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.
Now that we've pointed out the obvious ignorance toward Houston and San Francisco. New Orleans is definitely up there. I'll even say this; losing New Orleans would probably do more damage to the US economy than losing Dallas or Atlanta.
Absolutely not. Dallas and Atlanta have much, much larger economies than New Orleans. They have a much larger impact on the US economy than New Orleans.
Absolutely not. Dallas and Atlanta have much, much larger economies than New Orleans. They have a much larger impact on the US economy than New Orleans.
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,485 posts, read 14,997,570 times
Reputation: 7333
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkgiraffe
Mmm.....no, but true.
Nah, not really. Both Dallas and Atlanta are huge rail, trucking and air hubs that move more goods and commodities than a seaport every could (lets not forget that to get goods from a seaport you need rail, trucking or air cargo). The ground based transportation structure in both cities is the real big thing that would cause trouble. You can't just rebuild rail networks and highways in a few years nor just go around them.
With that said, I think a lot of people underestimate just how important New Orleans is the country. The destruction caused by Hurricane Katrina showed just how unprepared the country is to handle if a major city is knocked out of normal operating status even for just a few months. There were effects up and down the economy that particularly stressed the Southeast.
Nah, not really. Both Dallas and Atlanta are huge rail, trucking and air hubs that move more goods and commodities than a seaport every could (lets not forget that to get goods from a seaport you need rail, trucking or air cargo). The ground based transportation structure in both cities is the real big thing that would cause trouble. You can't just rebuild rail networks and highways in a few years nor just go around them.
With that said, I think a lot of people underestimate just how important New Orleans is the country. The destruction caused by Hurricane Katrina showed just how unprepared the country is to handle if a major city is knocked out of normal operating status even for just a few months. There were effects up and down the economy that particularly stressed the Southeast.
I agree with that last paragraph, New Orleans is underestimated. But New Orleans is not near as important to the US economy as Dallas or Atlanta.
I would say Denver but then again its more a global city as well. My reason for picking Denver is kind of clear. Its the largest city and one of the most important cities in the Rocky Mountain Region and its influence impacts much of the country.
You don't honestly believe this do you? Denver is not a global city.
Houston and San Francisco are the clear winners here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas
Nah, not really. Both Dallas and Atlanta are huge rail, trucking and air hubs that move more goods and commodities than a seaport every could (lets not forget that to get goods from a seaport you need rail, trucking or air cargo). The ground based transportation structure in both cities is the real big thing that would cause trouble. You can't just rebuild rail networks and highways in a few years nor just go around them.
With that said, I think a lot of people underestimate just how important New Orleans is the country. The destruction caused by Hurricane Katrina showed just how unprepared the country is to handle if a major city is knocked out of normal operating status even for just a few months. There were effects up and down the economy that particularly stressed the Southeast.
But the goods have to come through the seaports first before going inland to cities like Dallas and Atlanta.
Nah, not really. Both Dallas and Atlanta are huge rail, trucking and air hubs that move more goods and commodities than a seaport every could (lets not forget that to get goods from a seaport you need rail, trucking or air cargo). The ground based transportation structure in both cities is the real big thing that would cause trouble. You can't just rebuild rail networks and highways in a few years nor just go around them.
With that said, I think a lot of people underestimate just how important New Orleans is the country. The destruction caused by Hurricane Katrina showed just how unprepared the country is to handle if a major city is knocked out of normal operating status even for just a few months. There were effects up and down the economy that particularly stressed the Southeast.
Very true, Dallas and Atlanta are more important. But if New Orleans was 100% crippled it would still have a significant national effect on the economy.
Without having looked at any other responses, I'm going to say Houston although I do consider it to be somewhat of a global city, just on a lower tier than NYC, LA, etc.
I still think harm to South Louisna would cripple us moreso than Dallas and Atlanta. Neither really are bringing anything major to the table. The country isn't going into a frenzy when things are happening to these cities like you see with Houston or South Louisiana.
After overlooking the comments; I still think harm to South Louisna would cripple us moreso than Dallas and Atlanta. Neither really are bringing anything major to the table.
No offense, but you simply don't know what you're talking about.
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.