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.
No. I am not rehashing what I've already posted in this thread. 40 pages back. At this point you are just being deliberately obtuse.
Answer my question? A city one fourth the size of Chicago has comparable transportation, more hotel rooms and taxis, population swells by 78% with similar office space. What does that tell you?
These are city budgets! Money that comes from individual, commercial and property taxes, city fines, tickets, etc.... DC has a mayor and city council. The budget is approved by Congress.
Some of these cities are part of larger counties, LA and Chicago for example, which also have another layer of govt that take care of public services. Cities like SF and DC are not part of larger counties and their city budgets reflect that. One more reason why this whole point about city budgets is completely irrelevant.
These are city budgets! Money that comes from individual, commercial and property taxes, city fines, tickets, etc.... DC has a mayor and city council. The budget is approved by Congress.
Local government is certainly top heavy to have that kind of budget for a city that's not even 700k in population.
And what does this have to do with the thread again?
Answer my question? A city one fourth the size of Chicago has comparable transportation, more hotel rooms and taxis, population swells by 78% with similar office space. What does that tell you?
I'll try to give an explanation to your question:
Washington DC is not 1/4th the size of Chicago; arbitrary city limits are meaningless, especially in a metro area like DC.
Chicago is quite a bit larger than DC in almost every population metric, except for CSA, and with DC quite a bit more expensive than Baltimore, DC has a huge pull into the Baltimore MSA. So, when you are looking at your Transportation, Hotel Rooms, Taxis, Office Space examples it is more like a region of 9.5M vs. 8M; which is not nearly as big a gap as you make it out to be.
Now, Chicago is clearly more densely populated than Washington DC, I don't think anyone is arguing that, but DC does punch way above it's weight in most urban categories, as it is the seat of the Federal Government.
Also, hotel numbers are close, the majority of lists I've seen have Chicago with more hotel rooms than DC; but they are very close.
Facts - DC has higher transit usage as a percentage of the population. DC has worse traffic. DC has the same amount of office space. DC is more compact than Chicago, which is very suburbanish on the southside.
Office space and the percentage of the population that use the transit have nothing to do with pace. Yes, some parts of the southside look suburbanish; some don't. This can also be said about certain parts of Philly and New York; what's your point?
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.
Chicago or D.C....
