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)
View Poll Results: Will Houston surpass Chicago as the 3rd largest city by 2020?
Yes 492 41.55%
No 692 58.45%
Voters: 1184. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-13-2011, 01:52 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX & Miami, FL
317 posts, read 344,995 times
Reputation: 171

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by thePR View Post
People go on and on about Chicago being segregated and what that means for each race. People seem to forget that it's human nature to want to be by people like you.

It is known that minorities such as blacks, even when they do have money, tend to stay in Southern Chicagoland.
Never said Chicago is segregated, just said that Houston is more integrated which it is, even though it has segregation also in certain places.

Believe it or not, segregation DOES have its benefits too, its more centralized and gives neighborhoods to us like "Little Italy", "Chinatown", "Koreatown" and of that nature however its also nice to see people mixing too like a melting pot. Nothing wrong, and diversity is what you make of it, no right or wrong answer anywhere and no city should hang its head in shame of the people that live there, all to an extent have phenomenal diversity, some just a bit more than others though. Here are some others and these are all the new 2010 maps that were very recently released in the last 2 weeks.

Los Angeles:

All sizes | Race and ethnicity 2010: Los Angeles | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5560490330/sizes/o/in/set-72157626354149574/ - broken link)

New York:

All sizes | Race and ethnicity 2010: New York City | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5559914315/sizes/o/in/set-72157626354149574/ - broken link)

Philadelphia:

All sizes | Race and ethnicity 2010: Philadelphia | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5559907949/sizes/o/in/set-72157626354149574/ - broken link)

Phoenix:

All sizes | Race and ethnicity 2010: Phoenix | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5560484318/sizes/o/in/set-72157626354149574/ - broken link)

San Diego:

All sizes | Race and ethnicity 2010: San Diego | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5560483270/sizes/o/in/set-72157626354149574/ - broken link)

Dallas:

All sizes | Race and ethnicity 2010: Dallas | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5559904955/sizes/o/in/set-72157626354149574/ - broken link)

Atlanta:

All sizes | Race and ethnicity 2010: Atlanta | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5559880279/sizes/o/in/set-72157626354149574/ - broken link)

San Francisco & Oakland:

All sizes | Race and ethnicity 2010: San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5560477152/sizes/o/in/set-72157626354149574/ - broken link)

San Jose:

All sizes | Race and ethnicity 2010: San Jose | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5559901477/sizes/o/in/set-72157626354149574/ - broken link)

Boston:

All sizes | Race and ethnicity 2010: Boston | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/5559894531/sizes/o/in/set-72157626354149574/ - broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-13-2011, 08:55 AM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 28,190,591 times
Reputation: 7598
Quote:
Originally Posted by Social Network View Post
I'm not understanding this.

Okay lets break this down in two parts then. Part I, 1960 to 2000. And part II being 2000 to 2010. .
You didn't mention my post at all. The question was what was wrong with my post. the one I responded to the poster who said that the trends will change in 30 years and I said 30 years will be too late for trends to change.

you do a calculation of Houstons average increase and Chicago's increas like the poster said and maintain it for 30 years like he said, and see what you get. You will see you have been nitpicking my post for nothing. geez some people like to nit pick and pick out irrelevant stuff.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2011, 02:20 AM
 
2 posts, read 3,252 times
Reputation: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ogre View Post
I'm not sure what their populations are at present, but another factor to consider is metro area population. This has more effect on how big an entire urban area feels than just the population of the principal city. If you take that into account, the DFW areas is the biggest metro in Texas. In the sense of the entire urban agglomeration, Houston would still have to jump ahead to become the largest in its own state before it would overtake Chicago.

If you do look at only the cities proper, not entire metro areas, if Houston's population is now close to Chicago's, of course it's inevitable that Houston will become larger than Chicago before long. The big Sun Belt cities are growing. Most are growing at fast rates, while the old cities in the Northeast and Midwest are either losing population, remaining stable, or gaining population very slowly. You do the math. If these trends continue, some Sun Belt area will eventually overtake Chicago as the thrid largest metro. That will take longer than it will for the city of Houston proper (most likely Houston, since it's currently fourth in population) to move ahead of Chicago proper, but, if current population trends continue, it's inevitable that it will happen.
Houston is the largest city in Texas. Houston has a population of 2.32 million vs Dallas which barely has 1.19 million. Adding Fort Worth at about .74 and Arlington at about .36 totals 2.29 million. Houston is the fourth largest city in the United States period. Dallas, Arlington and Fort Worth are three separate and distinct cities. The Metroplex's claim to being the fourth largest metropolitan area in the United States is also suspect. The Dallas, Fort Worth metropolitan area includes 20 counties. If the 20 immeidate counties adjacent to Houston were included in the Greater Houston Area, Houston would again be the largest, but somehow conveniently only 8 counties are counted. The largest Metropolitan areas are as follows: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington DC, Boston, San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, Fort Worth-Arlington-Dallas, Houston, Philadelphia..etc. Dallas's metropolitan population cannot be and should not be included along with Fort Worth's metropolitan area. Sad but true. Houston will surpass Chicago. and Dallas can falsely claim whatever it is that they want to claim but Dallas has not grown since about 1990, only the Fort Worth and Arlington area has grown. Sad but true. Respectfully. Native Houstonian.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2011, 03:28 AM
 
