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.
What are you talking about? Post #47 of the thread you threw the thread off topic. Turning this into a North vs South debate which it is not. Kodeblue took the bait per usual and continued the off topic comments.
I don't throw throw threads off topic nor keep them off topic. I only correct or interject when valid points need to be made. And I do acknowledge the Census designation as much as I acknowledge the 9 or 10 supporting links I posted as a reply with either businesses or organizations referring to the area as the either Mid-Atlantic or Northeast. Leaving that point moot since there is no more to discuss there.
Back on topic, after the DC-Baltimore relationship, which of these places makes up the closest relationship in your view?
You posted a bunch of links to show that MD wasn't part of the south, so it was YOU that took the bait. You derailed the thread. You live in the south, and that's just something you gotta deal with, but in the meantime..Don't mention my name.
Chicago-Milwaukee is the winner. "Best relationship" is the key word. DC looks down on Baltimore, and Baltimore hates DC's guts. I quickly found that out when I moved to DC. When DC didn't have baseball, they followed the Orioles. When the Colts left, Baltimoreons would have rather died in a fire than root for the Redskins. Ironically, when Baltimore football fans were looking for a team to follow during the 13 years without a franchise, the team more took to than any other was the Steelers, as Pittsburgh was the closest NFL city that Baltimore didn't have a strong distaste for. Of course Ravens fans now hate Pittsburgh with a passion.
as OP, I'll be honest and say I thought it was Chicago and Milwaukee from the start. I tried to set it up fairly, but I was kind of interested if people would see it that way.
Baltimore and Washington are the trickiest pair to evaluate. I would venture to say that the two are the closest two cities can get to each other and not be the same metro area. I am not referring to any statistically based entity: I'm talking about how we view places.
Is it Baltimore and Washington....or is it Baltimore/Washington? No answer because each view is held by lots and lots of people.
So as close to each other as they are, no one is going to think is a friendly relationship. And while I cannot define as to why, I suspect that if those "friendly relationships" do exist in near-by cities, they are not very likely to happen on the coasts. And if we look at the interior, I would think they were far more likely to exist in the Midwest than the South.
While a megalopolis, particularly the Northeast Corridor, can and does link a number of cities (five major ones...which is no slight to Providence), it doesn't really create a particularly "zone" as I said before.
By zone, I'm suggesting where two metro areas have combined in on each other than you see a degree of development on the arteries that connect. And as I have chosen to consider Baltimore and Washington as separate cities, the sense that they match up into some sort of a zone with them both being major cities, as I also said before.
as a result, some pairs while making the proximity of distance fine, don't have the connectivity of that zone I speak of. Only two come to mind: New York-Philadelphia
Philadelphia-Baltimore
and not on the list because they are commonly viewed as being the same metro area: Minneapolis-St. Paul
Dallas-Ft Worth
San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose
structurally I can only think of three such pairs: Baltimore-Washington
Chicago-Milwaukee
Los Angeles-San Diego
And the dynamics of Chgo-Milw certainly exceeds the other two.
While a megalopolis, particularly the Northeast Corridor, can and does link a number of cities (five major ones...
You do realize that the distance between NYC and Boston is the same as the distance between NYC and DC? Those 4 cities (NYC, Philly, Baltimore, and DC) may all be "linked", but Boston is clearly pretty far from them. It's about the same distance from my house to both Montreal and Philadelphia. Considering normal traffic conditions, the drive to the former would likely be quicker.
I can’t even begin to figure out what this means, but I feel like you might be missing the point.
I’m not boosting Providence or claiming it to be better than Baltimore, Louisville, Pittsburgh or any of the other cities you listed. There are individual threads dedicated to those comparisons already if you want to peruse them.
I’m just saying that as far as non-MSA city relationships go, the one between Boston and Providence is much more close, historic, established, and stable than the ones between DC and Baltimore or between Chicago and Milwaukee.
Sorry about that. Topper is pretty famous for being the guy scoring points for San Jose whenever he can (Heck, I suppose I end up doing the same for Chicago) Anyway....
I do see your point. And I would think if you looked at our cities throughout the colonial era, a time when population differencials between cities was far smaller, I would imagine that Baltimore-Providence might have been the best example of two major cities being the closest to each other.
In the 1800 census, these were the 10 largest US cities
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...by_decade#1790)
01 New York
02 Philadelphia
03 Boston
04 Charleston
05 Baltimore
06 Northern Liberties, PA (today part of Phila.)
07 Salem, MA
08 Newport, RI
09 Providence, Ri
10 Marblehead, MA & Southwark, PA (today part of Phila)
Counting the three places that are now Philadelphia as one place, it would seem the closest places to each other would be Salem-Boston, Boston-Providence, Providence-Newport
And of course, around this era, there was a city missing in the corridor. A mere 10 years before that census, the only close by city that contained a "George" in its name was named for a king, not a cherry tree chopper.
I think one could make an argument that the oldest pair of close by decent sized cities would definitely be Boston-Providence. Their roots are the deepest and it would be hard to make a link with New York to any of its "neighbors" (Philly, Boston, etc.) prior to when the British took it from the Dutch.
Baltimore and Washington are the trickiest pair to evaluate. I would venture to say that the two are the closest two cities can get to each other and not be the same metro area. I am not referring to any statistically based entity: I'm talking about how we view places.
and not on the list because they are commonly viewed as being the same metro area:
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Dallas-Ft Worth San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose
I get your reasoning behind Baltimore/DC and not San Francisco/San Jose, but I personally think you have it wrong with how things are viewed. I’m not saying this in reference to you, but City data is the home combing or separating areas to make a point, often by the same posters in different threads.
All I can go off of for the DC/Baltimore connection are my friends from DC and northern Virginia that grew up, and still are, Orioles fans, but DC for everything else. On this site it seems like everyone likes to combine them these days, except for this thread. I’m guessing in real life they’re pretty separate with it’s citizens.
I have a lot familiarity with the entire Bay Area with family, friends, and visiting there countless times. On this site it seems like it’s one big city, where in reality all three major cities have their own identity, and their citizens let you know it. Even those outside the city limits identify with a specific city/area, and not the whole. Similar to both Los Angeles and Orange County of that MSA. I’ll give you clumping SF/OAK with the Twin Cities and Dallas/Ft. Worth, but not when you include SJ.
Personally I think If you can’t include the San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose CSA in this poll you can’t include the Baltimore/Washington CSA. But you’re the OP, not me.
a time when population differencials between cities was far smaller, I would imagine that Baltimore-Providence might have been the best example of two major cities being the closest to each other.
The two were considered comparable as recently as 7 years ago.
The only thing Baltimore-Providence share is relative distance to their larger neighboring city, similar architecture, infrastructure layout
Economically, demographically & culturally they are not similar in any regards. A 40% population disparity is massive especially at the levels these two cities work at. Baltimore GDP is larger then Richmond, VA & Providence, RI combined with billions to spare
I do agree Providence is substantially closer to Boston culturally and you feel like you are in the same area. City proper... DC & Baltimore might as well be on different sides of the country from a culture perspective
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.
