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)
 
Old 04-18-2015, 11:24 PM
 
5,625 posts, read 13,317,172 times
Reputation: 2887

Advertisements

The most debated that I would see:

CA: LA then SF (reasons stated above)
TX: Dallas then Houston. When I think of Dallas I think of Texas in the original Texas way and I have no idea why, but I just think from what I've seen of Dallas, it feels more Texas.
FL: Miami then Tampa then Orlando. Orlando might have theme parks, but aside from theme parks, I don't see Orlando having much culture. Tampa/St. Pete have quite a bit of culture. And to someone who said FL is based on tourism? Yeah. Miami Beach and the beaches might be. But Miami is basically the fashion, cultural, and economic capital of Latin America and it's not even in Latin America. That's pretty impressive.
NY: NYC then Buffalo. Rochester isn't bad, but Buffalo is more international being close to Canada and has pro sports.
Oklahoma: OKC then Tulsa
Ohio: Cleveland even with its current problems then Columbus. Ohio State University is such a large part of the Ohio identity that it would be hard to do without Columbus. Cincinnati is a large city, but I feel like it's quite overlooked on the national level.
Missouri: STL then KC
North Carolina: Has anyone mentioned this? I can't remember anymore. Charlotte then Raleigh.

 
Old 04-19-2015, 01:21 AM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland/ Piedmont, CA
31,598 posts, read 53,166,657 times
Reputation: 14516
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist View Post
The vitriol between LA and SF is actually a bit understandable. The two cities are so completely different, that totally different sets of people live in either. It impacts political ideas and persuasions as well. Both cities are filled with liberals, but two completely different types of liberals.

The CA drought is widely publicized. The latest reports out are that NorCal, and particularly SF are doing wayyy more than their fair share to save and conserve water whereas LA actually used more water in March YoY and is heading in the opposite direction. It's things like that that get under the skin of the San Francisco set and add to the overall negative opinion of SoCal.

I can tell you from my perspective, flying into LAX, Burbank, or OC is the pits, particularly LAX. It's the little things. That is probably my least favorite airport in the country, and yet it is the flagship airport for the country's 2nd largest city! I'd consider it an overall embarrassment. And yes, the smog when you fly in is still very very visible, and the cityscape is always interesting and huge, but I can see where liberal city types up in SF are literally offended that there is a city built like LA, period, let alone where it is built.

I don't know why Houston and Dallas hate each other - perhaps it's more of a rivalry thing since they are very close in size, scope, and influence and have the same overall upbringing. I am absolutely positive it's not a "rivalry" thing between LA and SF, but literally a one-way hatred of LA by SF for reasons of principle (and it doesn't help that SF is probably the "smartest" and nerdiest city and LA possibly one of the most vapid - that kind of opposing personal touch doesn't help relations).

One thing is true, though, and that is that LA people know how to throw better parties and have a better time than SF people, and I think SF people (quite a few of which are from SoCal originally), acknowledge that and go down to LA, SD, Carlsbad, Palm Springs, etc etc to party/vacation.

I don't think San Franciscans inherently view themselves as living in the state's #2 city. I think if they could have their way, they'd be in a separate state called North California. LA would still be 5-6 hours south on the 5 or 1 hour by flight and there would still be the same sort of relationship that exists now, but there would be a line of demarcation and a legal separation making it clear that LA is SoCal and SF is NorCal and they are two complementary but separate things/states/ideas/people.

The only other state where this total psychological and clear separation (without legal separation) that I can think of that exists like this is Florida - North and South FL are very very different, and Central Florida is the glue that binds them. California doesn't have an equivalent "Central FL" - it's either north or south and a vastness in between.
Zero vitriol on my part. I love LA and its by far the first place Id move to if I had to leave the Bay.

But SF Bay is most definitely not overshadowed or surpassed by any city in a 300-mile radius, nor is any city more influential in Nor Cal than SF is, nor does LAs larger population make it more influential in the upper two thirds of CAs land mass than SF.

And that's that.
 
Old 04-19-2015, 02:17 AM
 
1,039 posts, read 822,882 times
Reputation: 1140
Dallas really isn't the 2nd city. Both Houston and Dallas are #1. The fact that it's argued about so much kinda proves that point. I would say Austin is the 2nd city.
 
Old 04-19-2015, 04:03 AM
 
Location: kansas city
78 posts, read 84,452 times
Reputation: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
This is not now, nor has it ever, EVER been the case.

Talk about hilarious.

