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.
As an almost lifelong Houston area resident (God help me) I have to agree that Houston has a H-U-G-E inferiority complex with DFW.
With the NFL being the unofficial religion of the US and its VITAL importance to a city's image the most visible aspect is that you can go anywhere in the area and hardly see ANY Houston Texans merchandise but Dallas Cowboy merchandise and fans are EVERYWHERE. That is a big blow to the city's self esteem right there. When other people think of Texas the 1st thing they think of is Dallas b/c of the tv show and the Cowboys. Houston lags behind Dallas in probably every way except big business.
Houstonians and the city of Houston has tons of Cowboy fans. What your saying has no purpose or relevance to Houstonians feelings toward Dallas.
The simple fact is Houston never has been and never will be cool, or even as cool as Dallas and that really BURNS Houston people bad.
Houston has never been a city popular in the media and has never actually tried to gain as much publicity as Dallas. However, we're not cool but yet we are one of the fastest-growing cities in the country and attract more visitors than Dallas????
Sure ,there are lots of really nice parts of town and a few cool things that are unique to Houston but all in all DFW is superior to Houston in things that matter to people such as landscape, outdoor activities, shopping, nightlife, pro sports, media, tourist attractions, and even TV exposure.
Galveston, Kemah, NASA, San Jacinto Memorial, Museum/Theatre District, Astros , Uptown Houston, Piney Woods, and more.......
DFW has the more desirable demographics so they get all the newest and latest things.
Uh.......not really.
Houston is a blue collar city that's fine to live in but nobody ever wants to come to on vacation (there's absolutely no reason to.) Dallas is seen as the unofficial capital of Texas whereas Houston is the forgotten and redheaded stepchild to all the other Texas cities except for El Paso.
Answered above......
Houston will probably never emerge from Dallas' shadow and become cool on its own. There's nothing going on here and the local government is not very forward thinking.
Nothing going on here??? Tell me when you get to experience the Houston area outside of Katy.
Off the top of my head the only thing that could possibly give Houston a national exposure boost in the near future would be the new $500 million dollar "Disney quality" theme park and resort currently in the beginning stages of development north of the city. If done right it could put Houston on a map. Not "the" map but a map nontheless. Ha ha.
Hilarious.....
Houston is fine to live and work in but that's it. That's why there is such a huge airport because everyone wants to get out of here!
But Dallas's Airport is more bigger so what does that mean....???
Last time I checked; Houston didn't claim to be the 4th biggest city in America. It seems your using this as way to try and prove that Houston is inferior, but it's a bad definition because Houston's intentions were never to be this big; it annexing was for a different purpose.
Houstonians could give a damn about being the 4th biggest; and the only ones who love to bring it up is outsiders. Do you honestly think we walk around feeling better about ourselves because we live in the 4th biggest city??? Not sure why that would gives us a need to feel superior over everyone below us.
Oh really? I hear that over and over.
Living under the 4th biggest municipal government is horrible, for a metro the size of Houston. The center municipality is overgrown in relation to the size of its metro. Municipal Houston needs to divide itself into a smaller municipality of 500,000 to 750,000 population, covering the inner city areas, and separate the rest into a dozen or two dozen municipalities that would have specialized demographics. Then it would be on a par with real cities like San Francisco or Boston. Or Dallas. Or Atlanta.
This would work well because Houston's outer jurisdiction is what passes for inner-ring suburbs in other metros. The center city actually benefits by separating them off and letting them fund their own services, not drain the high value commercial developments in the downtown and nearby areas.
Meanwhile, the smaller center city could position itself to attract the higher paid and more creative demographics, and not need to accommodate the lower classes... those who are necessary to keep the metro functioning, but a drain in terms of demand for services, and generally people adverse to developing urban dynamics. This is exactly what makes places like SF or Boston so cool and desirable... smaller center municipalities in a large metro.
Houston's sense of inferiority may be proven by its claim that it is the nation's 4th largest city. It's not. It contains the nation's 4th largest municipal government, and they boost their image (and ego) by referring to that as a "city".
Be that as it may, Houston is also a large metro, approximately the 6th, at this time (Dallas-Fort Worth is the 4th, Philadelphia is the 5th) and that many people can support culture, employment, entertainment that smaller metros just cant provide.
It doesn't need the 4th largest boast, which only reveals its insecurity.
