Well then the sim city and cities xl would need to shift to simulators too, maybe even some of the city builders as they are simulating cities. What about the racing games, those are simulating car races. I mean if the only thing a game needs to do to get put in the simulation section is simulate something, we need to reclassify a ton of games, not just a handful, anything that simulates a job, simluates delivering papers, simulates drivinga car, simulates cooking, cleaning, gardening, simulates riding a horse, maybe we can put all the fitness games out there in the category too, simulating fitness and all.
I knew there would be an attempt at this kind of argumentation, but to put it succinctly - you got the whole idea wrong. 
The basic premise of a simulation is to mimic the functioning of a certain item, entity or a whole group of entities to a great extent. There is such a thing as a city simulation, if that game simulates the functioning of an entire city, yes. However, racing games are not car race simulations since most of them do not bother with the periphery of car races which are vital to the organization and functioning of the races themselves - the game is only concerned with the actual driving of a race car, and even that usually in a very simplified manner. You could call it a race car simulator if it absolutely required you to use a wheel with a gear shift, if you had to take into account the condition of your tyres, wind drag, condition of the road, weather conditions etc. much like you have to in, say, an airplane simulator.
So, detail, detail, detail. That's the key to naming something a simulation. So, if someone makes a tactical game which simulates the dynamics and conditions of a WWII battlefield, we can talk about a WWII battlefield, or tactical, simulator. If someone creates a game which simulates the strategic dynamics of an entire world set in the WWII era, we can say that its a WWII simulator as it simulates the dynamics of World War II. For example, Hearts of Iron III. It's also a strategic game in a broader sense.
You cannot have a game draw up a tank with infinite ammo, arcadish controls and no component damage and call it a tank simulator, although some have tried. Same goes for other games which approach their subject in a superficial manner, lacking depth or attention to detail.
In that sense, Sims are a social simulator. The game deigns to simulate a group of people whom player can influence by altering their "world" settings. The game does this with a great attention to detail, simulating the behaviour of a human being to a great depth, as much as can be attained by a simple computer game.
It is NOT, however, a strategy game. Strategy games require, yes, you guessed it, the ability of the player to resolve conflicting situations by employing strategy in an overarching theatre. Strategy games deal mostly with war. You could say that strategy means simply to formulate a specific plan which leads to a fulfillment of a certain goal, but then I could employ your argument and say that practically anything is a strategy game.
It's simply a matter of choosing which classification fits a game best. In the case of Sims, as their very name and intention implies, I think a simulator is a more fitting classification than strategy.
