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.
The Seattle-Olympia area was over 4.95M people last year. That is a ton closer to 5M than to 2M. So that's no stretch. I rank both Seattle and Detroit over Phoenix. Those two are closer to the 6M plus cities than they are to the next two 4M+ areas (Orlando-Lakeland and MSP).
There is a clear break between Orlando and MSP <<< Phoenix <<< Seattle and Detroit. Above that the differences are mainly just boosting
Seattle doesn't feel THAT much larger than MSP. MSP has surpassed Detroit as being the second metro of the midwest economically despite having over a million less people. Orlando feels way smaller than MSP. Phoenix JUST surpassed MSP in GDP despite being a 5 million + metro compared to the Twin Cities being a 3.7 million metro.
The Seattle-Olympia area was over 4.95M people last year. That is a ton closer to 5M than to 2M. So that's no stretch. I rank both Seattle and Detroit over Phoenix. Those two are closer to the 6M plus cities than they are to the next two 4M+ areas (Orlando-Lakeland and MSP).
There is a clear break between Orlando and MSP <<< Phoenix <<< Seattle and Detroit. Above that the differences are mainly just boosting
MSP's MSA 3.7 million, and using CSA to inflate Orland when SD, Baltimore & Denver are functionally bigger then it by GDP and population is questionable
MSP, SD, Denver & Baltimore are closer to Phoenix & Detroit in economic output, than either are to Seattle to the tune of +$100billion. Detroit is closest to Seattle in MSA's size/feel while Phoenix has the weakest economy relative to absolute size but has raw size as an offset.
Regarding Seattle being closer to 6M MSA's than +3 million metro's? That's a really tough hill to fight on imho. 2022 Seattle feels like what Denver, Baltimore or SD would look like if they had a major economic boom for a decade or two. So while yes, Seattle has very large GDP and core (for its size) but that's where the similarities end +6m MSA's.
Seattle (and Chicago) sit at either the extreme bottom of their upper tier or the extreme top of their lower tier using very specific criteria.
Seattle doesn't feel THAT much larger than MSP. MSP has surpassed Detroit as being the second metro of the midwest economically despite having over a million less people. Orlando feels way smaller than MSP. Phoenix JUST surpassed MSP in GDP despite being a 5 million + metro compared to the Twin Cities being a 3.7 million metro.
Agreed. MSP definitely feels right around Detroit/Seattle size.
You’d never know Seattle has a higher GDP than Miami or Dubai or that Chicago has a larger GDP than Paris or Hong Kong. You can’t feel GDP on the ground so I personally don’t weigh it heavily in these types of rankings and I take them with a grain of salt.
Its not just GDP or population. Seattle is a more well rounded and more globally connected city than MSP or Phoenix. For that matter Detroit is too.
I am not convinced that MSP has overtaken Detroit for 2nd in the midwest.
Seattle and Detroit are clearly the next cities after that ATL, Miami, DFW....group. they are more well rounded, more international, more cosmopolitan, more diverse have more of an international connected economy than MSP and Phoenix.
Yes Seattle's economy is not that far from Atlanta but it is not that far from Atlanta on the international scale either. MSP and Phoenix are not in the same boat.
And statistics are statistics they are never going to be fair across the board.. I don't like CSA either, but I'm using it for Boston and the Bay so I continued using it for Seattle,Detroit Orlando etc so I would remove my own bias against CSA. It is ridiculous that Riverside is now listed as a bigger metro than San Francisco so I didn't want to even get into that mess of listing it.
So after the 6M regions which I maintain has everything to be considered Tier 1 we have the following most populated regions:
Detroit 5.4M
Phoenix 5.0M
Seattle 4.95M
Orlando 4.3M
MSP 4.1M
I stand by my reasoning for listing Seattle and Detroit as next in line after the 6M metros ahead of Phoenix then comes the rest.
Seattle has left the league of cities in which Denver and SD are in. Seattle is undeniably the #3 region in the west. All around Detroit is still the 2nd in the Midwest.
