U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-29-2011, 11:31 AM
 
1,119 posts, read 2,365,602 times
Reputation: 382

Advertisements

It's been done many times by the same person.

I absolutely concur with what you wrote.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CelticGermanicPride View Post

if there was a city like san jose that happened to be the same distance outside of houston then houston would have a bigger economy. but since san francisco is lucky enough to have another city way down there, its gdp can boost itself above houston and chicago like it's all great? you can explain it all you want, it's stupid. combining two seperate cities outside of the metro area to boost your economy over one city is moronic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-29-2011, 11:34 AM
 
1,119 posts, read 2,365,602 times
Reputation: 382
pretty spot on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceTenmile View Post
hahahaha... they are combined when you decide to change the criteria for your own benefit.

In these circumstance regardless of influence or shared commuters, MSAs are always used and that's what this thread is about. An MSA, as far as I know, uses similar criteria and is all about commuters. I assume there has to be a higher level of commuters and clearly, the entire Bay Area does not meet those criteria, and as such, it is relegated to only being a CSA. I'm sure San Jose and San Fran are quite codependent, and you make a good case as to why they should be one single metro, but they just aren't right now. You can't try and call a CSA a metro when it's just not.

No one would argue that San Francisco and also San Jose don't have huge reputations internationally, of course they do, but reputation doesn't mean most important. In this country, Liverpool has a huge international reputation due to the Beatles, but that doesn't make it any more important as a city than if it lacked that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2011, 11:54 AM
 
Location: Boston
1,082 posts, read 2,348,653 times
Reputation: 888
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly View Post
actually I suggest you re-read the guideines and believe it or not i dont really care all that much, it doesnt make real life any different
That's the point. You understand what Philadelphia is, what New York is, and the relationship between the two. Philadelphia stands tall on its own, no need to scrape together a CSA with New York to make the point that Philadelphia is a large, prominent, important city. San Francisco is also a large, prominent, important city. But some on this forum want it to be more than it is, so they reach out for special rules. Ultimately, I wouldn't be surprised to see a claim such as, "well, a city has to have two words, starting with S and F," or some such very specific rule that can only enlarge the status of one city, and no other.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2011, 12:35 PM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland/ Piedmont, CA
31,375 posts, read 51,490,642 times
Reputation: 14268
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceTenmile View Post
hahahaha... they are combined when you decide to change the criteria for your own benefit.
LOL...Yes, I personally invented Combined Statistical Areas for my own benefit and enjoyment.

Just as you referred another forumer to the Census Bureau(which is wrong btw because they dont determine metrpolitan area boundaries), I would also like to invite you to send your grievance over to the Office of Management and Budget of the Executive Branch of the Federal Government because that is the decision making body which determines what defines Metro Areas and Combined Statistical Areas.

Have fun.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2011, 12:48 PM
 
Location: Weymouth, The South
786 posts, read 1,496,711 times
Reputation: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
LOL...Yes, I personally invented Combined Statistical Areas for my own benefit and enjoyment.

Just as you referred another forumer to the Census Bureau(which is wrong btw because they dont determine metrpolitan area boundaries), I would also like to invite you to send your grievance over to the Office of Management and Budget of the Executive Branch of the Federal Government because that is the decision making body which determines what defines Metro Areas and Combined Statistical Areas.

Have fun.
OK then, I got my bodies mixed up. So if it's the Office of Management and Budget that defines boundaries, it's them who split San Fran from San Jose in MSAs? Obviously nobody considers them to be the same MSA because you had to bring CSAs into it. I didn't say you invented CSAs, but you brought them into a thread that was about MSAs.

