U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-15-2009, 09:26 AM
 
8,317 posts, read 25,189,413 times
Reputation: 9067

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie View Post
Unlikely. California currently has a population of over 35 million people. The best projections I have seen for Colorado call for only 10 million people in the next 50 to 100 years. Our state can more then handle that as Pueblo alone currently has enough water and resources for a city of about 750,000 to 1 million people.
That is your very biased and frequently uninformed opinion. Colorado is shuddering trying to accomodate its current population without having a major decline in it quality of life. And basing what you say on whatever perceived benefits that Pueblo has, and extrapolating that to an applicable conclusion statewide is myopic at the best and downright ignorant at the worst.

You might also consider that fact that California has achieved its current population only by shouldering a massive decline in its quality of life over the past few decades--just ask the thousands of Californians pining to get the hell out there about that, has managed its growth by grabbing in inordinate share of water out of the Colorado River Basin, and has saddled its residents with an inefficient and regulation-ridden tax-hungry government. And you would wish all of that bull**** onto Colorado? Gimme a break! Also, you neglect to mention in your population impact calculation that California is 1 1/2 times Colorado's land area. Of course, one can't be bothered with facts like that, I guess. You would consider cancer good because its growth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-15-2009, 09:54 AM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,106 posts, read 20,424,415 times
Reputation: 4148
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzlover View Post
That is your very biased and frequently uninformed opinion. Colorado is shuddering trying to accomodate its current population without having a major decline in it quality of life. And basing what you say on whatever perceived benefits that Pueblo has, and extrapolating that to an applicable conclusion statewide is myopic at the best and downright ignorant at the worst.

You might also consider that fact that California has achieved its current population only by shouldering a massive decline in its quality of life over the past few decades--just ask the thousands of Californians pining to get the hell out there about that, has managed its growth by grabbing in inordinate share of water out of the Colorado River Basin, and has saddled its residents with an inefficient and regulation-ridden tax-hungry government. And you would wish all of that bull**** onto Colorado? Gimme a break! Also, you neglect to mention in your population impact calculation that California is 1 1/2 times Colorado's land area. Of course, one can't be bothered with facts like that, I guess. You would consider cancer good because its growth.
I am just going by the numbers and facts.

Pueblo has enough land and water to be about 10 times our current size and still maintain a good quality of life. In fact the quality of life would go up as we would have a better art and theater scene with more sports and better restaurants and possibly some pro teams with the growth of Colorado Springs as the area could top 2 million people.

The Springs with the SDS has plenty of water but they need to work on their road system more but that can be done and they have enough resources for a county of about 1 million people as well.

Denver has done a fine job thus far and with the light rail and how its becoming more dense there is no reason you cant add 2 million to the metro taking it to 5 million people in the next 50 to 100 years without losing quality of life.

Northern Colorado can add people as well with out hurting quality of life but I wont add a number as I don't study that area enough. Same with the Grand Junction area.

So overall there is no reason Colorado cant be 10 million people in the next 50 to 100 years and still maintain a large rural area with great farms out east, in fact they will be better off as they will have more people to sale their produce to locally. So Colorado can have some thriving small farm towns and have some fantastic urban areas giving Coloradoan's a great quality of life.

Last edited by Josseppie; 12-15-2009 at 10:36 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 06:19 PM
 
8,317 posts, read 25,189,413 times
Reputation: 9067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie View Post
I am just going by the numbers and facts.

