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.
London
Underground: 1,107 million
DLR: 78 million
Overground: 53.6 million
National Railway: 917 million (this include all train journey made in Southeast England excl the Eurostar)
Total: 2,155.6 million
New York City
Subway: 1,604 million
PATH: 73.9 million
LIRR: 81.4 million
Metro North: 81.1 million
NJTR: 80.4 million
Total: 1,920.8 million
Another factor to consider are the bus lines. While NYC subways run 24 hours, London switches to night buses late night. Of course, NYC's bus system is very extensive and includes many systems in the metro so it might very well come out on top. However, the point is that these places are still very much comparable.
I would assume that Shanghai given its growing international nature and high density would join in these ranks within the next two decades or so, though it might make a sharp turn curbing international migration and residency as Tokyo has done and end up being not very cosmopolitan.
There is too many bus operators (especially in New York) to make easy comparaisons.
I believe that Paris has the lowest bus ridership of those cities, while quite well used, I can't say that buses are very popular in Paris.
London, New York and Paris have all tram lines in the periphery but none in the center.
The London underground is only shut for 4 hours at late night and the night buses are good enough to get around, what makes you think New Yorks bus network is better than Londons?
I don't know how the City of London administrative region compares to New York City - the five boroughs. I usually count metropolitan area. In this case the NYC is bigger than Greater London, spreading it's tentacles into CT as well as being largely in northern NJ (hence the 'tri-state' area). About 22 million live in this vast metropolis, as opposed to about 14 million in Greater London.
Do you not think the way greater New Yorks population is added up is weird? How can a town 90+ miles away be considered part of a "greater New York"? That is like saying Newcastle is part of greater Edinburgh or Birmingham is part of greater London!
Do you not think the way greater New Yorks population is added up is weird? How can a town 90+ miles away be considered part of a "greater New York"? That is like saying Newcastle is part of greater Edinburgh or Birmingham is part of greater London!
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,081,790 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by paull805
Do you not think the way greater New Yorks population is added up is weird? How can a town 90+ miles away be considered part of a "greater New York"? That is like saying Newcastle is part of greater Edinburgh or Birmingham is part of greater London!
True, it's an imprecise definition. I think New York City is a much larger city than London in all respects though, downtown population (by far), city limits population, and metropolitan population. I've also heard Northamptonshire being considered part of Greater London since a few crazy souls commute to London via train every day.
New York and London have very similar populations if you're going by city boundaries. Saying it's much larger is inaccurate.
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.
