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.
Don't know what you are talking about but its not mega cities. Mega cities are cities with 10M + populations, don't know why you are going into Paris and other cities. Paris is a City you use to compare Global cities to, because of its density and amenities, that is not what a mega city is though.
A Mega City is a City with 10M+ people
I don't give a fart that you think it must look like Paris. No where looks like Paris.
One more time if you have not grasped what a Mega city is: It is a city with ten million or more people.
Why are you getting so defensive?
You don't know what I'm talking about because you don't happen to know what you're talking about as evidenced by your use of citing an online dictionary and wikipedia. I could go online to some random website or online journal and find different metric being used. As I said earlier, there's no standard definition of mega city as they vary. There are many metrics and the metric I prefer to use it based on population and structural density as a starting measure. And I didn't cite Paris to compare it to other cities; I cited it to simply show how dense and not spread out it was and how dense Houston was not and how spread out it is. Simply put: Houston isn't nowhere close to becoming a mega city for the foreseeable future. Cities like Houston are a testament to bad post-war city planning where sprawl is the norm.
If you need another example of how two measures can vary for the same thing you can look at the US census bureau and Eurostat definitions for a city. They vary by country to country. One is based more on population than the other.
You don't know what I'm talking about because you don't happen to know what you're talking about as evidenced by your use of citing an online dictionary and wikipedia. I could go online to some random website or online journal and find different metric being used. As I said earlier, there's no standard definition of mega city as they vary. There are many metrics and the metric I prefer to use it based on population and structural density as a starting measure. And I didn't cite Paris to compare it to other cities; I cited it to simply show how dense and not spread out it was and how dense Houston was not and how spread out it is. Simply put: Houston isn't nowhere close to becoming a mega city for the foreseeable future. Cities like Houston are a testament to bad post-war city planning where sprawl is the norm.
If you need another example of how two measures can vary for the same thing you can look at the US census bureau and Eurostat definitions for a city. They vary by country to country. One is based more on population than the other.
I hate sprawl and I love density. That does not change the fact that the only factor taken into consideration when designating Mega Cities is population. Houston will not for a damn long time be considered an Alpha World City, but if it reaches 10 million in population, it will gain the Mega City title.
Which population figure you use, with regards to the US, be it city proper, metropolitan area or urban area, is all that can vary. I happen to think it should be the urban area population which should be taken into account, not that of the MSA, so Houston will take a little longer to get the fairly meaningless designation of Mega City in my eyes, than in those of people who use MSA figures.
I hate sprawl and I love density. That does not change the fact that the only factor taken into consideration when designating Mega Cities is population. Houston will not for a damn long time be considered an Alpha World City, but if it reaches 10 million in population, it will gain the Mega City title.
Which population figure you use, with regards to the US, be it city proper, metropolitan area or urban area, is all that can vary. I happen to think it should be the urban area population which should be taken into account, not that of the MSA, so Houston will take a little longer to get the fairly meaningless designation of Mega City in my eyes, than in those of people who use MSA figures.
Fair enough. To be honest I wasn't disputing the population numbers though I've seen some that say below or above 10 million. I was disputing the metric used. In that other guys case he was using the entire metros population when I think the urban core and areas surrounding it should be counted instead of the entire the metro. When it's measure like that then population density and structural density become important since they go up as a result. Because of that, none of the sunbelt cities listed will become mega cities. And I agree, it is meaningless.
my belief matches with the accepted definition so I dunno what the heck you are talking about.
I am the one working with reality.
All you're doing is pouting despite me and several other people deconstructing the raw ten million figure and telling you why Houston will never be a megacity.
All you're doing is pouting despite me and several other people deconstructing the raw ten million figure and telling you why Houston will never be a megacity.
I don't think you can say never. Houston's UA population at the 2010 census was 4,944,332. I don't see how you can think it will never get to 10,000,000. It may take a while, but I think it could happen. Equally, it may take longer still, but I don't see why Houston won't one day become and Alpha World City.
I don't think you can say never. Houston's UA population at the 2010 census was 4,944,332. I don't see how you can think it will never get to 10,000,000. It may take a while, but I think it could happen. Equally, it may take longer still, but I don't see why Houston won't one day become and Alpha World City.
lol, he is saying that he and others is saying that Houston won't be a megacity when almost everyone who has posted thinks it will become one. In Fact everyone who has posted but him thinks it will be one.
He does not understand the meaning of megacity that is why he is so confused.
I don't think you can say never. Houston's UA population at the 2010 census was 4,944,332. I don't see how you can think it will never get to 10,000,000. It may take a while, but I think it could happen. Equally, it may take longer still, but I don't see why Houston won't one day become and Alpha World City.
Yeah I guess it depends on how Houston tries to cut back on sprawl and reverse it. The reason Houston has become attractive outside of the weather and jobs is the cheap price of housing in the surrounding suburbs. If development continues to go further out from the area increasing commute times along with higher energy prices then it could see its growth begin to slow down or stagnate as people choose other sunbelt cities over Houston for the same reason they originally liked Houston.
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.
