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.
Both cities are really big. The greater Los Angeles population has 19 million people. However, the greater Tokyo population has 39 million people. That is more than double. Los Angeles is very over crowded, but Tokyo is a lot worse. I was in Tokyo on the train, people are packed in like sardines. Go to downtown LA and it is very crowded but downtown Tokyo is a lot worse. So Tokyo takes the win here.
I wonder how many people have actually been to Tokyo. What I like a lot about NYC and Tokyo sprawl is that it's urban sprawl whereas LA is suburban sprawl. NYC has the likes of Jersey City, Hoboken, etc. which are extremely urban and Hudson County probably could have been the 6th borough if it were part of NY and not NJ.
What's more sprawly? Tokyo just wins because the country is so ridiculously urban. Yokohama and Saitama could be constrewed as bedroom communities of Tokyo and they're both over a million in populace, Yokohama over 3 million. You could be in a different MSA and commute to Tokyo Center, Shinagawa, Shinjuku, Shibuya, Nippori, etc. like a few of my friends. It's pretty ridiculous.
New York doesn't really have urban sprawl. IT covers a larger are than LA and Tokyo and is less dense than LA. That is because for every Hoboken their is 25 square miles with 50,000 people of suburbia.
Both cities are really big. The greater Los Angeles population has 19 million people. However, the greater Tokyo population has 39 million people. That is more than double. Los Angeles is very over crowded, but Tokyo is a lot worse. I was in Tokyo on the train, people are packed in like sardines. Go to downtown LA and it is very crowded but downtown Tokyo is a lot worse. So Tokyo takes the win here.
except this thread is not about which has more people or which is more crowded. So I don't know how your comment is even relevant.
The question is not about which has more people, or which city spreads farther. It is about how large are the bedroom suburban communities (with nothing except miles and miles residential homes: no good jobs, no real entertainment etc) in proportion to the actual self-sufficient urban part of the city.
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.
