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.
No, because the portion of the state actually is the Bridgeport-Stamford-Danbury metro area(Fairfield County). So, there isn't a part of CT in the NYC metro area. It is a part of the CSA though.
How about Memphis then?
Looks like their MSA spills into Arkansas and its significantly bigger than Little Rock MSA (by nearly 600K).
I think the difference with Kansas City versus those areas is that the Kansas side of the overall Kansas City metro area actually has more people than the Wichita metro area. Between Johnson, Wyandotte and Leavenworth Counties, there are about 880,000 people, which is about 230,000 more people than the Wichita metro area. So, there is a different dynamic between the KC example and that of CT and AR in the Memphis metro area.
I think the difference with Kansas City versus those areas is that the Kansas side of the overall Kansas City metro area actually has more people than the Wichita metro area. Between Johnson, Wyandotte and Leavenworth Counties, there are about 880,000 people, which is about 230,000 more people than the Wichita metro area. So, there is a different dynamic between the KC example and that of CT and AR in the Memphis metro area.
I suppose it's debatable, man KC needs to get a major metro.
Quote:
Originally Posted by testa50
Yeah I'm not sure why the discussion jumped to states like Mississippi.
I did some digging and found this clue upthread-
[quote=Losfrisco;66449682]A comparison of four states with relatively obscure primary MSA's:
Kansas: Witchita MSA (19% of state population)
Connecticut: Hartford MSA (43% of state population)
Mississippi: Jackson MSA (18% of state population)
Arkansas: Little Rock MSA (22% of state population)
Which state would lose the most status absent its primary MSA?[/QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airborneguy
Remember the question was simply “status”. That alone pretty much makes it only relevant for NY and IL.
It was a closed ended question with four distinct poll options underneath it. The fact that they are recognized as states is prima facie evidence that they have status.
There's another thread that poses the same question for New York, Illinois, and others:
Kansas and Connecticut are more defined by cities that aren't even in them (Kansas City and New York City, respectively) than ones that are, so it wouldn't be these two. Mississippi would actually improve without Jackson, so it's not that one. I guess that leaves Arkansas. Granted that Fayetteville carries an increasing share of the weight for that state, but I still think the loss of Little Rock would hurt.
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.
