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 12-25-2008, 08:06 AM
 
Location: metro ATL
8,190 posts, read 12,335,461 times
Reputation: 2698

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidyankee764 View Post
I wouldn't say "never" but I hope never is the truth. Rapid growth is not a good thing - it strains infrastructure.
See: early 20th century for Northern cities.

Quote:
Look at the ridiculous traffic and poor performing schools in those areas.
Up North or down South?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-25-2008, 08:16 AM
hsw
 
2,144 posts, read 6,352,716 times
Reputation: 1518
Population growth (or being a massive population center) means very little

Some 3rdWorld countries have 1Bn+ each....but most humans are economic and/or intellectual lightweights....

Real question is economic power....median incomes, median net worth, productivity per capita, valuable cos. based in region, concentration of centimillionaires, etc etc

Perhaps a better leading socio-economic indicator is where grads (esp top 10% of class in "real" majors) of nation's top 5-10 colleges choose to settle immediately post-grad...and where are they choosing to remain 5-10-20yrs post-grad

Lots of populous regions like FL/NV/AZ have dismal socio-economics, w/economies based upon low-skill stuff like tourism, nursing homes, retail, call-center jobs, etc etc
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2008, 08:19 AM
 
Location: Coastal Northeast
16,738 posts, read 23,177,771 times
Reputation: 5847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akhenaton06 View Post
See: early 20th century for Northern cities.



Up North or down South?
Down south. I frequently travel to Charlotte and I can't believe the gridlock there during rush hour! Atlanta, Phoenix, parts of Florida - eek. They just keep widening highways in those areas it seems, without giving a thought to a better mass transit network. I guess that's another thread though.

As I said, we have enough traffic here as it is, I can't imagine what it would be like if CT had a population boom. As I said before, it's strictly controlled here due to environmental concerns as well as concerns regarding infrastructure and education.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2008, 08:20 AM
 
Location: Coastal Northeast
16,738 posts, read 23,177,771 times
Reputation: 5847
Quote:
Originally Posted by hsw View Post
Population growth (or being a massive population center) means very little

Some 3rdWorld countries have 1Bn+ each....but most humans are economic and/or intellectual lightweights....

Real question is economic power....median incomes, median net worth, productivity per capita, valuable cos. based in region, concentration of centimillionaires, etc etc

Perhaps a better leading socio-economic indicator is where grads (esp top 10% of class in "real" majors) of nation's top 5-10 colleges choose to settle immediately post-grad...and where are they choosing to remain 5-10-20yrs post-grad

Lots of populous regions like FL/NV/AZ have dismal socio-economics, w/economies based upon low-skill stuff like tourism, nursing homes, retail, call-center jobs, etc etc
Hey for once, we agree!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2008, 08:24 AM
 
Location: metro ATL
8,190 posts, read 12,335,461 times
Reputation: 2698
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidyankee764 View Post
Down south. I frequently travel to Charlotte and I can't believe the gridlock there during rush hour! Atlanta, Phoenix, parts of Florida - eek. They just keep widening highways in those areas it seems, without giving a thought to a better mass transit network. I guess that's another thread though.
Rush hour traffic here in Charlotte is no walk in the park (I only live 2 miles from my job, so I don't have to deal with it), but cities like NYC, Chicago, Boston, etc. typically rank as cities with some of the worst traffic in America as well. We do have light rail here (first leg opened roughly a year ago), and plans are underway for expansion. I know Atlanta has plans to expand its transit network as well with the Beltline project. I think Phoenix has a light rail line under construction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2008, 08:29 AM
 
Location: Coastal Northeast
16,738 posts, read 23,177,771 times
Reputation: 5847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akhenaton06 View Post
Rush hour traffic here in Charlotte is no walk in the park (I only live 2 miles from my job, so I don't have to deal with it), but cities like NYC, Chicago, Boston, etc. typically rank as cities with some of the worst traffic in America as well. We do have light rail here (first leg opened roughly a year ago), and plans are underway for expansion. I know Atlanta has plans to expand its transit network as well with the Beltline project. I think Phoenix has a light rail line under construction.
You're kidding, right? I live outside of NYC and commuted there for an internship/job from '01-'03. I lived 40 miles outside of Manhattan in Connecticut, and it took me about 50 minutes to get there during rush hour. It wasn't bad until the bridge, which was stop and go.

When I visited Charlotte (I was a long-term stay for quite awhile multiple times in the University area) it sometimes took me over an hour to go THREE miles to work. No lie, no exaggeration.

