4 ms·
New York City is definitely the most ethnically and linguistically diverse place in the world, and because of this you have a myriad of different lifestyles tak
by ipnon 10y ago
New York City is definitely the most ethnically and linguistically diverse place in the world, and because of this you have a myriad of different lifestyles taking place side by side. I don't think you need to live in Manhattan to understand that.
- SideburnsOfDoom 10y ago> New York City is definitely the most ethnically and linguistically diverse place in the world Citation needed. FYI, other cities such as Auckland, Toronto and Los Angles and London are ahead by some metrics. http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/75964986/Auckland-a-melting-pot-ranked-worlds-fourth-most-cosmopolitan-city http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/75964986/Auckland-a-melting-... And NYC is probably ahead, but about level with London on others https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_born#Cities_with_largest_foreign_born_populations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_born#Cities_with_large...
- JBReefer 10y agoQueens is the most diverse place on Earth. http://traveltips.usatoday.com/indoor-attractions-queens-new-york-108847.html http://traveltips.usatoday.com/indoor-attractions-queens-new... Elmhurst Hospital has to have translators for 153 languages. (the article is also really good, would recommend it heartily!) http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/05/13/every-disease-on-earth http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/05/13/every-disease-o...
- acchow 10y agoThe term "foreign born" means very different things in London vs. New York. I don't think it's a meaningful comparison.
- CydeWeys 10y agoWhat are those different meanings?
- acchow 10y agoWith exception of Canadians, "foreign born" in New York means "born at least 2000 miles away" (and thus usually having a different native language and culture). In London, it's "born at least 200 miles away"; usually already speaks English and/or has some ancestry from Britain.
- CydeWeys 10y agoOK, that's what I figured. Thanks for the elaboration.
- SideburnsOfDoom 10y agoAll very subjective, but plenty of people in London who are born 200 or more miles away, "have a different native language and culture", and no ancestry from Britain. You seem to be saying that proximity of more different countries results in less diversity. Which is odd.
- JBReefer 10y agoThat's why it's a bad metric - native born in the US is much more likely to be something VERY different, like Gullah people vs Minneapolitans.
- SideburnsOfDoom 10y agoI don't think there are any perfect metrics for this - it's subjective. So saying "city x is the most diverse" is hard to give real meaning to.
- refurb 10y agoForeign-born seems like a bad metric for diversity. For example if you had an American city where 50% of the population was from Canada, I wouldn't call that very diverse.
- JBReefer 10y agoAlso, a neighborhood that's 100%, say, Chinese, is the least diverse neighborhood possible.
- SideburnsOfDoom 10y ago> Foreign-born seems like a bad metric for diversity. On it's own, it will mislead yes. Note that Dubai is top of the foreign-born list whereas I'm told (never been there) that it's really mono-cultural with lots of poor guest workers who all come from a handful of eastern countries. However I don't think a place could be "most diverse" without being on that list at all.
- istorical 10y agoI don't disagree with that - but it's the ultimate parent comment I was replying to that suggested it was because of the graveyard shift specifically that NYC is unique, not it's diversity. I totally agree on the diversity part being unique.