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 01-01-2009, 07:00 PM
 
Location: Houston Texas
2,898 posts, read 2,878,433 times
Reputation: 877

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by coldwine View Post
Can we please sell Texas back to whoever we bought it from/fought for it?
People would think your posts were credible regarding Texas if A) they were not filled with hate and bitterness B) if you ever stated a fact rather than rely on 50 yr old misconceptions and C) if you ever showed an inkling of making sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-01-2009, 07:01 PM
 
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,301 posts, read 12,217,259 times
Reputation: 8054
I suppose "nonwhite" is the kind of diversity the OP is talking about ..... I actually like white people, so that's not important to me.

"Cosmopolitan" interests me more ..... I don't know Houston, but while LA is very cosmopolitan I wouldn't put it at the top of the list ..... it's too spread out, the various communities are somewhat insular and don't really interact the way they are forced to do in more densely populated cities.

NYC, DC, Chicago, San Francisco, and Boston would probably be at the top of my cosmopolitan list, in no particular order.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2009, 07:05 PM
 
Location: Houston Texas
2,898 posts, read 2,878,433 times
Reputation: 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof View Post
I suppose "nonwhite" is the kind of diversity the OP is talking about ..... I actually like white people, so that's not important to me.

"Cosmopolitan" interests me more ..... I don't know Houston, but while LA is very cosmopolitan I wouldn't put it at the top of the list ..... it's too spread out, the various communities are somewhat insular and don't really interact the way they are forced to do in more densely populated cities.

NYC, DC, Chicago, San Francisco, and Boston would probably be at the top of my cosmopolitan list, in no particular order.
Substitute Los Angeles for San Fran and Houston for Boston (yes I have been to Boston and SF many times) and your list works
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2009, 07:35 PM
 
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,301 posts, read 12,217,259 times
Reputation: 8054
I think of "cosmopolitan" more in terms of having many sophisticated cultures interacting with each other, Sweetclimber .... for example most Europeans are white, but have many very interesting and sophisticated cultures.

LA seems to me more about ostentatiously rich people being served by a variety of impoverished thirdworld immigrants than is San Francisco, which seems more highly and widely educated, and which interacts more freely between cultures.

Just take restaurants for an example - LA has many very fine Mexican restaurants, some Asian joints, and then a smattering of other types if you know where to look - San Francisco has a lot of every conceivable kind of restaurant and bistro mostly within walking distance of wherever you are in the city, including all international cuisines and various creative fusion types of cooking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2009, 07:55 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
18,633 posts, read 27,060,365 times
Reputation: 9577
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweetclimber View Post
This can't be valid. If you take Boston and it's surrounding county (Middlesex) you would have a population of 2 million in about 800 sq miles. Same with a number of those other cities. That other guy just picked random census tracts to come up with those numbers. You have to take the land immediately aroung the city itself to come up with a Houston type example. detroit is another city here that proves that poster wrong. Wayne county which incldes detroit is 614 sq miles and is only 1.9 million.
That's actually what he did. He took the land immediately around the city center and based it off of current tracts and current density of those tracts. Keep in mind that this was as of 2000 and Detroit has lost population since than and more people have moved even more out from Detroit in these 9 years.

Here's another part of his post.
Quote:
The next step is to determine what the theoretical 600 sq. mi. population is. The reason is I need a base density to apply to a map. I add up the densest census tracts until they reach an area of about 600 sq. mi. In Salt Lake's case, the theoretical 600 sq. mi. city comprises 335 census tracts, of which the lowest tract has a density of just over 420 pps
Here is Houston at it's current boundaries.

Now here is Detroit if it was the size of Houston.


Here is something else for you to consider. If Houston and Dallas was the size of Atlanta which is 132 square miles, this is what the population could be. (Remember, this is based off of the 2000 census).

Houston 583668
Dallas 518216
Atlanta 416559
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2009, 07:57 PM
 
Location: Houston Texas
2,898 posts, read 2,878,433 times
Reputation: 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spade View Post
That's actually what he did. He took the land immediately around the city center and based it off of current tracts and current density of those tracts. Keep in mind that this was as of 2000 and Detroit has lost population since than and more people have moved even more out from Detroit in these 9 years.

Here's another part of his post.


Here is Houston at it's current boundaries.