I think everyone agrees, well the majority anyways. Perhaps someday when LA is whipped out by a Earthquake or any disaster, maybe then SanFran can claim to be the number 1 city in California. Until then, enjoy being number two.
 
Old 04-19-2015, 05:51 AM
 
886 posts, read 586,242 times
Reputation: 1124
Quote:
Originally Posted by jessemh431 View Post
The most debated that I would see:

CA: LA then SF (reasons stated above)
TX: Dallas then Houston. When I think of Dallas I think of Texas in the original Texas way and I have no idea why, but I just think from what I've seen of Dallas, it feels more Texas.
FL: Miami then Tampa then Orlando. Orlando might have theme parks, but aside from theme parks, I don't see Orlando having much culture. Tampa/St. Pete have quite a bit of culture. And to someone who said FL is based on tourism? Yeah. Miami Beach and the beaches might be. But Miami is basically the fashion, cultural, and economic capital of Latin America and it's not even in Latin America. That's pretty impressive.
NY: NYC then Buffalo. Rochester isn't bad, but Buffalo is more international being close to Canada and has pro sports.
Oklahoma: OKC then Tulsa
Ohio: Cleveland even with its current problems then Columbus. Ohio State University is such a large part of the Ohio identity that it would be hard to do without Columbus. Cincinnati is a large city, but I feel like it's quite overlooked on the national level.
Missouri: STL then KC
North Carolina: Has anyone mentioned this? I can't remember anymore. Charlotte then Raleigh.
Miami is very important to Latin American and the Caribbean...but cultural and economic capital? Nah, its basically where Latin and Caribbean elites go to hide their money from their respective citizenry while taking advantage of a more stable US economy...Miami serves an important function for Latin America and the Caribbean but the culture and economy comes from within the respective countries not some city in the USA...don't know enough about fashion to get into that but I am not sure about that...would Argentina look to Miami or Italy?...does Mexico even have a super close relationship with Miami?...what about Brazil and Miami vs Brazil and Europe?

For the purposes of this thread, Miami is number 1 in Florida no doubt...the only states I see with the 1 and 1a relationship are Texas with Dallas and Houston and Maryland with Baltimore and DC burbs...Ohio is interesting because I agree with you about Cleveland as its the city most think of when it comes to Ohio, but I wonder what Ohioans think about it...for some reason I think Ohio may be close to a 1, 1a, 1b situation on the ground in Ohio
 
Old 04-19-2015, 07:24 AM
 
Location: San Antonio
5,286 posts, read 3,817,110 times
Reputation: 4294
Quote:
Originally Posted by orlando-calrissian View Post
Dallas really isn't the 2nd city. Both Houston and Dallas are #1. The fact that it's argued about so much kinda proves that point. I would say Austin is the 2nd city.
What it proves is that some people don't know what they're talking about and didn't bother reading the OP.

When I think of Florida, Orlando is the first city that comes to mind. That alone does not make it the first city.
 
Old 04-19-2015, 09:00 AM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland/ Piedmont, CA
31,598 posts, read 53,166,657 times
Reputation: 14516
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJdekc View Post
I think everyone agrees, well the majority anyways.
I certainly hope that the majority arent the bunch of superficial ignoramuses you make them out to be.

Quote:
Perhaps someday when LA is whipped out by a Earthquake or any disaster, maybe then SanFran can claim to be the number 1 city in California. Until then, enjoy being number two.
I would refrain from talking about natural disasters given the fact that your house could be gobbled up by a tornado like at anytime.

lol
 
Old 04-19-2015, 10:15 AM
 
1,632 posts, read 1,481,298 times
Reputation: 1171
I think Houston is #1 in Texas. Not by a lot, but due to it having a larger economy and a seaport/close access to the ocean, makes it pull ahead of DFW imo. Isn't Houston more diverse and more cosmopolitan as well?
 
Old 04-19-2015, 10:24 AM
 
Location: San Antonio
5,286 posts, read 3,817,110 times
Reputation: 4294
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaelectro View Post
I think Houston is #1 in Texas. Not by a lot, but due to it having a larger economy and a seaport/close access to the ocean, makes it pull ahead of DFW imo. Isn't Houston more diverse and more cosmopolitan as well?
Absolutely. There are only three things Dallas beats Houston in:

1. Media attention
2. Regional travel and commerce
3. Light rail miles
 
Old 04-19-2015, 10:30 AM
 
Location: Nashville TN
4,925 posts, read 4,598,525 times
Reputation: 4778
Chicago is known as the Second City because it could never beat NYC in anything.
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.


Closed Thread

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.

2005-2018, 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, 33, 34, 35 - Top