Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which city is the fourth most important in the nation?
San Francisco 118 25.00%
Washington D.C. 217 45.97%
Boston 63 13.35%
Houston 74 15.68%
Voters: 472. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-06-2010, 01:19 PM
 
Location: Long Beach
2,347 posts, read 2,785,715 times
Reputation: 931

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jluke65780 View Post
Obviously you didn't look because if you did than you'd see these cities are not regional cities.
One, I'm not sure what cities you're refering to exactly. Boston and SF are not regional cities, they are players nationally and internationally.

The other ones I mentioned were for arguments sake. Are they important, yes. As important as the top 5, NO. Could they be in the top 10, probably

Miami is important to Florida. Atlanta/Dallas can battle over Southern supremacy. Dallas/Houston can battle over Texan supremacy. Philly has the unfortunate postition of being located between NYC and DC. And Seattle is important to the Pacific Northwest.

When arguing, try to be specific.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-06-2010, 02:07 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
20,516 posts, read 33,561,459 times
Reputation: 12157
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin View Post
One, I'm not sure what cities you're refering to exactly. Boston and SF are not regional cities, they are players nationally and internationally.
Honestly, because of the industry Houston has, they are also players nationally and internationally.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 02:45 PM
 
196 posts, read 458,299 times
Reputation: 59
For #4, I'll say D.C. Then SF, then Boston, then Houston.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 03:22 PM
 
30 posts, read 56,807 times
Reputation: 21
Philadelphia at #4. Too Much National History. D.C. could be anywhere in the top 4 or 5, depending on how you see fit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 03:27 PM
 
Location: NYC
1,213 posts, read 3,609,594 times
Reputation: 1254
I'm sure it's been mentioned somewhere on this thread already, but I don't feel like looking through the whole thing. I've always considered DC to be part of the "Big Three" with Chicago coming in at number 4.

1. New York
2. Los Angeles
3. Washington, DC
4. Chicago
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 03:32 PM
 
Location: Pasadena
882 posts, read 2,246,335 times
Reputation: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin View Post
One, I'm not sure what cities you're refering to exactly. Boston and SF are not regional cities, they are players nationally and internationally.

The other ones I mentioned were for arguments sake. Are they important, yes. As important as the top 5, NO. Could they be in the top 10, probably

Miami is important to Florida. Atlanta/Dallas can battle over Southern supremacy. Dallas/Houston can battle over Texan supremacy. Philly has the unfortunate postition of being located between NYC and DC. And Seattle is important to the Pacific Northwest.

When arguing, try to be specific.
Imo, Houston is not top 4, but is in contention for the 5th, 6th, or 7th spot. At worst, Houston is 7th, at best 5th.

Houston's energy role makes it an international player. As the location for NASA's Johnson Space Center, that makes Houston a national player, and even an international player for aeronautics and space exploration, etc. Houston is a national player in the medical industry both in hospital care and medical research. No need to mention the TMC or MD Anderson. The Port of Houston, among the largest in the world, allows Houston to be an international player in trade, with shipping,exporting,importing,etc.

Seriously, some may think that Houstonians boast, for constantly having to bring out all these facts about Houston, but we wouldn't need to if people kept downgrading Houston to things like simply "regional cities". Houston is much more than that. Just because Houston might not be seen as the most important city in its region, or even its state, doesnt diminish its role in the country and world. Houston is definetely is in contention for being the 4th-7th city in the US.(Me personally, Houston is 5th, though its probably closer to 6th.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 05:31 PM
 
Location: Boston, MA
289 posts, read 1,025,741 times
Reputation: 134
New York City IS the UN-ufficial inancial Capitol of the world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 05:33 PM
 
Location: Long Beach
2,347 posts, read 2,785,715 times
Reputation: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthmoreAve View Post
Imo, Houston is not top 4, but is in contention for the 5th, 6th, or 7th spot. At worst, Houston is 7th, at best 5th.

Houston's energy role makes it an international player. As the location for NASA's Johnson Space Center, that makes Houston a national player, and even an international player for aeronautics and space exploration, etc. Houston is a national player in the medical industry both in hospital care and medical research. No need to mention the TMC or MD Anderson. The Port of Houston, among the largest in the world, allows Houston to be an international player in trade, with shipping,exporting,importing,etc.

