The two "dominant" cities in select states- which is the better one? (bigger, metropolitan)
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.
For Pennsylvania I would pick Pittsburgh over Philadelphia any day. It’s cleaner and safer.
"Better" is certainly subjective, but Pennsylvania is interesting here since Pittsburgh seems to be more Pennsylvanian in key aspects while Philly is more Northeastern/East Coast. Pittsburgh's MSA is completely within PA and the CSA stretches into WV and fringe OH counties, whereas Philadelphia's MSA includes large/populous swaths of NJ and DE, and the CSA includes all of south Jersey and most of DE, including its capital and largest city. Although the bulk of metropolitan Philadelphia is in Pennsylvania and is the state's first city, Pittsburgh seems to be more representative of the state so on that basis, I can see an answer for Pittsburgh over Philadelphia apart from personal preference.
I'm not following your logic here. The size disparity between Tampa and Miami isn't anywhere near the scope as it is between Huntsville and Birmingham. In fact Miami and Tampa are more close in size than Pittsburgh and Philly which you consider most acceptable.
It kind of is though. The Miami metro has double the GDP and population of the Tampa metro. For many other things the difference is much greater between the two. For the Birmingham and Huntsville metro population numbers it's almost the exact same story, a little more than twice the amount. I think many people perceive the Pittsburgh metro to be closer to the Philadelphia metro in many factors then they do the Tampa and Miami metros. It's just that Miami takes so many factors to such an extreme that it stands out a lot.
Cleveland is not the dominant city based on objective factors such as metro population, gdp, and growth rates.
I posted in the comment you're responding to that Cleveland is falling behind in population... and I don't believe that automatically means it isn't the most dominant city in Ohio anymore. It still holds the most sports teams in OH (also the most iconic sports teams in the state), has the best urban bones (though a debate could be had with Cincinnati), strongest financial center, and has the most varied suburbs and a wider stretching MSA.
Most major events that take place in Ohio, are still taking place in Cleveland. The '16 RNC, for example.
Cleveland CSA is also well ahead of Columbus and Cincinatti by a pretty large margin.
All things considered, it's still the most dominant. I'd bet when most people think of Ohio, they think of Cleveland first.
Last edited by CCrest182; 03-02-2021 at 07:39 PM..
"Better" is certainly subjective, but Pennsylvania is interesting here since Pittsburgh seems to be more Pennsylvanian in key aspects while Philly is more Northeastern/East Coast. Pittsburgh's MSA is completely within PA and the CSA stretches into WV and fringe OH counties, whereas Philadelphia's MSA includes large/populous swaths of NJ and DE, and the CSA includes all of south Jersey and most of DE, including its capital and largest city. Although the bulk of metropolitan Philadelphia is in Pennsylvania and is the state's first city, Pittsburgh seems to be more representative of the state so on that basis, I can see an answer for Pittsburgh over Philadelphia apart from personal preference.
Philadelphia is to Pennsylvania, what NYC is to New York.
Same goes with Illinois and Chicago.
You have iconic NYC culture and iconic Philadelphia culture.
But you do not find that culture in the other regions of the state as much.
For example, I would say Buffalo - Rochester represents more of New York State culture overall than NYC once you get north of the Hudson Valley and cover a larger area of the state, similar to how Pittsburgh does for Pennsylvania.
In true splitting hairs fashion, I would say Ohio takes the cake as having no true dominate city. Columbus, Cleveland and Cincinnati to me are all equals, with perhaps Columbus being the least interesting historically and architecturally.
The only thing I can think of is that it’s more appealing to white people. Places that do that seem to get boosted on city data
LOL, pretty much. That's the reason why Austin has been getting hyped and ranked by outsiders as the best city in Texas for the past 10 years when it's not even HALF the city Houston and Dallas are (the REAL heavyweight cities in Texas), and honestly isn't even as culturally Texan or as tourist friendly of a city to visit as San Antonio is.
When it comes to objective metrics like population and GDP, the three Ohio cities are about as neck-and-neck as could possibly be.
Metro population (2019 est.)
1. Cincinnati - 2.221 mil
2. Columbus - 2.122 mil
3. Cleveland - 2.048 mil
Urban Area (2018 est.)
1. Cleveland - 1.765 mil
2. Cincinnati - 1.695 mil
3. Columbus - 1.544 mil
GDP (2018)
1. Cincinnati - $141,042 mil.
2. Cleveland - $134,369 mil.
3. Columbus - $129,328 mil.
I'd probably give the nod to Cleveland edging out the other two because of its 3 professional sports teams and legacy cultural institutions like the orchestra and Playhouse Square. Though who knows what will happen in the next 20 years
I am by no means a Cleveland booster but I do think that NE Ohio is still both the dominant brand and region in the state. The only thing that really separates Akron and it's 600k metro/economy from Cleveland are the statistical bylaws that determine MSA boundaries. In truth Cleveland is a market and economy of a 3+ million MSA. I do think it's immediate proximity to statistically separate satellites gives it an edge.
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.