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.
...
4. You are factually wrong and not the poster that you were responding to. He said that Philly has more density Boston which is factually accurate.
this is still bothering me:
Quote:
Population density: 13,544 people per square mile (very high).
When it's as close as Boston & Philly, who cares about which is more dense? Philadelphia is the larger city overall, but the density difference between the two is pretty negligible. This isn't Houston vs San Francisco in terms of density.
fair enough. i understand where you are coming from. mite you have any stats from census.gov or something ?
I think there are few ways to do this.
The easiest is to just list out denser municipalities that are adjacent to Boston and then keep adding to that contiguous blob until you reach roughly 134.1 square miles in land area--after that, you'll just tally the population and divide by the area and you have something roughly comparable.
Philadelphia is 1,567,442 people in 134.1 square miles for a density of 11,635.3 people per square mile
Total: 1,485,571 people in 134.0 square miles for a density of 11,086.5 people per square mile.
This is basically using what the Metropolitan Area Planning Council for Greater Boston defines as its inner core, but with some of the furthest out and least dense portions subtracted from the municipalities listed there until we hit about the same size as Philadelphia in land area. I believe these are all one contiguous block, but if someone familiar with the area can check, that'd be great. I believe the final shape is a little funny, but so are the borders for Philadelphia proper. I think the most tenuous part is the connection between Lynn and the rest of the mass over a bridge to Revere and the numbers do drop significantly if you replaced Lynn with Saugus which is more continuous with the rest of the mass and is roughly the same land area but much lower density. Populations are based on the 2015 estimates.
Also, keep in mind that there are a lot of small municipalities bordering Philadelphia with fairly high or comparable densities whereas the ones in the Boston area are pretty much all listed above. I don't think the difference overall is that large though. See the little widget on wikipedia that takes you around the communities that directly border Philadelphia. In the end, the two are comparable, but Philadelphia's urban core is a bit denser and a bit larger.
You can also get greater resolution by going for contiguous census tracts and building them up over roughly the same area for both Boston and Philadelphia where you just add tracts based on density, but you take care never to create an "enclave" census tract that isn't counted among the ones you are counting. Or you can make other rule sets where the census tracts must be roughly circular.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 02-20-2017 at 12:00 PM..
i had the same post ready and i was going to do what you've done as a suppliment.
here's what i had;
Boston's and Philadelphia's cores and extended metros are difficult to compare at a glance. Boston's metro population is about 4,700,000 and Philadelphia is about 6,100,000. Philadelphia's metro ostensibly extends to include the northern region of Delaware and extends well into the southern part of Jersey, so it's hard to read.
When you examine Boston and Philly's dense cores on google earth (the extent before the green begins to show solidly through), it becomes obvious their dense cores are surprisingly similar in size. However, Philadelphia has a sizable edge with it's 'warehouse/shipping/distribution' district. Moving outward to their statistical metros, Boston shows more sparcely settled suburbs;
The homes in the cities and towns circling Boston have much more land than the equivalent area that circles Philadelphia. Most of Boston's suburbs require more land for building a single family home. They're also lagging behind with archaic/draconian home construction regulations of all classes of dwellings. That's why we haven't built much outside of Rt 128 belt in the last 20 years.
Having spent several years in the metro's of both cities, i can say with a lot of certainty that the cities and towns that comprise Bucks, Trenton, Mount Holly, Camden and Woodbury counties are considerably denser. Home's don't occupy the same lot space as the belt between Rt 128~495 in Massachusetts. It's just a fact. Philadelphia's outer metro differs significantly from Boston's outer metro in this way.
Population density: according to City Hall, Boston surpassed ~667,000 in June of 2015 (20 months ago). Boston is currently estimated to have about 675~680,000, but that number is actually, believed to be well-higher due to it's sanctuary city context. Therefore, you can be quite certain Boston has a core density at or slightly above 14,000/ sq mi.
if you add Somerville and Cambridge whose outer borders are yet, only a couple of miles from Boston's Back Bay, the population density rises to about 14,500/ sq mi. Figuring for the construction already planned, that number will easily top 15,000/ sq mi withn 4~5 years. That's a very dense metro core. Philadelphia's density will not have risen significantly by the time that occurs.
