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: Cleveland bound with MPLS in the rear-view
5,509 posts, read 11,870,451 times
Reputation: 2501
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by msamhunter
MSA's and CSA's are definitions defined by OMB, not looking at the map or by square miles. Cleveland MSA consists of Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain and Medina counties due to the patterns defined. It is no different than Lafayette, Bloomington and Kokomo not being part of Indianapolis CSA and you can get to Kokomo in 20 minutes from the northside and no traffic.
Your example isn't an apples to apples comparison because you are comparing a CSA to an MSA. It's apples to oranges. Apples to apples is MSA to MSA or CSA to CSA but not MSA to CSA. MSA wise, CBus and Indy are the smallest land area wise (maps are very deceiving to the naked eye), but yet you give the bump to Cleveland based off of land area thereby making Cleveland the runner with the 10 second head start.
I have no qualms with using CSA, just make it across the board instead of giving one area an advantage over the others. Indy is only 3100 sq miles. Cleveland is just over 3900. Akron and Youngstown have their own MSA, separate fips codes due to work patterns between the three locations. While it's not necessarily fair for St. Louis to have 8k+ square miles, it is its official designation of counties within its MSA. You are not going to chop off the Illinois counties because the MSA is too large land wise.
Which ever base criteria you use for population, CSA,MSA, Television market etc. it should be the same across the board. No one said OMB makes complete sense, but it is official. As I said earlier, using base for everyone may keep the order the same or it may change who knows, but to give one area an unfair advantage over all of the others takes away from all of the hard work and dedication you put into doing it and gives a sense of personal preference when you were truly not trying to do that.
MSA Land Areas
KC - 7952
Indy - 3135
Cleveland - 3979
Detroit - 3913
Chicago - 9581
MSP - 6364
Milwaukee - 4084
STL - 8458
Cincy - 4465
CBus - 3169
Oh, how I REALLY wish "urbanized areas" were how metros were defined, because I hate this MSA/CSA bull$hit! What Blue Earth is doing (which I agree with) is trying to give an "apples-to-apples" comparison between urbanized areas by combining Cleveland with Akron and comparing it to say, St. Louis. If you start adding adjascent counties in Indianapolis and Columbus, you'd be adding almost exclusively non-continuous urbanized areas/populations to the total, which would skew the purpose of the analysis.
Blue Earth took the time to do this right and I completely agree thus far. But like I said, maybe MSA/CSA aren't the answer......I personally prefer urbanized areas.
Location: Cleveland bound with MPLS in the rear-view
5,509 posts, read 11,870,451 times
Reputation: 2501
Quote:
Originally Posted by austiNati
Cincinnati and Dayton are pretty much as connected as Cleveland and Akron, at this point. Multiple places that are considered suburban Dayton, can be found in counties included in the Cincinnati MSA. Even Dayton's Newspaper headquarters in is a county included in the Cincy MSA. I-75 is being widened to 8 continous lanes from I-275 (Cincy beltway) to I-675 (Dayton spur route). That's an area of 3 million people. Our suburbs are now connected. I wonder where the Cincy-Dayton CSA would stand in regards to GDP
Man, that kinda pi$$es me off actually, because even in Minneapolis-St. Paul, the two cities are 10 miles apart and even THAT small section isn't 8 continuous lanes between both cities, yet it handles more traffic (assumption) between two LARGER cities! I don't always understand how some freeways are built the way they are while others aren't. Even the Kennedy Expressway in Chicago is no more than 6 continuous lanes wide at most parts, and it's had traffic issues for decades, and often more than half the average day! I just don't get it!
Oh, how I REALLY wish "urbanized areas" were how metros were defined, because I hate this MSA/CSA bull$hit! What Blue Earth is doing (which I agree with) is trying to give an "apples-to-apples" comparison between urbanized areas by combining Cleveland with Akron and comparing it to say, St. Louis. If you start adding adjascent counties in Indianapolis and Columbus, you'd be adding almost exclusively non-continuous urbanized areas/populations to the total, which would skew the purpose of the analysis.
