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.
this coming from the same person who holds cleveland in the highest regard possible. fyi, st. louis has a higher gdp, higher metro population, more fortune 500s, and is more "economically viable" than cleveland. you cite columbus as ranking above st. louis because "it's more vibrant and economically viable" yet you still place cleveland above columbus, which is less vibrant and less economically viable than both columbus and st. louis. so your opinion is inconsistent. you are so biased and subjective that you lack credibility.
Your ignorant opinions belong only to yourself. Believe what you want, as I really could care less.
Cleveland and Columbus are both cities that are much better off than St. Louis ... but you'll come back exhibiting "your own blatant bias" concerning St. Louis in an attempt to discredit me.
We have different opinions, it's just that simple!
Your ignorant opinions belong only to yourself. Believe what you want, as I really could care less.
Cleveland and Columbus are both cities that are much better off than St. Louis ... but you'll come back exhibiting "your own blatant bias" concerning St. Louis in an attempt to discredit me.
We have different opinions, it's just that simple!
FWIW, I agree with the person who responded to you. He/she is right. The facts are the facts. St. Louis has a larger metro area (much larger in fact), larger gross metropolitan product, more Fortune 500 companies, and is the hub city for a larger geographic area than either Cleveland or Columbus. It's not a matter of opinions.
Metro area population, as of 2009:
St. Louis: 2,828,990
Cleveland: 2,091,286
Columbus: 1,801,848
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,047,399 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by slengel
this coming from the same person who holds cleveland in the highest regard possible. fyi, st. louis has a higher gdp, higher metro population, more fortune 500s, and is more "economically viable" than cleveland. you cite columbus as ranking above st. louis because "it's more vibrant and economically viable" yet you still place cleveland above columbus, which is less vibrant and less economically viable than both columbus and st. louis. so your opinion is inconsistent. you are so biased and subjective that you lack credibility.
Yeah. I feel Saint Louis is extremely underrated here on City-Data. It deserves to be what it is, and that is a Top 20 Contending Metropolitan Area/City. And honestly, the place has one of the most stable economies in the Midwest, one of the best public transit in the Midwest (probably the best outside of Chicago), and the success of great sports teams.
I have a lot of respect for Saint Louis, it was the first Midwestern city I ever saw outside of Chicago, and I loved every moment of the place. But its been years since I have been there, I need to see it again sometime soon.
Columbus Vs. Saint Louis: Saint Louis wins
Higher Education:
Washington University at Saint Louis Vs. Ohio State University Winner: Washington University at Saint Louis (It's a great school)
Population by MSA:
Saint Louis MSA: 2,828,990
Columbus MSA: 1,801,848
There is a difference in 1 Million people between the two of them.
Population by CSA:
Saint Louis CSA: 2,892,874
Columbus CSA: 2,031,229
Economic Output (GDP):
Saint Louis: $127.8 Billion
Columbus: $90 Billion
Fortune 500 Companies in Designated Metropolitan Areas (2010):
New York City: 71
Bay Area: 31
Chicago: 28
Houston: 25
Dallas-Fort Worth: 24
Los Angeles: 24
Minneapolis–St. Paul: 20
Washington DC: 17
Philadelphia: 14
Atlanta: 12
Boston: 12
Detroit: 12
Cincinnati: 9 St. Louis: 9
Charlotte: 8
Denver: 8
Milwaukee: 8
Pittsburgh: 8
Cleveland: 7
Seattle: 7
Richmond: 6 Columbus: 5
Miami–Fort Lauderdale: 5
Omaha: 5
Phoenix: 5
Hartford: 4
San Antonio: 4
Indianapolis: 3
Jacksonville: 3
Kansas City: 3
Louisville: 3
Tampa: 3
In terms of History: Saint Louis possibly has the most history of any Midwestern city.
In terms of Literature: Saint Louis is often one of the top references in Literature, many great writers and poets have represented Saint Louis, like Mark Twain as a very basic example.
In terms of Sports: Saint Louis Cardinals have won 10 World Series, the Rams have won 1 Superbowl.
In terms of economic health: Both Saint Louis & Columbus are below national average and remain to be healthy.
In terms of influence to America: Saint Louis was once one of the Top 10 largest cities in America, and it held that spot for countless decades, Columbus hasn't been anywhere near the Top 10 list yet. Saint Louis was able to rival any city at one point, Baltimore, Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston, & New Orleans.