Also, when you expand outward from Boston's incorporated neighborhoods and simply go one layer (into the non-incorporated, neighborhoods bordering Boston), and go stop when you reach Philadelphia's footprint + Camden,
You'll soon discover, the dense parts of the metro cores contain roughly the same number of people, have similar distribution, and have not only about the same density.... but, Boston and Philadelphia are nearly identical in their actual, true size.
which, as you see, OC has straightforwardly done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nephi215
1. Philadelphia's land area is not 142 square miles. The area is 134.1 square miles.
2. You cannot find a continuous 134.1 square miles of land of Boston and surrounding areas that is more dense than Philly.
3. As I said before, Philly is a significantly larger city than Boston both in population and area. So, if you shrink Philly down to Boston's 48 sq miles of land, Philly is significantly more dense than Boston.
4. You are factually wrong and not the poster that you were responding to. He said that Philly has more density Boston which is factually accurate.
and now that your 4 proclamations have been disproven, let's compare business ECONOMIC MIGHT....
Let's start with the sports teams valuations; Put this near the top of the 'you can run, but you can't hide' categories.
Boston Red Sox; $3,200M (3rd) New England Patriots; $3,200M (2nd) Boston Celtics; $2,100M (4th) Boston Bruins; $790M (5th)
TOTAL $9.29B
Philadelphia Phillies $1,240M (10th) Philadelphia Eagles $2,500M (10th) Philadelphia 76ers $700M (27th) Philadelphia Flyers $800M (7th)
TOTAL $5.24B
Last edited by odurandina; 02-20-2017 at 01:19 PM..
One difference between Philly and Boston that I haven't seen mentioned is the people, especially from the perspective of race relations. With a much higher ratio of African Americans to Euro Americans, race relations in Philadelphia seem more even and integrated, with many interracial couples and families seen on its streets. Such mixed families are pretty common in Philadelphia, but can still seem novel in Boston, even in 2017. Though both cities still have exclusively black and white neighborhoods, the diversity one encounters in both downtowns are very different, with Philadelphia feeling and looking more diverse at all socio-economic levels. It is interesting also that Boston has never had a mayor of color, whereas Philly has had at least 2, the most recent of whom, Mayor Nutter, achieved approval ratings above 60% at different times during his tenure. So if you're uncomfortable in a downtown that can feel almost all white, go for Philadelphia.
Boston does generally feel more organized, upscale and polished, with fewer and less aggressive homeless people. But it has also been my experience that Philadelphians are more willing to help a stranger in the street, whether giving money, asking for directions, holding a door open, giving up a seat on the bus, etc. Boston can feel like it operates on a 'don't bother me and I won't bother you' ethos, whereas Philadelphians seem more willing to engage each other in their day to day encounters, for better or for worse.
Finally, this might just be my experience, but I never heard white people use the N word in Philadelphia, whereas on several occasions the word has been used by whites within my earshot at bars I've visited in Boston.
One difference between Philly and Boston that I haven't seen mentioned is the people, especially from the perspective of race relations. With a much higher ratio of African Americans to Euro Americans, race relations in Philadelphia seem more even and integrated, with many interracial couples and families seen on its streets. Such mixed families are pretty common in Philadelphia, but can still seem novel in Boston, even in 2017. Though both cities still have exclusively black and white neighborhoods, the diversity one encounters in both downtowns are very different, with Philadelphia feeling and looking more diverse at all socio-economic levels. It is interesting also that Boston has never had a mayor of color, whereas Philly has had at least 2, the most recent of whom, Mayor Nutter, achieved approval ratings above 60% at different times during his tenure. So if you're uncomfortable in a downtown that can feel almost all white, go for Philadelphia.
Boston does generally feel more organized, upscale and polished, with fewer and less aggressive homeless people. But it has also been my experience that Philadelphians are more willing to help a stranger in the street, whether giving money, asking for directions, holding a door open, giving up a seat on the bus, etc. Boston can feel like it operates on a 'don't bother me and I won't bother you' ethos, whereas Philadelphians seem more willing to engage each other in their day to day encounters, for better or for worse.
