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 know Kidphilly would prefer to keep the 2000 numbers Right Paul??
Gotta love Miami
Ah not when we get Mercer Back - another 350K to UA (either if as a CSA or MSA county) - UA for Philly will then be 5.9 million - there is hardly Philly MSA population outside of the UA, but not surprising considering the MSA is much smaller area wise when compared to most others
Actually the Reading UA has a high chance to be added as well based on the Census recs you provided earlier which would be another 180K I believe, could push the UA above the MSA because the of the CSA continuous development provision they discussed - That would be a real anomaly if the Philly UA designated by the census exceeded the census desinated MSA population (more fuel for the philly banter I suppose) - an interesting quirk for an area many believe is largly undercounted relative to its peers at the MSA level
odd part is if Mercer which is almost definate as a CSA back to Philly based on the census rec and reading is added, already meets continuous developed criteria up the 422 corrider; Philly could truly have a census designated UA of over 6 million and potentially 200K more than their MSA - would kind of be funny in some ways.
Ah not when we get Mercer Back - another 350K to UA - UA for Philly will then be 5.8 million - there is hardly Philly MSA population outside of the UA, but not surprising considering the MSA is much smaller area wise when compared to most others
pfffft, you will have to wait two more years to get Mercer back hun.
Your list is just a list of population density for city proper. You have not created any value. I'm sorry you wasted your time.
I enjoyed making the list and it initiated discussion even if your Holiness rejects it.
BTW, the list you posted is not so vastly different. The general placement of cities that moved up or down is basically the same, even if the exact location on the list is different. Also, it looks like your list is for MSAs when I did just city proper.
you are saying the same thing I agreed to. why take it out of context? The poster mentioned that it is hard to quantify based on density because of the dead zones, and I said that is true and mentioned the ones for my city??
why do you have to be so contrary?
It is like someone saying "oh it is cold in the US today"
and I replied "yes, it was 28 degrees this morning"
and you would go, "where in the US would it not be cold?"
geez man, you don't have to be so contradictory, look at the context of what I am saying.
I am not saying it is the coldest temp today, just carrying on with the conversation.
what, you want a prize or something for pointing out the obvious?
Whoa, easy there buddy it wasn't meant to contradict you in any way it was more of a general question to you and others to point out the very same thing almost everyone on this thread is complaining about, the meaning behind my quote was to basically say there's no way to make everyone happy with the density formula. I do see how you could have taken it the wrong way though.
Whoa, easy there buddy it wasn't meant to contradict you in any way it was more of a general question to you and others to point out the very same thing almost everyone on this thread is complaining about, the meaning behind my quote was to basically say there's no way to make everyone happy with the density formula. I do see how you could have taken it the wrong way though.
This is true.
As an aside, I think it would be cool to determine how many square feet of building a city has per square mile. I mean, it would be literally impossible to get an accurate figure...but it would give you a great idea of how "built up" an area is. I'm not just talking about building footprints either...but floors. The figure for NYC would literally be mind boggling.
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.
Whoa, easy there buddy it wasn't meant to contradict you in any way it was more of a general question to you and others to point out the very same thing almost everyone on this thread is complaining about, the meaning behind my quote was to basically say there's no way to make everyone happy with the density formula. I do see how you could have taken it the wrong way though.
