Metropolises of North America: Chicago, San Francisco, Toronto, and Washington D.C. (live, better)
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.
Not to Toronto proper, but across the border within the Golden Horseshoe and vice versa. The Peace Bridge is supposedly the most trafficked US/Canada crossing and that's one of several crossings in the area.
I think it would need to be more then just to Niagara Falls but much further. Traffic surely goes both was as it's a main link for Canadians traveling south. Maybe there are some stats out there if enough of a work link is there?
Probably there is for Vancouver and Bellingham? To seem to infer this is playing unfair to DARE BOOST Vancouver numbers. When it is suppose to be Toronto is the King, case closed. But really, Vancouver is NOT in the thread list. So no threats from Vancouver to Toronto. Being facetious but I've seen Torontonians be demanding in recognizing their city in threads and not allow another their due so. Too many Toronto vs. Other US cities get closed. But just don't see Vancouver having a link with Bellingham for the thread or Toronto as relevant anyway. It does seem understandable to me though.
I think it would need to be more then just to Niagara Falls but much further. Traffic surely goes both was as it's a main link for Canadians traveling south. Maybe there are some stats out there if enough of a work link is there?
Probably there is for Vancouver and Bellingham? To seem to infer this is playing unfair to DARE BOOST Vancouver numbers. When it is suppose to be Toronto is the King, case closed. But really, Vancouver is NOT in the thread list. So no threats from Vancouver to Toronto. Being facetious but I've seen Torontonians be demanding in recognizing their city in threads and not allow another their due so. Too many Toronto vs. Other US cities get closed. But just don't see Vancouver having a link with Bellingham for the thread or Toronto as relevant anyway. It does seem understandable to me though.
My post has nothing to do with Toronto's numbers, I'm currently in Vancouver and found it odd that it was lumped with Bellingham where people only go to cross border shop. I wouldn't consider Bellingham part of the Vancouver metro.
Bellingham has a population of 80k people, it's not doing much in boosting Vancouver's numbers.
Last edited by Mr. Burns; 11-22-2016 at 11:46 AM..
GTA = Greater Toronto Area personally. I have a lot of relatives there and I always felt Toronto is vastly underrated as a city. Been to Chicago suburbs before - it's ok but nothing special. I wasn't impressed.
SF suburbs - very scattered, been here too. If you have a couple million $$, you can live like a king in some of the hill-based communities with a gorgeous view. Washington DC - Virginia has some very nice suburbs near DC.
If I had to rank specifically:
1. GTA (by a hair, I've been here in the early 2000s and fell in love with it). Only downside is weather and well... I'm American and Canada as a whole can't provide the vibrant culture/busy life style I feel New York has always provided me.
2. SF suburbs (San Jose, Oakland are also pretty nice cities for nightlife - if you got money in Cali, you can really live like a King probably more than any other state out there with the views and scenery you can get in the hilly region of NoCal). It still mindblowers me how different California and NY is since I grew up in NY but have visited California multiple times. At times, they seem like polar opposites.
3. DC suburbs (I don't have much experience with this but I've been there once and liked it)
4. Chicago suburbs (loved the city, didn't like the suburbs)
My post has nothing to do with Toronto's numbers, I'm currently in Vancouver and found it odd that it was lumped with Bellingham where people only go to cross border shop. I wouldn't consider Bellingham part of the Vancouver metro.
Bellingham has a population of 80k people, it's not doing much in boosting Vancouver's numbers.
Toronto though is in the thread title. After all the post defending Toronto and taunting against Chicago in another thread you I posted on. Sorry I say it in a wrong perspective. Being how that thread degraded.
The one who originally included Bellingham in stats. Apparently has one and probably will reply why.
But on topic. I see each city in the Poll as having great offerings. But just 1 city to win with most of the criteria it wins individually and most overall. It's easy to see why San Francisco WON this poll just on the first 4 criteria to rate by.
- Location
- Climate
- Topography
- Economy
San Francisco clearly wins the first 3 right off the bat 100%. The 4th is I'd say still a SF win for 80% here including me. So it was easy to see a clear advantage ALWAYS if Topography and Climate of no winters it would win.
But again I give a thumbs up to Chicago still fully capable to win the #2 spot in the poll. As Chicago pitted against one city in this Poll in other threads. Had that cities couple boosters TOTALLY DEMAND that CHICAGO IS A DECLINING CITY TOTALLY ,and the win is their city booming has the win. But population changing has professionals moving its low to Middle-Class in especially African-Americans declining leading to a change in its demographics continuing. Not total declining stats.
They also tried to drill San Francisco a New One. calling its connected housing ugly and to have few trees and greens in neighborhoods to lessening the Golden Gate even. Got bad a thread SF vs this city too. Just glad it is not happening here.
