Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think this is a good post. Population comparisons have to be taken with a grain of salt....like one would take the unemployment rate. The unemployment rate may be lower because somee people are not counted because they have become so discouraged they have stopped looking and fall out of the "official count". Metropolitan areas are kind of the same. Unless people in outlaying counties or areas commute to the core county or city at a certain percentage, they are not included as part of the metro count. In other instances a close by metro may choose to be independent and seperate and hence are not added in.
For example, the Boston area, if it had the same geographic footprint of Atlanta or Houstan or Dallas.......would have at least a million more people than these areas. There was a topic in the City-vs-City forum that ranked population by 100 mile radius and one that ranked them by 50 mile radius.
Note that Metropolitan Atlanta is listed at being over 5 million people, while Metro Detroit is listed as just above 4 million. However, at a 50 mile radius Detroit has more people than Altanta which means Metro Altanta's foot print is born from more than a 50 mile radius while Detroits metro foot print, due to counting methodologies, is obviously less than a 50 mile radius given that Metro Atlanta is listed as having a million more people than Metro Detroit. In truth, Atlanta, using a 25, 50, or 100 mile radius is less populated than Detroit but Altanta is ranked as having more people by MSA standards....due to commuting patterns and other things. There is almost 3 million more people in the Detroit area, at a 100 mile radius, than in the same size area centered at Atlanta.
I think Altanta is a fast riser....or should I say it used to be a fast riser, but the truth is that Atlanta is really not a top 10 population center.....yet.
But that misleading different metros have different geography and they grow different outward vs upward both are growth. Outward growth is not the same thing as being next to another metro. So you can't just give some metros more area and take away area from others. In 100 miles radius have nothing to do with one city. In l00 miles Macon, Athens, Columbus and Chattanooga are part of Atlanta. You got to see what wrong.
If Atlanta was Detroit MSA size Detroit wouldn't be that much bigger actually less than 500k, However Atlanta grown outward more un like Detroit, So expanding Detroit MSA your blowing up Detroit population in which has nothing to do with Detroit. And by making Atlanta smaller your taking away Atlanta outward growth. Atlanta put people in Forsyth County. Detroit didn't put people in Ingham County. The Atlanta region is more populated than Detroit and top 10.
But that misleading different metros have different geography and they grow different outward vs upward both are growth. Outward growth is not the same thing as being next to another metro. So you can't just give some metros more area and take away area from others. In 100 miles radius have nothing to do with one city. In l00 miles Macon, Athens, Columbus and Chattanooga are part of Atlanta. You got to see what wrong.
If Atlanta was Detroit MSA size Detroit wouldn't be that much bigger actually less than 500k, However Atlanta grown outward more un like Detroit, So expanding Detroit MSA your blowing up Detroit population in which has nothing to do with Detroit. And by making Atlanta smaller your taking away Atlanta outward growth. Atlanta put people in Forsyth County. Detroit didn't put people in Ingham County. The Atlanta region is more populated than Detroit and top 10.
I think you are placing artifical importance to abitrary boundaries. What is the functional value of your point? If PEOPLE are the metric then what difference does it make. Let me draw an anlogy about who is richer. Lets say that person A has a 1 billion dollars in a bank account and person B has 900 million in a bank account. Say that person A earned his money years ago and also inherited about a quarter of it. Say also that person B earned his money more recently and did not inherit much of it like Person A. Who has more money in their bank account? Based upon your logic, person B is richer than person A despite person A having more money in his account....which is absurd if the metric is simply how much money currently exists in the accounts. What you are saying is that Person B actually is more responsible for earning the money that he has in his account than is person A, who inherited a good portion. Regardless of how true that maybe, the FACT is that person A has more money in their account and is thus RICHER than person B.
The TRUTH/FACT is that the Detroit area is more populated with people than the Altanta area is whether those people in the Detroit area are part of other smaller independent metro areas or not....just like the guy who has more money in his bank acount than the other guy. It all spends the same. Again, Detroit has more people than Atlanta does at 25, 50 and 100 miles radiuses. How you can conclude Atlanta has more people, despite those FACTS,....has to do with denial.
Ok so, for whoever repped me with a message complaining about Atlanta being a New Rome. I was only referring to the quote and stated that in my post I in no way think it is going to replace Rome, but however it is a wonderful city and should be treated as such not with the condescending manner the individual had done....anyhow thanks for the rep!
