How long before Charlotte and Nashville become major cities and will it make the southeast 2 most important region? (largest, America)

[Prickly Pear]

Originally Posted by NOVA_guy

Yeah... I think it'll be a long time before a southern city ever joins the ranks of NYC, LA, SF, DC, Boston, etc. IMO. But not impossible though.

Surely you’re joking? Atlanta and Miami are the same size as Philadelphia. And Houston and Dallas both are even bigger than Philly.

And assuming you think that capitalism is the only metric that matters, Houston and Dallas are higher than both Boston and Philly in GDP. Atlanta is higher than Seattle.

The southern cities are already right up there.

[QC Dreaming 2]

Originally Posted by Prickly Pear

Surely you’re joking? Atlanta and Miami are the same size as Philadelphia. And Houston and Dallas both are even bigger than Philly.

And assuming you think that capitalism is the only metric that matters, Houston and Dallas are higher than both Boston and Philly in GDP. Atlanta is higher than Seattle.

The southern cities are already right up there.

This!

[Losfrisco]

Originally Posted by wpipkins2

There is no such thing as a ChiPitt mega region. I’m from Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh is northeast and always has been.

Also from Pittsburgh.

Appalachia is much more accurate, or failing that, mid-Atlantic.

It just doesn't make sense to group Pittsburgh and Cleveland in separate regions given distances to the other northeast metros(I don't see Cleveland as midwest).

Its really hard to shoehorn Pittsburgh into any of these nonsense regions people make up to feel important, if there could be one its Pittsburgh-Cleveland-Detroit, with Chicago just being too far west.

There's just no case for Pittsburgh being in any kind of meaningful geographic alignment with the other northeast corridor cities-simply glancing at a map makes that obvious.

[jjbradleynyc]

Originally Posted by whereiend

You left out San Antonio. The Texas Triangle is the most populated corridor in the South, but it's obviously not going to catch the Northeast given that NYC alone has a slightly larger population than the entire triangle.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mega..._United_States

Thanks! I did yeah, my mistake. Also, I left out both Orlando and Tampa metros.

Orlando is at 2.6 million
Tampa is at 3.2 million
and San Antonio is neck and neck with Orlando at 2.6 million

The south and southeast are well represented with large metros in general. And although the cities are not traditional "dense" cities like the midwest and northeast, they are the fastest growing in the US.

A sidenote, it is actually exciting to continue to watch the pace of Orlando, Charlotte and San Antonio's metro area numbers grow, since they are all 3 in the 2.6-2.7 million metro range right now.

They all 3 will surpass long established, but slow growing metros of Baltimore (2.8 million) and St Louis (2.8 million), in the next several years.

[wpipkins2]

Originally Posted by Losfrisco

Also from Pittsburgh.

Appalachia is much more accurate, or failing that, mid-Atlantic.

It just doesn't make sense to group Pittsburgh and Cleveland in separate regions given distances to the other northeast metros(I don't see Cleveland as midwest).

Its really hard to shoehorn Pittsburgh into any of these nonsense regions people make up to feel important, if there could be one its Pittsburgh-Cleveland-Detroit, with Chicago just being too far west.

There's just no case for Pittsburgh being in any kind of meaningful geographic alignment with the other northeast corridor cities-simply glancing at a map makes that obvious.

This is silly. I agree that Cleveland does not fit the mold of most midwestern cities. Cleveland has heavy and light rail but the layout is definitely mid western Great Lake.

Pittsburgh has the PA turnpike not to mention that our college student population leans heavily east. Our travel patterns as well. DC, Philadelphia, and NYC are mor popular than Cleveland Detroit or Chicago. Geographically speaking Pittsburgh and Cleveland are very close to their designated regions. Midwest Great Lake vs Interior North East.

I think the diagonal industrial line from Cleveland-Pittsburgh’s-Baltimore has more in common with one another.

[Bicala]

Originally Posted by aries4118

There will never be a Miami, Atlanta, and Tampa "stretch." Drop that. Like, now.


However, we can start talking about the Southern Crescent or the Southern Appalachian Crescent:

The Southern Crescent Mega-Region (should be renamed from Piedmont-Atlantic)

Raleigh/Research Triangle<--> <-->Piedmont Triad<-->Charlotte<-->Greenville<-->ATLANTA<-->Birmingham<-->Huntsville <-->Nashville


{And...ATLANTA <-->Chattanooga<-->Knoxville<-->Tri-Cities}


*Could also be called The Southern Appalachian Crescent Mega-Region



Description:

Atlanta is the fulcrum, the heart.

One arm stretches northeast to Raleigh/Research Triangle via Charlotte and the Piedmont Triad.

Another arm stretches west, then north to Nashville via Birmingham and Huntsville.

A big finger stretches north to Chattanooga, Knoxville, and the Tri-Cities.

Three little fingers stretch to Columbus/Opelika-Auburn/Montgomery, Macon/Warner Robins, and Augusta.

Will that make it the 2nd most important region? I would think not.

[Joakim3]

Originally Posted by wpipkins2

This is silly. I agree that Cleveland does not fit the mold of most midwestern cities. Cleveland has heavy and light rail but the layout is definitely mid western Great Lake.

Pittsburgh has the PA turnpike not to mention that our college student population leans heavily east. Our travel patterns as well. DC, Philadelphia, and NYC are mor popular than Cleveland Detroit or Chicago. Geographically speaking Pittsburgh and Cleveland are very close to their designated regions. Midwest Great Lake vs Interior North East.

I think the diagonal industrial line from Cleveland-Pittsburgh’s-Baltimore has more in common with one another.

Baltimore has more in common with Philly & NYC than it does Cleveland & Pittsburgh

[wpipkins2]

Originally Posted by Joakim3

Baltimore has more in common with Philly & NYC than it does Cleveland & Pittsburgh

Baltimore has a lot in common with Philadelphia but is nothing like NYC. Philadelphia is substantially larger and more robust than Baltimore. Baltimore is a medium sized metro and is a peer city to Pittsburgh and Cleveland. Baltimore is nothing like NYC in fact nowhere is similar to NYC.

[Joakim3]

Originally Posted by wpipkins2

Baltimore has a lot in common with Philadelphia but is nothing like NYC. Philadelphia is substantially larger and more robust than Baltimore. Baltimore is a medium sized metro and is a peer city to Pittsburgh and Cleveland. Baltimore is nothing like NYC in fact nowhere is similar to NYC.

It’s has zero to do with size… and if we are using that as basis Baltimore is substantially larger than Cleveland & Pittsburgh

Baltimore is more similar to Philly & NYC than it does with Pittsburgh & Cleveland in look, feel, culture & history.

[Dw572]

I think the Southeast and South might've already passed the Midwest, if not atleast equal. Imo I don't think it'll be able to compete with the West Coast though. The West is the only region that owns the Pacific front, while Florida and the SE has to share the Atlantic with the NE.

It's a good comparison to the Midwest forsure. The Midwest has been generally declining, I mean they call it the "rust belt" for a reason, plus being the coldest region.