Toronto though is in the thread title. After all the post defending Toronto and taunting against Chicago in another thread you I posted on. Sorry I say it in a wrong perspective. Being how that thread degraded.
The one who originally included Bellingham in stats. Apparently has one and probably will reply why.
But on topic. I see each city in the Poll as having great offerings. But just 1 city to win with most of the criteria it wins individually and most overall. It's easy to see why San Francisco WON this poll just on the first 4 criteria to rate by.
- Location
- Climate
- Topography
- Economy
San Francisco clearly wins the first 3 right off the bat 100%. The 4th is I'd say still a SF win for 80% here including me. So it was easy to see a clear advantage ALWAYS if Topography and Climate of no winters it would win.
But again I give a thumbs up to Chicago still fully capable to win the #2 spot in the poll. As Chicago pitted against one city in this Poll in other threads. Had that cities couple boosters TOTALLY DEMAND that CHICAGO IS A DECLINING CITY TOTALLY ,and the win is their city booming has the win. But population changing has professionals moving its low to Middle-Class in especially African-Americans declining leading to a change in its demographics continuing. Not total declining stats.
They also tried to drill San Francisco a New One. calling its connected housing ugly and to have few trees and greens in neighborhoods to lessening the Golden Gate even. Got bad a thread SF vs this city too. Just glad it is not happening here.
But SF wins fair and square.
I wasn't taunting Chicago, I merely pointed out correctly that the city has been in decline in terms of influence, population, and socioeconomic health over the past couple decades.
You couldn't handle this fact and had the thread closed, but now insist on migrating that discussion here, where you and the other Chicago boys will make another scene and have this thread closed as well.
I wasn't taunting Chicago, I merely pointed out correctly that the city has been in decline in terms of influence, population, and socioeconomic health over the past couple decades.
You couldn't handle this fact and had the thread closed, but now insist on migrating that discussion here, where you and the other Chicago boys will make another scene and have this thread closed as well.
Then you will blame the torontonians.
Sorry I brought it up I gave no names or city but of course you knew. Just you really did not see NO Chicago residents or Midwesterners were even defending Chicago. I am NOT one I'm com and live in the Northeast US and the other defender for Chicago is a Atlanta area resident. You seemed to be clear you were a Torontonians and another key downplayed of Chi-Town. All the stats given on Chicago's booming core and holding Global status. (though other rising US cities will be ring fast). That Also has Toronto just as likely being surpassed by other North American cities as Chicago in future Global status.
So the whole complete decline because of population and crime taunted toward Chicago. Did not erase current status and extremely vibrant and growing core levels others listed to say total decline claims are nonsense.
My last post on this other thread and arguments here. If you want to say more for me to reply to. We will have to take it to private messaging. Or risk post deleted here as off topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mosdefinitely
GTA = Greater Toronto Area personally. I have a lot of relatives there and I always felt Toronto is vastly underrated as a city. Been to Chicago suburbs before - it's ok but nothing special. I wasn't impressed.
SF suburbs - very scattered, been here too. If you have a couple million $$, you can live like a king in some of the hill-based communities with a gorgeous view. Washington DC - Virginia has some very nice suburbs near DC.
If I had to rank specifically:
1. GTA (by a hair, I've been here in the early 2000s and fell in love with it). Only downside is weather and well... I'm American and Canada as a whole can't provide the vibrant culture/busy life style I feel New York has always provided me.
2. SF suburbs (San Jose, Oakland are also pretty nice cities for nightlife - if you got money in Cali, you can really live like a King probably more than any other state out there with the views and scenery you can get in the hilly region of NoCal). It still mindblowers me how different California and NY is since I grew up in NY but have visited California multiple times. At times, they seem like polar opposites.
3. DC suburbs (I don't have much experience with this but I've been there once and liked it)
4. Chicago suburbs (loved the city, didn't like the suburbs)
I respect your opinion and agree in LOVED the City of Chicago on a visit. But in comparing suburbs? That are generally Middle-class homes to McMansions on degrees of sprawl especially for Chicago. Oldest Suburbs generally have the most in a bit more urban core at least. Then you have your Wealthiest Suburbs.
DC - has its suburbs start away from Core DC much sooner then Chicago's Core but perhaps more wealth overall then Chicago's? DC's also span multiple States and includes Baltimore and its suburbs as a bonus.
Chicago - is on its own in its suburbs and too far from Milwaukee to include their suburbs even, though they touch. it has some very wealthy ones and older suburbs built more as the city and some have their own cores and train to easier access to the cities mass transit.
I won't discuss Toronto's suburbs as I know little about them to say better.
DC can boast a growing CSA overall and of course SF. Though Toronto clearly in Canadian calculating their version of CSA as Toronto's whole Golden Horseshoe. I would be interested if it had US CSA calculating and criteria? If it would still be the Whole Golden Horseshoe for Toronto? Would be interesting if it would? There is a lot of sparse areas in the Horseshoe. That generally won't happen in a CSA in the US.
