U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
 [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 02-27-2021, 04:41 PM
 
Location: Australia
1,973 posts, read 843,793 times
Reputation: 3841

Advertisements

Boundaries can be quite arbitrary, as outlined previously.

This was driven home to us with Covid rules. Our northern state of Queensland closed the state to residents of “Greater Sydney” which normally has a population of around 5 million people. But the definition they used was one including the nearby cities of Newcastle, Wollongong and other areas, which added about another million people to the ban. And also created a fair bit of confusion.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-28-2021, 01:08 AM
 
Location: Alexandria, Commonwealth of Virginia
2,216 posts, read 1,595,330 times
Reputation: 3015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
Greater London is what constitutes the boundaries of London, and it covers 606 sq mi (1,569 km2), with a population of over 9 million people.

The City of London is one of London's two main financial districts, and covers one square mile and has a population of around 10,000 people.

NYC by contrast is 468.19 sq mi (1,212.60 km2) including land and water with a population of around 8.4 million, so London is 138 square miles larger than New York city in terms of the geographic boundaries of each city.


In terms of metro areas, I don't really put that much emphasis on them beyond a cities actual surrounding area and the ease at which people can commute or visit a city.

Some of the US metro area sizes are just laughable, indeed the NYC metropolitan statistical area is around 22 times the size of London at 13,318 sq miles (34,494 km²).

For comparison the entire country of Israel is 8,522 square miles, Belgium is 11,787 square miles, Switzerland is 15,940 square miles, the Netherlands are 16,100 sq miles and Denmark is 16,639 sq miles. Whilst Wales in the UK is 8,005 sq mi, whilst the South East of England region is 7,373 sq mi and the East Anglia region is around 7,382 sq mi
Why are you including water? Nobody lives on water. Your bias is showing.

The numbers have been posted on this thread. New York has far more people in 606 square miles than does London. Why do you ignore objective reality?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2021, 01:10 AM
 
Location: Alexandria, Commonwealth of Virginia
2,216 posts, read 1,595,330 times
Reputation: 3015
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler View Post
Like I said, that's true for city boundaries where NYC are defined to be smaller, but realistically, New York City is a larger city. When London County Council and the County of London covering what's now considered Inner London was essentially replaced by the larger Greater London we know today, the city didn't materially change. The same would be if there was a 6th borough as proposed many times for NYC or a downstate separation as a single New York entity--these don't really suddenly make NYC a larger city even if the official city boundaries have increased.
Yeah, I'm not sure what he's arguing. By his logic, Chongqing is the most populous city in the world and Sydney is the size of Rancho Cucamonga. Using city proper boundaries is the poor man's argument on City-Data. Everyone knows why it's faulty.


To repeat my post that actually included counts and area figures:

Quote:
Originally Posted by manitopiaaa View Post
New York City is 300 square miles and Greater London is 607 square miles, so this analysis would get you kicked out of grad school. Your numbers are also way off. New York is estimated at 8,336,817 in 2019. In the 2010 Census, it was 8,175,133. You gathered data from "a few other sources" but didn't go to literally the only one that counts: the Census Bureau. Why gather data from a crappy source like World PopulationReview when Census QuickFacts is right there?

If you truly wanted to compare the two, you'd see how many people live in the most central 607 square miles of New York's metropolitan area.

Doing that gets us:
  • Clifton: 85,052 (11 square miles)
  • Essex County: 798,975 (126 square miles)
  • Hudson County: 672,391 (46 square miles)
  • New York: 8,336,817 (300 square miles)
  • Passaic: 69,703 (3 square miles)
  • Paterson: 145,233 (8 square miles)
  • Union County - Summit: 534,444 (95 square miles)
  • Yonkers: 200,370 (18 square miles)
GREATER NEW YORK: 10,842,985 (607 square miles)

GREATER LONDON: 8,899,375 (607 square miles)

