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'm not denying that Philadelphia (especially), DC, and Boston are overshadowed by NYC to some extent, but a lot of the posters in this thread keep repeating how NYC's presence hurts Boston, DC, and Philadelphia, but the same can't be said for LA and SF?
-LA is the most powerful city in the State of California, while SF isn't
-LA is the most major city on the West Coast, which SF isn't that far away from
-Growth in California for the past 50 years has been driven by Southern California, which has indirectly benefited Northern California.
Though most of those things are probably changing nowadays.
I think Dallas-FW and Houston are neck and neck in national importance. Neither are merely 'regional' cities.
I am taking about global economies NOT national importance.
This was what was said, don't twist the words:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove
Houston is far from a regional City. Houston has globally important economic centers in Energy and Shipping. It by no means serves as a regional hub. Dallas is clearly the regional hub for the area, you can see that by the level of flights through DFW airport
I actually dont see SF as being overshawdowed in the same regards as a place like Philadelphia; if at all (though LA is the "capital" of CA)
NYC has actually commuter poached GDP and population from Philly based on census metrics (not sure in the reality but on these metrics there are tangible aspects that can actually be quantified on quantitative metrics).
Seriously the impact of NYC could have as much as a tangible shift of 15-20% on population and economic output. Again the reality is that in the integrated economy the money still flows and jobs and people and amentities are still only a few miles away so wherever the census draws a line doesnt really change the way people live
Isn't the Bay Area, to some extent, in the shadow of LA? I mean the distance from DC to NYC is 220 miles, while LA-SF is 380 miles.
I was thinking about this as I wrote the post slightly above. That's why it's so hard to figure out who is 4 and 5. In a sense, both DC and SF are in the shadow of NY and LA, respectively. Like I said, that's why fighting over who is 4 and 5 is pointless.
I was thinking about this as I wrote the post slightly above. That's why it's so hard to figure out who is 4 and 5. In a sense, both DC and SF are in the shadow of NY and LA, respectively. Like I said, that's why fighting over who is 4 and 5 is pointless.
I think regional prominence is just one part of the equation - this part benefits Dallas and Houston.
Houston is far from a regional City. Houston has globally important economic centers in Energy and Shipping. It by no means serves as a regional hub. Dallas is clearly the regional hub for the area, you can see that by the level of flights through DFW airport
I know that Houston packs more punch than Dallas. I don't think it's 4 or 5 though, but it clearly has more international significance than Dallas.
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.