The south is more blurry as after the big 4 there are a couple of contenders. Orlando is the 5th biggest CSA but Tampa doesn't have a CSA and would be the 5th biggest metro. Charlotte would be in the picture too. But it doesn't make a difference. All of those areas are below Phoenix, which itself is below Seattle and Detroit.
If you're using CSA like boundaries, then Denver is near 5 million too. The Front Range includes some cities that are further than 1 hour from Denver but if you just include an hour north and south, it puts the population at approximately 4.8 million.
Metro populations are always changing. Different people think of them in different tier systems.
Here is my quick take:
Dallas about to join the big 3 in Tier 1 over 8 million.
Next 5 over 6 million in Tier 2.
Tier 3 for next 26 over 2 million.
Then maybe next 46 over 750,000 for Tier 4.
Then Tier 5 for next 45 over 400k.
Tier 6, next 56 over 250k.
Tier 7, next 92 over 150k.
Tier 8, next 96 over 75k.
Under 75k places are important / interesting to me as places to live but going to stop here for this top level METRO distribution / post. That is most of the top 400 metros.
84 micropolitans over 75k, about 125 over 50k and then about 175 more over 25k would add on to that.
Many will prefer a tier or 2. Some will rule tiers out. Others don't think about it or care that much. Lots of choices.
For those who want to comment, what tier metro are you in or prefer and why over higher or lower? If you changed would it be for higher or lower?
The "Metroplex" is Dallas PLUS Ft. Worth (2 top 15 cities).
Houston's metro population is a tick below the Metroplex BUT the city of Houston economy is fueling the population, all on its own.
So, technically the Metroplex has the greater population but Houston is THE alpha city of Texas, not Dallas.
In general I would use the metro area for determining population with a few exceptions. (Bay area is both San Fran & San Jose)
My categories would be
Gigacity: 20M+
Megacity: 10-20M
Large city: 6-10M
Medium city: 3-6M
Small city: 1.5-3M
Large town: 750k-1.5M
Medium town:250k-750k
Small town: 50k-250k
Village: <50k
I know this list makes a small city one with 2M people, but I think in this day and age of cities, I think it's appropriate to change the definition.
Personally I think any city bigger than 20M people is only making it worse for its citizens.
I am not convinced that MSP has overtaken Detroit for 2nd in the midwest.
I am not convinced of this either. The argument used to say MSP has overtaken Detroit is usually total metro GDP which gives MSP a slight lead in overall output. The Twin Cities MSA has an absolutely massive land area. Whereas Detroit's MSA statically splits the urban area with other MSAs. This cuts out key counties that impact overall GDP, making it artificially smaller on paper. Similar to Cleveland, though not as dramatic. This doesn't even consider the economic output of the Canadian side of its conurbation(which can't be counted), or the economic and commercial impact it has as one of the busiest points of entry for trade in North America.
There's no question that Minneapolis out performs Detroit in GDP per capita. It is still more statistically convenient that it has a larger economy, than it is intellectually honest.
Last edited by Landolakes90; 11-30-2022 at 02:21 PM..
I am not convinced of this either. The argument used to say MSP has overtaken Detroit is usually total metro GDP which gives MSP a slight lead in overall output. The Twin Cities MSA has an absolutely massive land area. Whereas Detroit's MSA statically splits the urban area with other MSAs. This cuts out key counties that impact overall GDP, making it artificially smaller on paper. Similar to Cleveland, though not as dramatic. This doesn't even consider the economic output of the Canadian side of its conurbation(which can't be counted), or the economic and commercial impact it has as one of the busiest points of entry for trade in North America.
There's no question that Minneapolis out performs Detroit in GDP per capita. It is still more statistically convenient that it has a larger economy, than it is intellectually honest.
Even if this is true, you can make an argument for either metro being the second most important metro in the Midwest economically. What can't be denied though is that the Twin Cities Metro is easily the most vibrant, and fastest growing metro in the Midwest right now (after Chicago), with one of the most fortune 500 companies per capita in the country.
Last edited by Kaszilla; 11-30-2022 at 02:49 PM..
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.
