Ohio, better or worse with no true major city? (Columbus: houses, universities)

[cbusflyer]

I know this will spark some heated debate but here it goes. Ohio is an oddball state. I have been trying to find another state that has the population and history comparable to Ohio that has no major city in modern times. North Carolina was the only state that I could come up with, that is slightly similar to Ohio. All other top 10 states based on population, have a major dominating city.

Obviously we can't change history but do you think not having a dominant city has hurt Ohio in the long run vs three comparable medium size cities? Ohio has no true airline hubs anymore vs the other top ten states. Other top ten states have a city that draws tourists beyond what Ohio can draw. I don't know if there is a right answer but Ohio seems stuck in a weird place that it is a top 10 state but nothing about it stands out to the outside world.

[Natural510]

I don’t think so. Outside of Chicago, there aren’t any large Midwestern cities that are a national draw anyway. Detroit and the Twin Cities have their big 4 sports teams and major corporations but I don’t see what they bring otherwise compared to Ohios smaller cities. Also, one could argue Detroit has been an anchor since the fortunes of the state come and go with that of the city & industry. Ohio has three mid-major cities that have all had varying fortunes over the years, which has benefited the state, and people have a choice over which one they’d like to live for their chosen opportunities or lifestyle preferences.

[spruce_enjoyer]

Texas is on the same boat with there being multiple major cities with neither dominating the state, and they're thriving down there.

[cbusflyer]

Originally Posted by Natural510

I don’t think so. Outside of Chicago, there aren’t any large Midwestern cities that are a national draw anyway. Detroit and the Twin Cities have their big 4 sports teams and major corporations but I don’t see what they bring otherwise compared to Ohios smaller cities. Also, one could argue Detroit has been an anchor since the fortunes of the state come and go with that of the city & industry. Ohio has three mid-major cities that have all had varying fortunes over the years, which has benefited the state, and people have a choice over which one they’d like to live for their chosen opportunities or lifestyle preferences.

True, it is nice that people can choose between metros within one state. That is one nice thing we have going for us.

I guess I was thinking that a combined 3C would be a roughly 6.3 million metro and an even higher CSA. That would place it in the same tier as Washington DC and Philadelphia.

Ohio to me seems out place for being the 7th largest state by population yet the population is so spread out between metros, that it misses out on the benefits of having a single large Metro in the state. Other states with a single dominant metro, have a more robust airline hub network, public transportation and identity.

Again not able to rewrite history but just thought it would be interesting to see people's thoughts on whether Ohio would've been better or worse if it had a single large metro.

[kyle19125]

OP if anything a dominant major city is a detriment to the state in terms of potential over-representation in state politics and higher funding, as well as overshadowing tourism in the remainder of the state. NYC in NY State is a great example.

[cbusflyer]

Originally Posted by spruce_enjoyer

Texas is on the same boat with there being multiple major cities with neither dominating the state, and they're thriving down there.

True but Dallas and Houston are Major cities. I feel like there is a population point where a metro is large enough to support things like airline hubs, and public transportation, infrastructure ect. Ohio seems to have to spread all its resources around to the 3C's which in a way hurts Ohio.

[sheena12]

Originally Posted by cbusflyer

I know this will spark some heated debate but here it goes. Ohio is an oddball state. I have been trying to find another state that has the population and history comparable to Ohio that has no major city in modern times. North Carolina was the only state that I could come up with, that is slightly similar to Ohio. All other top 10 states based on population, have a major dominating city.

Obviously we can't change history but do you think not having a dominant city has hurt Ohio in the long run vs three comparable medium size cities? Ohio has no true airline hubs anymore vs the other top ten states. Other top ten states have a city that draws tourists beyond what Ohio can draw. I don't know if there is a right answer but Ohio seems stuck in a weird place that it is a top 10 state but nothing about it stands out to the outside world.

How about Pennsylvania? Closer to home, PA has Philadelphia and Pittsburgh? Also, a background much more similar to Ohio that North Carolina.

Until recently, North Carolina wasn't even on the radar as a place to live - or visit. The building explosion caused by Northerners demanding new builds and not being able to afford them, has put NC on the map, for some. For example, Charlotte isn't a city to me at all. It's a sprawling conglomerate of oversized houses and one subdivision after another. I do not see the draw.

What is Connecticut's dominating city? Hartford? Bridgeport? Stamford? Really none.

Since I am originally from the East Coast, I can tell you where people I know like to visit when they are in Ohio - Cleveland. No, not Cincinatti or Columbus. Northeastern Ohio. The Lake, the culture and arts, the rolling hills of northeast Ohio, are very inviting to tourists, as is the great food scene and historic Rock and Roll culture.

Many people first visit Ohio because they are interested in Nationally ranked colleges and universities. I have friends who attended Case Western Reserve, Hiram, Oberlin, Antioch and Kenyon.

[cbusflyer]

Originally Posted by sheena12

How about Pennsylvania? Closer to home, PA has Philadelphia and Pittsburgh? Also, a background much more similar to Ohio that North Carolina.

Until recently, North Carolina wasn't even on the radar as a place to live - or visit. The building explosion caused by Northerners demanding new builds and not being able to afford them, has put NC on the map, for some. For example, Charlotte isn't a city to me at all. It's a sprawling conglomerate of oversized houses and one subdivision after another. I do not see the draw.

What is Connecticut's dominating city? Hartford? Bridgeport? Stamford? Really none.

Since I am originally from the East Coast, I can tell you where people I know like to visit when they are in Ohio - Cleveland. No, not Cincinatti or Columbus. Northeastern Ohio. The Lake, the culture and arts, the rolling hills of northeast Ohio, are very inviting to tourists, as is the great food scene and historic Rock and Roll culture.

Many people first visit Ohio because they are interested in Nationally ranked colleges and universities. I have friends who attended Case Western Reserve, Hiram, Oberlin, Antioch and Kenyon.

Philadelphia comes immediately to mind for Pennsylvania. I was really just comparing the top 10 states based on population. North Carolina seems to be the only top 10 state similar to Ohio.

[JR_C]

Personally, I think Ohio's past greatness was because of its multiple cities. (all of them, not just the biggest) No one was too far away from a population center to take their first step to changing the world. (yes, that sounds like rhetoric, sorry ) The Wright brothers started out in Dayton. The Warner brothers started out in Youngstown. Alan Freed became famous in Cleveland but got his start in Youngstown and Akron, etc.

Sorry to get political, but if Ohio isn't exactly thriving today, I think it's because the state has slowly gone Republican. And, the policies of today's Republican party typically don't support cities. Speaking very generally, because I'm sure there are exceptions, if our cities are successful, it's despite a lack of help from the state. (Columbus being an outlier as the state capital)

[Matt Marcinkiewicz]

Originally Posted by kyle19125

OP if anything a dominant major city is a detriment to the state in terms of potential over-representation in state politics and higher funding, as well as overshadowing tourism in the remainder of the state. NYC in NY State is a great example.

NYC subsidizes the much poorer remainder of the state. Ask me how I know. Republican Upstaters who sometimes go as far as to call for Upstate's creation of a separate state have little appreciation for NYS' budgetary realities. As it happens, all throughout my life (well, past a certain age, anyway), I've compared Upstate NY with Ohio