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.
This is purely subjective....but here's my list...I might have forgotten some.
Internationally known
Los Angeles
New York
Seattle
San Francisco
Boston
Chicago
Washington DC
Atlanta
Dallas
Houston
Miami
U.S. major (Very important cities in North America)
Philadelphia
Minneapolis
Phoenix
Denver
Detroit
Regional (Cities important only in their respected metro areas and states)
Portland
Sacramento
San Diego
San Antonio
St. Louis
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Tampa
Salt Lake City
San Jose
Charlotte
Milwaukee
Last edited by pistola916; 05-18-2008 at 01:05 AM..
"Major" should expand beyond fame. That's not to say that LA and SF are carried by reputation alone, but they also shouldn't be held on another level just because some random on a street corner could name them first when asked to list California cities. Similarly, I don't think Austin or San Antonio are all that unknown on a national scale.
This all boils down to each person having the "cutoff mark" placed at a different level on the list.
True, there are quite a few of famous cities, but even so, fame doesn't just come for no reason. How can a city be major if you can barely remember it?
Also one has to include influence on the world when referring to major cities. Just because Texas [a very large state] has 2 major-size cities doesn't make them like Los Angeles & San Francisco. Who vacations at the largest port in Texas?
Being a major city doesn't really have anything to do with vacation. The quality of being a major city usually brings tourism, but tourism does not necessarily make a major city. True they may not be on the same scale when talking about tourism, but the four afformentioned cities all have world influence to some extent.
Also one has to include influence on the world when referring to major cities. Just because Texas [a very large state] has 2 major-size cities doesn't make them like Los Angeles & San Francisco. Who vacations at the largest port in Texas?
Lots of people vacation at Myrtle Beach, does that make it a major city? How about Aspen Colorado, lots of vacationers too! Houston and Dallas are major with lots of influence, get used to it. Don't let your hatred for GWB distort the reality here.
Lots of people vacation at Myrtle Beach, does that make it a major city? How about Aspen Colorado, lots of vacationers too! Houston and Dallas are major with lots of influence, get used to it. Don't let your hatred for GWB distort the reality here.
You go, boy!
Anyone that can compare Houston to San Francisco or Dallas to Los Angeles has been out in that Texas sun too long. btw, having Bush as a state resident will do nothing to improve the image that Texas already suffers from.
Anyone that can compare Houston to San Francisco or Dallas to Los Angeles has been out in that Texas sun too long. btw, having Bush as a state resident will do nothing to improve the image that Texas already suffers from.
Actually the comparison would go the other way around. It would be Dallas to San Francisco (snooty) and Houston to LA. (sprawly)
Pennsylvania is out of the Running, Pittsburgh has more people dying in the city then being born. It was in the NY Times today.
I still think California Wins...
But To Name all what I would perceive to be Major Cities...
Texas: Houston, San Antonio, Dallas, Fort Worth, El Paso, and Austin
California: Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, and San Jose
So if you don't count Suburbs, which San Jose really is but I'll count if for its Huge population and the Tech Centers (IE: Silicon Valley)...
If you Mean by Skyline... which is Superficial... haha
Texas: Dallas, Houston, and Fort Worth(if you look it up on Google images it says Related searches: Dallas Skyline... It probably bugs the crap out of those in Fort Worth...LoL)
California: Los Angeles and San Fran
but Overall, as a Texan my vote would still go to CA.
like I said
In Texas Roughly 29 cities break the 100,000 population Line
California has roughly 67 cities breaking 100,000 people.
Different sources say different things... But Texas has like the 9-15 largest economy in the world (depends on who you look at)... And While California beats Texas's economy... Texas is population wise, smaller.. and has nothing to do with 'Major Cities'
Quote:
Anyone that can compare Houston to San Francisco or Dallas to Los Angeles has been out in that Texas sun too long. btw, having Bush as a state resident will do nothing to improve the image that Texas already suffers from.
what are you? 5?
I actually like Bush, and you as a Californian have no right to speak...RONALD REGAN is all I have to say.
but if you insist ... You win, I always let little kids win...
So if you don't count Suburbs, which San Jose really is but I'll count if for its Huge population and the Tech Centers (IE: Silicon Valley)...
How is it a suburb if you concede that it's a job center? Do you define suburbs by the fame hierarchy?
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.