Other than that, there is no substantive asset in Houston that Dallas wishes it had. Dallas has much better transit, a cohesive urban residential core, good zoning and planning, better weather, and a major league hockey team, as well as ML Baseball, football, basketball, soccer, nascar, etc. On the other hand, there are things in Chicago that Dallas aspires to, such as a Chicago-level mass transit system, and an inner city-urban core similar to Chicago's.
Take it up with the Census. According to them, the city of Houston proper, seperate from the rest of the metro area, is the 4th largest US city in population with 2-million residents, behind New York, L.A, and Chicago. Period. But its like the 7th largest metro area or something like that.
I have to add this thought. I married a gal from "Chicagoland" and we have been married 15 years. Who knew it would last so long haaa. She talks sometimes of an inferiority complex that exists in Chicago about New York and sometimes Los Angeles. Chicago is tethered to the flat and gray midwest and no matter how much cosmopolitan they slap up there is always a midwestern mindset lurking that tends to knock every other city that is not home. If Chicago simply knocked LA or New York it wouldnt be so obvious that they have a complex but they pretty much will cut down any city at any time and act like its normal. But when it comes to New york they all seem in Chicago to wear the same tshirt. The one that says F*** New York across it.
The Bay Area is not technically a city but I understand where the OP is coming from.
And to be honest, I don't think the BA has an inferiority complex-but instead a superiority complex. Many of us can be insufferable and we need to get over ourselves. I'll admit that I too can get a bit drunk off this smug flavored kool aid that seems to be secretly pumped into the region's water supply.
Remember Channel 5's old slogan "The best place for news in the best place on earth".
How about Herb Caen's comment "When I die and go to heaven, I'll say this is nice, but it aint San Francisco"
That southpark skit about SF smugness is hillarious-mainly because so much is based in some level of truth.
The Bay Area is not technically a city but I understand where the OP is coming from.
And to be honest, I don't think the BA has an inferiority complex-but instead a superiority complex. Many of us can be insufferable and we need to get over ourselves. I'll admit that I too can get a bit drunk off this smug flavored kool aid that seems to be secretly pumped into the region's water supply.
Remember Channel 5's old slogan "The best place for news in the best place on earth".
How about Herb Caen's comment "When I die and go to heaven, I'll say this is nice, but it aint San Francisco"
That southpark skit about SF smugness is hillarious-mainly because so much is based in some level of truth.
If you think it's significant, then why don't you describe Houston as the "4th largest municipal government"? Why use the word "city" when "Municipality" is what you really mean? The only reason I can think of is to confuse the public as to Houston's actual importance.
The size of the central municipality is irrelevant. Your claim is designed to misrepresent the relative importance of Houston relative to other US metros. Actually, the boast is intended to artificially inflate Houston's stature over Dallas-Ft Worth, a larger metro.
Nobody ranks urban areas on the basis of a municipal population.
If Houston municipality expanded its municipal boundaries within its metro area, or contracted them, would make no difference to Houston. Nor would it affect Houston's stature in North America or the world.
It is just an example of deception. But not respected on the world stage. Nobody believes that Houston is a bigger city than London... even though it is a much larger municipal government than the "City of London".
As I mentioned, the claim that Houston is the 4th largest "city" is an example of the Houston metro's inferiority complex. And ego reinforcement over being eclipsed as a metro by Dallas-FW. Especially since the actual ranking of Houston is already pretty respectable. Just as in the 1970's, when Houston described its airport as the "Houston Interplanetary Airport".
So Houston should just try and be like every other city. Give me a break. The Houston annexes cities so it can have majority of its metro under one government. Do you really think the city government is annexing cities because so they can satisfy their "insecurities" about Houston? That's completely absurd.
DFW overshadows Houston? Seriously? That's got to be the most ignorant Dallas booster comment I've ever seen.
Other than that, there is no substantive asset in Houston that Dallas wishes it had. Dallas has much better transit, a cohesive urban residential core, good zoning and planning, better weather, and a major league hockey team, as well as ML Baseball, football, basketball, soccer, nascar, etc. On the other hand, there are things in Chicago that Dallas aspires to, such as a Chicago-level mass transit system, and an inner city-urban core similar to Chicago's.
Really? I guess for the purpose of this thread, you could say the massive construction projects going on in Dallas' museum and theater districts might be because Houston's museum and theater district has been far superior for a long time.
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.
The BAY AREA is a CITY!
