant" places the big port cities that make so much money shipping goods wouldn't have anywhere to ship them to. If the only people you care about are the ones living in cities the size of LA and up, I'm afraid you care about very few people.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    Indianapolis has a population density of 2500 people per square mile. SF has about 19,000 in the same space. Seattle is about 10,000. Denver and Nashville are around 5k and 1.5k respectively, so you're getting closer. LA is way back up about about 9k. You see why these things aren't the same?

    Chicago has the density, but its glory days are long past. Its just not able to compete with better placed city centers. Not with the state of rail.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    So you're not a real city unless a 500 sqft apartment is a luxury? Stupid take. Throw it on the pile of other stupid takes.

    Edit: Also, I love how your defense of calling it tiny is "yeah, sure, it has a lot of people. But it also has a lot of land too, so... ergo... it's tiny and irrelevant."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    You do recognize that there are a lot of places boats can't get to, right? That it'd be... whatever I'm not explaining trains to you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    And that's why people build cities next to water pretty much any chance they get. No matter how efficient your transportation system is on land, it cant beat floating stuff on water. Look at history. The best cities always have water (and boats) nearby.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •