The Great Canadian Skyline Thread! II

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

Now its arguably one of the top 3 Metropolises in the Country.

Don't know many who would agree with that...

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Don't know many who would agree with that...

Ok, top 4. And I bet you out of the general populace I could find many to agree with that very statement. Out of my entire statement, why don't you point out the most insignificant part. Oh wait you already did.

It is pointless because rating cities is completely a matter of perception. But it is the 5th largest metropolis in the Country, potentially 4th if it has surpassed Ottawa. Why don't you comment on the relevance of the entire statement I made rather than reply on something out of what is complete bias, or a typical response from someone out of Toronto.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Love that photo. What cruise line docks in Montreal and where do they typically sail to? Ottawa - Montreal - Quebec City?

FYI - there are no large cruise ships that sail to Ottawa.

[The_Architect]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

Why don't you comment on the relevance of the entire statement I made rather than reply on something out of what is complete bias, or a typical response from someone out of Toronto.

And you just completely threw away your entire argument there. How was that necessary? All Leftcoaster did was disagree with your claim that Calgary was a top 3 metropolis in Canada (which it isn't), and you made that against all Toronto posters? Talk about an inferiority complex.

Try responding out of a "typical response from someone out of Winnipeg".

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

to this

Wow!, looking at this photo, not hard to imagine, Calgary as the largest city in Canada. - This is an impressive skyline even for a city of 2 or 3 million. (even 4 or 5 million)

Wow! Again!

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

And you just completely threw away your entire argument there. How was that necessary? All Leftcoaster did was disagree with your claim that Calgary was a top 3 metropolis in Canada (which it isn't), and you made that against all Toronto posters? Talk about an inferiority complex.

Try responding out of a "typical response from someone out of Winnipeg".

I am not trying to defend Winnipeg in any way. I am speaking from my own experience. It seems that any time Calgary is mentioned to Torontonians it is followed by eye rolls. Many times I have discussed Western Cities in Toronto as I am from out west and I spent 8 years in the GTA, and a good number of the people I've talked to have done nothing but talk down about Western City's. Not everyone in Toronto does it, but when someone in Toronto makes a snark remark about how he doubts Calgary is a top three city it really doesn't surprise me.

And this discussion had nothing to do with Winnipeg. Winnipeggers have no room to talk down about other cities, most Winnipeggers try to look to city's like Calgary, Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto for ways to better the city, so your comment makes no sense what so ever.


You can't say it is not a top three city. It may not be in size, but I was referring to status, or desirability. In which case again, it is perception based - which is why I used the term arguably because many people would vehemently defend that. Personally I think Vancouver has the edge on Calgary, but for many reasons a lot of people disagree. But once again way to focus on the wrong aspect of the conversation.

And out of any city I have been to, people seem to think they live in the centre of the world in Toronto. Many times I have held conversations with individuals discussing likes and dislikes about Toronto, and it seems as soon as someone mentions another city the response seems to be a long the lines of "who cares, I will never move there." Or they respond along the lines with "Well I live in the best city in Canada, so why should I care about a Western city".

Obviously these aren't word for word, but many conversations end up halted because of this mentality. Once again this is from my personal experience.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

I am not trying to defend Winnipeg in any way. I am speaking from my own experience. It seems that any time Calgary is mentioned to Torontonians it is followed by eye rolls. Many times I have discussed Western Cities in Toronto as I am from out west and I spent 8 years in the GTA, and a good number of the people I've talked to have done nothing but talk down about Western City's. Not everyone in Toronto does it, but when someone in Toronto makes a snark remark about how he doubts Calgary is a top three city it really doesn't surprise me.

And this discussion had nothing to do with Winnipeg. Winnipeggers have no room to talk down about other cities, most Winnipeggers try to look to city's like Calgary, Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto for ways to better the city, so your comment makes no sense what so ever.


You can't say it is not a top three city. It may not be in size, but I was referring to status, or desirability. In which case again, it is perception based - which is why I used the term arguably because many people would vehemently defend that. Personally I think Vancouver has the edge on Calgary, but for many reasons a lot of people disagree. But once again way to focus on the wrong aspect of the conversation.

And out of any city I have been to, people seem to think they live in the centre of the world in Toronto. Many times I have held conversations with individuals discussing likes and dislikes about Toronto, and it seems as soon as someone mentions another city the response seems to be a long the lines of "who cares, I will never move there." Or they respond along the lines with "Well I live in the best city in Canada, so why should I care about a Western city".

Obviously these aren't word for word, but many conversations end up halted because of this mentality. Once again this is from my personal experience.

Well, i think it is the choice of wording you used, metropolis, which generally refers to sheer size (population). And there, there is no argument, Vancouver blows Calgary out of the water (you only have to look at the sheer amount of skylines and urban centres outside of Vancouver's downtown core (Richmond, New Westminster, Metrotown, Brentwood, Lougheed, Coquitlam, North Van, West Van, Surrey Centre, etc...) to relize that Vancouver is much more of a "metropolis" than Calgary is.) This iswhat creates a metropolis feeling, where you can hop on the metro, and for the next 30 to 40 minutes ride through several dense suburban cores with their own thing going on.

In fact, IMO, only Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver are able to obtain this term due to the fact that they have other large population centres surrounding them, and IMO, also have true metro systems and commuter rail, along with port activities.

Now, if you were arguing skyline, or head offices, then that would be a different case. But as far as the order of "metropolis" go in Cnaada, that is pretty much set in stone via population, especially when cities are separated by more than a million people (such as Cal to Van, Van to Mon, and Mon to Tor).

Where there is wiggle room, is between Cal, Edm, and Ott.

I will also add that one "metropolis" feeling aspect that Vancouver and Montreal have (and a lesser degree Toronto) that Calgary definitely does not is the huge port activities / operations. The massive ports throughout Vancouver do add a lot of texture and movement to greater Vancouver. I could honestly never live in a city that is not on the Ocean or any other major body of water.

[Ramako]

I love the ambiance of this shot. Commerce Court North is the real star here.


By neltron3030 at Skyscraper City

[Metro-One]

That is a sweet pic

[Martin Mtl]

That's a wonderful pic of Toronto. Reminds me of some pics of 1940's NY midtown. Very romantic in a modern/urban way. Love it.

[davidivivid]

Sweet pic of Toronto

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Well, i think it is the choice of wording you used, metropolis, which generally refers to sheer size (population). And there, there is no argument, Vancouver blows Calgary out of the water (you only have to look at the sheer amount of skylines and urban centres outside of Vancouver's downtown core (Richmond, New Westminster, Metrotown, Brentwood, Lougheed, Coquitlam, North Van, West Van, Surrey Centre, etc...) to relize that Vancouver is much more of a "metropolis" than Calgary is.) This iswhat creates a metropolis feeling, where you can hop on the metro, and for the next 30 to 40 minutes ride through several dense suburban cores with their own thing going on.

In fact, IMO, only Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver are able to obtain this term due to the fact that they have other large population centres surrounding them, and IMO, also have true metro systems and commuter rail, along with port activities.

Now, if you were arguing skyline, or head offices, then that would be a different case. But as far as the order of "metropolis" go in Cnaada, that is pretty much set in stone via population, especially when cities are separated by more than a million people (such as Cal to Van, Van to Mon, and Mon to Tor).

Where there is wiggle room, is between Cal, Edm, and Ott.

I will also add that one "metropolis" feeling aspect that Vancouver and Montreal have (and a lesser degree Toronto) that Calgary definitely does not is the huge port activities / operations. The massive ports throughout Vancouver do add a lot of texture and movement to greater Vancouver. I could honestly never live in a city that is not on the Ocean or any other major body of water.

Yes the word choice was not the best. I was more concerned with the fact that out of my entire post what was fixated on was the most irrelevant point. It was about how much Calgary has grown, and how Regina and Saskatoon, though most likely not to the same degree can also grow. Out of my whole argument all that was picked up on was the word usage of "Calgary is arguably the top three metropolis."

What I meant by that minor point was really that out of the top 5 cities in the country a large number of people would choose to live in Calgary if they had a choice.

