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.
Greater Orlando versus Greater Las Vegas versus Riverside/San Bernardino (the Inland Empire)
It's almost hard to believe that the Inland Empire is just a few years away from becoming the second largest metropolitan area in California after Los Angeles and after supplanting the San Francisco/Oakland metropolitan area. It's even harder to grasp around the fact that if it continues with its current trajectory that within 20-30 years it will also be the #10 largest MSA in the United States behind New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston, Washington DC, Miami/Fort Lauderdale, Atlanta, and Phoenix. Though the writing has been on the wall for years now, at the present moment the Inland Empire leads all of California in economic job growth by percentage and comes in second overall in raw total job growth behind the much larger Los Angeles MSA.
Yet despite the gains, the Inland Empire's profile remains subdued and muted relative to its size.
Orlando, also no stranger to explosive population gains over the decades, is also on a trajectory towards becoming its state's second largest metropolitan area behind Miami/Fort Lauderdale and thus supplanting the Tampa Bay Area, which in and of itself is going through a super boom as well. By most indicators, Orlando has become the top performer in Florida when it comes to job creation, population gains, GDP gains, and the like for the last one or two years in Florida. The area also stands to gain a massive influx of Puerto Rican expats in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria in 2017.
Las Vegas is the youngest major city in the United States and was the fastest growing city and metropolitan area of the 20th century. It's population essentially went from 0 to over 2.2 million people in a span of 117 years from 1900 to 2017. The city is a direct beneficiary of its location, which is in a low tax and low regulatory state that borders California to the east. It's generally warmer climate and location in the heart of the West attribute to its status as a migration hub from all over the United States but most especially from California. It's also a pretty large immigrant hub, especially for a place of its size. In recent years the largest city without any professional sports teams went from 0 to 2 in just as many years (2). Over the last half-a-century it has cultivated a brand for itself as one of the world's top entertainment centers, with a nightlife scene that is even more active than its megacity neighbor to the west (Los Angeles).
All three are relatively younger regions, perhaps the three absolute youngest regions in the Sunbelt. The lack of a cohesive transportation network with an almost non-existent rail transport network is perhaps one of the most obvious trademarks of their collective youth.
Compare them on the following factors for this thread: climate, scenery, quality of life, cost of living, architecture, entertainment, location, food scene, museums, parks, and nightlife. As a bonus topic, which if the three is the most urban and has the best downtown?
State your preference on which one you would choose to live in if you had to pick between the three.
Location: Watching half my country turn into Gilead
3,530 posts, read 4,181,377 times
Reputation: 2925
Greater Las Vegas > Greater Orlando > Inland Empire, easily. Vegas has the bigger and baddest global recognition out of the three, will have two professional sports teams, and is renowned for being the world’s adult playground. Given the above criteria and astronomical growth of all three, this is a no-brainer.
Greater Orlando versus Greater Las Vegas versus Riverside/San Bernardino (the Inland Empire)
It's almost hard to believe that the Inland Empire is just a few years away from becoming the second largest metropolitan area in California after Los Angeles and after supplanting the San Francisco/Oakland metropolitan area. It's even harder to grasp around the fact that if it continues with its current trajectory that within 20-30 years it will also be the #10 largest MSA in the United States behind New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston, Washington DC, Miami/Fort Lauderdale, Atlanta, and Phoenix. Though the writing has been on the wall for years now, at the present moment the Inland Empire leads all of California in economic job growth by percentage and comes in second overall in raw total job growth behind the much larger Los Angeles MSA.
Yet despite the gains, the Inland Empire's profile remains subdued and muted relative to its size.
Orlando, also no stranger to explosive population gains over the decades, is also on a trajectory towards becoming its state's second largest metropolitan area behind Miami/Fort Lauderdale and thus supplanting the Tampa Bay Area, which in and of itself is going through a super boom as well. By most indicators, Orlando has become the top performer in Florida when it comes to job creation, population gains, GDP gains, and the like for the last one or two years in Florida. The area also stands to gain a massive influx of Puerto Rican expats in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria in 2017.
