U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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 07-05-2007, 08:06 AM
 
Location: In God
3,073 posts, read 10,786,845 times
Reputation: 510

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by FutureCop View Post
NYC will never be passed by any city in America for most people within city limits. Is the metro part of the city? No, so why consider it in the rankings?
I agree wholeheartedly. I wish this whole metro mess had never begun. Nobody really looks at those numbers. People just know, let alone care about the actual population. The OP predicts that Los Angeles will have a bigger metro than New York by the year 2030, but who's really going to look at LA as the bigger city?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-05-2007, 08:08 AM
 
Location: In God
3,073 posts, read 10,786,845 times
Reputation: 510
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewYorkcapitaloftheworld View Post
Why does it have to be a bad idea, it is a very good topic to discuss. Some people like Steve-o have to take shots for no apparant reason. I guess people from the North just cant stand having southern cities taking over.
But when you say stuff like that, whether it's true or not, people get offended and start throwing insults. Next thing you know, people's points are getting removed, posts deleted, and the thread would be closed within days.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2007, 08:16 AM
 
Location: Texas
2,703 posts, read 2,624,601 times
Reputation: 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpope409 View Post
I agree wholeheartedly. I wish this whole metro mess had never begun. Nobody really looks at those numbers. People just know, let alone care about the actual population. The OP predicts that Los Angeles will have a bigger metro than New York by the year 2030, but who's really going to look at LA as the bigger city?
No, people always look at metro numbers. Many cities have small city limits, but large metro areas. Atlanta for example. When sports teams move/are formed, or corporations are looking for a move, they look at metro areas. They even look at TV Markets and Radio Markets (sports teams). I can't believe you think metro areas are worthless, when it is really the other way around (for the most part).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2007, 08:20 AM
 
Location: In God
3,073 posts, read 10,786,845 times
Reputation: 510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guerilla View Post
No, people always look at metro numbers. Many cities have small city limits, but large metro areas. Atlanta for example. When sports teams move/are formed, or corporations are looking for a move, they look at metro areas. They even look at TV Markets and Radio Markets (sports teams). I can't believe you think metro areas are worthless, when it is really the other way around (for the most part).
Not your average American citizen who isn't into this kind of stuff. No, they don't look at metro numbers. The way I see it, metros define an area NOT a city.

Atlanta is a good example, it's small with a big metro. Who hasn't said that Atlanta still has that southern town feel...a small town masquerading as a big city, I say.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2007, 08:30 AM
 
Location: Scarsdale, NY
2,775 posts, read 10,736,857 times
Reputation: 795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guerilla View Post
No, people always look at metro numbers. Many cities have small city limits, but large metro areas. Atlanta for example. When sports teams move/are formed, or corporations are looking for a move, they look at metro areas. They even look at TV Markets and Radio Markets (sports teams). I can't believe you think metro areas are worthless, when it is really the other way around (for the most part).
But the metro is not the city. How can you say LA will be bigger than NYC when NYC will have over 4-5 million more people in the city? It's just not right.

Los Angeles might have the biggest METRO in 2030, but they will not be the biggest CITY. The only way LA might have the biggest metro is if the NYC metro doesn't join with the Philly metro which will happen within the next decade.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2007, 08:32 AM
 
Location: Texas
2,703 posts, read 2,624,601 times
Reputation: 206
Do you think people don't travel? People from the suburbs go in and out of the city. Metro areas better define the whole area. How can you not see that? The metro may not actually be the city, but it is continuous with the city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2007, 08:44 AM
 
Location: Scarsdale, NY
2,775 posts, read 10,736,857 times
Reputation: 795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guerilla View Post
Do you think people don't travel? People from the suburbs go in and out of the city. Metro areas better define the whole area. How can you not see that? The metro may not actually be the city, but it is continuous with the city.
No, it's not. It is not a part of the city, therefore it should not be considered in the rankings.

Just because people commute doesn't make them a part of the city. They just work in the city, that's it. If they live in Josephdale they are not a part of the city. The city gov't doesn't control the suburbs. The city ends where the city gov't ends---city limits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2007, 08:46 AM
 
Location: Scarsdale, NY
2,775 posts, read 10,736,857 times
Reputation: 795
Yeah, some cities have larger areas than others, which is why there's another option--per capita. Do it by people per square mile within the city limits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2007, 08:51 AM
 
Location: Texas
2,703 posts, read 2,624,601 times
Reputation: 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by FutureCop View Post
No, it's not. It is not a part of the city, therefore it should not be considered in the rankings.

Just because people commute doesn't make them a part of the city. They just work in the city, that's it. If they live in Josephdale they are not a part of the city. The city gov't doesn't control the suburbs. The city ends where the city gov't ends---city limits.
They are part of the city. The city wouldn't be there without them. The city needs the suburbs, and the suburbs need the city. They all generally work together. A lot of those people you see walking around Downtown in business suits live in the suburbs. The city and suburbs are all one continuous area. Simple.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2007, 09:22 AM
 
Location: Scarsdale, NY
2,775 posts, read 10,736,857 times
Reputation: 795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guerilla View Post
They are part of the city. The city wouldn't be there without them. The city needs the suburbs, and the suburbs need the city. They all generally work together. A lot of those people you see walking around Downtown in business suits live in the suburbs. The city and suburbs are all one continuous area. Simple.
The city does not need the suburbs and the suburbs do not need the city.

Without suburbs, pollution would be down because less people would need cars because they'd live in the city. And the suburbs are good for farming.

They're two completely different things and should not be put together the way they are. It's just not fair for places like NYC, Chicago, San Francisco, Boston, and Philly. They're all dense, people are jampacked in the city with less poeple sprawling all over the place. It's basically cheating to count the suburbs.
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.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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