Largest Cities in California (Los Angeles, San Diego: living in, legally, versus)

[Rex00365]

Largest cities in California based on the latest U.S. Census estimates. [url=http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2975954/largest_cities_in_california.html?cat=4]Largest Cities in California - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com[/url]

[the city]

well, first of all. I consider any city in california under 500,000 population to be a town. I even consider Sacramento, Oakland, and Long Beach to be towns because they have more suburban areas and there downtowns aren't that large.

Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, and San Jose are the only cities in California.

[slo1318]

thats absurd.

[californio sur]

It would help if the OP's link actually opened to an article or something. Does anyone know what Rex00365 is referring to?

[pistola916]

Originally Posted by the city

well, first of all. I consider any city in california under 500,000 population to be a town. I even consider Sacramento, Oakland, and Long Beach to be towns because they have more suburban areas and there downtowns aren't that large.

Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, and San Jose are the only cities in California.

That is such a ridiculous statement. So I guess Miami, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Cleveland, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, and Atlanta are all small towns because their city population is below 500,000. Metro population is the important number when determining whether it's a big city.

Dude, most of LA is suburban.

[wburg]

the city is the master of completely ridiculous statements. I am often awestruck by his mind-boggling contracted consciouslessness.

[MIKEETC]

Originally Posted by the city

well, first of all. I consider any city in california under 500,000 population to be a town. I even consider Sacramento, Oakland, and Long Beach to be towns because they have more suburban areas and there downtowns aren't that large.

Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, and San Jose are the only cities in California.

This is a matter of semantics because the definitions of 'city' and 'town' are not precise nor do the definitions clearly distinguish the two. However, I am certain that if you approached the residents of any city that does not meet your (arbitrary) criteria, you'll find that most would not consider themselves living in a town.

[Majin]

It still amazes me how easily the people on this forum are trolled.

[Mr5150]

Heck my entire county has 50,000 or so people.

Originally Posted by the city

well, first of all. I consider any city in california under 500,000 population to be a town. I even consider Sacramento, Oakland, and Long Beach to be towns because they have more suburban areas and there downtowns aren't that large.

Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, and San Jose are the only cities in California.

And from my perspective any town with more than 100,000 is a city.

Legally a city is a settlement of any size that is incorporated.

[californio sur]

To my knowledge, there is no definitive population standard over what constitutes a town versus a city. But I think the common understanding is that a town is generally well-under 500,000 people! To me a town in California would be 50,000 and under. Over 100,000 is certainly city-like to me.