Las Vegas is the youngest major city in the United States and was the fastest growing city and metropolitan area of the 20th century. It's population essentially went from 0 to over 2.2 million people in a span of 117 years from 1900 to 2017. The city is a direct beneficiary of its location, which is in a low tax and low regulatory state that borders California to the east. It's generally warmer climate and location in the heart of the West attribute to its status as a migration hub from all over the United States but most especially from California. It's also a pretty large immigrant hub, especially for a place of its size. In recent years the largest city without any professional sports teams went from 0 to 2 in just as many years (2). Over the last half-a-century it has cultivated a brand for itself as one of the world's top entertainment centers, with a nightlife scene that is even more active than its megacity neighbor to the west (Los Angeles).
All three are relatively younger regions, perhaps the three absolute youngest regions in the Sunbelt. The lack of a cohesive transportation network with an almost non-existent rail transport network is perhaps one of the most obvious trademarks of their collective youth.
Compare them on the following factors for this thread: climate, scenery, quality of life, cost of living, architecture, entertainment, location, food scene, museums, parks, and nightlife. As a bonus topic, which if the three is the most urban and has the best downtown?
State your preference on which one you would choose to live in if you had to pick between the three.
I was thinking this too recently, it's the only reason I support the IE being separated due to its size almost the second largest in the state next to the first it's insane to have two very large metros in the same market. Although, this comparison is very hard to choose between he 3, but I would choose the IE for now, but I really enjoy the other two even outside of their tourist corridors.
I was thinking this too recently, it's the only reason I support the IE being separated due to its size almost the second largest in the state next to the first it's insane to have two very large metros in the same market. Although, this comparison is very hard to choose between he 3, but I would choose the IE for now, but I really enjoy the other two even outside of their tourist corridors.
It can be chilling to think that the Greater Los Angeles CSA will one day be home to two of the Top 10 largest MSAs in the United States.
The Inland Empire is heavily suburban in nature but like all places in the world it is currently going through an infill and boom phase in the core sections of both Riverside and San Bernardino, with Downtown Riverside having improved by leaps and bounds as compared to where it was just 18 years ago. UC-Riverside has also developed over the decades into a formidable and respectable school academically, I think in the U.S. Top 70 range now. I also think Ontario International Airport and the freeway infrastructure already in place are ahead of schedule for the region, so it has some breathing room while absorbing this potential growth.
Still though, the level of density and urbanization between Los Angeles metropolitan area and Riverside/San Bernardino metropolitan area will make them unique in a sense since both are poised to be in the United States' ten largest (second and tenth respectively) one day. There are like four high-occupancy highways that go from Los Angeles to the Inland Empire. The Northeast Corridor also has several large metropolitan areas stringing from one to the next but the level of development and density between them remain less than what exists between Los Angeles and the Inland Empire.
As it is given the room it has for expansion, the Inland Empire is likely going to be California's fastest growing all the way up to midcentury. It's probably also California's best metropolitan area after Los Angeles, San Francisco/Oakland, San Diego, and San Jose. Meaning probably the best one in California's interior sections.
For what it is worth, I think Los Angeles-Inland Empire-San Diego-Tijuana are by themselves also a cohesive megaregion and an emerging (potential) megalopolis.
Last edited by Trafalgar Law; 10-17-2018 at 05:36 PM..
Please elaborate on why the Inland Empire is the "next" best area in California to you. Let's first agree that "best" is completely subjective, especially in a state as polarizing as California...
While I have no problem acknowledging the Bay Area and San Francisco as the second strongest and second most prestigious city/area in California, I can tell you emphatically and with no hesitation that it isn't the second best city in California to me, on a more intimate level. Clearly, being of Asian background, SF would present a greater appeal to you than to the average person of black ethnicities---what I'm doing here is illustrating how wishy-washy a designation of "best" is here...
Understood and agreed on everything else in your write-up, but please elaborate how the IE qualifies as "next best", especially considering the fluidity and connotation of "best" in this instance. I don't know anyone black who would agree with your "ranking" of California areas, beyond maybe the first two, for anything other than prestige, and not all would be sold on that, and my nearly entire family on both sides is from California (with plenty of multiracial within)...
