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.
Not really, St. Louis and Cincinnati have been specifically ****ed over by Chicago buying up companies but they're not dependent on Chicago or ever got their business from Chicago, which is the whole point. If Chicago was feeding the rest of the region that would be a different story, then the region would truly need Chicago and that's not the case.
Local tourists only visit Chicago because is the closest sizeable urban default, not because it's got some sort of strong influence, Toronto would simply be the hot tourist destination for the eastern part of the Great Lakes cities if not for Chicago.
You do have issues with Chicago. If personal, so be it. But how does a city buy up companies? Perhaps Chicago gains in corporate headquarters from other Midwest cities lately it has been. But Chicago s not stealing blue-color jobs. They head to the sunbelt cities with low corporate taxes. But Chicago is known to give a company Big tax breaks if they do relocate there.
I don't think it steals from Detroit. Heck, Detroit has Cleveland or Toledo to do that if possible. I did note in another post. That Michigan STILL sways toward Chicago rather then East-Coast. But Ohio cities (especially Cleveland) do not. The look Eastward and I don't mean Pittsburgh.
Chicago again gets the Plains states and Northward from it and into Indiana and Michigan. Ohio doesn't deny it is a Midwest state. But it still prefers looking Eastward not toward Chicago feels no connection to.
Chicago despite its issues. Has maintained its Status in the Midwest and Global link of its Centric-Core just is way over the rest of the Midwest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by the resident09
Somebody should start an "If Chicago were an East Coast city" thread. The responses would be epic, lol.
IF CHICAGO WAS A EAST COAST CITY?
I'd say it would be much closer to NYC's population today and in a warmer mild climate? Would have much more then its Core booming today. Its Lakefront would be a resort too with ocean beaches over the lake and aspects of a Miami on the East coast.
I'm sure I'll get all kinds of heck for this. As a Midwesterner I was thinking in terms of culture and honestly all of our mid sized cities really lack in culture relative to anything in the NE or West. Detroit is way out on the peripheral of the Midwest and it does have some culture, but that's a long way from most of the Midwest. No city out here can compare to Boston or Philadelphia, or a handful of other similar sized cities. We simply don't have the history out here. St Louis has some cultural importance, but is it at all comparable to the aforementioned cities? No way. Chicago dwarfs any other Midwestern city in culture and influence. Boston, Philadelphia, and DC are all world class cities and the Midwest has nothing remotely close to them. Are people really comparing Minneapolis, KC, or Indianapolis to Boston, Philadelphia, or DC? Population wise they might not be that far off, but none are similar in culture or influence.
NYC is an amazing city and it's the most influential city in the country, but it's also surrounded by other world class cities. I don't think voting either way is necessarily wrong, it all depends on what one is looking at.
Can someone please define "Culture" and what makes "Culture" in Middle America or the South lesser than East and West Coast "Culture"? I thought the beauty of "Culture" is that St. Louis is nothing like Boston and Phoenix is nothing like Philadelphia. If everybody in America had the same allusive East Coast "Culture", wouldn't the coasts lose their "Cultural" value?
I have nothing against Chicago, I absolutely adore the city and think it's better than every coastal city in the country (except for Boston).
Chicago has a long history with merging companies with ones in St. Louis and then dragging them to Chicago, Cincinnati has a similar history although I don't think it really happened with Detroit. Toledo and Cleveland sure aren't stealing anything from Detroit so I don't really follow you there.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,565,972 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal
This what I was responding to my other post.
NYC dominate over those 4 to 5 million "word city" metros
More than
Chicago dominates over those 2 to 4 mil mid size midwestern cities metro.
New York is 20.2 million
If you took Detroit, Minneapolis and combine them would equal 7.7 mill that's not bad to Chicago size 9 mil.
but if you took DC, Philly and combine them would equal around 12 mil that sort of NY by like 8 mil.
Also Detroit might be far from Kansas city but not from Chicago.
I'm not a big population freak, especially in a thread like this because it doesn't matter to me, but the CSA's combined reflect more of the story for the Northeast.
DC-Baltimore CSA- 9.6 million
Boston-Providence CSA 8.1 million
Philadelphia CSA 7.1 million
Total 24.8 million
NYC CSA- 23.6 million
In terms of only population these three CSA's that all directly link and tap the next CSA over slightly edge the total NYC CSA. Which many people say already encroaches on Philadelphia's "true" population or density.
Either way NYC dominates by MSA yes, and still it takes all three in CSA to total the gargantuan NYC.
I'm not a big population freak, especially in a thread like this because it doesn't matter to me, but the CSA's combined reflect more of the story for the Northeast.
DC-Baltimore CSA- 9.6 million
Boston-Providence CSA 8.1 million
Philadelphia CSA 7.1 million
Total 24.8 million
NYC CSA- 23.6 million
In terms of only population these three CSA's that all directly link and tap the next CSA over slightly edge the total NYC CSA. Which many people say already encroaches on Philadelphia's "true" population or density.
Either way NYC dominates by MSA yes, and still it takes all three in CSA to total the gargantuan NYC.
By population, Chicago dominates the Midwest more than NYC dominates the Northeast. Chicago's MSA is a 9.5 million whereas Detroit's and Minneapolis' combined MSA is 8 million. So it takes TWO MSAs in the Midwest to equal Chicago's "gargantuan" MSA.
