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.
1900 population of Los Angeles: 102,479
1900 population of New York: 7,268,894
Los Angeles is an extremely young city which saw a majority of it's growth (90% of it's current population including metro) after WWII. Suburbanization knocked on LA's door in the 1960's and it's been going strong ever since turning it into a giant suburb; while NY maintain's extremely dense neighborhoods with incredible transportation and vibancy ANY WHERE you go. You'd be hardpressed to find a suburban looking neighbourhood on the Manhattan island if you tried. Whereas in LA, you'll find it literally downtown. New York's untouchable in the Western Hemisphere, people have to face the facts.
What is the fascination of Los Angeles by New Yorkers?
Honestly it makes me sick when I read people saying things like "If (insert city here) was destroyed no one would care." That is a huge superficial and pretentious attitude to have. Every city big or small is what makes America great and they each offer something different to the American life. So what if L.A. isn't dense enough? it's still a great place! if every city was like NYC, America would be really boring. Diversity in every form is what makes America unique. Most cities in Europe all look the same. Where's the fun in that?
Last edited by BacktoBlue; 01-07-2011 at 01:37 PM..
LA is a notch below NY overall. LA is very underrated on city data especially on being urban. In fact there are some statistics that show LA being more urban than chicago, now it might not feel like it though because LA is auto-centric.
1900 population of Los Angeles: 102,479
1900 population of New York: 7,268,894
Los Angeles is an extremely young city which saw a majority of it's growth (90% of it's current population including metro) after WWII. Suburbanization knocked on LA's door in the 1960's and it's been going strong ever since turning it into a giant suburb; while NY maintain's extremely dense neighborhoods with incredible transportation and vibancy ANY WHERE you go. You'd be hardpressed to find a suburban looking neighbourhood on the Manhattan island if you tried. Whereas in LA, you'll find it literally downtown. New York's untouchable in the Western Hemisphere, people have to face the facts.
There are no suburban looking neighborhoods in Downtown LA. What are you talking about?
LA is a notch below NY overall. LA is very underrated on city data especially on being urban. In fact there are some statistics that show LA being more urban than chicago, now it might not feel like it though because LA is auto-centric.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,043,145 times
Reputation: 4047
I like auto-centric cities. Los Angeles to be fair is still the densest Urban Area (UA) in the entire country, even more than New York City on that metric.
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.
