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 09-29-2015, 09:35 PM
 
2,195 posts, read 2,145,372 times
Reputation: 1916

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nashvols View Post
Same can be said for Tennessee.
And Missouri. And probably Indiana to a lesser degree. I tend to think KC has it the worst with state government, though, since Indianapolis and Louisville are both the primary large city in their respective states, and Tennessee seems to have more invested in Nashville's success than Memphis's decline. Plus Nashville and Indy are capitals. In Missouri, its outstate, then StL, then outstate again, then KC in terms of pecking order...

 
Old 09-30-2015, 03:41 AM
 
3,008 posts, read 4,164,683 times
Reputation: 1524
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.davis View Post
And Missouri. And probably Indiana to a lesser degree. I tend to think KC has it the worst with state government, though, since Indianapolis and Louisville are both the primary large city in their respective states, and Tennessee seems to have more invested in Nashville's success than Memphis's decline. Plus Nashville and Indy are capitals. In Missouri, its outstate, then StL, then outstate again, then KC in terms of pecking order...
In Indiana cities and towns are beholden to the stats. Not much they can do without big brother permission. Nash and Indy being capitols means nothing. Legislatures tend to be majority small town hate big city types and generally very conservative at least in the south and mw. One of the reasons the state stripped Indy of its at large council seats when they all swung Democratic last election thinking it will shift the CCC back Republican next election. Heck primary reason Indy consolidated the first time was due to center twp swinging Democratic
 
Old 09-30-2015, 03:55 AM
 
1,480 posts, read 1,287,504 times
Reputation: 1486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter1948 View Post
We will have to agree to disagree there. I am just not buying it.

http://www.census.gov/population/www...0027/tab13.txt

Louisville had a substantially larger built urban city than KC, Indy, or Nashville, really until about WWII.
Those historic stats do not count Louisville's Indiana urban neighborhoods like New Albany and Jeffersonville. New Albany was the largest city in Indiana until post Civil War actually.
Louisville was (and still is) the largest industrial and manufacturing city in the southeast. After WWII, the city saw a rapid decline, fading to almost irrelevance. Proponents of other cities like Indy or KC still see Louisville in this light.
Do you actually believe anything you posted? By 1910 both Kansas City and Indianapolis surpassed Louisville in population.

1910: http://www.census.gov/population/www...0027/tab14.txt

1920: https://www.census.gov/population/ww...0027/tab15.txt
 
Old 09-30-2015, 04:41 AM
 
Location: San Diego
1,760 posts, read 2,935,979 times
Reputation: 1230
It's funny how this thread just keeps getting derailed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyadic View Post
Do you actually believe anything you posted? By 1910 both Kansas City and Indianapolis surpassed Louisville in population.

1910: http://www.census.gov/population/www...0027/tab14.txt

1920: https://www.census.gov/population/ww...0027/tab15.txt
Be careful if you're using statistics to point out a flaw in someone's argument. That's now considered an attack on their city.
 
Old 09-30-2015, 05:32 AM
 
6,295 posts, read 13,176,543 times
Reputation: 2789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyadic View Post
Do you actually believe anything you posted? By 1910 both Kansas City and Indianapolis surpassed Louisville in population.

1910: http://www.census.gov/population/www...0027/tab14.txt

1920: https://www.census.gov/population/ww...0027/tab15.txt
I do. I stated at the TURN of the century. That means that Louisville has a substantially bigger urban environment before cars were built. That's significant because city were much more dense, walkable, and compact then. See the difference in Boston or DC vs LA. Bigger metro is not always better. Look at Louisville's density. Indy and KC, like they always have, surpassed Louisville in population by annexing. Louisville finally learned the trick in 2004.

Let's look at 1920, when the prominence of suburbs arose and cars were becoming very common.

And notice again the land area of the cities:
pop sq miles pop/sqmi.
21 Indianapolis city, IN.... 314,194 43.6 7,206
29 Louisville city, KY...... 234,891 22.4 10,486
19 Kansas City city, MO..... 324,410 58.4 5,555

Louisville had substantially more density and had half the land area. If it were the size of Indy in geographic terms, it would have had 500k people. KC? It had THREE times the land area.
This is the same thing that continues today as Louisville has half the land area in her MSA as KC. If you gave Louisville 8,000 sq miles today, it would have over 2 million people and include Lexington/Frankfort.

KC and Indy are NOT big cities. They offer nothing major one would need to live that Louisville doesn't unless you must have pro sports to live. Even then, Louisville has by far superior college sports so it is a preference.
 
