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: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,138 posts, read 7,599,473 times
Reputation: 5796
Advertisements
People get caught up in the semantics too much, saying DC feels like it's 8 million would never be accurate. The city is 68 square miles with a little over 600,000 people. Now saying the DC/Baltimore region feels that large could make sense to some. Although I agree with urban area being a better predictor in certain cases rather than CSA which is essentially just takes in county boundaries.
The comment about the connection between the White House and Downtown Baltimore is very accurate. It's actually only 37 miles from The White House (center of downtown) to Camden Yards in Baltimore...
Baltimore is closer to the San Jose in this scenario, but that's also a stretch.
I wouldn't say although I DEFINETLY believe d.c. Has more influence than Baltimore it being the nations capital Baltimore is still a very independent city, very different from Oakland, a city that can barely afford to sustain itself financially.
Ive commuted from Baltimore City to Alexandria. My wife, before I met her, commuted from Baltimore City to Greenbelt Md. My strong sense is that commuting across the line, and even from center city to center city and BEYOND, is common enough to be unsurprising. Baltimore City has run ads for living in Baltimore in the DC metro - I've never seen anything like that in NYC wrt Philly. Yes, Baltimore is a proud metro area - its not DC's Oakland. But it is tightly linked to DC, in a way Philly is not to NYC. Commuting, but also day trips, cultural events, radio stations and newspapers, etc. I think DCs metro area population excluding metro Baltimore does somewhat understate greater Washingtons size, but yeah, treating all of Metro Baltimore as part of metro DC would overstate it.
I wouldn't say although I DEFINETLY believe d.c. Has more influence than Baltimore it being the nations capital Baltimore is still a very independent city, very different from Oakland, a city that can barely afford to sustain itself financially.
I never realized how many people saw the San Fran - Oakland relationship as negative. I've never lived there, so maybe I'm missing something. San Francisco is more of an office city and Oakland is more of an industrial city, much like DC / Baltimore. Oakland seems to have its unique identity, culture, and sports that many people prefer. The distance difference seems to be the biggest factor that gives Baltimore more of an independent quality.
The exact phrase you used was "fringe people with a lot of time on their hands." It's obviously a deliberately insulting, condescending choice of words. For you to now pretend otherwise is flat-out ridiculous, particularly since you followed up that comment with the argument that such people merited the criticism because they make what you consider to be poor choices that are bad for the planet and promote further sprawl. And, you did so in the context of a discussion about the areas included in a CSA, when you suggested that areas of West Virginia where many residents commute to jobs in NoVa and DC should not be considered part of the same CSA as DC and closer-in suburbs. The thrust of the comment really could not have been clearer - these marginal people with time to burn make bad choices and should be voted off our important CSA island. Everything you've said on the subject since then has been damage control.
Haha. I just saw this old post. Silly, silly. I explained multiple times I worded it poorly. Like a bitter partisan hack ranting about "100 years of war" or "You didn't build that", misrepresenting one's poor word choices doesn't give you the kill shot. Good effort, though. DC fits you well.
Quote:
Au contraire, I live in an auto-centric, but not auto-dependent, suburban landscape, with a range of commuting options that include public transportation. I choose to defend that lifestyle, as well as others that may be more or less car-focused, to the extent that they reflect a range of judgments made by rational people seeking to act in their best interests and the best interests of their families. If that means they decide to live in a city, that may be a reasonable decision. If that means they choose to live in a city and then exaggerate the number of middle-class families or minimize the challenges that some of the local schools may face, in an effort to encourage others to follow their own path, that's intellectually dishonest, contrary to C-D at its best, and fair game for comment.
Then we're on the same page. Congratulations on agreeing with me, at long last.
I have no shortage of posts hoping we can provide the adequate housing for those who prefer auto-centric and adequate housing for those who do not. Right now, we're out of balance on that. I have many friends and family in the area who are best suited to more auto-centric lifestyles and I think that's great. I visit them and enjoy their communities and have no judgment whatsoever. Talking about city living on a city's forum and letting people know how nice it can be is not intellectually dishonest. I'm pretty clear I think people can live a good, happy life that doesn't involve a lot of surface parking. If I'm intellectually dishonest, then so are you.
I have no shortage of posts complaining about DC's bad schools and the biggest hurdle the city faces, though unlike you I don't see walkability as a political boundary, as there are plenty of great schools in Arlington, Bethesda, Gaithersburg, Alexandria, and even some in DC.
