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.
Heres some pics of San Luis Obispo, Jackson, etc... would you really live in Detroit, Baltimore, Philly? What billionaires do these cities have, names?
Billionaires...another excellent example of an idiotic way to compare cities.
And where did I ever say, highest density = the best? Density is not everything (many excessively dense cities in Asia and Africa are slums) but you can't go around the fact that the most desireable cities in the world are very dense at it's core.
Many of those cities are dense, but that's about it. They lack education, they lack amentities, they lack diversity, they lack large groups of rich people (yes, the dreaded "overstated" RICH people) and rich corporations to fund great institutions/amentities that elevate it to the status of let's say - New York or London or any other admired city.
Why are you taking everything to the extreme to prove a non existent point?
I simply said density is very important, because it is! Density is important density is important densty is important! Waaa get over it!
And no, I wouldn't live in Detroit, Philly, Baltimore OR Jackson Hole or SLO.
I would live in Monaco or NY or London or Sydney or Paris or Florence. Because I like cities. And I'm here to talk about real cities on city-data.com thank you very much.
Last edited by sputnikkk; 04-07-2011 at 09:10 PM..
All of these are up there. But skyline is the most stupid of what I see constantly.
Also, "fashion contribution" is an oxymoron. Anyone who chooses to use this as a measure of contribution ot the nation is doing themselves a disservice and revealing they're superficial.
I'm gonna get flamed to death for this, but "diversity" as it's commonly defined is the most overrated. People value diversity of appearance more than diversity of thought. For example, Hollywood has all the colors of the rainbow, but you will be ostracized and blackballed if your personal, socioeconomic and political worldview deviates in any way from what's "acceptable." I'd rather be a fly on the wall in a room with a military veteran, a schoolteacher, a successful CEO and an auto mechanic who are all old white men. The conversations between them would be much more enlightening and stimulating.
All of these things mentioned in the poll and throughout the thread are important (except skylines) to some of us. We all have different opinions of course.
I voted for Divesity, as most overrated. But not because I don't think diversity is good. It certainly helps make cities more interesting.
But its because of some of the threads where we have someone saying City A is better than City B because simply City A has 1.1% more Germans, 1.2 % more Koreans, .08% more Italians than City B! It certainly gets a little ridiculous.
I'm pretty sure Detroit, Baltimore and Philadelphia have billionaires.
And no you wouldn't live in those ghost towns over Philly, Detroit and Baltimore. Neither would anyone else since they're literally ghost towns you fool LOL.
Now tell us, which previously banned user are you? And where do you REALLY live?
I'm sorry, but notice a trend between NYC, London, Paris, Rome, Hong Kong, San Francisco, Tokyo, Monaco, [insert random lovely European city]
The worlds most desireable cities are very dense in their core. Period.
Vibrancy and excellence comes out cities that are dense.
I'm sorry but cities with low densities at it's core are usually cities nobody aspires to. I mean, lots of people live in places like Orlando or Tampa or Phoenix but most of those people don't care about cities or amentities per se, they're just living in those places because they're cheap and comfortable. But this is city-data.com and people that post here aren't interested in discussing cookie cutter homes in master planned developments, costco, play grounds or super targets. We're here to discuss great cities, and yes skyline, amentities, the arts, etc are important to city buffs.
I will never understand the type of person who lingers on city-vs-city upset (jealous?) when we compare cities to one another? (Which obviously will include city stats). Why exactly are you here? Take away all those "over stated" categories and what exactly is there to discuss ? LOL. Get real.. Because your city doesn't have all this doesn't make it overrated!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Sweetkisses*
The only troll here is you.
Thanks for calling this out, I was about to dignify that nonsense with a response. That's probably for the best, I have dinner reservations at Golden Corral.
I think that whether you're a fan of high density or not, it matters in terms of a lot of these discussions. I'm not saying that it's not mentioned a lot, but it absolutely makes a huge impact in terms of street vibrancy, retail, etc. So, in terms of the OP's question, I don't think density is overstated because it has a definite impact to the environment of a city.
The only density threads I dislike are the ones where people can't accept the stats as proven by simple mathematics and so they create threads with the expressed purpose of trying to "out-density-ing" a specific city that is more dense than ther own.
Those are the most pathetic density threads. We cant all be number 1 and we cant all be number 2 either.
You can't let it go can you , look 18 Montclair I as others have commented have proven my point that SF uses its tiny land area to its advantage for density, so just deal with it and move on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly
Or when those same exact mathmatics prove otherwise; I hate when people accept the same mathmatic in one way yet disregard the exact same mathmatic the other way
lucky for us we can all agree when calculating a density there is only one answer for whatever area it is placed upon whether that be .4, 47, 130, or 600 sq miles
Density will always equal Population divided by sq miles
Yup, but some people on this site will take offense because their cities' density no longer looks all that impressive when their borders are stretched or when other cities borders are reduced.
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.
.
, look 18 Montclair I as others have commented have proven my point that SF uses its tiny land area to its advantage for density, so just deal with it and move on.
