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.
Location: Originally Fayetteville, Arkansas/ now Seattle, Washington!
1,047 posts, read 3,947,989 times
Reputation: 382
Advertisements
Hehe i still have to disagree, especially with Philly. While it was important in the past, its becoming overly crime ridden. I think LA and Seattle are just as culturally advanced as Boston or Philly, Perhaps even a bit more friendly to newcomers to the city. But all cities have something to offer to everyone
Hehe i still have to disagree, especially with Philly. While it was important in the past, its becoming overly crime ridden. I think LA and Seattle are just as culturally advanced as Boston or Philly, Perhaps even a bit more friendly to newcomers to the city. But all cities have something to offer to everyone
I certainly won't debate the fact that Philly has a crime issue, but there are still very significant parts of the city that are relatively safe (Center City, South Philly, the Northeast, etc.). Also, Philadelphia has plenty of relevance as a major economic and cultural center of this nation's fifth largest metropolitan area. That alone puts it on a level of importance above Seattle.
I say Seattle-lots of young hipsters, good job market, friendly, west coast. It rains a lot and I hear the 5 is just murder. Boston and Philly are old crumbling cities that just don't offer what the west has.
I disagree. If the OP thinks that Minneapolis is lagging in the job department, then the OP will think that there is NO jobs in Seattle. There is actually a large number of people who migrate to Seattle from Minneapolis each year. Most of them end up coming back, mainly because the cost of living is too high and lack of decent paying jobs (in comparison to MPLS).
Boston and Philly crumbling? Ok, what ever Boston and Philly, among other Northeast cities contain some of the best living in the country. The west coast only really became vibrant and 'rich' about fifty years ago. The Northeast has about 400 years on that.
I disagree. If the OP thinks that Minneapolis is lagging in the job department, then the OP will think that there is NO jobs in Seattle. There is actually a large number of people who migrate to Seattle from Minneapolis each year. Most of them end up coming back, mainly because the cost of living is too high and lack of decent paying jobs (in comparison to MPLS).
Boston and Philly crumbling? Ok, what ever Boston and Philly, among other Northeast cities contain some of the best living in the country. The west coast only really became vibrant and 'rich' about fifty years ago. The Northeast has about 400 years on that.
Seattle unemployment rate at 4.0, Minneapolis at 4.5
The cost of living is higher in Seattle. So take these stats as you wish but I think they show the Seattle area has a healthier economy with more, higher paying jobs.
Location: Originally Fayetteville, Arkansas/ now Seattle, Washington!
1,047 posts, read 3,947,989 times
Reputation: 382
Size of metro alone doesn't mean that a city is important. I'm not saying Philly isn't important, but just because it has more people does not mean it is more important. Its just older. Starting to show its age.And has more crime. Seeing as how it has more people and more crime, means it has more criminals. Take the criminals out of both cities and their metros might be similar. ;D
I certainly won't debate the fact that Philly has a crime issue, but there are still very significant parts of the city that are relatively safe (Center City, South Philly, the Northeast, etc.). Also, Philadelphia has plenty of relevance as a major economic and cultural center of this nation's fifth largest metropolitan area. That alone puts it on a level of importance above Seattle.
First of all, all cities have bad areas. Its the proportion of safe/economically diverse/stable communities within a metro area that differentiate a successful city (Houston) to a city that has more problems than positives (Detroit). The existence of wealthy residents has nothing to do with a city's economic viability.
Secondly, I'd like to know where you got your Philly as 5th biggest metro area? I'm positive Austin, Houston, Las Vegas, Dallas, San Diego, Chicago, LA, NYC
are all bigger both in population and physical size.
Last edited by leighland; 02-05-2008 at 10:08 AM..
Reason: the spelling mistakes continue!
First of all, all cities have bad areas. Its the proportion of safe/economically diverse/stable communities within a metro area that differentiate a successful city (Houston) to a city that has more problems than positives (Detroit). The existence of wealthy residents has nothing to do with a city's economic viability.
Secondly, I'd like to know where you got your Philly as 5th biggest metro area? I'm positive Austin, Houston, Las Vegas, Dallas, San Diego, Chicago, LA, NYC
are all bigger both in population and physical size.
1) Greater New York
2) Greater Los Angeles
3) Chicago Metro/Chicagoland
4) Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex 5) Delaware Valley (Philadelphia)
6) Greater Houston
7) South Florida Metro (Miami)
8) Washington Metro/National Capital Area
9) Metro Atlanta
10) Metro Detroit
First of all, all cities have bad areas. Its the proportion of safe/economically diverse/stable communities within a metro area that differentiate a successful city (Houston) to a city that has more problems than positives (Detroit). The existence of wealthy residents has nothing to do with a city's economic viability.
Secondly, I'd like to know where you got your Philly as 5th biggest metro area? I'm positive Austin, Houston, Las Vegas, Dallas, San Diego, Chicago, LA, NYC
are all bigger both in population and physical size.
1.) I never made any claim about wealthy residents as compared to economic vitality. Again, the Philadelphia city core certainly has a high crime rate, but the metro area's crime rate and economic vitality is definitely on par with any other of comparable size.
2.) Completely incorrect. Philadelphia has a city population (note, I'm not speaking of land area) of 1.45 million (2006 Census Estimate), making it the 6th largest city in the US behind Phoenix. That is well ahead of Austin and Las Vegas, both with well under a million residents. Also, as noted above, I was speaking in terms of metropolitan area, which is a measurement of the city core and the surrounding suburban areas.
Size of metro alone doesn't mean that a city is important. I'm not saying Philly isn't important, but just because it has more people does not mean it is more important. Its just older. Starting to show its age.And has more crime. Seeing as how it has more people and more crime, means it has more criminals. Take the criminals out of both cities and their metros might be similar. ;D
Funny.
Seriously though, I wasn't just referring to the metropolitan population, but the economic vitality that defines the area. In ranking metropolitan economies, Philadelphia is 9th in the nation ($312 billion), whereas Seattle ranks 12th ($201 billion) (Source, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Sept. 2007).
1) Greater New York
2) Greater Los Angeles
3) Chicago Metro/Chicagoland
4) Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex 5) Delaware Valley (Philadelphia)
6) Greater Houston
7) South Florida Metro (Miami)
8) Washington Metro/National Capital Area
9) Metro Atlanta
10) Metro Detroit
He did say metropolitan area.[/quote]
I'm shocked! Honestly.
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.
But all cities have something to offer to everyone
Boston and Philly, among other Northeast cities contain some of the best living in the country. The west coast only really became vibrant and 'rich' about fifty years ago. The Northeast has about 400 years on that.