Finally, this might just be my experience, but I never heard white people use the N word in Philadelphia, whereas on several occasions the word has been used by whites within my earshot at bars I've visited in Boston.
I HAVE!!
There were a bunch of white kids on the train (teens maybe early 20s) using the N word left and right. They didn't mean it in a racial way, they were basically using amongst each other the same way black people use it towards each other.
One difference between Philly and Boston that I haven't seen mentioned is the people, especially from the perspective of race relations. With a much higher ratio of African Americans to Euro Americans, race relations in Philadelphia seem more even and integrated, with many interracial couples and families seen on its streets. Such mixed families are pretty common in Philadelphia, but can still seem novel in Boston, even in 2017. Though both cities still have exclusively black and white neighborhoods, the diversity one encounters in both downtowns are very different, with Philadelphia feeling and looking more diverse at all socio-economic levels. It is interesting also that Boston has never had a mayor of color, whereas Philly has had at least 2, the most recent of whom, Mayor Nutter, achieved approval ratings above 60% at different times during his tenure. So if you're uncomfortable in a downtown that can feel almost all white, go for Philadelphia.
Boston does generally feel more organized, upscale and polished, with fewer and less aggressive homeless people. But it has also been my experience that Philadelphians are more willing to help a stranger in the street, whether giving money, asking for directions, holding a door open, giving up a seat on the bus, etc. Boston can feel like it operates on a 'don't bother me and I won't bother you' ethos, whereas Philadelphians seem more willing to engage each other in their day to day encounters, for better or for worse.
Finally, this might just be my experience, but I never heard white people use the N word in Philadelphia, whereas on several occasions the word has been used by whites within my earshot at bars I've visited in Boston.
Fine... everybody in Philly is good and everybody in Boston is a racist. As a Bostonian when I see somebody walking behind me into a building I don't just not hold the door, I close it behind me.
I also feel the need the great comedian Bill Burr from his stand up. "real racism is quiet, people look around. Then its followed by f'ed up conversation."
Fine... everybody in Philly is good and everybody in Boston is a racist. As a Bostonian when I see somebody walking behind me into a building I don't just not hold the door, I close it behind me.
Same!
Haha I mean Boston certainly isn't a "friendly" place per se, but far from rude.
Location: Watching half my country turn into Gilead
3,530 posts, read 4,177,862 times
Reputation: 2925
Quote:
Originally Posted by KodeBlue
I HAVE!!
There were a bunch of white kids on the train (teens maybe early 20s) using the N word left and right. They didn't mean it in a racial way, they were basically using amongst each other the same way black people use it towards each other.
Same here. I'm over 25, and it seems the generation younger than I doesn't have the same hiccups using it when it's not used offensively.
One difference between Philly and Boston that I haven't seen mentioned is the people, especially from the perspective of race relations. With a much higher ratio of African Americans to Euro Americans, race relations in Philadelphia seem more even and integrated, with many interracial couples and families seen on its streets. Such mixed families are pretty common in Philadelphia, but can still seem novel in Boston, even in 2017. Though both cities still have exclusively black and white neighborhoods, the diversity one encounters in both downtowns are very different, with Philadelphia feeling and looking more diverse at all socio-economic levels. It is interesting also that Boston has never had a mayor of color, whereas Philly has had at least 2, the most recent of whom, Mayor Nutter, achieved approval ratings above 60% at different times during his tenure. So if you're uncomfortable in a downtown that can feel almost all white, go for Philadelphia.
Boston does generally feel more organized, upscale and polished, with fewer and less aggressive homeless people. But it has also been my experience that Philadelphians are more willing to help a stranger in the street, whether giving money, asking for directions, holding a door open, giving up a seat on the bus, etc. Boston can feel like it operates on a 'don't bother me and I won't bother you' ethos, whereas Philadelphians seem more willing to engage each other in their day to day encounters, for better or for worse.
Finally, this might just be my experience, but I never heard white people use the N word in Philadelphia, whereas on several occasions the word has been used by whites within my earshot at bars I've visited in Boston.
Philadelphia has had 3 black mayors: Wilson Goode, John Street, and Michael Nutter. The current mayor, Jim Kenney, is white.
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.
The People
