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.
I never said Houston doesn't have poverty and I dont recall anyone elso making that sort of statement. This is more of a comparison to me as this is one distinction of northern cities to me; the poverty looks alot different(worse) and more desperate. I only said that Philly is worse in regard to poverty, not that Houston doesn't have any. And just because an area is poor(Sharpstown, Acres Homes, Sunnyside, Ect..) doesnt make it a real slum. I have family and friends in many of those neighborhoods and those are not comparable places to Philly's worst neighborhoods. Now Philly has real ghettos/slums. I guess this part is subjective but I still believe that:
1. High density makes impoverished areas worse, not better.
2. Philly's "hoods" are worse in every way and more plentiful than in Houston
3. I understand the preference of east coast/northern cities, but when we look at cities, lets evaluate the entire city and not the "expensive" parts of town only like many do here.
Philly has some great areas and many amenities if you can afford it, but for most, Philadelphia PA is a "hard" city.
Yep... He's right in that aspect. & I'm from there.
Not at all you are free not answer, but without knowledge of this i will NOT accept your dismissal of the urbanity and density, just as I recommended the OP actually visit Houston before formulating an opinion.
I will assume the answer is no so your earlier comment will likely be percieved as hypocritical.
you can assume all you want, but there is nothing hypocritical about my comments. We all know (or should know) that perceptions and assumptions can be very wrong because in alot of cases, they're simply not accurate or based on the truth.
Quote:
Continue to hide in your "safe" suburb, and if that is your perspective Houston is a great choice.
I'm not hiding anywhere, Philly. Grow up. Divulging my experiences just for argument sake isn't necessary.
Quote:
And honestly and for the record i do like Houston and think it does offer a lot, urbanity is not the strong suit however, at least in the traditional sense, which is fine
so why can't we leave it at that. Why must we get wrapped in these silly petty little back and forths about who's more urbanly dense than whom? Seriously...
Quote:
but i do get annoyed when people in Houston (mainly a select few) make the city out to be everything, they come accross very silly, and i suspect many not well traveled
Stating that Houston is the 4th largest city, for example, isn't making the city out to be everything. What i've seen here is that some people seem to be a little thick, when it comes to this city's status. For as long as I can remember, this city has been the 4th largest city in America, based on the U.S Census. But there are those on here, that can't seem to digest that, and here comes the inane arguments about how it's not as urbanly dense as Philly or Boston or Seattle so how can it be the 4th largest. They don't question the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 5th largest cities. Then comes the comparisons of land size of other cities and the debate becomes more ridiculous
Houston is consistantly bashed for not having the architecture of cities like the aforementioned and again bashed with the false assumption that it's trying to be something that it's not. In the process, the people comparing Houston to Philly and others are the ones making those cities out to be everything.
Last edited by Queen Palm; 05-24-2011 at 10:12 PM..
What I find amusing about all the city vs city threads is that when it is a sunbelt city against a more "urban" city it always stirs great debate. And the comments, views and perspectives from both sides are quite sharply contrasted. Just about every single category is immeasurably debated, from amenities to weather to education to history to poverty to skylines and crime rates. It's ludicrous! But go take a look at Seattle vs San Diego thread and its hardly a debate. It's people just making smiley faces. Or put Philadelphia vs Seattle, Philadelphia vs Boston, or any city of that sort and its hardly a debate. I wonder why that is.
hate to say it, but because the subject [in this case] is Houston. I don't know why it stirs up such debate. People get real snippy.
Not really. No one here ever stated Houston is this vibrant, walkable city filled with tons of energy and urbanity. We realize our flaws and acknowledge them, It's you guys who keep downplaying what Houston offers. The first post in this thread was ignorant within itself.
Every time Houston comes up; here come rolling in on your red carpet bringing up that annoying density stuff. We get it. Yet, that has nothing to do with the topic. These threads are created to bring negativity and shame on Sunbelt cities. The agenda is very obvious.
you can assume all you want, but there is nothing hypocritical about my comments. We all know (or should know) that perceptions and assumptions can be very wrong because in alot of cases, they're simply not accurate or based on the truth.
I'm not hiding anywhere, Philly. Grow up. Divulging my experiences just for argument sake isn't necessary.
so why can't we leave it at that. Why must we get wrapped in these silly petty little back and forths about who's more urbanly dense than whom? Seriously...
Stating that Houston is the 4th largest city, for example, isn't making the city out to be everything. What i've seen here is that some people seem to be a little thick, when it comes to this city's status. For as long as I can remember, this city has been the 4th largest city in America, based on the U.S Census. But there are those on here, that can't seem to digest that, and here comes the inane arguments about how it's not as urbanly dense as Philly or Boston or Seattle so how can it be the 4th largest. They don't question the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 5th largest cities. Then comes the comparisons of land size of other cities and the debate becomes more ridiculous
Houston is consistantly bashed for not having the architecture of cities like the aforementioned and again bashed with the false assumption that it's trying to be something that it's not. In the process, the people comparing Houston to Philly and others are the ones making those cities out to be everything.