It was just frustrating that the conversation was pulled off course completely because someone decided to point out that not many would agree with living in Calgary. And he was right out of many Torontonians many would probably prefer to stay in Toronto. But I know of many people all across the country who have moved to Calgary because it is a great place to live. So yeah, many people would agree with that.

[Metro-One]

No worries man, you will find that happens a lot on these forums, all you have to do is take it in stride, hehe.

We are all friends here

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

Ok, top 4. And I bet you out of the general populace I could find many to agree with that very statement. Out of my entire statement, why don't you point out the most insignificant part. Oh wait you already did.

It is pointless because rating cities is completely a matter of perception. But it is the 5th largest metropolis in the Country, potentially 4th if it has surpassed Ottawa. Why don't you comment on the relevance of the entire statement I made rather than reply on something out of what is complete bias, or a typical response from someone out of Toronto.

All I said is I don't think Calgary is a top 3 metropolis, and you turn it into some big calamity and take a shot at where I live. Not even a shot at where I live but a shot at the people from where I live.

I didn't comment on the rest of your statement because I didn't have anything to say about it.

I think you need to settle down.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

Just because it can't be compared to Montreal or some other raving metropolis doesn't mean that right now its Economy isn't booming. Which leads to development. I wouldn't hesitate to guess that for a city the size of Regina it has the most striking skyline for a city its size. And everyone I know is moving there. Does that mean it is automatically a better place to live than Montreal? No. It does however mean that the perception around the previously "Boring" province has altered, and if the Government takes advantage of their new found wealth, Saskatchewan can show some great potential.

It is pretty ignorant to say that nothing would come of this when not 40 years ago Calgary was a town of under 400 000. Now its arguably one of the top 3 Metropolises in the Country.

You are assuming that it's guaranteed that growth today will turn into sustained, exceptional growth over a 40 year period. That's not necessarily true. 10 years ago, Windsor had one of the highest population growth rates in the country. Today it is losing population.

With Calgary, in addition to having picked an exceptional example with the advantage of hindsight, you are also talking about a 40 year time period, and a city that started out larger and more important than Regina. It doesn't seem very practical to say that people should move there today or that it should be considered an exciting city today because it might be Winnipeg-sized in 2050.

This all seems consistent with my point. I never said that any of these cities are good or bad, I said that it's easy to overweight present-day growth rates. There also tend to be dramatically different perspectives on cities because, to give one example, some people look at what cities are and other people extrapolate 40 years into the future. People also live in different worlds socially and in terms of employment, so a town that's full of opportunity for one person might not be so great for somebody else. Overall, the big cities are providing more opportunity and more money for more people, even though in relative terms their growth might be slower.

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

All I said is I don't think Calgary is a top 3 metropolis, and you turn it into some big calamity and take a shot at where I live.

I didn't comment on the rest of your statement because I didn't have anything to say about it.

I think you need to settle down.

You said "Don't know many who would agree with that". That is much different than saying that you don't agree with that. That is suggesting that Calgary can't compete with the other big three, and that saying that it might possibly is ludicrous. I didn't take a shot at Toronto.

I love Toronto, however from my experience people who live in Toronto are very centred around what happens in Toronto, and care very little about what happens throughout the rest of the country, which is all I said. I never took a shot at the city or its people. I didn't say Torontonians are all ass holes. I said it doesn't surprise me that someone from Toronto said that, which it really doesn't, because I have heard many other Torontonians say similar things.

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by someone123

You are assuming that it's guaranteed that growth today will turn into sustained, exceptional growth over a 40 year period. That's not necessarily true. 10 years ago, Windsor had one of the highest population growth rates in the country. Today it is losing population.

With Calgary, in addition to having picked an exceptional example with the advantage of hindsight, you are also talking about a 40 year time period, and a city that started out larger and more important than Regina. It doesn't seem very practical to say that people should move there today or that it should be considered an exciting city today because it might be Winnipeg-sized in 2050.

This all seems consistent with my point. I never said that any of these cities are good or bad, I said that it's easy to overweight present-day growth rates. There also tend to be dramatically different perspectives on cities because, to give one example, some people look at what cities are and other people extrapolate 40 years into the future.

