Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Houston
 [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)
 
Old 01-10-2011, 09:44 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,495 posts, read 32,943,565 times
Reputation: 7752

Advertisements

we can also use Chicago as an example even though it was growing in reverse for 50 years:


metro:
2009 9,580,567
2000- 9,098,316
1990- 8,065,633
1980-7,869,542
1970-7,612,314
1960-6,794,461
1950- 5,495,364

City
1950 3,620,962
1960 3,550,404
1970 3,366,957
1980 3,005,072
1990 2,783,726
2000 2,896,016
2010 2,900,000

In 1950 the city of Chicago had 3.6M people- 1.3M more than the city of Houston, and their metro was only 5.4M. so like I said before, our metro is great for our size

 
Old 01-10-2011, 09:45 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,495 posts, read 32,943,565 times
Reputation: 7752
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmberAzeneth View Post
Going by those correct and authentic stats, you are also a statistical Atm like DANNYY HtownLove, then Houston is on a steady pace like L.A. to reach those numbers. So I guess we should say, "Patience my boy A&M, patience. Some say it is a virtue." But I do like A&M's line of thought here though. The bigger, the denser, the better.

I stole the numbers from Wikipedia
 
Old 01-10-2011, 09:46 PM
 
12,735 posts, read 21,774,364 times
Reputation: 3774
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmberAzeneth View Post
A&M, HtownLove is right. I am thinking that you, A&M, think Houston is maybe a little underpopulated for it's size. But like HtownLove said, if the current growth trends prevail, then in about 15 years Houston will be around 2,800,000-3,000,000 city with a metro of 7,500,000-8,000,000. Now that ain't to shabby is it?!
That's what I'm trying to say.
 
Old 01-10-2011, 09:50 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,495 posts, read 32,943,565 times
Reputation: 7752
Quote:
Originally Posted by A&M Bulldawg View Post
That's what I'm trying to say.
it is??? I thought you asked why it did not have 9M people in the metro when the city had 2M people??
 
Old 01-10-2011, 09:53 PM
 
12,735 posts, read 21,774,364 times
Reputation: 3774
Amber knew what I was saying.
 
Old 01-10-2011, 10:05 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,495 posts, read 32,943,565 times
Reputation: 7752
Quote:
Originally Posted by A&M Bulldawg View Post
Amber knew what I was saying.
do you still think Houston is underpoulated for its size?

there are only 5 million cities that have hit 2M, do you want me to post their metros?

the 5 are
NY
Chicago
Philly
LA
Houston

From those only NY, LA, and Chicago got to the 8-9M range.

The other two (Houston and Philly) both have metros of 6M people.

Detroit came really close to having 2M people in 1950, and even then their metro was 3.2M and their CSA was 3.7M
 
Old 01-10-2011, 10:18 PM
 
Location: Texas
1,339 posts, read 2,602,739 times
Reputation: 2370
Quote:
Originally Posted by A&M Bulldawg View Post
I know you guys may not know and this may be a crazy question: Why isn't Houston's metro more than 6 million (at least 8-9million) since the city has a population of 2 million?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmberAzeneth View Post
A&M, HtownLove is right. I am thinking that you, A&M, think Houston is maybe a little underpopulated for it's size. But like HtownLove said, if the current growth trends prevail, then in about 15 years Houston will be around 2,800,000-3,000,000 city with a metro of 7,500,000-8,000,000. Now that ain't to shabby is it?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by A&M Bulldawg View Post
That's what I'm trying to say.
Winner,winner,winner.....what is my prize?

Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove View Post
it is??? I thought you asked why it did not have 9M people in the metro when the city had 2M people??
He did!!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by A&M Bulldawg View Post
Amber knew what I was saying.

It was an educated, speculative, presumptous, guesstimation on my part. Sorry. I will try and not let that happen again. LOL!! For once, A&M, I kind of read you pretty clear with a little thought working on my side. But sometimes you can throw me a curveball and make my head work a little harder than it needs to figure out your posts. Just not this time!
 
Old 01-10-2011, 10:20 PM
 
12,735 posts, read 21,774,364 times
Reputation: 3774
LOL! I'm sorry!
 
Old 01-10-2011, 10:23 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,495 posts, read 32,943,565 times
Reputation: 7752
another thing A&M should look at is the natural increase of Houston metro. even if migration slows, we will still be coasting to 8M in about 30 years
 
Old 01-10-2011, 10:31 PM
 
12,735 posts, read 21,774,364 times
Reputation: 3774
Are you sure????
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.


Closed Thread


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


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 > Texas > Houston

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:45 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top