Please elaborate on why the Inland Empire is the "next" best area in California to you. Let's first agree that "best" is completely subjective, especially in a state as polarizing as California...
While I have no problem acknowledging the Bay Area and San Francisco as the second strongest and second most prestigious city/area in California, I can tell you emphatically and with no hesitation that it isn't the second best city in California to me, on a more intimate level. Clearly, being of Asian background, SF would present a greater appeal to you than to the average person of black ethnicities---what I'm doing here is illustrating how wishy-washy a designation of "best" is here...
Understood and agreed on everything else in your write-up, but please elaborate how the IE qualifies as "next best", especially considering the fluidity and connotation of "best" in this instance. I don't know anyone black who would agree with your "ranking" of California areas, beyond maybe the first two, for anything other than prestige, and not all would be sold on that, and my nearly entire family on both sides is from California (with plenty of multiracial within)...
Whoa there Plato, . . .you should probably reread his post.
To the thread topic: This is one instance where I could choose any of the 3 and not care. Orlando is what i instinctively clicked on though
Last edited by jdaelectro; 10-17-2018 at 05:57 PM..
Reason: answering the thread question
Entertainment: depends on what you're looking for...
Location: push, probably Vegas for me, though
Food: push
Museums: push
Parks: Vegas
Nightlife: Vegas/Orlando tie
Urbanity: Orlando/Vegas tie
Best downtown: Vegas/Orlando tie
I wouldn't choose the IE for anything, I actually have a best friend, a Latina from Riverside who relocated to the Atlanta area a decade ago. To keep it simple, if I can live in Riverside, I can live in LA. Wouldn't consider anywhere else in the IE. The only place I would consider would be Riverside, but it loses easily to these other two, to me...
Orlando and Vegas are pretty much the same city to me. Neither high on my list of relocation....I love Vegas' location between the intermountain West and California, it has a burgeoning black middle class and festivities towards its black population, and it now has two big league sports franchises with potential for more. I've been told the dating scene isn't all that...
Orlando has a stronger black presence socio-politically. It has two big league franchises. I don't value its location nor the weather in either city. I'm almost 30, nightlife for me now means a lounge here or there, enjoying unique local festivities, and this can be found in both...
If you forced me to pick, I'd probably take Vegas, but the truth is I could do either if the right set of circumstances presented themselves. I wouldn't choose either for museums, sports, nightlife, or any of those other superficial categories, and neither is particularly urban...
Whoa there Plato, . . .you should probably reread his post.
To the thread topic: This is one instance where I could choose any of the 3 and not care. Orlando is what i instinctively clicked on though
I read it, the shining points for the IE would be its population and economic growth. Not particularly unique attributes, as there are other places in California growing faster or just behind the IE...
The IE is an LA outpost in my view without the benefits of living in LA. There are other healthy economic areas in California; I can't imagine a circumstance that I'd be under pressure to choose the one with the most positive economic gains currently. Not to diminish that, but if those are the best attributes it has, it certainly doesn't stand out compared to Orlando and Vegas, and the IE has to give me more than that...
Yay, a fresh new thread. Glad to see the IE finally getting some recognition, very underrated due to being in LA's shadow. Most likely the most underrated MSA for its size. Although I understand its huge population growth is because of the influx coming in from other parts of California, namely LA & Orange county. IE area is much more affordable compared to LA but mostly suburban sprawl. Riverside, the most populous city in IE does however have a decent downtown. The historic Mission Inn & annual Festival of Lights during the holidays are truly spectacular. The festival runs about a month and I believe is the largest x-mas public lights display in the country? But yeah Riverside is the more prosperous IE city. Although the IE (San Bernardino in particular) is no stranger to having an above average poverty, vacancy, and crime rate. Overall Vegas & Orlando outshine IE in most of those categories but IE is slowly getting better. To live I would choose IE, particularly Riverside; & Vegas/Orlando to visit.
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.
