Which is on top? London or New York?

Rick St thomas Spanish Springs,NV — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 19:44:11 GMT

America was the nation for the 20th century.
It will not be the nation of the 21st.

Which is on top? London or New York?

J. Doe — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:04:54 GMT

No one is worth 50 million as a bonus in a single year.

Which is on top? London or New York?

John Mac — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:22:17 GMT

All the more reason to keep trading open 24 hours in America.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Daniel Schlafer — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 23:07:51 GMT

Based upon it's history, London is the top city in the world ! Think of English history ? Think of the history of the United States, Ireland, Scotland, Wales,Canada, India, the countries of the Middle East ? All have had positive or negative direction from London ! Look at decisions made in London that directly affected the European continent. New York has its charm, but it has been affected by decisions made in London. Economic growth is always important, but not what determines who is on top as a city.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Roger — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 23:31:43 GMT

London thrives on the US's missteps. The bond and currency markets there were created by heavy handed US regulation in the 1970s and it seems the dead hand of Sarbannes-Oxley will give a fillip to equities there. New York should look to the politicos in Washington as the single greatest source of trouble.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Rick, New York — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 23:52:19 GMT

Congestion, pollution and arrogance are a few more things London has to offer.

Which is on top? London or New York?

SEAN ONEILL — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 00:21:20 GMT

HOW ABOUT THOSE BIG TAXES ON THE RICH OVER THERE?ENGLAND TAXES ITS PEOPLE OUT OF HOME AND HEARTH....THAT'S A WELL KNOWN FACT!ALBEIT NY MAY BE EXPENSIVE IT COMES NOWHERE CLOSE TO LONDON, OR ALL OF ENGLAND FOR THAT MATTER.FOR EVERY AMERICAN WHO GOES TO LONDON THERE ARE TWENTY LONDONERS MOVING TO AMERICA.JUST ASK ALL THE EX-PATRIATES THAT HAVE FLED TO AMERICA OVER THE LAST 30 YRS.BECAUSE OF THE SOCIALISED TAX WOMB TO TOMB NANNY STATE ?I'D RATHER PAY 30 DOLLARS FOR A STEAK IN NY THAN 70 EUROS IN LONDON.EVERYTHING'S RELATIVE NOW ISN'T IT?

Which is on top? London or New York?

Larry Tampa,FL — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 06:25:18 GMT

Simply put the fed has laid down and given up by lowering interst rates. Until they raise rates again to attract foreign investors the dollar will continue to fall like a brick. When interset rates are pegged to the abilty of the subprime consumers we are all doomed. Shame on the fed for being swayed by irresponsible lenders who's bad loans will end up in default regardless of a point or two anyway. 5.5% and up will bring the dollar back (slowly) and nothing else will. I say a good shock to the market like a 1 point basis increase would shock the global market enough to reverse it. A couple solid .25 increases to follow would support the reversal. This is not rocket science.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Jessica , Sayre, Pa — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:52:15 GMT

I have been to both London and New York. Personally i found London cleaner with more to offer, both in sights and business.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Joe, Windsor Ontario — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:59:52 GMT

why would someone pay 70 Euros for a steak when the currency in London is Pounds Sterling?

Which is on top? London or New York?

Richard Marcheski, Mt. Pocono, Pa. 18344 — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:17:15 GMT

However you chop it up, it's all coming down to one thing: the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, whether it is in London or New York.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Eric Truong, Tulsa , OK — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:30:49 GMT

London & New York together survive will help everyone, everywhere in the world. No one can stand if one felf.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Duwayne Josephsson, Detroit, MI — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:37:47 GMT

London always was the 'Capital of Capital' and the Prime Meridian still runs through Greenwich. New York City was an upstart colony of Britain whose time is to be compared to a meterorite rather than a comet.
Not only has London surpassed NYC but several Asian cities are many times more dynamic and ultra modern than it as well. Tokyo, Shanghai, Hong Kong, Bangkok and Seoul operate on a pace New Yorkers can hardly equal.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Patrick Patel, reston, VA — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:38:34 GMT

Please do not mistake the "City of London" (their Wall Street area) with the city of London. Concentrated wealth and power in a 4 sq mile radius cannot make up for the rest of the nation being cold, rainy, dreadfully expensive, and stuck in the past.

