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.
Location: An Island off the coast of North America
449 posts, read 1,132,664 times
Reputation: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly
Well Vancouver is in Canada for one
But the others all part of a larger metro and most on your list very close to the core
You referenced Newark for example - as Metro Division it by itself would be a top 10 MSA in the US. I am not sure i see your point; basically on on your list are parts of larger mtros and heavilly influenced by the underlying metro they are a part of.
If your questioning whther Austin feels closer to the 35th largest or 15th largest; most definately 35th
i meant vancouver washinton, Portland OR's version of a newark so to speak.
what im trying to say is that some large cities are part of other's metros. Newark isn't the largest city in the country even though it belongs to a metro area of 19 million-new york is. vancouver ain't 23rd, portland is. newark as 68th and vanouver as 100-something-th sounds more reasonable. so if talking about rankings, do u say newark is 68th is or 1st? and even if u say metropolitan division, what bout JC? another big city under NYCmetro. IMO the best way to rank major cities is by populaton density or metro population, but as you go down the list to smaller cities u should go back to general population. its complicated.
i meant vancouver washinton, Portland OR's version of a newark so to speak.
what im trying to say is that some large cities are part of other's metros. Newark isn't the largest city in the country even though it belongs to a metro area of 19 million-new york is. vancouver ain't 23rd, portland is. newark as 68th and vanouver as 100-something-th sounds more reasonable. so if talking about rankings, do u say newark is 68th is or 1st? and even if u say metropolitan division, what bout JC? another big city under NYCmetro. IMO the best way to rank major cities is by populaton density or metro population, but as you go down the list to smaller cities u should go back to general population. its complicated.
See the point but most of these are very affiliated with their core city/metros so they are really not all that distinguishable and in terms of economic or population groeth they are more closely tied to the core cities
On JC for example it is one subway stop to Manhattan; closer than most of Brooklyn or Queens for example, Newark to Manhattan is 15-20 minutes by train/Path
Or Cary NC - as the triangle goes so goes Cary so to speak
If a city isn't already on the map by now, it likely never will be.
Precisely. If anything, the population of the United States will likely begin to stagnate or possibly start to decline in the next 3 or 4 decades. This seems to be what happens when developing countries transition into mature ones. Many established Euro countries have stable or even slightly declining populations.
Precisely. If anything, the population of the United States will likely begin to stagnate or possibly start to decline in the next 3 or 4 decades. This seems to be what happens when developing countries transition into mature ones. Many established Euro countries have stable or even slightly declining populations.
Except the US has a growing population overall not a decling population like parts of Europe. So cities will grow and some industrial cities will surpass there all time highs or peak populations.
Does anyone know if nashville added a county or land area - I am surprised it grew by over 20% at the MSA level over the last 10 years - very impressive
From that list? No.
5 counties were added after the 2000 census. However, in the wikipedia numbers, the 5 counties were already added to the previous 2000 total.
Actually, those 5 counties slightly hampered the overall growth rate (but not by much, as they are sparsely populated to begin with).
The original 8 counties had a population of 1,231,311 in 2000, and grew to 1,502,159...a growth of 270,848 (22.0%) while the 5 added counties had a population of 80,478 in 2000, grew to 87,775, a growth of 7,297 (9.1%).
Nashville's biggest two suburban counties each grew by more than 44%...3 more grew by 22-28%.
Quite frankly, I don't understand why you all think that boise and baton rouge will become huge. Baton Rouge has horrible weather, and there is nothing as a backobone there whatsoever. Boise is geographically challenged. I think that you will see Greensboro, NC become larger because of the huge incerase of high tech industry, beacause people are sick of high taxes in CA, and they are going to move to other states. Also, Greensboro is bolstered by Raleigh and Charlotte. I do agree with Razor123 with Stamford, beacause companies are moving out of NYC and to Ct and NJ. Stamford is also near some very exclusive neighboorhoods, some of whom like to have their companies and jobs nearby, rather than having to commute into NYC.
Quite frankly, I don't understand why you all think that boise and baton rouge will become huge. Baton Rouge has horrible weather, and there is nothing as a backobone there whatsoever. Boise is geographically challenged. I think that you will see Greensboro, NC become larger because of the huge incerase of high tech industry, beacause people are sick of high taxes in CA, and they are going to move to other states. Also, Greensboro is bolstered by Raleigh and Charlotte. I do agree with Razor123 with Stamford, beacause companies are moving out of NYC and to Ct and NJ. Stamford is also near some very exclusive neighboorhoods, some of whom like to have their companies and jobs nearby, rather than having to commute into NYC.
Baton Rouge may not become huge but it can definately reach 1.3+million MSA. It has much potential, I guess you don't know much about the city. And seeing as we're always compared to MS yet we're next to New Orleans and still is a sizable population, it's not that bad nor impossible to grow.
I can't see any city in CT seeing a large population growth, too cold for masses of people to move to.
It seems to me the only way cities will see massive growth in the 21st Century is: 1) a major growth industry, or 2) cheap housing in a Sun Belt state.
I see maybe a city like Beaumont/Port Arthur, TX fitting the bill. Sunbelt state, cheap housing, should see increase in port jobs once the Panama Canal is widened.
Overall, though, I just don't see another big city rising out of thin air. It just doesn't make sense to build big cities anymore, and I am not sure I see any city going from 100,000 to 1,000,000, like we did last century, with Los Angeles, San Diego, Phoneix, Dallas, Houston etc....
I like bowneline's point. In the turn of the century, you saw huge cities expand rapidly, but no I doubt, that would happen. China on the other hand...
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.