Seriously, some may think that Houstonians boast, for constantly having to bring out all these facts about Houston, but we wouldn't need to if people kept downgrading Houston to things like simply "regional cities". Houston is much more than that. Just because Houston might not be seen as the most important city in its region, or even its state, doesnt diminish its role in the country and world. Houston is definetely is in contention for being the 4th-7th city in the US.(Me personally, Houston is 5th, though its probably closer to 6th.)
It's laughable to think that Houston would outrank SF or Boston. You're gonna need to explain what TMC/MD Anderson are; hospitals? But I know you know what Mass General is. To think it would even outrank DC is a joke.

Just because I didn't think it belonged in the top 4/5 didn't mean I was downgrading it. I just used those cities as comparison. I know it has a busy port. I know of the space industry. I know of the medical industry there. But when ALL factors are taken into play culture, livablity, industry, commerce, public transportation, Houston falls well short.

Last edited by lmkcin; 03-06-2010 at 06:10 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2010, 12:18 AM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
20,516 posts, read 33,561,459 times
Reputation: 12157
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin View Post
It's laughable to think that Houston would outrank SF or Boston. You're gonna need to explain what TMC/MD Anderson are; hospitals? But I know you know what Mass General is. To think it would even outrank DC is a joke.

Just because I didn't think it belonged in the top 4/5 didn't mean I was downgrading it. I just used those cities as comparison. I know it has a busy port. I know of the space industry. I know of the medical industry there. But when ALL factors are taken into play culture, livablity, industry, commerce, public transportation, Houston falls well short.
Houston is up there with culture. Livability is subjective. Industry wise, Houston is indeed up there. Commerce, Houston AGAIN is up there. Public transit is where Houston falls short but is still improving as there are currently four light rail systems currently under construction.

If you know what the medical industry that Houston has, then you would know of the TMC and MD Anderson. But I'll explain anyway. What is the TMC? It is the largest medical center in the world focusing mostly on research. It has over 48 institutions with 13 only being hospitals and 19 being Academic research centers. It attracts people from all over the world and it is currently growing. What is MD Anderson? It is the number Cancer center in the country according to USNews. So obviously, this hospital and medical center makes it much more then something regional.

BTW, he never said it would outrank DC. But I don't think you know much about Houston. BTW, I don't think it's laughable at all if one was to place Houston above Boston. I personally don't think it is. But those two are close to each other.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2010, 03:04 AM
 
Location: ITL (Houston)
9,221 posts, read 15,961,448 times
Reputation: 3545
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainrock View Post
Philly + connecting micro regions Real GDP 2008 would be a well diversified $453 B.

Houston is a heavily oil dependant $403 B in 2008. Houstons GDP acts more like a stock than an actual economic barometer. Houstons GDP increased $100 B between 2005-2008. Meanwhile diversified metroes like SF,Bos,Phillys only averaged $30B increase over the same time frame.

In 2005 Houstons GDP was $300M, almost even with Philly. Houstons GDP spiked in 2008 mainly due to the historic rise in oil prices $145 per barrel. Houston GDP is has probably fallen back into the mid $300's B with oil prices hovering around $70 B per barrel.

Philly -$332 B
Allentown-$28 B
Trenton-$25 B
Lancaster-$20 B
Reading-$15 B
Atlantic City-$14B
Dover-$6B
Vineland-Millville $5 B
Lebanon-$5 B
Ocean City- $4 B

Philly unoffical CMSA $453 B

Houston- Ehh Id guesstimate around $370 B considering the current market conditions in the energy market.
Why would Houston go down this year? And it didn't just spike in 2008. Let's compare the two. These numbers start from the year 2001-2008. Also throwing in Boston for lmkcin, who thinks it's laughable for Houston to outrank Boston. Looks like it does:

Boston: 230,658, 231,908, 238,419, 250,412, 259,157, 273,995, 289,415, 299,590
Houston: 230,404, 233,811, 252,663, 280,820, 312,314, 346,338, 375,451, 403,202
Philadelphia: 241,831, 253,505, 267,316, 280,141, 295,454, 309,977, 322,325, 331,897

So even with all of those extra MSA's and other metropolitan areas you lumped in with Philly, Houston is still right there. Shows you it's economic size. Try it yourself: BEA : Gross Domestic Product by Metropolitan Area

Last edited by Trae713; 03-07-2010 at 03:13 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top