Blue Earth took the time to do this right and I completely agree thus far. But like I said, maybe MSA/CSA aren't the answer......I personally prefer urbanized areas.
Urbanized areas aren't good because economic breakdowns are not by UA, it's by MSA/CSA. I also understand what blue was doing, but OMB has officially defined MSA/CSA, based off of a myriad of things, including work travel patterns. The land mass is what the land mass is. Even taking into account ONLY the land mass, Milwaukee is still the smallest in land mass at 1700+ sq mi but yet Blue is only taking into consideration for Cleveland based off of land mass all while ignoring Milwaukee. That is an unfair advantage as when doing anything on the lines of what Blue did, your base has to be the same across the board however they are defined. Adding Akron MSA to Cleveland MSA is improper because 1, they are two different MSAs with two different FIPS codes designated by OMB. Doing it because it feels about the size of STL or he feels it should be the size of STL is of no consequence. It isn't as officially designated. It used to be yes, but his study isn't based off of populations of 30-40 years ago, it's based off of current and Cleveland and STL just are not the same MSA wise. CSA, yes they are similar and if you want to take the CSA you just do not do it for one, you take the CSA of all and compare that way. That's the only way it is fair across the board. Other than that you are showing nothing but favoritism by giving one and advantage based off of land mass and it isn't even the smallest land mass to begin with.
chicago - 8,472,015
detroit - 3,770,281
minneapolis/st. paul - 2,468,367
st. louis - 2,113,914
cleveland - 1,682,301
cincinnati - 1,569,034
kansas city - 1,460,881
milwaukee - 1,340,468
indianapolis - 1,292,636
columbus - 1,206,847
Okay then how many other large cities can you find that are in a similar situation with it's MSA. You probably can't find any, at least in the midwest. The fact is that Clevelands MSA has the smallest land area of all these other Midwest large city MSAs included, most by far. Even when combined with Akron it's still the smallest. Cleveland and Akron already being in the same CSA is saying something. The MSA and CSA classifications are very technical, there was probably one little thing off with Cleveland/Akron that kept it from being one MSA.
So if it's so unique, why wasn't that taken into consideration when setting up the boundaries? Surely the people who set all that up noticed. Your argument is not with me, it's with them. I get what you're saying to some degree, but unless they change the classifications, Cleveland and Akron are not the same MSA, no matter how much you want them to be.
I'm positive that I heard you say multiple times that you should compare by city proper. Almost all in the Ohio forum. You said yourself you were against comparing them by MSA or CSA. I don't want to look through all your posts to find this, but if I have to I will.
If you're positive of that, then I don't think you've been really reading whta I've posted. I've argued that city proper size plays a role in the perception of city size (particularly when people consider moving), but I haven't argued that it's the single factor of importance.
The fact is that you're twisting stats and words just so you can say Columbus has more minorities than Cleveland. You would have to be unbelievably naive to think the far majority of people wouldn't think you're talking about percentage when you state Columbus has more minorities than Cleveland. You're not supposed to compare raw numbers, especially when the city of Columbus is twice the population of Columbus in the city limits. The fact that Columbus has more blacks and Hispanics in city limits than Cleveland means little to nothing, Columbus has twice the population and 3 times the land area.
You can compare both raw numbers AND percentage of population. I really think you are trying to make an argument about something that I'm not. I don't know how many more times I can say this: Columbus has more in numbers, Cleveland has more as a percentage of population. In the next decade or so, this will all be moot, as Columbus will most likely have the largest as a percentage of population as well given its growth rates of minority populations. You can look at the numbers yourself, you don't need me to tell you that.
Location: Cleveland bound with MPLS in the rear-view
5,509 posts, read 11,870,451 times
Reputation: 2501
Quote:
Originally Posted by slengel
midwest urbanized area population, 2009
chicago - 8,472,015
detroit - 3,770,281
minneapolis/st. paul - 2,468,367
st. louis - 2,113,914
cleveland - 1,682,301
cincinnati - 1,569,034
kansas city - 1,460,881
milwaukee - 1,340,468
indianapolis - 1,292,636
columbus - 1,206,847
Thanks, this is probably what people truly experience when they go to these cities....not the small rural villages and exurbs that really don't connect to the city in MSA/CSA calculations.