Traffic up here can't even compare to Charlotte and Atlanta, simply because so many of the area residents use mass transit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2008, 08:53 AM
 
Location: metro ATL
8,190 posts, read 12,335,461 times
Reputation: 2698
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidyankee764 View Post
You're kidding, right? I live outside of NYC and commuted there for an internship/job from '01-'03. I lived 40 miles outside of Manhattan in Connecticut, and it took me about 50 minutes to get there during rush hour. It wasn't bad until the bridge, which was stop and go.

When I visited Charlotte (I was a long-term stay for quite awhile multiple times in the University area) it sometimes took me over an hour to go THREE miles to work. No lie, no exaggeration.

Traffic up here can't even compare to Charlotte and Atlanta, simply because so many of the area residents use mass transit.
Don't take my word for it:

Quote:
Top 10 Cities With The Worst Traffic:

1. Washington D.C.
2. Atlanta, GA
3. Los Angeles, CA
4. San Francisco, CA
5. Houston, TX
6. New York, NY
7. Riverside – San Bernardino, CA
8. Chicago, IL
9. Dallas, TX
10. Boston, MA
Source

It's a pretty well-known fact that large cities with extensive mass transit networks also have bad traffic.

As far as Charlotte, Charlotte's traffic doesn't come remotely close to NYC's simply due to the sheer size difference. The number of people who commute by car in metro NYC is probably more than the number of people who reside in the entire Charlotte metro area. And yes, University City is a sprawled hellhole. Area residents have no qualms about saying so. But to use an example somewhat comparable to yours, when I used to live in Rock Hill, SC, my job in Charlotte was 20 miles away, and it took me 25-30 minutes to get there during morning rush hour traffic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2008, 08:54 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,056 posts, read 30,540,265 times
Reputation: 10490
Well, if USAToday says so, then it must be a fact carved in stone, and there's nothing to debate. [Sarcasm alert!]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2008, 09:27 AM
 
Location: Coastal Northeast
16,738 posts, read 23,177,771 times
Reputation: 5847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akhenaton06 View Post
Don't take my word for it:



Source

It's a pretty well-known fact that large cities with extensive mass transit networks also have bad traffic.

As far as Charlotte, Charlotte's traffic doesn't come remotely close to NYC's simply due to the sheer size difference. The number of people who commute by car in metro NYC is probably more than the number of people who reside in the entire Charlotte metro area. And yes, University City is a sprawled hellhole. Area residents have no qualms about saying so. But to use an example somewhat comparable to yours, when I used to live in Rock Hill, SC, my job in Charlotte was 20 miles away, and it took me 25-30 minutes to get there during morning rush hour traffic.
The number of those who commute by car is probably higher, but not by much. The vast majority of NYC commuters from CT/NJ take mass transit. There are also many more roads/highways/interstates that wind through the city. In Charlotte, there are only a few highways that EVERYONE takes. Also we must look at the percentage, not the number.

The claim that it took you 25-30 minutes from SC doesn't change the fact that it took me an hour to go a few miles in U City on a daily basis.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2008, 10:03 AM
 
7,848 posts, read 18,276,935 times
Reputation: 2784
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidyankee764 View Post
You're kidding, right? I live outside of NYC and commuted there for an internship/job from '01-'03. I lived 40 miles outside of Manhattan in Connecticut, and it took me about 50 minutes to get there during rush hour. It wasn't bad until the bridge, which was stop and go.

When I visited Charlotte (I was a long-term stay for quite awhile multiple times in the University area) it sometimes took me over an hour to go THREE miles to work. No lie, no exaggeration.

Traffic up here can't even compare to Charlotte and Atlanta, simply because so many of the area residents use mass transit.
The only way it would take someone an hour to go 3 miles is if there is an accident with multiple lanes blocked. It doesn't take that kind of time anywhere to go 3 miles...I think someone is exaggerating to make a point. Connecticut has population controls to keep a boom from happening? Give me a break...why would they be needed? No city or state keeps people out...growth is prosperity, and any city or state would welcome growth.

The NYC subway handles 7 million riders/day. I have to assume that there are MANY more commuters than that, which would mean that a large number of people in NYC use the subway to and from work, but not an overwhelming majority.

The secret is out...adding lanes doesn't improve traffic flow. They are not still "widening highways in those areas it seems, without giving a thought to a better mass transit network". There have been transit improvements all over the U.S., with plans for many more.
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