Now here is Detroit if it was the size of Houston.


Here is something else for you to consider. If Houston and Dallas was the size of Atlanta which is 132 square miles, this is what the population could be. (Remember, this is based off of the 2000 census).

Houston 583668
Dallas 518216
Atlanta 416559
Gotcha, the way I thought at first was a little fuzzy but I see what you are getting at.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2009, 08:34 PM
 
Location: from houstoner to bostoner to new yorker to new jerseyite ;)
4,085 posts, read 11,453,292 times
Reputation: 1942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof View Post
I think of "cosmopolitan" more in terms of having many sophisticated cultures interacting with each other, Sweetclimber .... for example most Europeans are white, but have many very interesting and sophisticated cultures.

LA seems to me more about ostentatiously rich people being served by a variety of impoverished thirdworld immigrants than is San Francisco, which seems more highly and widely educated, and which interacts more freely between cultures.

Just take restaurants for an example - LA has many very fine Mexican restaurants, some Asian joints, and then a smattering of other types if you know where to look - San Francisco has a lot of every conceivable kind of restaurant and bistro mostly within walking distance of wherever you are in the city, including all international cuisines and various creative fusion types of cooking.
That's the best explanation I've heard so far on the difference between the two. Makes some sense. So cosmo seems to have more to do with walkability allowing for increased human interaction? I think in some cases this can be substituted for in other ways in a sprawling city, such as having lots of public space where people of all backgrounds can come together, but I understand what you're saying.

But then again, is the difference one of perception rather than reality? Because as a visitor it may be harder to see that cosmo aspect of L.A., but easy to see if you live there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2009, 12:14 AM
 
3,596 posts, read 7,706,431 times
Reputation: 2878
Default whoncares?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweetclimber View Post
People would think your posts were credible regarding Texas if A) they were not filled with hate and bitterness B) if you ever stated a fact rather than rely on 50 yr old misconceptions and C) if you ever showed an inkling of making sense.
Darling, perhaps no one clued you in, but this is a message board.

I understand what you are attempting, but if you believe that there is any importance whatsoever to posting online that I grant it for even one moment enough gravity to pull a paperweight... well. Short of saying something horrendous, I'm at a loss to point out the futility of informing you that the other side of credibility is being someone important enough to grant it.

Do you need me to point out where your place is? Or is it suffucient to say, south of the I80?

Last edited by coldwine; 01-02-2009 at 12:18 AM.. Reason: because I wanted to edit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2009, 04:39 AM
 
Location: Houston Texas
2,898 posts, read 2,878,433 times
Reputation: 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldwine View Post
Darling, perhaps no one clued you in, but this is a message board.

I understand what you are attempting, but if you believe that there is any importance whatsoever to posting online that I grant it for even one moment enough gravity to pull a paperweight... well. Short of saying something horrendous, I'm at a loss to point out the futility of informing you that the other side of credibility is being someone important enough to grant it.

Do you need me to point out where your place is? Or is it suffucient to say, south of the I80?
Fortunately, your ignorant comments are not even close to represetative of the nice city of Chicago

So, according to you places south of I 80 are bad huh? So from this we can deduce that places North of I 80 are great. So Flint, Gary, Springfield MA, Newark, E Cleveland, Racine WI are wonderful places because they are North of I 80 and places like Santa monica, La Jolla, River Oaks, Palo Alto, San Jose, Malibu, Laguna Beach, Buckhead, Ft Lauderdale, Key West etc must suck because they are South of I 80? Wow, I think that you are definitely a person with a sense of humor that is for sure!!! I guess everyone must have a redeeing quality. America thanks you for a good laugh!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2009, 04:42 AM
 
938 posts, read 3,667,301 times
Reputation: 768
OP: get a life.

Oh, and LA IS diverse. Why? Because it has large populations of :

Africans
Afro-Caribbeans
African Americans
Armenians
Belizeans
Brazilians
Cambodians
Central Americans (Salvadorans, Hondurans, Guatemalans and Nicaraguans)
Chinese
Eastern Europeans
Ethiopians
Western European expats
Filipinos
Indians
Japanese
Jews
Persian Jews
Koreans
Mexicans
Russians/Ukrainians
Samoans/Polynesians
Thai
Vietnamese
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.
Similar Threads
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