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.
But many people would say it's only three large cities in the Northeast. Demographically, Cleveland has more in common with Philly, Pittsburgh and NYC than DC and Baltimore do. And unlike those latter cities, Cleveland was never, ever a part of the South.
Which would not be included as a large city? All 5 are among the Top 10 Most Populous Metros in the country, and have been for quite some time.
NYC, Philadelphia, DC and Boston are also Top 10 for Urban Areas (Baltimore is 19th, Cleveland is 25th).
Which would not be included as a large city? All 5 are among the Top 10 Most Populous Metros in the country, and have been for quite some time.
So? What does size have to do with whether a city is Northeastern are not? During the 19th Century, Baltimore was the 3rd largest city in the nation and the largest city in the South. So what's your point?
I don't get the cherry-picked logic here. The logic works fine until it works in favor of a city that some people don't want to be in the Northeast (i.e., Cleveland). All of a sudden, state lines and historical differences matter.
So? What does size have to do with whether a city is Northeastern are not? During the 19th Century, Baltimore was the 3rd largest city in the nation and the largest city in the South. So what's your point?
I don't get the cherry-picked logic here. The logic works fine until it works in favor of a city that some people don't want to be in the Northeast (i.e., Cleveland). All of a sudden, state lines and historical differences matter.
I was talking about the megalopolis which has a clear definition (although I guess could be argued is spread across two regions), not "The Northeast"-which frankly I don't care if Baltimore, DC, Philly, Cleveland, etc. are included or not.
I was talking about the megalopolis which has a clear definition (although I guess could be argued is spread across two regions), not "The Northeast"-which frankly I don't care if Baltimore, DC, Philly, Cleveland, etc. are included or not.
Hmm. Well, I suppose you like the idea of a megalopolis since it helps Philly's stats...
It's the poorest metro on the East Coast. So if it's all considered one big region, it pads its stats.
Mmh, I've never seen people argue stats for the whole Bos-Wash corridor...ever. That would probably take a lot of work and research. And calling it "the poorest Metro" is irrelevant without discussing cost of living. That $48,000 median income in the Philly metro suddenly becomes a lot more attractive than the $53,000 in Boston or even $57,000 in DC.
People seem a little butthurt that Baltimore/DC are "undignified Southern cities" that get to be included with the likes of Boston and NYC. Philly is just caught in the middle, unphased by the chest thumping but with nothing to prove.
Mmh, I've never seen people argue stats for the whole Bos-Wash corridor...ever.
I'm sure there are some West Coast posters who probably have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2e1m5a
People seem a little butthurt that Baltimore/DC are "undignified Southern cities" that get to be included with the likes of Boston and NYC.
It's more like people get a little butthurt at the idea of other cities becoming Northeastern. It's sort of like different ethnic groups coming to America in the 19th/early 20th Century and fighting to be "white." And then as soon as they did, they did their best to block other groups from becoming white. But instead of fighting to be considered White, people in these threads are fighting to be considered Northeastern.
There are clearly linguistic and cultural border zones between the North and the South, for example, the southernmost counties of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois; northern West Virginia; southern Maryland and the Delmarva Peninsula; the Missouri Ozark region. Similarly, there are border zones between the Northeast and Midwest. Western New York, western Pennsylvania, and northeastern Ohio are transitional areas. Similarly, areas like eastern Colorado, western Nebraska, and the Black Hills of South Dakota represent transition zones between the Midwest and West.
There is a clear distinction between a border area and the predominant influence. The overwhelming influence in Ohio, whether one talks about dialect, historical settlement patterns, economics, and ethnic populations, is Midwestern. New York and Pennsylvania are dominated by their respective seaboard cities, which are clearly East Coast, Pennsylvania less so than New York. Dialect wise, Western New York closely resembles rest of the Great Lakes area, while Pennsylvania is a mixture of East Coast, Appalachian, and Midwest, plus some unique urban dialects in the two largest cities. Ohio speech is clearly Midwestern, with the areas around Lake Erie having a Great Lakes pattern, the north and middle a North Midland pattern, and the southernmost counties a South Midland dialect with ties to Appalachia. Agriculture is far more important in Ohio than in New York or Pennsylvania. Ohio is politically a "purple" state, while New York and Pennsylvania are Democratic in Presidential elections. White Protestants are more prevalent numerically in Ohio than anywhere in the Northeast. In fact, southwestern Ohio is something of a mini Bible Belt. Ohio is where the Appalachians end and the Plains begin.
The Northeast-Midwest boundary is far more "fuzzy" than the American-Canadian boundary. You know immediately whether you are in Hamilton, Ontario or Buffalo, New York by accent, culture, and attitude. However, Ohio is as Midwestern as Ontario is Canadian.
Central Ohio has a North Midland dialect like the majority of Pennsylvania and half of Jersey. Philadelphia's dialect is absolutely Midland and not some made up "East Coast" linguistic type as people make it out to be. How are you gonna bring up Midland dialects and completely ignore their Pennsylvania presence and origin? Also, Ohio's southernmost county doesn't speak in a South Midland dialect. Cincinnati's dialect is always, always classified as North Midland the same way Pennsylvania is. The only Appalachian dialect in Ohio is of the Pittsburgh variety spoken in Youngstown (Youngstahn). South Midland dialects are not spoken in Ohio. One must go into Ketucky for that.
Also, contrary to popular belief, the Northern Cities Vowel Shift isn't limited to the Great Lakes. It goes east into Scranton, PA and Western Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. It even goes west to Minneapolis and Eastern South Dakota. It is thought of as just a Great Lakes or Chicago thing but I assure you Western New York is NOT its eastern terminus. It does exist in the Northeast.
Last edited by EddieOlSkool; 06-03-2015 at 10:36 AM..
Have you spent time in Baltimore? Cleveland can't feel any less Northeastern than Baltimore.
Ah, so you haven't. I expected this. Just saying, a list of stats will never, ever trump the actual feel of a place. Cleveland is very much Midwestern, and echoes other Midwestern cities far more than Northeastern ones.
I don't feel like raising the ever-tiresome Baltimore - south, northeast, or traaaaansition folks? - argument. Ever. Again. Also, it's a red herring - have you spent actual time in Cleveland? If so, did you honestly feel it was more a Northeastern city than a Midwestern one? Why?
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.
That would probably take a lot of work and research. And calling it "the poorest Metro" is irrelevant without discussing cost of living. That $48,000 median income in the Philly metro suddenly becomes a lot more attractive than the $53,000 in Boston or even $57,000 in DC.
