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 10-30-2013, 02:46 PM
 
Location: Bothell, Washington
2,701 posts, read 4,671,793 times
Reputation: 3676

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by branh0913 View Post
Kansas City is larger, and to be honest with you, it does not have even close to 1 million less than St. Louis. Geez, have some dignity at least before you just go ahead and sit on St. Louis face like that.
No, the of metro area is not bigger, it is much smaller. Check the census figures, they are facts that don't lie. And to clarify, this is about metro population, not city proper.

Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-30-2013, 02:54 PM
 
Location: Bothell, Washington
2,701 posts, read 4,671,793 times
Reputation: 3676
I was off a bit by saying St Louis metro is a million bigger. The 2010 numbers are 2.3 million for Kansas City and 2.8 million for St Louis.

Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2013, 03:40 PM
 
66 posts, read 97,722 times
Reputation: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle19125 View Post
I think Tennessee is a good example with Nashville clearly over Memphis (the largest city) in my opinion.
Nashville has overtaken Memphis within the past decade for metro area population.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fezzador View Post
Arkansas - Little Rock is the capital and largest city, but Northwest Arkansas (Fayetteville, Bentonville) is the hot spot of the state and the reason why the growth rate of AR has picked up recently. It's home to the Wally World HQ and the University of Arkansas.
I have been to both and somewhat disagree. NW Arkansas lacks an urban core while Little Rock actually feels like a real city (a small one but still real). For most of its history, Little Rock was pretty much the only game in the state but now NW Arkansas has become a second player. It's still behind Little Rock though by a good margin in my opinion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2013, 05:19 PM
 
Location: Tampa - St. Louis
1,090 posts, read 1,627,885 times
Reputation: 1513
Quote:
Originally Posted by branh0913 View Post
Kansas City is larger, and to be honest with you, it does not have even close to 1 million less than St. Louis. Geez, have some dignity at least before you just go ahead and sit on St. Louis face like that.
Dude, you are a troll and are totally ignoring the facts. St. Louis is a metro of about 2.8 million, Kansas City is a metro of 2 million. St. Louis is nearly a million people larger. I cant force you to look at the facts, but I'm done responding to you. Its obvious you prefer Kansas City over St. Louis and that's cool, because a lot of people do. My problem is that you are totally ignoring the facts and are a complete troll.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2013, 05:20 PM
 
Location: Tampa - St. Louis
1,090 posts, read 1,627,885 times
Reputation: 1513
Quote:
Originally Posted by jm31828 View Post
I was off a bit by saying St Louis metro is a million bigger. The 2010 numbers are 2.3 million for Kansas City and 2.8 million for St Louis.

Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk
No, you were more correct earlier. The 2010 census had KC at a little over 2 million and St. Louis at a little under 3 million. So you are actually correct, the poster from San Francisco is just being a troll. He obviously has a vendetta against St. Louis and wants to put out false info.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2013, 05:33 PM
 
Location: Both coasts
1,582 posts, read 4,290,476 times
Reputation: 1447
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityBrightLights View Post
Sometimes the mentality with metro areas is bigger is better but I don't think that is always the case. What are some states you can think of where the second largest metro outshines or is more desirable than the largest? Here are ones I can think of.

California: San Francisco > Los Angeles
)
this is arguable. I'm a big fan of the Bay Area but I think there's a significant chunk of the populace that holds higher regard for LA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2013, 05:47 PM
 
Location: Twin Cities (StP)
3,017 posts, read 1,871,864 times
Reputation: 2342
The St. Paul metro outshines the Minneapolis metro.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2013, 05:54 PM
 
Location: East Coast of the United States
17,251 posts, read 19,550,442 times
Reputation: 13018
Quote:
Originally Posted by sskink View Post
This is easy.

Pittsburgh > Philadelphia.

I'd post the list of accolades, but it's very, very long.

Take that, ya cheesesteak-eating jagoffs.
Pittsburgh is not close to outshining Philadelphia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2013, 08:03 PM
 
Location: roaming gnome
12,391 posts, read 24,570,477 times
Reputation: 5662
Quote:
Originally Posted by goat314 View Post
Dude, you are a troll and are totally ignoring the facts. St. Louis is a metro of about 2.8 million, Kansas City is a metro of 2 million. St. Louis is nearly a million people larger. I cant force you to look at the facts, but I'm done responding to you. Its obvious you prefer Kansas City over St. Louis and that's cool, because a lot of people do. My problem is that you are totally ignoring the facts and are a complete troll.
I find it funny Missouri folks arguing between what a difference .8 million makes (not saying it doesn't), then you have people trying to say their city has everything or on the same level of NYC or Los Angeles despite being short by 10+ million people...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2013, 10:14 PM
 
29,944 posts, read 27,386,421 times
Reputation: 18522
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityBrightLights View Post
I have been to both and somewhat disagree. NW Arkansas lacks an urban core while Little Rock actually feels like a real city (a small one but still real). For most of its history, Little Rock was pretty much the only game in the state but now NW Arkansas has become a second player. It's still behind Little Rock though by a good margin in my opinion.
But you tend to hear more about NW Arkansas these days, so in that sense, NW Arkansas kind of outshines Little Rock.
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