The reason I used Calgary as an example because it is almost an exact replica scenario that occurred 40 years ago. I said propably not to the same extend when saying that Regina and Saskatoon may grow. But the reason I used Calgary as a reference is because it was soon after Oil and Potash became a big resource for Saskatchewan that people started flocking there. And if Saskatchewan follows in the same footsteps it could potentially lead to a population increase. I never said it will overtake montreal or any other big city in the process, but there is no doubt that it will and already has lead to change in the region. That isn't even debatable as Saskatchewan has seen many great changes since the the Potash/Oil boom. Including having the highest GDP/Revenue/Housing Starts etc. in the country.

I have never been to Saskatchewan except while driving through, but many of my friends from Ontario have left for there and say that they love it, so that is where the biggest source of my argument comes from. Young people who spent their lives thinking that Saskatchewan is a place no one would ever go, end up there only to discover it is a lot better than they could have imagined.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

You said "Don't know many who would agree with that". That is much different than saying that you don't agree with that.

I know it is different and I mean just that. I am suggesting that I dont think anyone outside of Calgary would call it one of the "big 3" metropolises of this country, which are known to be Toronto Montreal and Vancouver.

You can infer whatever you want from my post and try and pretend it was some close-minded prick from Toronto saying Calgary is insignificant, when all I simply said was that Calgary has not supplanted Vancouver or Montreal from the big 3 Canadian cities.

And does it really surprise you that someone from Toronto doesn't really care about what happens in a smaller city 2500km away? Do you follow the comings and goings of Kingston Ontario?

[chrisallard5454]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

I know it is different and I mean just that. I am suggesting that I dont think anyone outside of Calgary would call it one of the "big 3" metropolises of this country, which are known to be Toronto Montreal and Vancouver.

You can infer whatever you want from my post and try and pretend it was some close-minded prick from Toronto saying Calgary is insignificant, when all I simply said was that Calgary has not supplanted Vancouver or Montreal from the big 3 Canadian cities.

And does it really surprise you that someone from Toronto doesn't really care about what happens in a smaller city 2500km away? Do you follow the comings and goings of Belleville Ontario?

I never said you were a prick or close minded. I just said it doesn't surprise me that someone from Toronto would say that. Why is this not getting through to you. I wasn't insulting you. I was stating that people from Toronto don't care about smaller cities (from my experience). There isn't anything wrong with that. If you constantly defend it like such, I may start to think there is, because there really isn't anything to defend. Would I care about a small city of 100 000 across the country. Probably not.

What made your point frustrating is the automatic assumption that just because people around you (Toronto) including yourself don't think Calgary is a top 3 place to live, then everyone is like that. Had you said "Not many people in Toronto would agree with that" I wouldn't have said anything. But there are many people across Canada who would much rather live in Calgary than Toronto Montreal or Vancouver. Though most likely many people from Toronto, Vancouver or Montreal wouldn't because they live in top tier cities. That's not to say they're better, but why would anyone move from one top tier city to another without an underlying reason? I have family members who are from Vancouver and now live in Calgary, and think it is a much better place to live. So what you said comes out as completely ignorant, blatant, and inconsiderate. I never said it makes you a prick. Please stop putting words in my mouth.

Oh and to be a smart ass I might say that I do care about both Kingston and Belleville, because my girlfriends families are from both those cities, and considering I spent a fair amount of time in Peterborough and have travelled to both cities many times. I would say I care. I wouldn't however make the assumption that they are comparable to Oshawa.

Calgary can be compared to the other big three cities in Canada. Maybe not in sheer size, but definitely in livability. I am not from Calgary and have only been there once. I have much more ties to Toronto, where I spent a good portion of my life. So to say that only people from Calgary would say this is completely ignorant.

[LeftCoaster]

So I'm not a prick, but I'm ignorant and inconsiderate? Can I go back to being a prick?

And you are still misunderstanding me. I never said it wasn't a top 3 place to live, I merely said it wasn't one of the top 3 metropolises by means of population which is clearly the connotation you were making when you said it used to be a city of 400,000 people now it is a top 3 city...

You may not have meant it in a population connotation but then you sure did a piss poor job phrasing it.