Can someone please define "Culture" and what makes "Culture" in Middle America or the South lesser than East and West Coast "Culture"? I thought the beauty of "Culture" is that St. Louis is nothing like Boston and Phoenix is nothing like Philadelphia. If everybody in America had the same allusive East Coast "Culture", wouldn't the coasts lose their "Cultural" value?
It's bs. People have an idea that the coasts are better. Says more about them they when they are from.
Location: Watching half my country turn into Gilead
3,530 posts, read 4,177,144 times
Reputation: 2925
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCobb
By population, Chicago dominates the Midwest more than NYC dominates the Northeast. Chicago's MSA is a 9.5 million whereas Detroit's and Minneapolis' combined MSA is 8 million. So it takes TWO MSAs in the Midwest to equal Chicago's "gargantuan" MSA.
And NYC's MSA population is 20.1 million. DC's is 6.1 million, Philly's is 6 million, Boston's is 4.8 million and Baltimore's is 2.8 million. So FOUR MSAs in the Northeast at 19.7 million STILL fall short of NYC's MSA of 20.1 million.
Urban area, a more accurate measure, makes this even more lopsided. Per Demographia, NYC is at 21.4 million. Boston is at 7.2 million, Philly is at 5.5 million, DC is at 5.1 million and Baltimore is at 2.3 million. So 21.4 million versus 20.1 million. NYC basically comprises half of the Northeast.
is much closer to Detroit, Minnapolis, Cleveland, St Louis, Kansasa city 2 - 4 mil
Than New York 18 mil
is to Boston, DC, Philly, Baltimore, Buffalo, Providence Pittsburgh 2 to 6 mil metros.
Chicago may be over 4 million larger than the next Midwestern Metro but NYC is more than 10 more than Next East coast metro.
Let's go by CSA, looking at medium sized cities (2 million plus, I think that's reasonable, 2 million qualifies as at least a medium sized city):
Chicago: 9.9 million
Detroit: 5.3 million
Minneapolis: 3.9 million
Cleveland: 3.5 million
St. Louis: 3 million
KC: 2.4 million
Columbus: 2.4 million
Indianapolis: 2.4 million
Cincinnati: 2.2 million
Milwaukee: 2 million
Total: 34 million
Chicago represents 29% of the Midwest major metro area population. NYC is 49% of northeast CSA populations (over 2 million).
NYC: 24 million
DC: 9.6 million
Boston: 8.1 million
Philly: 7.1 million
There are no other cities in the BOS-Wash corridor that have CSAs above 2 million.
So the east coast is very much "centralized" whereas the midwest is quite multi-nodal. 10 cities of two million or more vs 4 cities of two million or more.
It's ridiculous to say Chicago has the same effect as NYC does. Not a critical examination in the least.
It's about a 4 hour drive to NYC from both Boston and DC (~220 miles, center to center). Not so far. Milwaukee is the only CSA that's really close to Chicago. Next closest is Detroit, which comes in at 284 miles away, 4 hours 19 minutes driving. Minneapolis is 400 miles, 6 hours. Cleveland is 350 miles, 5.5 hours (CLE is also just 375 miles, 5 hours 50 minutes from DC by the way). Cincinnati is 400 miles, 4.5 hours. Columbus 350 miles and 5.5 hours.
Location: Watching half my country turn into Gilead
3,530 posts, read 4,177,144 times
Reputation: 2925
Quote:
Originally Posted by qworldorder
And NYC's MSA population is 20.1 million. DC's is 6.1 million, Philly's is 6 million, Boston's is 4.8 million and Baltimore's is 2.8 million. So FOUR MSAs in the Northeast at 19.7 million STILL fall short of NYC's MSA of 20.1 million.
Urban area, a more accurate measure, makes this even more lopsided. Per Demographia, NYC is at 21.4 million. Boston is at 7.2 million, Philly is at 5.5 million, DC is at 5.1 million and Baltimore is at 2.3 million. So 21.4 million versus 20.1 million. NYC basically comprises half of the Northeast.
Sidenote, I just realized that Demographia combined Boston and Providence into one urban area this year.
"• The built-up urban areas of Boston and Providence (USA) and other smaller adjacent built-up
urban areas have been combined as a result of their now being included in the Boston combined
statistical area."
Moderator cut: link removed, linking to competitor sites is not ok
As such, this makes Boston the second largest Urban Area on the East Coast, ahead of both Miami and Philadelphia. In fact, this now makes Boston the fourth largest urban area in the entire country, behind only NYC, LA and Chicago. I'm going to start a separate thread on this, but I find this fascinating, as many of us on City Data believe urban area to be the best, most accurate (though not infallible) measure of population.
By population, Chicago dominates the Midwest more than NYC dominates the Northeast. Chicago's MSA is a 9.5 million whereas Detroit's and Minneapolis' combined MSA is 8 million. So it takes TWO MSAs in the Midwest to equal Chicago's "gargantuan" MSA.
Not at all... Chicago's population is a much smaller percentage of the Midwest than NYC's of the NE, people in this thread, really, really don't like facts... The thread isn't just about how many cities add up to the region's premier city, it's the region as a whole, and the Midwest is HUGE with a lot of cities!
Edit: See some of the posts following yours.
Last edited by Caesarstl; 04-25-2017 at 12:28 PM..
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.