I have no shortage of posts that recognize it's the recent increase (baby strollers and birthday parties abound in walkable neighborhoods like never before) and not the absolute value (which is still quite small) that is of interest in this demographic shift. I think you knew that distinction on some level. I've explained it multiple times before to you.
Quote:
I don't need to jam words in your mouth; your own words betray you. You pay lip service to the idea of choice, but then assert that the market is not functioning properly because it doesn't produce enough of what you consider desirable - more density. To date, at least in this area, there has been a healthy and sustained demand in both urban and suburban areas, which is why a place like Loudoun County now has the highest median incomes in the nation.
The market, not me, says there isn't enough density to meet market demand. That's why cities are clamouring to build more, including in Tysons, south Arlington, and PG County.
You seem very proud of Loudoun County and its superior wealth in relation to the rest of the region and country. I'm not as happy as you are that there's so much wealth generated by a federal city, but do I at least get to call you an elitist now, too?
Okay. Good.
Quote:
By the way, I read the Ehrenhalt book that you've plugged several times on C-D. As a travelogue of urban and suburban communities in the early 21st centuries, ranging from devastated rowhouse neighborhoods in Philadelphia to New Urbanist developments outside Denver and Portland, it's a quick, entertaining read. As a piece of social science or demographic forecasting, however, it's lightweight stuff that is short on analysis and heavy on wishful thinking that Americans now want, and will have the means, to live like 19th century European bourgeoisie (so long as they still have good Internet access).
Haha. Okay, then. Stats and academic inquiry are irrelevant. More opinions, please - preferably my own! I simply said you might enjoy the book as an academic foundation demonstrating the cultural shift you used to deny on here. I didn't say it was the end-all-be-all. Of course there's a lot of projection. That's what the book was meant to be.
You revealed the rub of your issue here: you associate the desire to be able to walk to a corner store with "bourgeoisie", even though, when done right, it can provide a very high quality of life to people who can't afford a car or gas. You think you're above the fray, but in reality you have some deep seeded issue against people who prefer density. I represent that to you so you despise people like me because we value a different life than you and try to use any chance you get to cast us as elitist and bourgeoisie because it serves your personal narrative of keepin' it real.
That's why you were so excited when you thought I referred to people commuting in from West Virginia as personally fringe rather than a statistical fringe. You were waiting for that like Republicans were waiting for Obama to mistakenly look like he attacked small businesses.
Haha. I just saw this old post. Silly, silly. I explained multiple times I worded it poorly. Like a bitter partisan hack ranting about "100 years of war" or "You didn't build that", misrepresenting one's poor word choices doesn't give you the kill shot. Good effort, though. DC fits you well.
Then we're on the same page. Congratulations on agreeing with me, at long last.
I have no shortage of posts hoping we can provide the adequate housing for those who prefer auto-centric and adequate housing for those who do not. Right now, we're out of balance on that. I have many friends and family in the area who are best suited to more auto-centric lifestyles and I think that's great. I visit them and enjoy their communities and have no judgment whatsoever. Talking about city living on a city's forum and letting people know how nice it can be is not intellectually dishonest. I'm pretty clear I think people can live a good, happy life that doesn't involve a lot of surface parking. If I'm intellectually dishonest, then so are you.
I have no shortage of posts complaining about DC's bad schools and the biggest hurdle the city faces, though unlike you I don't see walkability as a political boundary, as there are plenty of great schools in Arlington, Bethesda, Gaithersburg, Alexandria, and even some in DC.
I have no shortage of posts that recognize it's the recent increase (baby strollers and birthday parties abound in walkable neighborhoods like never before) and not the absolute value (which is still quite small) that is of interest in this demographic shift. I think you knew that distinction on some level. I've explained it multiple times before to you.
The market, not me, says there isn't enough density to meet market demand. That's why cities are clamouring to build more, including in Tysons, south Arlington, and PG County.
You seem very proud of Loudoun County and its superior wealth in relation to the rest of the region and country. I'm not as happy as you are that there's so much wealth generated by a federal city, but do I at least get to call you an elitist now, too?
Okay. Good.
Haha. Okay, then. Stats and academic inquiry are irrelevant. More opinions, please - preferably my own! I simply said you might enjoy the book as an academic foundation demonstrating the cultural shift you used to deny on here. I didn't say it was the end-all-be-all. Of course there's a lot of projection. That's what the book was meant to be.
