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 03-28-2016, 01:54 AM
 
998 posts, read 882,944 times
Reputation: 1065

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyc_Anyday_Everyday View Post
VA Beach winters would be colder than most of southern California and summers to hot except inland SoCal.
I live in the VA Beach metro, moved here from SoCal. Well aware the winters are colder and the summers hotter. Considering cities on the East Coast that have SIMILAR weather to SoCal there are none but VA Beach has quite a bit more sunny days than its eastern seaboard counterparts. It's a stretch I know but the key word is "similar". The original post was way out of the box in the first place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-28-2016, 02:06 AM
 
Location: Washington State
18,529 posts, read 9,580,194 times
Reputation: 15782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poquoson7 View Post
I live in the VA Beach metro, moved here from SoCal. Well aware the winters are colder and the summers hotter. Considering cities on the East Coast that have SIMILAR weather to SoCal there are none but VA Beach has quite a bit more sunny days than its eastern seaboard counterparts. It's a stretch I know but the key word is "similar". The original post was way out of the box in the first place.
Yeah if there was a city on the East Coast with a climate as pleasant as Socal, it would be the largest city in the world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2016, 05:16 AM
 
Location: East Coast of the United States
17,247 posts, read 19,545,740 times
Reputation: 13002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall Traveler View Post
Yeah if there was a city on the East Coast with a climate as pleasant as Socal, it would be the largest city in the world.
Well, the largest city in the U.S. does not have that weather.

Nor do the 10 largest cities in the world, as far as I know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2016, 07:39 AM
 
1,687 posts, read 989,318 times
Reputation: 327
Amazed people can't put two and two together.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2016, 08:07 AM
 
Location: Washington State
18,529 posts, read 9,580,194 times
Reputation: 15782
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
Well, the largest city in the U.S. does not have that weather.

Nor do the 10 largest cities in the world, as far as I know.
But if anywhere on the East Coast had weather like Socal, it would be the largest city in the world. Put another way, if the Europeans had landed and developed the West Coast before the East Coast, LA would be the largest city in the world and NYC would be tiny.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2016, 08:11 AM
 
Location: East Coast of the United States
17,247 posts, read 19,545,740 times
Reputation: 13002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall Traveler View Post
Put another way, if the Europeans had landed and developed the West Coast before the East Coast, LA would be the largest city in the world and NYC would be tiny.
Possibly. Of course, we will never know since the west coast is a whole continent away and was much harder to get to back then.

Plus, so much of the American west is uninhabitable even today because of the geography and climate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2016, 08:15 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA (Morningside)
12,419 posts, read 11,926,143 times
Reputation: 10539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall Traveler View Post
But if anywhere on the East Coast had weather like Socal, it would be the largest city in the world. Put another way, if the Europeans had landed and developed the West Coast before the East Coast, LA would be the largest city in the world and NYC would be tiny.
No, no no!

Major cities do not grow because they have awesome climates. They grow because they are excellent locations for regional and international trade. NYC became dominant for two reasons. First, it was a great natural harbor, something it shared with many East Coast cities. Secondly, it was at the mouth of the Hudson River, which became exceedingly important once the Erie Canal was finished in the early 19th century. It meant that virtually all trade from the Great Lakes littoral went through NYC on its way out to the rest of the world.

If an area with a Mediterranean climate (which is what Southern California has) had the geographical advantages of NYC, it would have grown as big or bigger. However, it the SoCal area was just a random strip of coast without good natural harbors or access to major navigable cities, it wouldn't end up hosting a particularly large city.

FWIW, let's look at Europe. London, Berlin, Moscow, and Saint Petersburg are all larger cities than Madrid or Rome, even though the latter two cities have climates which aren't too different from Southern California.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2016, 08:16 AM
 
Location: The City
22,331 posts, read 32,161,575 times
Reputation: 7738
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrcousert View Post
It's cold in the north, hot and humid in the south. Is there someplace in the middle with moderate weather most of the year?


its hot and humid along most of the coast in the summer including much of the N


Short answer for many days there is similar but for 70+% generally no. Unlike SOCAL the weather on the EC has seasons and FLA is mostly hotter and more humid so no there is not a similar weather year round
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2016, 10:07 AM
 
Location: Washington State
18,529 posts, read 9,580,194 times
Reputation: 15782
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
No, no no!

Major cities do not grow because they have awesome climates. They grow because they are excellent locations for regional and international trade. NYC became dominant for two reasons. First, it was a great natural harbor, something it shared with many East Coast cities. Secondly, it was at the mouth of the Hudson River, which became exceedingly important once the Erie Canal was finished in the early 19th century. It meant that virtually all trade from the Great Lakes littoral went through NYC on its way out to the rest of the world.

If an area with a Mediterranean climate (which is what Southern California has) had the geographical advantages of NYC, it would have grown as big or bigger. However, it the SoCal area was just a random strip of coast without good natural harbors or access to major navigable cities, it wouldn't end up hosting a particularly large city.

FWIW, let's look at Europe. London, Berlin, Moscow, and Saint Petersburg are all larger cities than Madrid or Rome, even though the latter two cities have climates which aren't too different from Southern California.
Historically i agree but today I think the economic conditions have changed to allow people to live in better climates. LA & San Diego would be much smaller if the climate were much worse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2016, 10:28 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
15,470 posts, read 25,417,065 times
Reputation: 8936
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
No, no no!

Major cities do not grow because they have awesome climates. They grow because they are excellent locations for regional and international trade. NYC became dominant for two reasons. First, it was a great natural harbor, something it shared with many East Coast cities. Secondly, it was at the mouth of the Hudson River, which became exceedingly important once the Erie Canal was finished in the early 19th century. It meant that virtually all trade from the Great Lakes littoral went through NYC on its way out to the rest of the world.

If an area with a Mediterranean climate (which is what Southern California has) had the geographical advantages of NYC, it would have grown as big or bigger. However, it the SoCal area was just a random strip of coast without good natural harbors or access to major navigable cities, it wouldn't end up hosting a particularly large city.

FWIW, let's look at Europe. London, Berlin, Moscow, and Saint Petersburg are all larger cities than Madrid or Rome, even though the latter two cities have climates which aren't too different from Southern California.
The only good natural harbor in SoCal is San Diego Bay and it's the smallest metro with the least amount of port traffic. LA's harbor isn't natural at all.

Also Madrid is larger than Berlin and St Petersburg.
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