I think you are placing artifical importance to abitrary boundaries. What is the functional value of your point? If PEOPLE are the metric then what difference does it make. Let me draw an anlogy about who is richer. Lets say that person A has a 1 billion dollars in a bank account and person B has 900 million in a bank account. Say that person A earned his money years ago and also inherited about a quarter of it. Say also that person B earned his money more recently and did not inherit much of it like Person A. Who has more money in their bank account? Based upon your logic, person B is richer than person A despite person A having more money in his account....which is absurd if the metric is simply how much money currently exists in the accounts. What you are saying is that Person B actually is more responsible for earning the money that he has in his account than is person A, who inherited a good portion. Regardless of how true that maybe, the FACT is that person A has more money in their account and is thus RICHER than person B.
The TRUTH/FACT is that the Detroit area is more populated with people than the Altanta area is whether those people in the Detroit area are part of other smaller independent metro areas or not....just like the guy who has more money in his bank acount than the other guy. It all spends the same. Again, Detroit has more people than Atlanta does at 25, 50 and 100 miles radiuses. How you can conclude Atlanta has more people, despite those FACTS,....has to do with denial.
Under what I saying Person A would have one 1 billion dollars, person B would have 900 million in one account, person B also has another account of 900 million. Your saying A has more money because one account having a billion, I'm saying person B has more one billion 800 million in total. Your looking one thing and not the whole network.
But No I placing importance on growth and development. If Atlanta didn't exist, Forsyth County population wouldn't exist. Ingham County population whether or not Detroit is there would exist anyway with it's population. Detroit didn't sprawl Ingham in existence nor does it now or ever depend on Detroit as it's city. You simply can't make Ingham just apart of Detroit of out spite. However you can't separate Forsyth from Atlanta out of spite. Forsyth is Atlanta growing outward. Ingham is not anything to Detroit.
The population exist in suburbs because of the central city growth outward. Suburbs exist because people who work and etc in city not actually living in a city. This is why the MSA and CSA go by commuter rates. Some places grow outward farther then others it's call "sprawl". Like it or not sprawl is growth. A suburb is not a town near a city, but a town that grow in relation to a city.
And no, the Detroit area is not more populated FACT, there already a term for term thinking it's called "density" the Detroit area is Denser yes....... but it's not bigger. If Atlanta didn't sprawl the population would had grown more upward and Atlanta be denser because it bigger.
Under what I saying Person A would have one 1 billion dollars, person B would have 900 million in one account, person B also has another account of 900 million. Your saying A has more money because one account having a billion, I'm saying person B has more one billion 800 million in total. Your looking one thing and not the whole network.
But No I placing importance on growth and development. If Atlanta didn't exist, Forsyth County population wouldn't exist. Ingham County population whether or not Detroit is there would exist anyway with it's population. Detroit didn't sprawl Ingham in existence nor does it now or ever depend on Detroit as it's city. You simply can't make Ingham just apart of Detroit of out spite. However you can't separate Forsyth from Atlanta out of spite. Forsyth is Atlanta growing outward. Ingham is not anything to Detroit.
The population exist in suburbs because of the central city growth outward. Suburbs exist because people who work and etc in city not actually living in a city. This is why the MSA and CSA go by commuter rates. Some places grow outward farther then others it's call "sprawl". Like it or not sprawl is growth. A suburb is not a town near a city, but a town that grow in relation to a city.
And no, the Detroit area is not more populated FACT, there already a term for term thinking it's called "density" the Detroit area is Denser yes....... but it's not bigger. If Atlanta didn't sprawl the population would had grown more upward and Atlanta be denser because it bigger.
I totally understand your point. Like I said....I totally understand the formula used to cacluate the official unemployment rate. The unemployment rate only counts those people who are currently looking for work and NOT those out of work for so long that despite wanting and needing a job, they have become so frustrated that they have stopped looking. Hence, the fact that I understand how the come up with the "official" rate of unemployment, THE FACT, still remains that more people are unemployed that what is said.