Location: Lancaster, TX
1,507 posts, read 3,371,956 times
Reputation: 2280
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBENAV View Post
Houston is the largest city in Texas. Houston has a population of 2.32 million vs Dallas which barely has 1.19 million. Adding Fort Worth at about .74 and Arlington at about .36 totals 2.29 million. Houston is the fourth largest city in the United States period. Dallas, Arlington and Fort Worth are three separate and distinct cities. The Metroplex's claim to being the fourth largest metropolitan area in the United States is also suspect. The Dallas, Fort Worth metropolitan area includes 20 counties. If the 20 immeidate counties adjacent to Houston were included in the Greater Houston Area, Houston would again be the largest, but somehow conveniently only 8 counties are counted. The largest Metropolitan areas are as follows: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington DC, Boston, San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, Fort Worth-Arlington-Dallas, Houston, Philadelphia..etc. Dallas's metropolitan population cannot be and should not be included along with Fort Worth's metropolitan area. Sad but true. Houston will surpass Chicago. and Dallas can falsely claim whatever it is that they want to claim but Dallas has not grown since about 1990, only the Fort Worth and Arlington area has grown. Sad but true. Respectfully. Native Houstonian.
There are 12 counties in the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), not 20. If you are referring to the larger Combined Statistical Area (CSA) it consists of 19 counties. Commuter exchange rates determine the boundaries of MSAs and CSAs. There is a high rate of commuter exchange between Dallas and Fort Worth, which is why they form a single metropolitan area.

There are 10 counties, not 8, in the Houston Metropolitan Statistical Area. The Houston-Baytown-Huntsville Combined Statistical Area includes 12 counties.

Last edited by Acntx; 11-15-2011 at 03:55 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2011, 03:48 AM
 
Location: Manila
1,144 posts, read 1,582,045 times
Reputation: 736
It will eventually happen! Just not sure if it will be in 2020!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2011, 08:03 AM
 
63 posts, read 58,933 times
Reputation: 37
I doubt Chicago will continue to shrink. Right now the trends point to Houston surpassing Chicago, but I don't think Houston will maintain vigorous growth for long enough to make that a reality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2011, 10:11 AM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
18,649 posts, read 27,087,224 times
Reputation: 9580
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBENAV View Post
Houston is the largest city in Texas. Houston has a population of 2.32 million vs Dallas which barely has 1.19 million. Adding Fort Worth at about .74 and Arlington at about .36 totals 2.29 million. Houston is the fourth largest city in the United States period. Dallas, Arlington and Fort Worth are three separate and distinct cities. The Metroplex's claim to being the fourth largest metropolitan area in the United States is also suspect. The Dallas, Fort Worth metropolitan area includes 20 counties. If the 20 immeidate counties adjacent to Houston were included in the Greater Houston Area, Houston would again be the largest, but somehow conveniently only 8 counties are counted. The largest Metropolitan areas are as follows: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington DC, Boston, San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, Fort Worth-Arlington-Dallas, Houston, Philadelphia..etc. Dallas's metropolitan population cannot be and should not be included along with Fort Worth's metropolitan area. Sad but true. Houston will surpass Chicago. and Dallas can falsely claim whatever it is that they want to claim but Dallas has not grown since about 1990, only the Fort Worth and Arlington area has grown. Sad but true. Respectfully. Native Houstonian.
Only the Fort Worth and Arlington Area has grown? Even though the Dallas side of the metro grew faster this past decade in raw numbers? And why shouldn't Dallas and Fort Worth combine? Together they are the same size as the Houston metro in land area. Many of the suburbs of the FWA commute to the Dallas side to work. They share just about everything from sports teams to an airport. You also do realize that in your list, DC is combined with Baltimore, right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2011, 01:33 PM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,483 posts, read 10,478,335 times
Reputation: 5401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Bruce View Post
I doubt Chicago will continue to shrink. Right now the trends point to Houston surpassing Chicago, but I don't think Houston will maintain vigorous growth for long enough to make that a reality.
Houston's growth rates will eventually slow down like many other cities do. As the census shows that Houston did not grow much as projections indicate. It would be foolish to assume a city can a vigorous growth rates forever.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2012, 05:42 PM
 
1 posts, read 1,564 times
Reputation: 11
DFW metro is only larger because of Forth Worth. Dallas has ways to go before passing Houston.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2012, 09:48 PM
 
1,189 posts, read 1,811,819 times
Reputation: 972
Houston would need to gain 600 K in 10 years to be at chicago's population. Plus chicago is changing so im pretty sure chicago will gain a decent amount of people by 2020. So the answer is no. Will houston surpass chicago as the 3rd largest city eventually? Yes, it will probably be in 2030 or so
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

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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, 33, 34, 35 - Top