The MSA/CSA is comprised by county, regardless if the entire county is actively part of the metro area. In the Twin Cities for instance, more than half of the counties in the 7-county MSA are less than 50% urbanized (in some cases, MUCH less). So when you calculate land mass, a whole lot of un-urbanized area is getting included as part of the metro just so the MSA captures the small area where the population participates to the urbanized metro area.
Location: Cleveland bound with MPLS in the rear-view
5,509 posts, read 11,870,451 times
Reputation: 2501
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81
You can compare both raw numbers AND percentage of population. I really think you are trying to make an argument about something that I'm not. I don't know how many more times I can say this: Columbus has more in numbers, Cleveland has more as a percentage of population. In the next decade or so, this will all be moot, as Columbus will most likely have the largest as a percentage of population as well given its growth rates of minority populations. You can look at the numbers yourself, you don't need me to tell you that.
Sorry, but I don't see that happening in 10 years (or so):
Columbus, OH CSA
1 Black or African American alone: 283,289
2 Mexican: 39,502
3 Asian Indian or East Indian alone: 19,818
4 Chinese (except Taiwanese) alone: 11,527
5 Puerto Rican: 8,467
6 Korean alone: 4,854
7 Japanese alone: 3,633
8 Filipino alone: 3,395
9 Vietnamese alone: 3,274
10 Salvadoran: 2,740
11 Dominican (Dominican Republic): 2,118
12 Spanish or Spaniard: 2,062
Total Population: 2,071,052
~385K minority population
Cleveland, OH CSA
1 Black or African American alone: 504,921
2 Puerto Rican: 63,690
3 Mexican: 26,593
4 Asian Indian or East Indian alone: 18,687
5 Chinese (except Taiwanese) alone: 12,911
6 Filipino alone: 5,475
7 Korean alone: 4,093
8 Vietnamese alone: 3,540
9 Spanish or Spaniard: 2,871
10 Cuban: 2,066
11 Dominican (Dominican Republic): 2,000
Total Population: 2,881,937
Sorry, but I don't see that happening in 10 years (or so):
Columbus, OH CSA
1 Black or African American alone: 283,289
2 Mexican: 39,502
3 Asian Indian or East Indian alone: 19,818
4 Chinese (except Taiwanese) alone: 11,527
5 Puerto Rican: 8,467
6 Korean alone: 4,854
7 Japanese alone: 3,633
8 Filipino alone: 3,395
9 Vietnamese alone: 3,274
10 Salvadoran: 2,740
11 Dominican (Dominican Republic): 2,118
12 Spanish or Spaniard: 2,062
Total Population: 2,071,052
~385K minority population
Cleveland, OH CSA
1 Black or African American alone: 504,921
2 Puerto Rican: 63,690
3 Mexican: 26,593
4 Asian Indian or East Indian alone: 18,687
5 Chinese (except Taiwanese) alone: 12,911
6 Filipino alone: 5,475
7 Korean alone: 4,093
8 Vietnamese alone: 3,540
9 Spanish or Spaniard: 2,871
10 Cuban: 2,066
11 Dominican (Dominican Republic): 2,000
Total Population: 2,881,937
~650K minority population
Wait, so now we're going to change the argument again? We weren't debating the CSA to begin with, and I was told repeatedly that using raw numbers is bad. Why is it suddenly okay to use a different regional size and different criteria?
Location: Cleveland bound with MPLS in the rear-view
5,509 posts, read 11,870,451 times
Reputation: 2501
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81
Wait, so now we're going to change the argument again? We weren't debating the CSA to begin with, and I was told repeatedly that using raw numbers is bad. Why is it suddenly okay to use a different regional size and different criteria?
Want urbanized area instead? I don't have the racial breakdown handy, as the info I provided came from the U.S. Census. Do you have ANY information that shows Columbus is more racially diversified than Cleveland?
Besides Chicago and Minneapolis, the midwest generally is still the way of the dinosaur. Even those cities still have lots of midwestern traits.
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.