Old 09-30-2015, 05:47 AM
 
1,480 posts, read 1,287,504 times
Reputation: 1486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter1948 View Post
A quick google search of Indy and Louisville as "hip" cities proves Louisville just gets more national press for this, and deservedly so. The most common mistake people make regarding Louisville is to think it is just about a horse race and bourbon (that horse a"race" is actually a 2 week festival btw). In fact, Louisville is one of the most festive cities in the USA. There are 7 hotels under construction or proposed downtown alone and the convention center is expanding to put it on par with Indy's. Unlike Indy, which gets most its tourists that are not from the 500 for conventions and sports, Louisville gets actual LEISURE travelers. And that is my point. Louisville is a city that is a lot more fun...bourbon, gambling, and great foods, arts and restaurants with 4 am last call bars.

If anything, Louisville, Nashville and KC have more in common in that they are hip, artsy foodie towns. Indy may have the best downtown in terms of having everything one needs to live (only midsized city around with that much national chain retail), but that is its main redeeming quality.

Finally, if these 4 cities were beers and I think this really helps you know about the cities, here is what they would be:

Nashville: Yuengling
Louisville: PBR
Indianapolis: Bud Light
KC: Coors

Maybe it is a bad analogy but I feel it helps one understand the cities better.
Is hip, artsy and foodie a measurable metric? In my opinion whether a city is hip, artsy or a foodie town is highly subjective. Let's use the Indianapolis Convention Center as an measurable metric example. The convention center generates $800 million a year in economic impact, according to Visit Indy, the city’s convention and tourism marketing arm. In 2014, its 433 meetings, trade shows, conventions and other events generated more than $32 million in hotel, rental car, and food and beverage taxes and another $53 million in state sales tax. What economic impact does the LEISURE traveler (your words not mine) have on the Louisville economy?
 
Old 09-30-2015, 06:07 AM
 
1,480 posts, read 1,287,504 times
Reputation: 1486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter1948 View Post
I do. I stated at the TURN of the century. That means that Louisville has a substantially bigger urban environment before cars were built. That's significant because city were much more dense, walkable, and compact then. See the difference in Boston or DC vs LA. Bigger metro is not always better. Look at Louisville's density. Indy and KC, like they always have, surpassed Louisville in population by annexing. Louisville finally learned the trick in 2004.

Let's look at 1920, when the prominence of suburbs arose and cars were becoming very common.

And notice again the land area of the cities:
pop sq miles pop/sqmi.
21 Indianapolis city, IN.... 314,194 43.6 7,206
29 Louisville city, KY...... 234,891 22.4 10,486
19 Kansas City city, MO..... 324,410 58.4 5,555

Louisville had substantially more density and had half the land area. If it were the size of Indy in geographic terms, it would have had 500k people. KC? It had THREE times the land area.
This is the same thing that continues today as Louisville has half the land area in her MSA as KC. If you gave Louisville 8,000 sq miles today, it would have over 2 million people and include Lexington/Frankfort.

KC and Indy are NOT big cities. They offer nothing major one would need to live that Louisville doesn't unless you must have pro sports to live. Even then, Louisville has by far superior college sports so it is a preference.
You are moving the goal post again.
 
Old 09-30-2015, 12:19 PM
 
6,385 posts, read 10,365,395 times
Reputation: 6528
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter1948 View Post
Not true. Nashville is the capitol. So it does what it wants. TN government is in a different stratosphere than KY. Trust me on this one. The biggest things I hate about Louisville are state income tax and the way the state literally steals from Louisville to give to places that are nothing short of hopeless (i.e. Eastern KY).
That is absolutely not true. I can think of several recent ordinances that the city passed that were targeted by state legislators and overridden by a new state law, even if the Nashville law had no effect beyond the city's borders.
 
Old 09-30-2015, 12:37 PM
 
Location: Nashville, TN
4,272 posts, read 3,336,466 times
Reputation: 3001
Quote:
Originally Posted by nashvols View Post
That is absolutely not true. I can think of several recent ordinances that the city passed that were targeted by state legislators and overridden by a new state law, even if the Nashville law had no effect beyond the city's borders.
Insert: Mass transit and LGBT protections here.
 
Old 09-30-2015, 01:11 PM
 
6,295 posts, read 13,176,543 times
Reputation: 2789
Quote:
Originally Posted by nashvols View Post
That is absolutely not true. I can think of several recent ordinances that the city passed that were targeted by state legislators and overridden by a new state law, even if the Nashville law had no effect beyond the city's borders.
You guys have no idea how bad it is in KY. Louisville can't even think about getting mass transit because it doesn't even have adequate roads. What kind of city the size of Louisville has 2 lane freeways like I-64 and I-71 traveling throughout the city? So, because Nashville cannot get a few big ticket items you say they don't get what they want? Come on now. It is no coincidence that state capitol cities are more economically and growth positive than their counterparts since the growth of big government post WWII. There is not a state capitol in America that is not doing really well.
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