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.
Re: Minneapolis: in addition to the large Hmong and Somali population (and steadily increasing numbers of Hispanic residents, too) it's also worth pointing out the city's urban Native American population.
It's considered a modern immigrant gateway (as is Seattle, I think), so the old view of Minneapolis as an ethnically, but not racially, diverse place is outdated.
This Brookings report covers some of the ins-and-outs of the exploding diversity (mostly immigrant-driven) in the Twin Cities in recent years. In any case, I think it's fair to say that as far as diversity goes they're probably on equal footing.
What? Are you sure Minneapolis is represented by as many foreign cultures as Seattle? I had a test today in Geography and one thing for sure, Minneapolis has a heavy European influence, which is good for diversity, but what about Asian, and Latino, and African American?
But thanks for making the changes, you did a good job.
Just like many cities throughout the U.S., Minneapolis and St. Paul were influenced most by European immigrants. Demographics, however, have and continue to change.
Here is the official racial breakdown from the 2000 Census:
Central Cities of MPLS. & STPL.
Black alone: 99,656
Asian alone: 59,228
Hispanic: 51,781
Other race alone: 27,078
Amer Indian Alaska Native alone: 10,989
Hawaiian and Other Pac Islander alone: 527
Seattle
Asian alone: 73,849
Black alone: 46,716
Hispanic: 29,655
Other race alone: 12,996
Amer Indian Alaska Native alone: 5,645
Hawaiian and Other Pac Islander alone: 2,514
Seattle: 602,000 in 142.5 sq mi
Minneapolis: 390,131 in 58.4 sq mi
St. Paul: 287,151 in 56.2 sq mi Minneapolis/St.Paul: 677,282 in 114.6 sq mi
Winner: Twin Cities with more people in a smaller urban area.
But Seattle wins in the city proper. St.Paul and Minneapolis are different cities. If you want to get right down to that, then Bellevue could be what St.Paul is the Minneapolis, and Seattle would have well over 700,000.
But Seattle wins in the city proper. St.Paul and Minneapolis are different cities. If you want to get right down to that, then Bellevue could be what St.Paul is the Minneapolis, and Seattle would have well over 700,000.
Minneapolis and St. Paul function like no other 2 cities in America. The Dallas-Ft Worth and Bay Areas don't compare. At times you simply don't know whether you're in Minneapolis or St. Paul. Plus they border each other. Traffic flows to and from adn people go about their lives going in and out of each city as if it were one. If you took away the boundary between MPLS and STP it would be one big city.
I know it doesnt really make sense, but honestly MSP functions as one, and the 'Seattle + Bellvue' and 'Dallas + Ft Worth' arguments aren't the same as MPLS + STP
But, you're right. This is a City against CITY thread.
But Seattle wins in the city proper. St.Paul and Minneapolis are different cities. If you want to get right down to that, then Bellevue could be what St.Paul is the Minneapolis, and Seattle would have well over 700,000.
No, it's not the same. The Twin Cities metropolitan area is different than the majority of metropolitan areas in that both Minneapolis and St. Paul are are considered the primary, central cities. They literally border one another (no, they are not completely separated by the Mississippi River) and function as any other central city would.
No, it's not the same. The Twin Cities metropolitan area is different than the majority of metropolitan areas in that both Minneapolis and St. Paul are are considered the primary, central cities. They literally border one another (no, they are not completely separated by the Mississippi River) and function as any other central city would.
But they still are technically different cities with different populations. Not one city with two main areas. I'm just saying that, regardless of how similar and close the cities are, it wouldn't be fair to combine the separate St. Paul and Minneapolis in a city proper comparison. Because they're two cities with different city propers.
But they still are technically different cities with different populations. Not one city with two main areas. I'm just saying that, regardless of how similar and close the cities are, it wouldn't be fair to combine the separate St. Paul and Minneapolis in a city proper comparison. Because they're two cities with different city propers.
I understand what you are saying and agree with you for the most part, but one is basically getting half the picture, especially when it comes to discussing the demographics of central cities. St. Paul is not a suburb, nor does it function in the same sense as Fort Worth, Bellevue, etc... It was where Minneapolis currently is in that it gets most of the attention.
Before moving to the area, I didn't understand the whole Minneapolis - St. Paul thing either. Now that I've been here for a few years, I think that if it were up to me, I would combine the two and reduce the 330+ suburbs to a more manageable number.
I understand what you are saying and agree with you for the most part, but one is basically getting half the picture, especially when it comes to discussing the demographics of central cities. St. Paul is not a suburb, nor does it function in the same sense as Fort Worth, Bellevue, etc... It was where Minneapolis currently is in that it gets most of the attention.
Before moving to the area, I didn't understand the whole Minneapolis - St. Paul thing either. Now that I've been here for a few years, I think that if it were up to me, I would combine the two and reduce the 330+ suburbs to a more manageable number.
I agree, the whole "Twin Cities" thing is weird. To outsiders (non-Minnesotans) and media, you always hear "The Twin Cities", but when we need to put in our 2 cents of anything, its "Woah, Woah, Woah, it's Minneapolis, AND St. Paul, Ok?. You can't combine them"
So, I dont get it. To the rest of the country, we're "The Twin Cities" but when we make any points we have to single them out?
It truly is a phenomenon. I was an Urban Planning guy and still follow the profession closely and with all my studies, I never found an area similar to the Twin Cities. They truely are TWIN CITIES right next to each other.
I get both sides of the argument, but to most Minnesotans it just makes more sense to use them as a whole when comparing.
I like to say "The only difference between MPLS and STP is an imaginary line"
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.
