Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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: Which city is the fith most important in the nation?
San Francisco 59 43.07%
Houston 32 23.36%
Boston 46 33.58%
Voters: 137. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-25-2010, 10:28 AM
 
Location: Denver
6,625 posts, read 14,463,319 times
Reputation: 4201

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by killakoolaide View Post
My fault I was wrong, for some reason I thought the bay area didn't use sunbelt logic. They are over 40 miles apart, strong contiguous sub-urban developement, maybe, but continuous urban developement naw. The definition of urban is different on the east coast.
Dude, San Francisco and much of the Northern Bay are just as urban as any city on the East Coast, save NYC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-25-2010, 10:40 AM
 
2,419 posts, read 4,725,521 times
Reputation: 1318
san fran, oakland, and most of the close burbs are urban. The entire bay area is not though. People try to make it seem like the entire bay area functions like one one city. There are probably people in San Jose that have never been to San Francisco, and vice versa.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2010, 10:57 AM
 
Location: Northridge, Los Angeles, CA
2,684 posts, read 7,385,389 times
Reputation: 2411
Quote:
Originally Posted by killakoolaide View Post
san fran, oakland, and most of the close burbs are urban. The entire bay area is not though. People try to make it seem like the entire bay area functions like one one city. There are probably people in San Jose that have never been to San Francisco, and vice versa.
Are you and rainrock the same person?

I live in Los Angeles, and I'm pretty sure most people haven't been from one end of the city to the other. How many people in Chatsworth really make the trip out to San Pedro? That doesn't mean they aren't part of the same city.

I've known people when I lived in NYC who haven't even been to Staten Island or the Bronx, but it doesn't mean it isn't part of NYC.

In other words, you have a pretty weak argument there.

When you have posters that have no affiliation with the Bay Area (unlike me, because I went to college there) defending the idea that the Bay Area might actually be one metro area, that's pretty telling.


You tell me..where's the metro line?

Anyways, redirect all your SF size cutting here:
San Francisco Versus Philadelphia (it's SF vs. Philadelphia)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2010, 11:01 AM
 
2,531 posts, read 6,251,801 times
Reputation: 1315
Quote:
Originally Posted by killakoolaide View Post
san fran, oakland, and most of the close burbs are urban. The entire bay area is not though. People try to make it seem like the entire bay area functions like one one city. There are probably people in San Jose that have never been to San Francisco, and vice versa.
And you know this, how? Have you even been to the Bay Area to make such an absurd judgement?

It is a multi-polar, multi-city region, but it essentially functions as the "Bay Area" overall. There is continuous development between SF and SJ as well as SJ and Oakland.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2010, 11:02 AM
 
2,419 posts, read 4,725,521 times
Reputation: 1318
the top 4
NYC
LA
CHI
DC

After that its a toss up; not really just SF, boston, or houston. You gotta add philly, ATL, MIA, NOLA, DFW, PHX, Denver and Seattle
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2010, 11:05 AM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
20,516 posts, read 33,551,374 times
Reputation: 12157
Quote:
Originally Posted by killakoolaide View Post
the top 4
NYC
LA
CHI
DC

After that its a toss up; not really just SF, boston, or houston. You gotta add philly, ATL, MIA, NOLA, DFW, PHX, Denver and Seattle
No not really. After those four, it's between SF, Boston, Philly, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, and maybe Miami. Denver, Seattle, NOLA, and Phoenix are not that the level of these cities yet economically.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2010, 11:08 AM
 
Location: In the heights
37,153 posts, read 39,418,669 times
Reputation: 21252
Quote:
Originally Posted by killakoolaide View Post
san fran, oakland, and most of the close burbs are urban. The entire bay area is not though. People try to make it seem like the entire bay area functions like one one city. There are probably people in San Jose that have never been to San Francisco, and vice versa.
Maybe that's the key point you're missing--people are NOT trying to say the entire Bay Area functions as one city. They are saying it functions as one metro.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2010, 11:10 AM
 
2,419 posts, read 4,725,521 times
Reputation: 1318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spade View Post
No not really. After those four, it's between SF, Boston, Philly, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, and maybe Miami. Denver, Seattle, NOLA, and Phoenix are not that the level of these cities yet economically.
Its not all about money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2010, 11:10 AM
 
2,531 posts, read 6,251,801 times
Reputation: 1315
101 From San Jose to Mountain View:


YouTube - US 101 North (CA), San Jose & Silicon Valley

101 From San Mateo to San Francisco:


YouTube - US 101 North, CA 92 to San Francisco

101 Southbound from San Mateo to Mountain View:


YouTube - US 101 South (CA), CA 92 To CA 85 North


Will the Philly homers please enlighten me on the gaps in development between SF and SJ that they see? Because I sure as hell don't see any in these videos.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2010, 11:11 AM
 
Location: ITL (Houston)
9,221 posts, read 15,958,071 times
Reputation: 3545
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spade View Post
No not really. After those four, it's between SF, Boston, Philly, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, and maybe Miami. Denver, Seattle, NOLA, and Phoenix are not that the level of these cities yet economically.
If you're going by economy (GDP) then Atlanta and Miami need to be moved. For example, Houston is closer to Chicago, economy wise, than it is to Atlanta.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:38 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top