Also, you could invite me to do that, but what part of the conversation makes you think I have a grievance what so ever. It matters not at all to me if they are considered the same or separate MSAs. I am just stating that they don't and the only time the are lumped together is in a CSA. If they change it, hell, I'd probably be happier. I like the idea of a San-San MSA, but you need to make peace with the fact that they aren't together now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2011, 02:32 PM
 
Location: Boston
1,082 posts, read 2,348,653 times
Reputation: 888
I think SF has a Napoleon complex, or at least the SF boosters at city-data do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2011, 03:09 PM
 
672 posts, read 1,456,682 times
Reputation: 496
Simply defending what the whole World knows to be true gets SF attacked, it just makes you all look insecure. What did SF do to you? Why can't you all take a deep breath, and say to yourselves "you SF posters know your area better than we do, and you know what, you are probably right".

Each dot represents 1,000 lives. There is absolutely no break in population or development from SF-Oakland-San Jose.



Plus, if San Jose's Identity was so strong and seperate from SF's, why can't I find it?

This is the message I get from Wiki:
San Josť metropolitan area - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the area surrounding the capital city of Costa Rica. For the metropolitan area surrounding San Jose, California, see San Francisco Bay Area.

And yes, I Inderstand that technically there's a MSA for it, but you know what, technically there's a CSA as well, and it applies to all metros. It raises all boats. However, it just happens to reflect the reality of the Bay Area a bit more. And surprise surprise it's up there with the big boys - as some of you like to put it. So, is that why you don't like it?

Just sayin' all the constant sniping is unnecessary.

Last edited by Rhymes with Best Coast; 03-29-2011 at 03:32 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2011, 03:23 PM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland/ Piedmont, CA
31,375 posts, read 51,490,642 times
Reputation: 14268
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryAlan View Post
I think SF has a Napoleon complex, or at least the SF boosters at city-data do.
LOL...yes that's it.

We have the complex.

ROTFLMAO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2011, 03:25 PM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland/ Piedmont, CA
31,375 posts, read 51,490,642 times
Reputation: 14268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhymes with Best Coast View Post
Simply defending what the whole World knows to be true gets SF attacked, it just makes you all look insecure. What did SF do to you? Why can't you all take a deep breath, and say to yourselves "you SF posters know your area better than we do, and you know what, you are probably right".

Each dot represents 1,000 lives. There is absolutely no break in population or development from SF-Oakland-San Jose.



Plus, if San Jose's Identity was so strong and seperate from SF's, why can't I find it?

This is the message I get from Wiki:
San Josť metropolitan area - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the area surrounding the capital city of Costa Rica. For the metropolitan area surrounding San Jose, California, see San Francisco Bay Area.

And yes, I Inderstand that technically there's a MSA for it, but you know what there's a CSA that applies to all metros as well. Just sayin' the constant sniping is unnecessary.

http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m...g?t=1301433885

Just like Philly and New York Im sure.*rolls eyes*
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2011, 03:27 PM
 
Location: Weymouth, The South
786 posts, read 1,496,711 times
Reputation: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhymes with Best Coast View Post
Simply defending what the whole World knows to be true gets SF attacked, it just makes you all look insecure. What did SF do to you? Why can't you all take a deep breath, and say to yourselves "you SF posters know your area better than we do, and you know what, you are probably right".

Each dot represents 1,000 lives. There is absolutely no break in population or development from SF-Oakland-San Jose.



Plus, if San Jose's Identity was so strong and seperate from SF's, why can't I find it?

This is the message I get from Wiki:
San Josť metropolitan area - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the area surrounding the capital city of Costa Rica. For the metropolitan area surrounding San Jose, California, see San Francisco Bay Area.

And yes, I Inderstand that technically there's a MSA for it, but you know what there's a CSA that applies to all metros as well. Just sayin' the constant sniping is unnecessary.
It's true of course you DO know your region better than anyone else, and looking at all the evidence, it IS ridiculous that they aren't one MSA, but the fact is we must go off the official stats. As people keep saying, there is also a CSA for Washington-Baltimore, but no body would call that a metro. I know it annoys you, and I'm sure in time they will re-classify and make them a single MSA, but for the time being, whilst the area may be continuously built up and there may be a large amount of to and froing by commuters, officially, right now, we must consider them separately.

That's a great map by the way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top