In fact the quality of life would go up as we would have a better art and theater scene with more sports and better restaurants and possibly some pro teams with the growth of Colorado Springs as the area could top 2 million people.
If that's your measure of "quality of life," then you don't belong in Colorado. Period. You need to move to someplace like New York City that has plenty of all that, if that's what floats your boat. Leave the natural beauty of Colorado to those of us who appreciate THAT beauty, and who recognize that as a treasure that few other places have or ever will have. Let the people who don't appreciate that and who want to trash this state with tacky development and sprawl take their sorry ***es and their projects someplace else. We don't need 'em.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 07:22 PM
 
6 posts, read 10,530 times
Reputation: 12
Wow jazzlover you sound like you're pissed off, but I understand where you're coming from. I can't wait until I move back. So by development, are several areas in CO ( like Denver, Aurora, CS) building up or out? What comes to my mind is that long stretch of land when you drive from Denver to CS...is that still the same?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 07:50 PM
 
20,381 posts, read 37,949,187 times
Reputation: 18194
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYC->CO View Post
... What comes to my mind is that long stretch of land when you drive from Denver to CS...is that still the same?
There is a long stretch of open space from Castle Rock to Monument. IIRC it's called Greenland and development there is restricted.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 10:25 PM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,106 posts, read 20,424,415 times
Reputation: 4148
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike from back east View Post
There is a long stretch of open space from Castle Rock to Monument. IIRC it's called Greenland and development there is restricted.
I am not the biggest fan of open space but this area defiantly is a exception as I am glad it will always be like it is today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 10:32 PM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,106 posts, read 20,424,415 times
Reputation: 4148
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzlover View Post
If that's your measure of "quality of life," then you don't belong in Colorado. Period. You need to move to someplace like New York City that has plenty of all that, if that's what floats your boat. Leave the natural beauty of Colorado to those of us who appreciate THAT beauty, and who recognize that as a treasure that few other places have or ever will have. Let the people who don't appreciate that and who want to trash this state with tacky development and sprawl take their sorry ***es and their projects someplace else. We don't need 'em.
Colorado was meant to be more a urban state from the start. Just look back at the history of Pueblo, Colorado Springs and Denver and all of the founders wanted them to be large cities. So our generation is doing nothing that was not meant to be done.

Colorado is kind of in the middle, not as big and urban as NYC or California but not as rural as Wyoming or Montana. That is why I like it here, we have the best of both worlds and I think as this century goes on you will see Colorado just get better!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2009, 10:37 PM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,106 posts, read 20,424,415 times
Reputation: 4148
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYC->CO View Post
Wow jazzlover you sound like you're pissed off, but I understand where you're coming from. I can't wait until I move back. So by development, are several areas in CO ( like Denver, Aurora, CS) building up or out? What comes to my mind is that long stretch of land when you drive from Denver to CS...is that still the same?
I will say Colorado tends to build more out then I would like to see. I hope that changes in the next 10 to 20 years, at least where I live in Pueblo.

Last edited by Josseppie; 12-15-2009 at 10:46 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2009, 02:52 AM
 
Location: Denver, CO
1,627 posts, read 3,631,786 times
Reputation: 1777
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie View Post
Colorado was meant to be more a urban state from the start. Just look back at the history of Pueblo, Colorado Springs and Denver and all of the founders wanted them to be large cities. So our generation is doing nothing that was not meant to be done.
Meant to be done by a prior generation that did not have access to the kind of information and understanding of ecology, population, and other systems that we have today. Theirs was a different world. There are limits.

New York City had just topped one million people around the time Colorado achieved statehood. I don't think they really saw the megalopolis of today coming, nor the effects it could have on us socially and on the environment.

And don't get me wrong here. I love a great city.

But that's the thing. It's not about being a large city. It's about being a great city. The two do not necessarily go hand in hand. Just my humble perspective.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2009, 03:19 AM
 
Location: Arvada, CO
12,852 posts, read 23,332,009 times
Reputation: 12278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie View Post
I will say Colorado tends to build more out then I would like to see. I hope that changes in the next 10 to 20 years, at least where I live in Pueblo.
I mean no offense in this, because I really appreciate your enthusiasm.

Do you like Pueblo how it is now, exactly how it is? If so, why would you want it to change?

If your dream of a Pueblo megalopolis is realized, Pueblo will be nothing like it is today, and will be the exact antithesis of what Pueblo is now.

If you want Pueblo to be how you describe, why not move somewhere where that is already the case? It really sounds like you'd love Denver.
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:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > Colorado
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