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.
Found a chart from Stats Canada, reviewed it, and double checked it, and here is what I found.
By 2025, the GTAH is expected to reach 9.2 million, with the GTA reaching 8.4 million, a 3 million ish increase. Chicago's metropolitan area in 2025 is expected to reach 10.2 million, a 500,000 increase if not less than that. By 2041, the GTA is expected to reach 11.05 million with the GTAH reaching 11.8 million. Again, a 3 million increase. Chicago's metropolitan area is expected to reach 10.9 million around this time.
By 2041, The Greater Toronto Area is expected to be larger than Chicago's metropolitan area in 20,000 less kilometers.
Now, something cool to think about. The GTAH is supposed to be 11.8 million in 2041 and that is 9000km. The LA metropolitan area is expected to reach 14.0 million people by 2041.
Toronto is supposed to reach 3.5 million in comparison to Los Angeles' 3.6 million.
By 2041, Toronto and it's surrounding area is expected to be noticeably larger than Chicago, the same size as Los Angeles, and comparable to NYC.
The Greater Golden Horseshoe is expected to reach 14 mill by 2041, so the same as Los Angeles by American Standards as American metropolitan areas have much larger areas in land size.
Found a chart from Stats Canada, reviewed it, and double checked it, and here is what I found.
By 2025, the GTAH is expected to reach 9.2 million, with the GTA reaching 8.4 million, a 3 million ish increase. Chicago's metropolitan area in 2025 is expected to reach 10.2 million, a 500,000 increase if not less than that. By 2041, the GTA is expected to reach 11.05 million with the GTAH reaching 11.8 million. Again, a 3 million increase. Chicago's metropolitan area is expected to reach 10.9 million around this time.
By 2041, The Greater Toronto Area is expected to be larger than Chicago's metropolitan area in 20,000 less kilometers.
Now, something cool to think about. The GTAH is supposed to be 11.8 million in 2041 and that is 9000km. The LA metropolitan area is expected to reach 14.0 million people by 2041.
Toronto is supposed to reach 3.5 million in comparison to Los Angeles' 3.6 million.
By 2041, Toronto and it's surrounding area is expected to be noticeably larger than Chicago, the same size as Los Angeles, and comparable to NYC.
The Greater Golden Horseshoe is expected to reach 14 mill by 2041, so the same as Los Angeles by American Standards as American metropolitan areas have much larger areas in land size.
Pretty cool thought?
Predictions don't always come true though. And what makes you think the large us cities won't grow as well? LA already has a metro of 14 million, and is about 18 million in the Csa already. I don't see toronto becoming as large of a city as Chicago, LA, and for sure not NYC.
It's MUCH easier to immigrate to Canada. I know there were some forumers earlier in this thread arguing against this point, but they couldn't be more wrong. I'm an immigrant to the U.S. with family in both places, and know what I'm talking about.
This is largely why Toronto has such a high proportion of immigrants. It's the dominant city in a country that is VERY hospitable to immigration.
So it isn't really fair to compare the primate city in a country with relatively loose immigrant laws to a Top 5 city in a country with strict immigrant laws.
That said, Toronto, despite being a smaller city, and probably a less important city, is somewhat more international/worldly. It just has a far greater proportion of immigrants.
Toronto is supposed to reach 3.5 million in comparison to Los Angeles' 3.6 million.
By 2041, Toronto and it's surrounding area is expected to be noticeably larger than Chicago, the same size as Los Angeles, and comparable to NYC.
The Greater Golden Horseshoe is expected to reach 14 mill by 2041, so the same as Los Angeles by American Standards as American metropolitan areas have much larger areas in land size.
Pretty cool thought?
Besides the silliness of predicting population 30 years into the future, how does this make Toronto comparable to NYC or LA?
NYC currently has nearly 23 million people in its CSA. LA currently has 18 million people in its CSA. Even if Toronto reaches 14 million, NYC will probably be nearing 30 million or something crazy, and LA will be right behind at 25 million.
I'd say this is a close comparison in terms worldliness and cosmopolitan.. it's not worth comparing because they are so close but each for different reasons..
I think it's great that Toronto can actually now be compared to a city like Chicago.
Although I agree predictions can change - Toronto has been closing in on Chicago for some time in so many areas - including population. I'm not talking about sprawling out to infinity but in demonstrable urban form and density Toronto no longer can be dismissed easily in this comparison as the 'smaller city' and not to sound like a broken record - but city proper Toronto now exceeds Chicago.. I think Canadian Canucks summary is pretty accurate and I would bet on it - not just based on projections and probability but also historical trends as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mezter
Predictions don't always come true though. And what makes you think the large us cities won't grow as well? LA already has a metro of 14 million, and is about 18 million in the Csa already. I don't see toronto becoming as large of a city as Chicago, LA, and for sure not NYC.
Both LA Metro and NY Metro are only expected to gain 2.5 million in 30 years, so I forgot to calculate them.
This means LA metro is expected to reach just higher than 15 million in 2041 as opposed to Toronto's GGH reaching 14 million, and NY's is expected to reach just over 20 million.
OH! And CSA's mean nothing. Personally, I think metropolitan areas are stupid because in the states they are highly over-inflated. A town of 60k could be included in a metro of 10 million, and to me I just find it silly to extend the metropolitan areas so far. Personally, I think a cities population should be the main factor of how you measure the city. For example though, metropolitan areas are what many people today use to measure the size of a city, but as Canada has much different standards, Toronto is often listed low on the largest cities scale along with Sydney and Melbourne. This is all because of different standards but in reality, they are huge cities.
BUT, metropolitan and city wise, give Toronto another 100 hundred years and it may beat out New York ^_^
Last edited by CanadianCanuck; 05-11-2013 at 06:28 AM..
OH! And CSA's mean nothing. Personally, I think metropolitan areas are stupid because in the states they are highly over-inflated.
Let me get this straight.
You think CSAs are "stupid and highly over-inflated" even though they are based on rigorous data collection measures by an army of PhDs, while you want us to believe your wacky predictions for population estimates 100 years into the future?
Call me crazy, but I think I'll go with the current U.S. Census Bureau statistics, instead of some anonymous former making a prediction 100 years into the future.
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.