You revealed the rub of your issue here: you associate the desire to be able to walk to a corner store with "bourgeoisie", even though, when done right, it can provide a very high quality of life to people who can't afford a car or gas. You think you're above the fray, but in reality you have some deep seeded issue against people who prefer density. I represent that to you so you despise people like me because we value a different life than you and try to use any chance you get to cast us as elitist and bourgeoisie because it serves your personal narrative of keepin' it real.
That's why you were so excited when you thought I referred to people commuting in from West Virginia as personally fringe rather than a statistical fringe. You were waiting for that like Republicans were waiting for Obama to mistakenly look like he attacked small businesses.
You should be above that. I'm tired of this.
Uh, OK. You're "tired" of responding to my posts, so you dug up one from a month and a half ago to try and counter? Talk about self-induced fatigue. Should we assume this means you missed the last bus to Rehobeth last night and had to find something else to do this weekend?
Look - I see through this. I was one of several posters who commented that your analogy of the relationship between DC and Baltimore to the relationship between San Francisco and Oakland was stained and imperfect. Yet another new poster or two recently weighed in to agree, and you decided to concede the point, which supported my position. However, you were worried that I would pile on after your concession (which I had no plans to do), so you resuscitated an older post to try and change the recent focus of the thread.
Nice try, but fail. My thoughts on the subject of this thread are as follows: (1) the growth of the DC CSA does not simply reflect what's happened in the District of Columbia, but also the various jurisdictions that surround it, so one has to exercise caution in making broad statements about DC as a result of the CSA's growth (I think BCD agrees with this); (2) your characterization of people who live in counties in West Virginia that are part of the CSA as "fringe people with a lot of time on their hands" was both crass and telling; and (3) your analogy of the DC/Baltimore relationship to the San Francisco/Oakland relationship is not very useful or informative. I'm not interested in debating it with you further, or responding to your mischaracterizations of what I've said, what I think, or why I've posted.
I never realized how many people saw the San Fran - Oakland relationship as negative. I've never lived there, so maybe I'm missing something. San Francisco is more of an office city and Oakland is more of an industrial city, much like DC / Baltimore. Oakland seems to have its unique identity, culture, and sports that many people prefer. The distance difference seems to be the biggest factor that gives Baltimore more of an independent quality.
Baltimore is more of an industrial city than D.C. Because of its port. Baltimore is also a growing financial hub, considered the number one city for tech jobs in the country, and in my opinion the healthcare capital of the U.S.. I don't think the San Fran- Oakland relationship is a bad thing, but I believe regardless of distance Baltimore is a very independent city in terms of its financial status and economy.D.C being next to Baltimore is a plus because it brings in income tax revenue from people who choose to commute, but I think that's about it. Oakland is a nearly bankrupt!! I think I may be more upset that we got compared to Oakland. No disrespect to Oakland!!
I commute from Baltimore City to DC. From city limit to city limit its maybe 30 minutes driving. It takes me longer to get to most areas in Baltimore County. My commute is a little different since I work 24 hour shifts with the fire department so I leave at 4/5am before traffic picks up.
The differences between the city are why I like it so much. Not many areas of the country where you can get such a different big city feel in two cities as you do here. I like the laid back feel, dive bars, more urban/gritty feel that I get in Baltimore. Then I get the cosmopolitan, world-class, great public transit in DC. Great having them so close.
I commute from Baltimore City to DC. From city limit to city limit its maybe 30 minutes driving. It takes me longer to get to most areas in Baltimore County. My commute is a little different since I work 24 hour shifts with the fire department so I leave at 4/5am before traffic picks up.
The differences between the city are why I like it so much. Not many areas of the country where you can get such a different big city feel in two cities as you do here. I like the laid back feel, dive bars, more urban/gritty feel that I get in Baltimore. Then I get the cosmopolitan, world-class, great public transit in DC. Great having them so close.
Exactly. I consider it to be a major plus of living in the D.C. area to have a totally different city like Baltimore nearby. It's not something that gets mentioned very often. In fact, if you live in many of the Maryland suburbs of D.C., it's easier to get to downtown Baltimore than it is to get to downtown D.C.
Exactly. I consider it to be a major plus of living in the D.C. area to have a totally different city like Baltimore nearby. It's not something that gets mentioned very often. In fact, if you live in many of the Maryland suburbs of D.C., it's easier to get to downtown Baltimore than it is to get to downtown D.C.
True. The highway in Baltimore drops you off right in the middle of it. The BW Parkway drops you off close to it in DC but it's still a little more difficult.
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.
