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.
The problem with the MSA for Los Angeles is that LA and San Bernardino actually ARE continuously urbanized. There is no pause in the development between those MSAs. So if you want to get a "true" picture of the LA region's population, 12 million is a serious understatement.
Location: Concrete jungle where dreams are made of.
8,900 posts, read 15,939,050 times
Reputation: 1819
I think the NYC region should really only be in NY state. NJ and CT have their own cities which are closer than NYC. I'm going to get so much beef for this, but it's just how I feel.
I think the NYC region should really only be in NY state. NJ and CT have their own cities which are closer than NYC. I'm going to get so much beef for this, but it's just how I feel.
No, I agree with you.
I think Newark and the cities in Connecticut are their own cities and not part of New York City.
St. Louis
Atlanta
Kansas City
Houston
and a lot of the metro areas out west/SW.
They just simply cover too much land area IMO, and can make comparisons between areas a lot less accurate. They should factor in other things more than just mainly commuting patterns.
Are you kidding me? Cleveland's metro area covers roughly the same amount of land area at least if you include Akron and Canton. I also remember either you or somebody else from Cleveland arguing that Youngstown should also be included as part of Cleveland...that's over 60 miles from Cleveland and there is a lot of land area in between. Youngstown, OHio is to Cleveland as Rockford, Illinois is to Chicago..they are close, but not quite close enough to be one city. I have driven that stretch of Interstate 80...there is a lot of country between those cities. St. Louis' metro area I think is accurate because the parts it includes are no more than 40 miles away from it...the boundaries extend only to the areas where there is still a decent amount of urban sprawl, even in Illinois.
Are you kidding me? Cleveland's metro area covers roughly the same amount of land area at least if you include Akron and Canton. I also remember either you or somebody else from Cleveland arguing that Youngstown should also be included as part of Cleveland...that's over 60 miles from Cleveland and there is a lot of land area in between. Youngstown, OHio is to Cleveland as Rockford, Illinois is to Chicago..they are close, but not quite close enough to be one city. I have driven that stretch of Interstate 80...there is a lot of country between those cities. St. Louis' metro area I think is accurate because the parts it includes are no more than 40 miles away from it...the boundaries extend only to the areas where there is still a decent amount of urban sprawl, even in Illinois.
No, Clevelands immediate metro only covers 2,000 sq miles, one of the smallest on the list. The metro doesnt even include Akron which I think is ridiculous since Cuyahoga (Clevelands county) and Summit (Akrons county) are bordering counties. St. Louis metro covers 8,650 sq miles which is incredibly overextended. Thats over 4 times the size as Clevelands metro. Thats about the size as the entire NE Ohio. St. Louis metro has 2.8 million people, and if Cleveland covered that much area it would have roughly 5.2 million people. Look at this map of the metros and locate Cleveland and St. Louis and you will see what I mean: File:Core Based Statistical Areas.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The time your talking about with Youngstown, I was only saying that because some idiot said that Rochester should be included in Buffalos metro which didnt make sense at all. So I added that if Rochester was added to Buffalo, Youngstown should be added to Cleveland since Youngstown is closer and much more connected to Cleveland than Rochester is to Buffalo. I wasnt saying it should actually be added.
I think Newark and the cities in Connecticut are their own cities and not part of New York City.
Who said they were a part of NYC???
Has your close mindedness affected your reasoning???
This a case of when "keeping it real goes wrong".
You have to love dudes from NY like this (or Rachel at least). They are so self absorbed they can't see the forest from the trees.
NJ is not clamoring for your acceptance, but the reality is what it is.
If you don't think someone living 1/2 a mile from Manhattan on the Jersey side is not part of the NY "METRO", than you have let your inflated self perception get in the way of reality.
North Jersey & NYC are symbiotic in more ways than one could type.
In reality San Francisco isn't so low as some of these lists make it look. The Bay Area is a continuously developed region of 7.2 million people that's economically and culturally connected, and that shares the same public transportation, radio and TV stations...yet the census insists on splitting it up into arbitrary pieces. For example, the San Jose and San Francisco-Oakland MSA's are divided in the middle of continuous urban development that has a population density higher than 1,000 people per square mile...it's like they just drew a line there on a map and said, "OK! That's where we'll divide them up!"
When it comes to the Bay Area, metro and urban area populations don't really mean much. The CSA population of 7.2 million, on the other hand, reflects the reality of how the Bay Area operates and how residents view the region (as one, not many).
Who said they were a part of NYC???
Has your close mindedness affected your reasoning???
This a case of when "keeping it real goes wrong".
You have to love dudes from NY like this (or Rachel at least). They are so self absorbed they can't see the forest from the trees.
NJ is not clamoring for your acceptance, but the reality is what it is.
If you don't think someone living 1/2 a mile from Manhattan on the Jersey side is not part of the NY "METRO", than you have let your inflated self perception get in the way of reality.
North Jersey & NYC are symbiotic in more ways than one could type.
This is actually wrong Racine is considered to be apart of Milwaukee's MSA and i dont know why wiki or other sources say that is its own area. Milwaukee suburbs flow right into it and they get the pop wrong also its 2million now. not your fault just the stats makers that dont live in milwaukee. Maybe thats the next thread which msa's or cmsa's are wrong or too small.
Location: Concrete jungle where dreams are made of.
8,900 posts, read 15,939,050 times
Reputation: 1819
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nafster
Wow
Calm down there buddy. It's just my opinion.
Don't worry, they're your typical person from NJ. There's a reason why so many people from NJ post on the NYC forum and say it should be the 6th borough. It another state and has its own cities, but they fail to realize that and want to be part of NY.
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.