Shocking, Greater London's entire "lead" was simply having an arbitrary municipal boundary that capture 300 more square miles of area. New York is still larger by nearly 2 million people. And I wasn't even being selective about what was added to Greater New York. If you wanted to capture the densest 607 square miles of New York, you'd be closer to 11.5 million since you'd be adding all those super dense towns in Bergen County along the Hudson, southern Westchester County, and the Nassau townships closest to Queens.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2021, 02:49 AM
 
Location: Katy,Texas
4,836 posts, read 2,377,525 times
Reputation: 3150
I have no qualms in preferring London to New York. It’s far more integrated ethnically and is safer from a violent crime perspective you could also argue London in general is more aesthetically pleasing but that ones more subjective. London also have excellent rail compared to Greater New York. But by all objective measurements London is the smaller city. If we are talking core density no first world city can match Lower Manhattan. Central Tokyo is the closest. If we are talking physical size even without the green belt NYC is both physically bigger and has millions more people.

Brave New World, MSAs are far more valid than a Greater London population of 14 million. As someone who’s been in London more than New York. London doesn’t have the American supercommuter. MSAs only cover a large land area because they use counties rather than actual towns/cities due to State laws on towns and cities not being standardized nationwide. Their is a culture and infrastructure that supports super-commuting in not only New York but all of America. We have wider highways, with higher speed limits that penetrates the city center more (not necessarily a good thing), lower gas prices and very limited tollways when compared to London. Oxford and Cambridge while having a lot of history in connection to London have not seen growth largely because of suburban London. 95% of towns in a 60 mile radius weren’t significant till New York came around. Even without a greenbelt it’s hard to say whether Luton is actually connected to London in a suburban or satellite city relationship. Theirs nowhere within 60 miles of New York that isn’t related to the city that way. Americans culturally are willing to drive 70 miles to work, not all of them but a large enough portion for towns to form at that distance away from a major city. That culture doesn’t exist in London. Now London is definitely bigger than Greater London the political entity but it really isn’t more than 12-13 million people culturally.

Now because MSAs use counties they 100% add extra people to NYC area. You could probably shave off a decent amount of Ocean County, New Jersey and be well within your rights. But even places like Southern Fairfield County Connecticut which by all definitions is New York City, Manhattan commuting investment bankers isn’t included in the MSA last time I checked. So at best the 20.3 million is a wash or a couple hundred thousand lower.
You could also shave of significant portions of the rural areas of some of these Outer New Jersey counties and you would lose barely anyone but a majority of the land area.

Like I said it isn’t just a New York thing but it’s a Houston thing as well, you leave the Enfield area and theirs a few suburban towns until the area barely even feels connected to London and that’s only 30-40 miles out. I understand the Greenbelt has made development wonky but you don’t even see similar development patterns in places like Luton (surprisingly large amount of excess housing compared to Jobs which implies a strong commuter pattern). Places like Milton Keynes give a more suburban vibe than Luton even though it’s close to the city. Galveston on the other hand in Houston is very tied to the city not only physically but culturally as well, local culture is 100% derived from Houstonians culture even though it was a large town before development swamped it. Galveston is 50 miles away from Houston and Houston is much smaller population wise than London or NYC.

Last edited by NigerianNightmare; 02-28-2021 at 03:06 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2021, 03:05 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
16,962 posts, read 6,251,874 times
Reputation: 11020
Quote:
Originally Posted by manitopiaaa View Post
Why are you including water? Nobody lives on water. Your bias is showing.

The numbers have been posted on this thread. New York has far more people in 606 square miles than does London. Why do you ignore objective reality?
No problem.

NYC

Land 300.37 sq mi (777.95 km2)
Water 167.82 sq mi (434.65 km2)

In terms of London around 2% of the city is water -

Land 594 sq mi (1538.45 km2)
Water 12 sq mi (31.0799 km2)

New York has a higher population density especially in Manhattan, however in terms of geographic size and overall population of NYC it is smaller than London.