FWIW, I agree with the person who responded to you. He/she is right. The facts are the facts. St. Louis has a larger metro area (much larger in fact), larger gross metropolitan product, more Fortune 500 companies, and is the hub city for a larger geographic area than either Cleveland or Columbus. It's not a matter of opinions.
Metro area population, as of 2009:
St. Louis: 2,828,990
Cleveland: 2,091,286
Columbus: 1,801,848
Maybe you've never heard this before, but SIZE doesn't always mean a city is any better off ... St. Louis is NOT dramatically larger than the Cleveland metro ... and your GDP for Cleveland isn't accurate ( depends on what source you use ) I've read that Clevelands GDP stands at a respectable $102 BILLION
Yes it does. Only Chicago, Minneapolis-Saint Paul, & Detroit have more in the Midwest.
Fortune 500 Companies in Designated Metropolitan Areas (2010):
New York City: 71
Bay Area: 31 Chicago: 28
Houston: 25
Dallas-Fort Worth: 24
Los Angeles: 24 Minneapolis–St. Paul: 20
Washington DC: 17
Philadelphia: 14
Atlanta: 12
Boston: 12 Detroit: 12 Cincinnati: 9 St. Louis: 9
Charlotte: 8
Denver: 8 Milwaukee: 8
Pittsburgh: 8 Cleveland: 7
Seattle: 7
Richmond: 6 Columbus: 5
Miami–Fort Lauderdale: 5 Omaha: 5
Phoenix: 5
Hartford: 4
San Antonio: 4 Indianapolis: 3
Jacksonville: 3 Kansas City: 3
Louisville: 3
Tampa: 3
I highlighted the Midwestern cities in what I personally consider tiers for them in terms of Fortune 500 Companies. Omaha for it's size is EXTREMELY impressive to say the least. Not even at 1 Million people in the Metropolitan Area yet and already 5 Fortune 500 Companies, and also the most Billionaires Per Capita in the nation.
Personally I gave my Top 4 pick as Minneapolis, Detroit, Saint Louis, & Cincinnati. Detroit & Minneapolis are solid candidates, no question about it. Saint Louis is a solid 3rd candidate (in my opinion), and I personally gave it to Cincinnati for 4th because of all thats going on there, economically it is very much rising, its corporate power, busiest airport in the Midwest outside of Detroit, Chicago, & Minneapolis.
And its the largest Metropolitan Area (now officially) in the state of Ohio.
Anytime!
Minneapolis-Saint Paul along with Seattle (they trade places) are the most literate cities in the country. Minneapolis has made strides for itself, and it most certainly is paying off. It is the healthiest major Metropolitan Area in the Midwest right now and is gaining a good level of population too.
Yeah that is interesting to see, Minneapolis is a very wealthy Metropolitan Area and it has a extremely powerful corporate base as well.
That's by cities though, by Metropolitan Area, it has 3 more than that.
Didn't even see you post this. Ok, Cincinnati has 9. I was about right when I said 8 or 9. Thanks.
i would just be interested in johndbaumgardner's definition of what "better off" means. i have a feeling he bases that on his own perceptions, which are based on which cities happen to be part of his home state of ohio.
john, is there any evidence to substantiate your claim that "cleveland is much better off than st. louis"? i'm all ears.
i would just be interested in johndbaumgardner's definition of what "better off" means. i have a feeling he bases that on his own perceptions, which are based on which cities happen to be part of his home state of ohio.
Earlier this month he was in the top 10 most important cities thread trying to convince all that Cleveland was a tier 1 with NY. LMAO
I find Cleveland to be an exquisite city but the boosterism is to much
i would just be interested in johndbaumgardner's definition of what "better off" means. i have a feeling he bases that on his own perceptions, which are based on which cities happen to be part of his home state of ohio.
john, is there any evidence to substantiate your claim that "cleveland is much better off than st. louis"? i'm all ears.
Ahem, I will now concede that St. Louis, being the truly wonderful city that you proclaim it to be has "TOPPED CLEVELAND" and every other US city ...
john, you must be in high school or something. first of all, i am not even from st. louis (from philly), so i really have no allegiance to it. secondly, i have never said anything but positive things about cleveland and actually really enjoy your city. don't be a baby. posting those sensational crime rankings does not prove your point-- it's a different city every year and cleveland is always in the top 10 as well. i'd like to know what makes cleveland so much "better off" than st. louis. is there any empirical data that shows cleveland performing better? i'm not arguing, i'm asking a legitimate question because i am truly interested to know whether what you say is true. i really don't have much to base my opinions on other than gdp, corporate presence and population. if you have other data, i'd like to see it. no need to get so easily offended.
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.