For the common professional, given chance an Englishman will flee to LA, New York, or Sydney. All the British expates I meet in USA will NEVER go back to UK. 45% of all doctors in UK are of Indian origin. Why? Because the best British doctors emigrated to USA, Canada, and Australia.

I figure once DC and New York (policy and markets) get their act together, we will push back and prevail.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Charlie J, Miami, FL — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:51:18 GMT

Ironically both of these trading centers of the world suffer from really really horrible weather. I have been to both places and i would never live either place. Ill stick to miami

Which is on top? London or New York?

Stephen, NJ — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:18:44 GMT

This is a stupid debate...lets leave it at they are the two largest financial centers and both are incredible cities. I hate seeing people from detroit, pennsylvania, and miami of all places weighing in about great cities. detroit is the most downtrodden place on earth, pennsylvania is pittsburgh, farmland, and philly, and miami has great weather but what else? London and NY offer virtually everything under the sun, and I believe NY will soon again reign as the largest financial center.

Which is on top? London or New York?

kurt valdosta ga — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:29:23 GMT

Remember who's colony it was? BRITISH

Which is on top? London or New York?

rob rendall mont vernon new hampshire — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:44:41 GMT

ita a shame the tourist that wants to go to london just simply cannot afford it and business people only care about making huge profits that will never change

Which is on top? London or New York?

djc..chgo Il — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:01:57 GMT

It makes no difference! Both cities are shadows of themselves. The people who live in the US and Britan do not deserve to be great anymore.
The people are NOT PATRIOTS of their countries. They will sell their country out as long as they have anything to gain. They allow non believers of their systems of freedom to settle there while they plot to kill these countries citizens.
New York wants to give Illegals drivers licenses so they can VOTE..(democrats) and they want our western borders open for cheap labor (republicans)
In short I can care less, I did my duty in the Army, I raised my kids, I retired and I spend my day watching the future dead of our countries. Its a matter of time and we will join the Roman Empire in falling to barbarians from within..Look in the mirror for one if you wont fight for this country.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Nathan Shorty, Ganado, Arizona — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:10:58 GMT

London is the capital of the British economy, which at this point is the big fish in the little pond. The Etats-Unis with all its real estate, still cannot surpass the all encompassing Empire that the House of Windsor has inherited, and aimed to protect. The commonwealth of nations which Her Royal Highness oversees, is a portfolio greater than the richest independent citizen of the world. Elizabeth even has the military to enforce her economic prowess, on top of the cherry that is her relative time zone - Greenwich mean. Manhattan is a great modern city, and still has many millenia to come to show how large its bull's balls are. But, for the time being, London is a little bigger, merely because it has existed for more time as an international identity - as they say, "the Devil is not the Devil because he is evil, but because he the oldest." London sits in the relative middle of the trading market internationally, and it is not a full democratic republic- as a constitutional monarchy it has the ability to dictate more particularly, how the crown manages its markets. Manhattan may be controlled by international money, but it is in London, where all that international money takes refuge; exile; and imprisonment.

Which is on top? London or New York?

mark, orlando.fl. — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:27:33 GMT

lets face it us brits have just been doing it longer, so we're better at it as for the comments on taxes someone made i could leave florida go back to blighty earn half as much and still have the same standard of living.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Jane Doe — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:28:02 GMT

Until the Fed bites the bullet and listens to main street, not wall street, and raises interest we will be consumed by inflation. The bad loans are already in place, its too late, the damage is done. Write downs will become more common. People with 4 bedroom houses that cant afford a chicken coop were given loans by irrspondsable and greedy bankers and loan sharks. Now its grab as much as you can and hold on,
recession here we come!

Which is on top? London or New York?

Ron Long Island NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:42:09 GMT

I've been to London 7 or 8 times and I love to visit that city but I wouldn't want to live there.
I grew up in NYC and I loved every minute of it but as an adult I wouldn't want to live there either. I personally don't care which one is number one financially as long as our government gets off it's butt and starts building this country back up economically I hate the pound being two to one to the dollar and I hate the euro being above the dollar even more but that's probably just because of my good old American pride

Which is on top? London or New York?

George Ingram — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:44:41 GMT

The concept of the US making any change toward retaining the mantle of the Finincial Center of the World would be at cross purposes with it inheirent path it has taken to exclude all others in the area of dealing with other governments, and restricted what relationship US companies can have abroad. Look at the exodus of Amercian headquartered companies to elsewhere, case in point Halliburton. We Amercian's have sought to control who get what capital and when and it turns our we do not have that power.

