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 11-23-2010, 08:41 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,171 posts, read 12,802,899 times
Reputation: 4047

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavercreek33 View Post
DANNY, I wanted to comment on what you said earlier about Omaha. I have to agree. Completely underrated city. The companies based there have done wonders for the city. I had to go on a business trip to Omaha earlier this summer and I was thinking Omaha, NEBRASKA. Completely changed my view of the city. I have asked if we have any more trips scheduled for Omaha I would take them. The Old Market District, their booming riverfront, great downtown parks (Leahy Mall), great skyline, and the new world class sporting venues.

Omaha really belongs in a bigger class of cities.
Yeah the city is really nice, I want to actually visit it one day. I have a lot of respect for cities that know how to handle corporate businesses and build themselves off hard work.

Omaha is also the healthiest city economically in America, even more than Washington DC which is the healthiest major city in America.

It's also interesting to note that its one of the most sprawl proof cities in America, and it will develop quite nicely too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnDBaumgardner View Post
The proof is right there in front of you ... if you can't see that Cleveland is advancing and progressing more than St. Louis by researching the data presented, then there's no chance that you will ever know ... or care to know!
To be fair John, I think Cleveland is a great city. Definitely one with culture.

But you're being very unfair to Saint Louis. There is a lot about Saint Louis that many people do not know and the place has had more significance than 99% of the people will ever realize.

If anyone here has done high school studies and extensive history & literature courses in college/high school they will know the prominence of Saint Louis. From Mark Twain 9One of the most prolific and famous writers in the WORLD), to Louis & Clark, to the 1906 World Fair, which by the way was the most inviting world fair of all time in America. It drew crowds from nearly any country in the world because it was a special exhibit that year. It also led way to new regulations & partially set fire to some Civil Rights Movements.

Saint Louis is way more than people make it out to be. And it deserves more respect and credit than its getting here.

And John to your point about the revitalization projects in Cleveland it is just that. Saint Louis doesn't need it nearly to the same extent Cleveland does, not even close. Boston isn't getting any of these projects either. Why? Saint Louis (Much like Boston) has started growing and continued to grow throughout all of last decade, reversing the population decline it and every other Frostbelt city started experiencing in the 1950's.

Cleveland even to this day is still losing population. And that is not necessarily a bad thing as its not a good thing either. But Cleveland is doing these projects not because it wants to for fun, but because it needs to. It has to make itself more attractive and invite more to move into the core of the city, which has been seeing some of the worst population declines of all time in 2010.

It differs from projects in Sunbelt cities, that are infilling more than anything, for Cleveland it has to do it to keep itself from shrinking even more.

And to your point earlier about Cleveland's GDP being misrepresented by that source, its not. Every Metropolitan Area shrank in GDP from the previous year, we are amidst a Global Recession, and its not just Cleveland, almost everyone shrank besides Houston, Dallas-Fort Worth, Omaha, & Washington DC and all of which have arguably the healthiest economies in the country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-23-2010, 08:41 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,991 posts, read 8,318,361 times
Reputation: 4270
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly View Post
Detroit
St louis
Minneapolis
Cleveland
I consider your quotes to be very spot on, but why did you put STL above MPLS? MPLS' economy is roughly twice as large as STLs...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2010, 08:42 PM
 
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
1,372 posts, read 2,794,620 times
Reputation: 839
Quote:
Originally Posted by slengel View Post
please post sources to these facts.
.

I've given several bonafide links that are rather provident with accurate data ..
You can do the leg work, I've given you the sources!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2010, 08:49 PM
 
Location: Phoenix
1,277 posts, read 4,155,879 times
Reputation: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by DANNYY View Post
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.
I wanted to point out you are pretty off on education here. Columbus has city schools, in the city, that are actually well performing. This is within the city limits. How are the St.Louis schools? Columbus is consistently rated as having the best library system of any city in the U.S. And Columbus has 12 colleges and universities. I don't think St. Louis can compete with education and overall literature rates in metro Columbus, one of the highest in the U.S.

This was an off topic rant but important none the less.

For this topic: national/midwestern importance of cities I think St.Louis wins, but in terms of the overall health of the two cities Columbus is one of the most gentrified innercities in the U.S., has lower poverty rates, higher education rates, less crime, etc.. Yes, St. Louis has gentrification etc. but Columbus is one of the most "together" of all U.S. cities. If you try to argue this I suggest you fly out here and visit every neighborhood for yourself. Indicators for Columbus in terms of livability (within the city limits not just metro) are defiantly one of the best in the midwest and I think this is the argument John___ is trying to make. However, these do not necessarily mean Columbus is more "important" than St. Louis. Sometimes America rewards bigger cities, metros, and sports teams over livability.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2010, 08:51 PM
 