But still SF won this poll and would probably also on one on suburbs too. Chicago made a clear #2 win. Even if on suburbs alone? DC might win then to me as #2 in suburbs alone.
So are San Diego and Tijuana, Mexico
And Detroit and Windsor, Canada. Probably just because those places are right on the border
Here's a definition for conurbations, in the case of San Diego-Tijuana and Detroit-Windsor, we're working with bi-national conurbations:
Quote:
A conurbation is a region comprising a number of cities, large towns, and other urban areas that, through population growth and physical expansion, have merged to form one continuous urban or industrially developed area. In most cases, a conurbation is a polycentric urbanised area, in which transportation has developed to link areas to create a single urban labour market or travel to work area.
The term "conurbation" was coined in 1915 by Patrick Geddes in his book Cities In Evolution. He drew attention to the ability of the then new technology of electric power and motorised transport to allow cities to spread and agglomerate together, and gave as examples "Midlandton" in England, the Ruhr in Germany, Randstad in the Netherlands, New York City–North Jersey in the United States, the Greater Tokyo Area, Taiheiyō Belt in Japan, NCR of Delhi in India, and Southern Metro Manila in the Philippines.
In the link above, look under the United States, there's a sub-topic for both San Diego-Tijuana and Detroit-Windsor which would give detail about their relations to one another.
These are international conurbations. Below are established links that would give you more detail on each pair.
Probably there is for Vancouver and Bellingham? To seem to infer this is playing unfair to DARE BOOST Vancouver numbers.
Well look, I only added the areas that have "some sort" of international recognition as a bi-national conurbation together. So Detroit + Windsor, San Diego + Tijuana, El Paso + Ciudad Juarez, Mexicali + Calexico, and the Rio Grade Valley on both sides of the border.
The only two other places on the list, aside from those aforementioned border regions, that were combined were the CMAs that comprise of the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Toronto) and Vancouver and its surrounding environs of Abbotsford and Bellingham.
That's it.
For every other city on the list, the population is what their governments have released estimates for to the general public. Meaning for 137 out of the 144 places on the list, I didn't tamper with, didn't touch at all. Just listed the populations that their own governments have released for them. For the American cities, the definition is the CSA, and for the other Latin American cities, it is whatever their government handed over to this organization (see links below).
Here's a link for the American CSAs;
Also here's a detailed explanation for how the Greater Golden Horseshoe works and what it means:
Quote:
The population of the Greater Golden Horseshoe was 8.7 million residents at the 2011 census.
The region is projected to grow to 11.5 million people by 2031. The definition of the Golden Horseshoe as an agglomerated urban area, that is combining Census Metropolitan Areas is similar to how population counts are tabulated for Combined Statistical Area (CSA), which are used in the USA to combine more than one metropolitan area, defined as an MSA (Metropolitan Statistical Area), into a larger overall urbanized area. These metropolitan areas are intrinsically linked through inter-dependence of services, trade, transportation corridors, close proximity and other factors, in this context they can also be viewed as a single region. In 2011, the Greater Horseshoe was the fifth most populous greater urbanized area in North America, just behind the Baltimore-DC-Northern Virginia CSA.
Your original post combined binational conurbations and your stats uses the greater golden horseshoe, so should Toronto be counting the Buffalo metro as well.
Would Toronto and Buffalo count as a binational conurbation? The two cities don't sit adjacent across the border from one another and are a distance away from the border, both of them.
I think what happens more in this region is the Toronto area (Greater Golden Horseshoe Area) spills into the Buffalo area near the border and the region at the border is sort of a "grey area" for both cities. That grey area could tilt in either direction, depending on who you ask.
I'm no expert on that region to say definitively but if there is a case to be made for Toronto and Buffalo as a binational conurbation, I'd listen.
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.
But really, Vancouver is NOT in the thread list. So no threats from Vancouver to Toronto. 
Being facetious but I've seen Torontonians be demanding in recognizing their city in threads and not allow another their due so. Too many Toronto vs. Other US cities get closed. But just don't see Vancouver having a link with Bellingham for the thread or Toronto as relevant anyway. It does seem understandable to me though.
As Chicago pitted against one city in this Poll in other threads. Had that cities couple boosters TOTALLY DEMAND that CHICAGO IS A DECLINING CITY TOTALLY ,and the win is their city booming has the win. But population changing has professionals moving its low to Middle-Class in especially African-Americans declining leading to a change in its demographics continuing. Not total declining stats.
calling its connected housing ugly and to have few trees and greens in neighborhoods to lessening the Golden Gate even. Got bad a thread SF vs this city too. Just glad it is not happening here.
