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.
It’s actually kinda crazy to think about how big LA. Both Atlanta and Dallas are huge but combined they’re not even close to Greater LA in population. I do think this could’ve been a better match if it was Dallas or Atlanta + Miami
I thought LA had a population of 13 million in its metro?
Atlanta looks like Disney World. Dallas is suburban hell as much as Los Angeles, but without the ocean, beach, weather, mountains, proximity to great mountains, Las Vegas, and so on. Both cities are places people go specifically for the low cost of living, never realizing that there is a reason people with money choose certain places to live and not others. Los Angeles, like most global cities, does have many "idle rich", but it has many who choose to do business there as the talent pool is far greater.
No place ever thrives simply because it's cheap. If you're in an upper middle class profession, lower cost of living almost always means lower pay, and census statistics make that quite clear.
One of the great things about Los Angeles is that it actually has a lot of room to grow, particularly if desalinization efforts pay off. the county is notoriously zoned for low-density development. Los Angeles doesn't need high rises, but plenty of areas - particularly near downtown LA or even places like Long Beach - are very low density and can be redeveloped with 3- to 6-story apartments.
Dallas and Atlanta just become endless sprawl, and their only growth strategy is more sprawl.
Are we really gonna ignore all the new urban development and infrastructure these two cities have undertaken during the past decade to today? Atlanta is going through a huge apartment and townhome boom, even in areas that were recently no-go zones for the middle class.
Its “only” 13 million because Riverside is it’s own “metro”.
Greater LA is closer to 18 million and feels every bit of it.
He specifically said he wasn't including Riverside though. Yes we know Riverside really belongs with LA metro but officially part of the CSA not the MSA. He's only comparing the MSA for purposes of this hypothetical comparison.
================================================ -economy - DFW and ATL are both economic powerhouses for their respective regions.
Per statista:
Los Angeles: $999.98 Bil
--
DFW: $516.48 Bil
Atlanta: $387.72 Bil
--
Merged: $904.20 Bil
Los Angeles would still be ahead, but Dalanta would be runner up, surpassing Chicago and would be within region on contending with Los Angeles in economics specifically.
================================================ -entertainment: Los Angeles without a second thought.
================================================ -urbanity: None of these are truly beacons for urbanity IMHO but LA would probably still be ahead of Dalanta.
================================================ -upscale suburbs: Los Angeles - Although I would say if you took Frisco, Southlake and Westlake then gave it the prestige of Alpharetta and put it closer to the Blueridge, it could be closer.
================================================ -shopping: Los Angeles
================================================ -restaraunts/nightlife: Los Angeles (pre-covid) .. Dalanta (currently) .. Los Angeles (post-covid)
================================================ -potential: Dalanta - Sorry, giving this to Dalanta because both are growing as well as attracting new business much faster than Los Angeles.
================================================ -importance: IMHO it's pretty close. Losing either would do untold economical damage. Los Angeles would probably still do more damage but Dalanta would undoubtedly rock this country as well if something as prominent as itself were to be conceived and suddenly disappear.
I'd also like to add, despite the frequent comparisons and contrasts between Dallas and Atlanta, the union of these two rivals would make for one metro area that would be a force to rekkon. I'd kill to see it.
The layout and infrastructure and functionality of Dallas.
The nature, scenery and urbanity of Atlanta.
I think it's interesting that this comparison shows just how massive LA is. Even if you combine Dallas and Atlanta which are two huge cities in their own right, LA is still bigger.
I'd say LA wins on all fronts except for maybe potential, since Dallas and Atlanta are both growing like weeds right now.
LA (in shambles, homeless galore, smog, brown/dusty, wildfires, rampant crime, social unrest, oppressive government, residents and businesses fleeing in record numbers, filth, dark-age diseases in downtown area) vs. 2 of the top metros in the nation. Wow! This is a toughie!........I'll go with Dallas/Atlanta. LOL!!!!
Location: Miami (prev. NY, Atlanta, SF, OC and San Diego)
7,409 posts, read 6,542,189 times
Reputation: 6677
Ordinarily I might agree with this but LA, like NYC, has a history of bouncing back from adversity and tough times stronger than ever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by march2
LA (in shambles, homeless galore, smog, brown/dusty, wildfires, rampant crime, social unrest, oppressive government, residents and businesses fleeing in record numbers, filth, dark-age diseases in downtown area) vs. 2 of the top metros in the nation. Wow! This is a toughie!........I'll go with Dallas/Atlanta. LOL!!!!
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.