2,601 posts, read 4,073,014 times
Reputation: 2275
I am extremely curious about this. I'm originally from Minnesota, so I'm not bashing here. I question, though, everyone's love affair with Minneapolis. People talk about sprawl, and how (for example) Omaha is one of the most "sprawl proof" cities in America, and how it should develop "quite nicely." If "sprawl" is not loved, then why does Minneapolis get so much love? It's a city under 400,000 people (smaller than Omaha), and a metro of over 3,000,000. Isn't that quite a lot of sprawl? Can someone explain how it's bad for some cities, and okay for others? Or, is there a double standard?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2010, 08:56 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,991 posts, read 8,318,361 times
Reputation: 4270
Quote:
Originally Posted by NowInWI View Post
I am extremely curious about this. I'm originally from Minnesota, so I'm not bashing here. I question, though, everyone's love affair with Minneapolis. People talk about sprawl, and how (for example) Omaha is one of the most "sprawl proof" cities in America, and how it should develop "quite nicely." If "sprawl" is not loved, then why does Minneapolis get so much love? It's a city under 400,000 people (smaller than Omaha), and a metro of over 3,000,000. Isn't that quite a lot of sprawl? Can someone explain how it's bad for some cities, and okay for others? Or, is there a double standard?
Minneapolis' suburbs sprawl, but the city is moderately densely populated. I think the Twin Cities MSA is probably as dense or denser than the average MSA in the Midwest, so it's not the worst by any means (I believe that honor goes to KC).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2010, 08:57 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,171 posts, read 12,802,899 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by NowInWI View Post
I am extremely curious about this. I'm originally from Minnesota, so I'm not bashing here. I question, though, everyone's love affair with Minneapolis. People talk about sprawl, and how (for example) Omaha is one of the most "sprawl proof" cities in America, and how it should develop "quite nicely." If "sprawl" is not loved, then why does Minneapolis get so much love? It's a city under 400,000 people (smaller than Omaha), and a metro of over 3,000,000. Isn't that quite a lot of sprawl? Can someone explain how it's bad for some cities, and okay for others? Or, is there a double standard?
Quite honestly, it never has really mattered to me much. And it probably never will either. I like a city for what it has to offer, and I never write anything off because a number says its less dense or whatever.

I was simply throwing that out there because its an achievement for a city that gets little to absolute no recognition on these boards. The more things I can say about it, the more people will know about it. I'm just trying to get a thought of Omaha out there in the open for people to realize it very as well exists out there too. Omaha as a city pulls way above its weight in overall aspects of prominence, and thats quite evident.

The Metropolitan Area population of Omaha is at 765,000 people, not even a million yet. Just 3/4ths of a Million, and it is home to 5 Fortune 500 Companies. In 1972 when Houston was 2 Million or so people it only had 2 Fortune 500 Companies to put into perspective of Omaha.

Omaha has more Fortune 500 Companies even right now than Metropolitan Areas more than twice (some thrice) larger than it. It's GDP is very respectable for a city of its alleged size. And its the healthiest economy in the country, in one of the only states that saw a surplus instead of a deficit.

I think of these as no minor accomplishments, and they deserve crediting. I have never been to Omaha before, I should originally not feel anything for it to praise it, but I do it either way because it is respectable, very respectable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2010, 09:01 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,991 posts, read 8,318,361 times
Reputation: 4270
Not that you need this JohnDBaumgardner, but I'm afraid you are reaching a little to say that Columbus is "better off" than St. Louis when it comes to the overall economy. One thing that I will agree with you is that Columbus is growing MUCH faster than St. Louis, but otherwise St. Louis is a bigger city in just about every way, shape and form, and it feels like it too. I've lived in both cities and I feel like I have a decent bias to compare the two. St. Louis has also been "big" for MUCH longer, as it was once the dominant city in the Midwest, along with Cincy and Cleveland. Of the Ohio cities, Cleveland feels like and is the largest overall (CSA especially). Cincinnati is the most appealing architecturally (city only). Columbus is the smallest I believe but is growing the fastest as well as its economy, but Columbus is not "there" just yet -- even though it probably will be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2010, 09:01 PM
 
Location: Phoenix
1,277 posts, read 4,155,879 times
Reputation: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
Minneapolis' suburbs sprawl, but the city is moderately densely populated. I think the Twin Cities MSA is probably as dense or denser than the average MSA in the Midwest, so it's not the worst by any means (I believe that honor goes to KC).
Minneapolis is rated well on this kind of forums because of it's metro size and that it has a functional downtown. However, agreed that the area has mass sprawl outside of its city limits. If it didn't have a functional downtown, and the same metro size, I doubt it would be regarded so highly on these forums.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2010, 09:06 PM
 
2,601 posts, read 4,073,014 times
Reputation: 2275
Quote:
Originally Posted by DANNYY View Post
Quite honestly, it never has really mattered to me much. And it probably never will either. I like a city for what it has to offer, and I never write anything off because a number says its less dense or whatever.

I was simply throwing that out there because its an achievement for a city that gets little to absolute no recognition on these boards. The more things I can say about it, the more people will know about it. I'm just trying to get a thought of Omaha out there in the open for people to realize it very as well exists out there too. Omaha as a city pulls way above its weight in overall aspects of prominence, and thats quite evident.

The Metropolitan Area population of Omaha is at 765,000 people, not even a million yet. Just 3/4ths of a Million, and it is home to 5 Fortune 500 Companies. In 1972 when Houston was 2 Million or so people it only had 2 Fortune 500 Companies to put into perspective of Omaha.

Omaha has more Fortune 500 Companies even right now than Metropolitan Areas more than twice (some thrice) larger than it. It's GDP is very respectable for a city of its alleged size. And its the healthiest economy in the country, in one of the only states that saw a surplus instead of a deficit.

I think of these as no minor accomplishments, and they deserve crediting. I have never been to Omaha before, I should originally not feel anything for it to praise it, but I do it either way because it is respectable, very respectable.
I find it fascinating that you're bragging up Omaha, and you've never even been there. Well, I've been there. I grew up there - lived there for ten years. Omaha has always been a very under-appreciated city. I loved it when I lived there, and I still love it. You're preaching to the choir here.
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

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.
Similar Threads
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