However if you include other cities and counties in New Jersey and Connecticut, then the metro population and size will be bigger, especially given London has a green belt in order to try and stop urban sprawl and in order to improve the environment for those living in the city.

If you want to pretend that New Jersey and Newark or Connecticut are part New York city then so be it.

In terms of commuting it's very easy to get in to London via the regional rail networks, as well as national and international services, and I previously posted a map showing the extensive rail network. Indeed you can get on a train in central London and two hours later can be in the heart of Paris.

Last edited by Brave New World; 02-28-2021 at 03:35 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2021, 03:29 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
16,962 posts, read 6,251,874 times
Reputation: 11020
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler View Post
Like I said, that's true for city boundaries where NYC are defined to be smaller, but realistically, New York City is a larger city. When London County Council and the County of London covering what's now considered Inner London was essentially replaced by the larger Greater London we know today, the city didn't materially change. The same would be if there was a 6th borough as proposed many times for NYC or a downstate separation as a single New York entity--these don't really suddenly make NYC a larger city even if the official city boundaries have increased.
Greater London and it's boroughs are well documented, as is the 606 Sq miles, whilst the Greater London area is served by an elected Mayor, the Metropolitan Police and London Fire Brigade, as well as Transport for London and numerous other city wide bodies.

NYC also has it's own elected mayor, and it's boundaries are defined in relation to the five boroughs, whilst the city is served by the NYPD, FDNY, as well as the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

Last edited by Brave New World; 02-28-2021 at 03:38 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:31 PM
 
8 posts
Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare View Post
I have no qualms in preferring London to New York. It’s far more integrated ethnically and is safer from a violent crime perspective.
The first point is not true, and I'm not sure how such an imputation holds any water. It also (considering the period pre mid-2020) isn't safer from a violent crime perspective.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 06:50 PM
 
Location: Alexandria, Commonwealth of Virginia
2,216 posts, read 1,595,330 times
Reputation: 3015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
No problem.

NYC

Land 300.37 sq mi (777.95 km2)
Water 167.82 sq mi (434.65 km2)

In terms of London around 2% of the city is water -

Land 594 sq mi (1538.45 km2)
Water 12 sq mi (31.0799 km2)

New York has a higher population density especially in Manhattan, however in terms of geographic size and overall population of NYC it is smaller than London.

However if you include other cities and counties in New Jersey and Connecticut, then the metro population and size will be bigger, especially given London has a green belt in order to try and stop urban sprawl and in order to improve the environment for those living in the city.

If you want to pretend that New Jersey and Newark or Connecticut are part New York city then so be it.

In terms of commuting it's very easy to get in to London via the regional rail networks, as well as national and international services, and I previously posted a map showing the extensive rail network. Indeed you can get on a train in central London and two hours later can be in the heart of Paris.
Funny how in the other thread you were having a spasm about London being 25 million people, yet here you're passionately defending London as being 9 million. It's almost as if you have no standards beyond whatever makes your darling metropolis look best.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:56 PM
 
130 posts, read 43,026 times
Reputation: 264
London, what a fantastic city.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 04:57 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
16,962 posts, read 6,251,874 times
Reputation: 11020
Quote:
Originally Posted by manitopiaaa View Post
Funny how in the other thread you were having a spasm about London being 25 million people, yet here you're passionately defending London as being 9 million. It's almost as if you have no standards beyond whatever makes your darling metropolis look best.
Greater London is the boundaries of London, it is served by the Metropolitan Police, London Fire Brigade and Transport for London, it also has one elected Mayor and an Assembly (City Hall).

NYC is also defined by it's boundaries, and has it's Mayor, a City Hall, the NYPD, FDNY, MPA etc.

Greater London is what anyone in Britain would call London, just as New York City would be defined by it's five boroughs in the US.

As for the metro areas, if you want to justify whole regions or groups of regions as metro areas, then other cities can also play that game.

Last edited by Brave New World; Today at 05:15 AM..
Rate this post positively 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

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 > World Forums > World

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, 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