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. They are official govt. calculations, based on apples-to-apples methodology.
All of these calculations are.
But you are somehow implying that cities like El Paso and Juarez are not as interdependent as cities like those in US CSAs. In my opinion they are more interdependent than most.
Look, all of these terms are made up, but to people daily lives these cross-border agglomerations are just as tangible as these CSAs we wholly accept.
I am not getting what you are arguing against here.
Are you saying that these areas economics are not intertwined enough to analyze how many people depend on those areas to live?
All of these calculations are.
But you are somehow implying that cities like El Paso and Juarez are not as interdependent as cities like those in US CSAs.
Yes, I am absolutely saying that.
The vast majority of people in Mexico are not allowed to enter the U.S. The vast majority of Americans cannot enter Mexico.
Making up a metro area across national boundaries that are uncrossable for most, is nonsense. You might as well add Tokyo to Nagoya, because they're both intertwined with the auto industry.
No. They are official govt. calculations, based on apples-to-apples methodology.
Seriously? The Census Bureau definitions, are very flawed and somewhat fictional!! And while there are metrics involved, there are politics involved as well. Just look at the inconsistencies in the metro area definitions (especially the MSAs) across the US. These aren't 100% objective fact-based definitions!!
Seriously? The Census Bureau definitions, are very flawed and somewhat fictional!! And while there are metrics involved, there are politics involved as well. Just look at the inconsistencies in the metro area definitions (especially the MSAs) across the US. These aren't 100% objective fact-based definitions!!
Can you give examples of what you're referring to? As I have always known it census bureau standards for MSA are based on satellite counties commuting into core counties. The threshold for this is that at least 25% of the satellite counties workforce has to commute into the core county. This is very consistent, but because it's based on county patterns it can sometimes fragment out contiguous areas, and inflate other areas because of large county land area ect.
The Border metros are not often talked about but they are increasingly becoming major areas. I think there problem is their comparatively low $$$ status.
Brownsville for example has serious poverty issues.
But the sizes of these areas are interesting. El Paso-Juarez-Las cruces area has more people than the San Antonio area. The Rio Grande Valley cross border area also is approaching 3 M people.
Prior to joining City-Data, I never really knew how large the Rio Grande Valley ever was. I've been there before once, from South Padre Island all the way to McAllen and both Brownsville and Harlingen in between the former two. It felt like a pretty large, decentralized, but also suburbanized area but I never would have taken it to be larger than El Paso-Las Cruces.
I feel like the Rio Grande Valley's growth is more recent than anything else, the recent 20-30 years or so.
Technically other than South Padre Island, I've found all the things City-Data people are scared of El Paso (falsely) to be true of the Rio Grande Valley. There's definitely a drug moving element to it, a gang element to it, and a seedy, unsafe feel to it. Not saying if you're out that you'll be a victim of crime, I myself was not nor had any issues but you do tend to notice seedy characteristics there. I never found those in El Paso at all. I walked around a what was non-active Downtown El Paso at 5:30 A.M. just a few weeks ago, no issues at all. Nothing seedy, nothing wrong, nothing bad. Later that day, it was active and again nothing seedy or bad at all. Just a very general area even if Juarez is less than 1 mile away from Downtown El Paso. The city does not share the high-crime characteristics with its neighbor across the border. El Paso is also an older city, it actually has a lot of history in its state and was a pretty decent sized and built-up city in the early 1900s.
I feel this is different for the Rio Grande Valley, where outside of South Padre and a few coastal communities and about half of Harlingen, the rest of it feels like a seedy and dark place. Again, not to say you'll be a victim of crime there but it doesn't feel right in a general sense.
The Rio Grande Valley has many challenges to it though, population growth will only add to those challenges. The region has a very high poverty rate, infrastructurally could use more across the board, and in general could really use reformation in the public education districts there, they are very very far behind on that. It also needs to attract better jobs to the area. At 1.35 million (in the 4 South Texas counties), it sort of has a responsibility to improve on these things.
Going to 2050, I would wager that the Rio Grande Valley will post the highest growth in its state (on a percentage basis).
Can you give examples of what you're referring to? As I have always known it census bureau standards for MSA are based on satellite counties commuting into core counties. The threshold for this is that at least 25% of the satellite counties workforce has to commute into the core county. This is very consistent, but because it's based on county patterns it can sometimes fragment out contiguous areas, and inflate other areas because of large county land area ect.
Explain to me why Hartford MA/Springfield CT are not a MSA/CSA? After all, the two cities are in adjacent counties, 20 miles apart. Remember, Springfield is the larger city.
Explain to me why Hartford MA/Springfield CT are not a MSA/CSA? After all, the two cities are in adjacent counties, 20 miles apart. Remember, Springfield is the larger city.
They don't meet the 15% commuter threshold to be a CSA yet, nor the 25% commuter threshold to be an MSA.
The two measures are basically the same exact thing, they're tabulated the same exact way, only one distinction between an MSA and a CSA; the 15% commuter threshold (CSA) and the 25% commuter threshold (MSA).
That is the only actual difference between the two measures. The 10% commuter threshold is the only so called "big" difference between them.
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.
