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)
 
 
Old 01-08-2012, 04:40 PM
 
Location: Phoenix
5,649 posts, read 7,453,193 times
Reputation: 4318

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChikidII View Post
There's no reason? Yeah places like NYC, Boston, Chicago, Philly and several other smaller cities don't contribute at all to the country's economy or anything like that.

If anything there is more reason for one to live in let's say a place like Chicago over Phoenix. When Phoenix runs out of water, it won't be that you have no reason to live there, it will be that you CAN'T live there. When gas prices continue to go up and up Phoenix won't be so nice anymore. Sunbelt cities have their place just as much as the cities in the north.
This makes no sense. First of all, Phoenix is not running out of water and people actually use LESS water now (with a larger population) than they did 10-20 years ago. Secondly why did you single out Phoenix when speaking about gas prices? People drive in every metro and Phoenix most certainly is not the worst offender when it comes to urban areas that sprawl. Do your due diligence and actually do some research next time.

Last edited by AZLiam; 01-08-2012 at 05:11 PM..
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-08-2012, 05:05 PM
 
Location: Denver
6,628 posts, read 12,513,072 times
Reputation: 4055
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
I've noticed that quite a few of the articles on that site are pro-suburbs and sprawl. I don't take it too seriously. And most of the states and cities in the Sun Belt have high unemployment right now compared to the national average as well as to their Northern counterparts. Also, the recession clearly changed the way we are going to build in the future, as well as alter what we view as important.
Yea that website is incredibly slanted. It's not even remotely objective haha.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2012, 05:13 PM
 
Location: Denver
6,628 posts, read 12,513,072 times
Reputation: 4055
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZLiam View Post
This makes no sense. First of all, Phoenix is not running out of water and people actually use LESS water now (with a larger population) than they did 10-20 years ago. Secondly why did you single out Phoenix when speaking about gas prices? People drive in every metro and Phoenix most certainly is not the worst offender when it comes to urban areas that sprawl. Do your due diligence and actually do some research next time.
I think he/she was simply using it as an example. It's easy to single out Phoenix because it's in the middle of the desert and therefore there will always be an issue of water I would think.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2012, 05:35 PM
 
Location: One of the 13 original colonies.
10,164 posts, read 6,496,214 times
Reputation: 8025
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
In spite of all this domestic migration from the north to the south that's been happening for years and years, how is it that the northeast remains the most densely populated region in the U.S. and every northeast state keeps gaining population year after year?

It boggles the mind.

Have you checked the figures on this???
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2012, 07:32 PM
 
Location: Denver
6,628 posts, read 12,513,072 times
Reputation: 4055
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotty011 View Post
Have you checked the figures on this???
Well if we're going to say the NE consists of New England, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Delaware, here are the stats.

State, Population, Growth %

New England 14,444,865 3.75%
New York 19,378,102 2.12%
New Jersey 8,791,894 4.49%
Pennsylvania 12,702,379 3.43%
Maryland 5,773,552 9.01%
Delaware 897,934 14.59%

I know on the Census Maryland and Delaware aren't in the Northeast, but there's enough contention on the site to at least include them. Obviously the region isn't growing anything like the South, but it's still chugging along in terms of growth.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2012, 09:53 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
18,639 posts, read 27,073,493 times
Reputation: 9580
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmac9wr View Post
Yea that website is incredibly slanted. It's not even remotely objective haha.
It's Joel Kotkin. What do you expect? He's known for slanting his articles against urban areas.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2012, 11:20 PM
 
Location: The canyon (with my pistols and knife)
13,222 posts, read 17,969,169 times
Reputation: 14673
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkgiraffe View Post
Many Northerners have wet dreams about the sunbelt losing its steam, but the truth is this is how it's going to be for awhile and some of us just keep getting hotter. Some will sink -throws life jacket to Atlanta- while others will keep sailing.
You know what they call rapid cellular growth in the human body? Cancer. Be careful what you wish for.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2012, 10:01 AM
 
Location: Mexico City, formerly Columbus, Ohio
13,105 posts, read 13,496,767 times
Reputation: 5783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnutella View Post
You know what they call rapid cellular growth in the human body? Cancer. Be careful what you wish for.
People should remember that the former Rust Belt cities all had boom growth once too. It never lasts. I do think that most non-Sun Belt cities will see a resurgence in the coming decades, if only because many of the factors that made people go south have largely been improved, such as economic diversity.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2012, 11:40 AM
 
Location: The City
22,331 posts, read 32,176,306 times
Reputation: 7739
Interesting and somewhat related link on densities of residents, employment and impacts on travel time.

What was interesting to me is there is a correlation with average travel speed and longer commutes. I.e going faster on your commute in terms of mph actually correlates with a larger overall commute time. This would support that building more highways/lane miles is not reducing commute it is only perpetuating sprawl and creating longer commutes and more drain and less effecient use of infrastructure

original link provided by nei
http://www.lrrb.org/pdf/200124.pdf
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.


 
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.
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