The same fact exists in regards metro areas. I understand that they use commuting pattern percentages to calcuate the total and I understand what suburbs are and how they formed. However, the FACT remains that Detroit region has more people than the Atlanta region. Regardless of WHY and HOW these people live where they do....THEY STILL LIVE THERE. If a person lives 30 miles outside of Atlanta in a new subdivision and a person lives 30 miles outside Detroit in the city of Pontiac, which is an old city...what difference does it make? It really splitting hairs. The Detroit area is not only denser.....it has more people. Line get drawn for the MSA based upon commuting patterns. Hence, the Atlanta communting area is larger than the Detroit commuting area. However, Detroits population area is larger than the Atlanta population area when commuting patterns are ignored. Again, thats true at every radius, 25, 50, 75 or 100.
The population exist in suburbs because of the central city growth outward. Suburbs exist because people who work and etc in city not actually living in a city.
Maybe these are minor qualifications but a couple of points:
(1) In Atlanta, the suburbs were not created by the central city growing outward. The central city (downtown to Buckhead) has for the most part stayed put and become far more dense.
(2) The vast majority of the growth in the suburbs is new development that simply didn't exist before. Relatively little of it was transplanted from the central city.
(3) Most people who live in the suburbs work in the suburbs, not the city. Most people who live in the city also work in the suburbs.
Atlanta is Top 10 its already set in stone as being so. period
I think being in the top 10 is realistic. You generally have the top tier cities in America of NYC, Chicago, LA, and sometimes Boston (although even after living in LA I still dont really agree with it getting top tier status, but everyone lumps it in).
Then you have your secondary cities. There was talk of Phoenix, Denver, and Seattle earlier. I think Atlanta can solidly hold its own in that category, probably placing a little above Phoenix, on par with Denver, and maybe a little behind Seattle if you really wanted to break it down and nitpick.
Then you've got your tertiary cities like Charlotte, Birmingham, and what have you.
I totally understand your point. Like I said....I totally understand the formula used to cacluate the official unemployment rate. The unemployment rate only counts those people who are currently looking for work and NOT those out of work for so long that despite wanting and needing a job, they have become so frustrated that they have stopped looking. Hence, the fact that I understand how the come up with the "official" rate of unemployment, THE FACT, still remains that more people are unemployed that what is said.
The same fact exists in regards metro areas. I understand that they use commuting pattern percentages to calcuate the total and I understand what suburbs are and how they formed. However, the FACT remains that Detroit region has more people than the Atlanta region. Regardless of WHY and HOW these people live where they do....THEY STILL LIVE THERE. If a person lives 30 miles outside of Atlanta in a new subdivision and a person lives 30 miles outside Detroit in the city of Pontiac, which is an old city...what difference does it make? It really splitting hairs. The Detroit area is not only denser.....it has more people. Line get drawn for the MSA based upon commuting patterns. Hence, the Atlanta communting area is larger than the Detroit commuting area. However, Detroits population area is larger than the Atlanta population area when commuting patterns are ignored. Again, thats true at every radius, 25, 50, 75 or 100.
This has nothing to do with the unemployment rate, it's the commuter rate. Old towns and cities can be swallow into a suburb. In this case oldtowns start to grow because it's near a city it's the same thing. Your completely thrown out the ideal of outward growth.
First there the city, People live and work in the city. Then come the suburbs, People live in suburbs, 25% of suburbanites work in the city. Suburbs would not exist if a larger number of people didn't go hay let live here were still close to commute back to city for work.
You keep calling it a region it's not one region, the Detroit region is smaller by area then the Atlanta region is. A city next to one city does not make it one region. There not enough social activity between these place to be one place. Pontiac is actually counted a suburb of Detroit so there no difference that's a bad example. However Lansing MI to Detroit is a lot different then cartersville is to Atlanta. Not understanding or ignoring outward growth, people are in Bartow County because of Atlanta. Instead growing upward Atlanta is not as dense because it grow outwards.
The difference is people 40 to 50 miles outside come and go to Atlanta more. People won't even live 40 to 50 miles outside Atlanta it wasn't for Atlanta. There are plenty of towns and Atlanta made them bigger. What happens in Atlanta effects them.
Again what your saying is call "density" yes Detroit is denser it has more people in certain area. But the Atlanta sprawls more, in total population Atlanta is bigger. Detroit was larger than Atlanta then Atlanta grew upward and outward. Detroit was never larger in area nor larger in population than what metro Atlanta is now 2012. Atlanta is 5.2 million total metro area 8,000 sq mi.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