I think you miss the whole point of what the argument is and why city boundaries especially as large as Houston make the population ranking rendered useless in comparisons. And this point no one in Houston in particular accepts. And yes when the area has a density of 3,500 ppsm it is tough to take the overall metric serious. I do not dispute that Houston is a large and important metro. It is kind of like saying you win because you were able to add all the points from 5 games together while the others only use the points from one - city boundaries are not an apples to apples comparison. Why not use metric that is more similar like urbanized area etc. (And yes you are right people do not question 1 NYC, 2 LA, 3 Chicago, or 5 Philly because they all are developed and maintain city characteristics throughout and all have density above 10k except LA which is close, and many people question the relevance of #6 Pheonix and even SA on these metrics because of size and densitiy and developed density) From this same prespective is Boston really the 22nd largest city in the US, smaller than the city of Charlotte, El Paso and Austin? I mean really? Or are San Jose, Jacksonville and Indianapolis really larger cities than SF. This is exactly the point of where statistics become useless when they are not consistent, they basically cant be compared or when they are a dose of appropriate caveats or not off base.
And your decision not to address your comments on urbanity to me are equally as inane as the OPs original rant on Houston without ever experiencing it. So I will assume you never have and thus see zero relevance in your opinion of said urbanity. That was my only point and the one you still have yet to respond or back up your comments. I am by no means saying you need to prefer that or even like it, but just as many have said about the OPs original statement, without ever experiencing it how can you then make then justify the same tact without substantiation, or maybe you actually cant substantiate it.
I think you miss the whole point of what the argument is and why city boundaries especially as large as Houston make the population ranking rendered useless in comparisons. And this point no one in Houston in particular accepts. And yes when the area has a density of 3,500 ppsm it is tough to take the overall metric serious. I do not dispute that Houston is a large and important metro. It is kind of like saying you win because you were able to add all the points from 5 games together while the others only use the points from one - city boundaries are not an apples to apples comparison. Why not use metric that is more similar like urbanized area etc. (And yes you are right people do not question 1 NYC, 2 LA, 3 Chicago, or 5 Philly because they all are developed and maintain city characteristics throughout and all have density above 10k except LA which is close, and many people question the relevance of #6 Pheonix and even SA on these metrics because of size and densitiy and developed density) From this same prespective is Boston really the 22nd largest city in the US, smaller than the city of Charlotte, El Paso and Austin? I mean really? Or are San Jose, Jacksonville and Indianapolis really larger cities than SF. This is exactly the point of where statistics become useless when they are not consistent, they basically cant be compared or when they are a dose of appropriate caveats or not off base.
well then I suggest you gather a petition disputing the population statistics of Houston. Tell them all what you're telling me. Have people physically sign it in your area (no e-petitions) and send it in to the U.S. Census. . Let me know what they say .
Quote:
And your decision not to address your comments on urbanity to me are equally as inane as the OPs original rant on Houston without ever experiencing it.
You asked me where I've lived. I've already stated my comments about urbanity.
Quote:
So I will assume you never have and thus see zero relevance in your opinion of said urbanity.
then, once again, your assumption will is wrong. I'm very familiar with urbanity. In fact, I love the whole urban gritty vibe. I get what people are saying about it. Houston has that. Just not as dense as Philly or other north/northeastern cities. I get that. But it does not make the city less relevant. People need to stop comparing Houston to other cities like Philly making this ultra-ridiculous argument. It's level of urban density does NOT negate Houston's rank. So again, if you have a problem with that start a petition and send it to the U.S. Census Bureau. I've said it before: Houston is what it is. If people want a hyper-urban city, then they should go/move to those cities. Simple as that.
Quote:
That was my only point and the one you still have yet to respond or back up your comments.
But I have back them up. You just want to continue under your false assumptions.
Quote:
I am by no means saying you need to prefer that or even like it, but just as many have said about the OPs original statement, without ever experiencing it how can you then make then justify the same tact without substantiation, or maybe you actually cant substantiate it.
I can and have. I just choose not to divulge where I've lived at this point. I don't have to. Whether I have or haven't does not change the truth. That is, based on Census statistics, Houston is the 4th largest city in the United States. The Census counts the population of residents living within the city limits, and not how urbanly dense, gritty, walkable, or vibey a city is, or how historical the architecture is. It counts people, not environments..lol
So again, if your disputing the population stats of Houston, take up a petition, have people physically sign it, and send it to the Census Bureau.
Still going, after a poll with a clear preference and people beating their opinions into the ground lmao..
the arguments aren't even at all about the poll. the arguments are about the annoying incessant pestering opinions that people from northeastern cities have on houston and such. i don't think anybody is offended that most prefer philadelphia. i'd vote for philadelphia too. it just gets annoying and old and stupid and wish people would shut the hell up when it comes to the bickering and downplay on houston. i mean, come on... the houston metro has 6 MILLION people. not enough to suggest that there is OBVIOUSLY something that Houston is doing right????????
i hear it in real life.... not long ago my roommate said that Houston was like a third world country. i asked if he'd ever been there. he said, "no and i never plan to go." and i wish he never does either cause Houston has way more respectable human beings than the type that he and other's who've dissed on Houston are.
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.