People fly around the US now from Europe, and Asia just to avoid the brow beating they get from HomeLand Security (US Customs) in the transit lounge.

Try to get a request for incoming wire transfers from FINCIN (Financial Crimes Network) in a reasonable period of time. Just the name itself causes the outsiders to say forget it! So, to imply that somehow New York will be on top sometime in the near future is idiodic. One thing is for certain, the rest of the finanical world will be by default exclude US.

Which is on top? London or New York?

George Ingram — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:49:33 GMT

The concept of the US making any change toward retaining the mantle of the Financial Center of the World would be at cross purposes with it inherent path it has taken to exclude all others in the area of dealing with other governments, and restricted what relationship US companies can have abroad. Look at the exodus of American headquartered companies to elsewhere, case in point Halliburton. We American’s have sought to control who gets what capital and when and it turns our we do not have that power.

People fly around the US now from Europe, and Asia just to avoid the brow beating they get from Homeland Security (US Customs) in the transit lounge.

Try to get a request for incoming wire transfers from FINCIN (Financial Crimes Network) in a reasonable period of time. Just the name itself causes the outsiders to say forget it! So, to imply that somehow New York will be on top sometime in the near future is idiotic. One thing is for certain; the rest of the financial world will be by default exclude US.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Rohn Lamontier, Princeton, WV — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:05:10 GMT

I believe the U.S. is in decline somewhat similar to the Roman Empire. It's best days are over. All we can do is watch it fall with sympathy aken to one's mother dying, maybe much worse.

Which is on top? London or New York?

O , NY,NY — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:14:06 GMT

lol thank you stephen, NJ. stole the words right from my lips.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Cindy, Lake Forest, CA — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:16:12 GMT

America thrived on innovation. Unfortunately, our society has bubble-wrapped itself so heavily in recent decades that our ability and willingness to be innovative and take risks is all but squashed. I am not surprised to see us losing our hold on the world markets.

Which is on top? London or New York?

G Harrison, LLantwit Major Wales. — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:39:04 GMT

Samuel Johnson once said that 'when a man is tired of London, he is tired of life'. What a shame he was so narrow minded. Both these cities are dirty, congested, over priced, and overated. You should try Cardiff in Wales, small but beautiful. Thats praise from and Englishman.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Jos. P. Alam — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:41:50 GMT

The US has forgotten how to be first. We regulate and tax everything. Business men are not saints and certainly not angels. In this country, CFOs and CEOs can go to jail for making an honest mistake, or for that matter not knowing that one of their subordiantes has made an honest mistake. First? We will soon be third or fourth. The idiots in Washington either don't know or don't care.

Which is on top? London or New York?

Joe B - Tampa, FL — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:59:03 GMT

We have too many pansies in this country. People who are afraid of hard work, want to suckle the governments tit for assistance, then complain that our country isn't as good as some of the others.

To those, I tell them to get off their a** and make it better. If you don't have the fire to make it so, move somewhere else that because "just getting by" has never been an American dream.

With that said, I tend to agree. In the 19th and 20th centuries, we proved quite the power and had enough integrity in our leadership to prosper at home. With the globalization of just about every economy now we're starting to see how policy affects the overall health of the economy and in fact the very livelyhood of our entire nation. Unfortunately, it seems both sides of politics in America have fallen victims to self serving and deceitful ways. There was a day when our politicians would act in the best interest of the country, even if it was to their detriment. Why exactly did John Hancock sign his name so big? For the notoriety? For money? Nope, he esentially signed his own death warrant and did so in a large fashion to show that freedom wasn't about one man, it was an idea that can't be taken away, an idea that can't be stomped out, an idea that is fundimental to the very fabric of human existance.

Today, it's all about money, power and passing some of it to their friends with pork barrel spending. Politicains are more worried about getting re-elected than actually creating a better place for our children. Today, American politics more about looking out for yourself before your fellow countrymen and make no mistake, the 298,000,000 of us who don't work for the government are getting pretty fed up with it.

I am patiently waiting for the day this sleeping giant that is America wakes from their stupor and realizes that the hard faught freedoms, financial independance and our very way of life is nothing but a piece of history that we let slip between our fingers.

When my fellow brothers and sisters do wake up, I will join in the revolution and take back what greedy and inept politicans have taken away.

Screw Bush, Screw Clinton, screw the whole lot of them.