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.
St. Louis...southern flavor? I disagree. Maybe a few Southern influences, but its flavor is overall Midwestern. Washington doesn't really have that kind of flavor to me. St. Louis has only one monument: The Arch. Washington has TONS of monuments. I think St. Louis is a lot more like Pittsburgh (river city) due to its industrial and manufacturing past and also Baltimore and I guess also D.C., if only because they are on similar latitudes. I've heard some people compare St. Louis to Boston on occasion. Chicago I would say is like New York and Philadelphia. Milwaukee and Detroit like Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and maybe Philadelphia. Minneapolis I think is most like Boston. Cleveland is a lot like Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Philadelphia, and Boston. Cincinnati is like Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and D.C. Columbus and Indianapolis really seem to be most like D.C., Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and Baltimore. Kansas City to me is probably on par with Baltimore and Washington, D.C.
You know, I can really see the parallels between Indy and Washington. Interesting; I never thought of that before.
I saw this on here somewhere once before, but now I can't find it. It's a topic that fascinates me. Isn't it interesting how similar trends develop as history repeats itself, and new cities take on the role of old cities? Anyway, enough jibba jabba. For purposes of this thread, I am including Pittsburgh in the East Coast. Let's get this thing started:
Chicago............NYC (urban heart of the region)
St. Louis...........Washington (southern bookend, southern flavor, historical city, on a River, grand monuments)
Milwaukee..........Pittsburgh (as much as I want to say Milwaukee is like Boston, it has so much in common with Pittsburgh it's ridiculous)
Minneapolis........Philly (it's around, but kinda gets overlooked. Each of these is a hidden gem in the region)
Detroit..............Baltimore (decaying urbanization, rough and rampant crime)
What are your thoughts?
Des Moines,IA...............Hartford,CT (places known for insurance. Des Moines wasn't nicknamed "Hartford of the West" for nothing)
^Combined^ metroes are what we thought they were. Combined. They're bogus, a sham, fraudulent. Its a marketing ploy for middle of the pack metroes to try and make themesleves relevant.
SF alone is a great metro but a minnow in a sea sharks so they brainstorm on how not to become tomorrows lunch, wahla they somehow manage to add another 5,000 sq milesof the Bay Area overnight to their metro and they become the 4th or 5th largest metro in the company.
Boston is the 5th largest Metro area in the country.
tomato is a fruit.
actually, DC is the fifth largest and Philadelphia the fourth. http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/NumberPortability/msas.html (broken link)
I'm not sure why that's relevant anyway
tomato is a fruit.
actually, DC is the fifth largest and Philadelphia the fourth. 100 Largest Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) (http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/NumberPortability/msas.html - broken link)
I'm not sure why that's relevant anyway
that list isn't right..L.A isn't first, it actually only has roughly 3 million people more than Chicago.
2000 Census
Chicago: 9,569,924
L.A: 12,872,808I've always been confused on how L.A adds over 4 million people to their CSA. They REALLY must be reaching to pass NYC
that list isn't right..L.A isn't first, it actually only has roughly 3 million people more than Chicago.
2000 Census
Chicago: 9,569,924
L.A: 12,872,808I've always been confused on how L.A adds over 4 million people to their CSA. They REALLY must be reaching to pass NYC
I tend to wonder hwo any of them are compiled. DC grows, of course, when you include Baltimore and shrinks when you don't. MSA's seem to be more art than science.
I tend to wonder hwo any of them are compiled. DC grows, of course, when you include Baltimore and shrinks when you don't. MSA's seem to be more art than science.
Interesting. I read somewhere that the true measure of a metropolitan area is by "urbanized areas." For example, Harrisburg's MSA is around 600,000 people. Yes less than 400,000 people live in "urbanized" areas within that zone. Does this make sense?
St. Louis I would match either to Pittsburgh or Baltimore. Cleveland = Pittsburgh and Buffalo. Detroit=Philadelphia. Chicago=New York. The Twin Cities=Boston. Milwaukee I'd probably compare to Pittsburgh.
St. Louis I would match either to Pittsburgh or Baltimore. Cleveland = Pittsburgh and Buffalo. Detroit=Philadelphia. Chicago=New York. The Twin Cities=Boston. Milwaukee I'd probably compare to Pittsburgh.
Totally... you are dead on! That is nearly exactly what I picked.
St. Louis I would match either to Pittsburgh or Baltimore. Cleveland = Pittsburgh and Buffalo. Detroit=Philadelphia. Chicago=New York. The Twin Cities=Boston. Milwaukee I'd probably compare to Pittsburgh.
Please do not compare Chicago to New York. That's offensive.
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.
