Why is it so hard for NYers to believe that under the old definitions LA was a larger metro than NY? (Los Angeles: live in, versus)

[HtownLove]

The people in this thread https://www.city-data.com/forum/city-...00-census.html

are going crazy becaus eit shows that LA was bigger than NY under the old metro definitions.

I donth think it is that hard to believe that LA was larger for a while

[Charles]

I don't see how new york can be larger than LA since (unfortunately) half of new york moved to LA.

[marilyn220]

As a New Yorker, I can tell you most of us honestly don't care if you're bigger than us. Most NYers don't even have LA on their radar, unless they're planning to move here.

LA and NY are different as night and day. We have more in common with San Francisco.

Yes, we now know that most of Los Angeles is really a series of huge suburbs under the Los Angeles County umbrella trying to masquerade as a metropolis. The only thing is people won't know that until they MOVE here.

[pacific2]

As a New Yorker, I can tell you most of us honestly don't care if you're bigger than us. Most NYers don't even have LA on their radar, unless they're planning to move here.

LA and NY are different as night and day. We have more in common with San Francisco.

As a former New Yorker, I second what you said. There is so much going on in NYC, that people really don’t tend to think about LA unless they are thinking of ways to finally escape the cold. As for bragging rights about which city is bigger, who cares???

[missRoxyhart]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

The people in this thread https://www.city-data.com/forum/city-...00-census.html

are going crazy becaus eit shows that LA was bigger than NY under the old metro definitions.

I donth think it is that hard to believe that LA was larger for a while

I assume you want an actual answer to this and you're not just trying to start stuff, posting this where you don't expect any NYers to see it I guess. But I like to look at lots of boards.

So anyway, the answer is pretty obvious. If someone doesn't exactly understand what you were posting in that other thread than yeah, it really is that hard to believe that LA is in any way bigger than NY. It's just not on the same level. And that first list isn't a good reflection of reality. It's the old metro definition I know, but it's a pretty arbitrary definition and not really representative of a city's real area of influence, unless you think NYC's influence stops at pretty much the city limits.

It's not the city of LA with 469.1 sq mi versus the city of NY with 304.8 sq mi but LA County with 4,061 sq mi versus NY plus a lil extra. All that tells me is takes LA with an inflated area of more than 10 times the size of NYC to match it in population, and even then that's all it matches in. I guess the problem is people didn't see or know what was being compared, if you know this than obviously it's not so ridiculous, and it really speaks more to NY's size if anything, not LA's.

Anyway, I agree, not many people in real life would actually care about this. People in NYC don't think much about LA as much as I'm sure people in LA don't think much about NYC either.

[1200RT]

Originally Posted by missRoxyhart

It's not the city of LA with 469.1 sq mi versus the city of NY with 304.8 sq mi but LA County with 4,061 sq mi versus NY plus a lil extra.

This. Most people don't realize that the "City of Los Angeles" is just the "tip of the iceberg". There are so many unincorporated areas of LA county, not to mention smaller independent cities that fall under the "Los Angeles" bubble.

I live in Santa Monica, but outside of LA, i tell people i live in "LA". They don't realize the area that is actually considered Los Angeles.

It would be like including "mainland" NY suburbs, North NJ suburbs and CT in the NYC population/size numbers.

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by missRoxyhart

I assume you want an actual answer to this and you're not just trying to start stuff, posting this where you don't expect any NYers to see it I guess. But I like to look at lots of boards.

So anyway, the answer is pretty obvious. If someone doesn't exactly understand what you were posting in that other thread than yeah, it really is that hard to believe that LA is in any way bigger than NY. It's just not on the same level. And that first list isn't a good reflection of reality. It's the old metro definition I know, but it's a pretty arbitrary definition and not really representative of a city's real area of influence, unless you think NYC's influence stops at pretty much the city limits.

It's not the city of LA with 469.1 sq mi versus the city of NY with 304.8 sq mi but LA County with 4,061 sq mi versus NY plus a lil extra. All that tells me is takes LA with an inflated area of more than 10 times the size of NYC to match it in population, and even then that's all it matches in. I guess the problem is people didn't see or know what was being compared, if you know this than obviously it's not so ridiculous, and it really speaks more to NY's size if anything, not LA's.

Anyway, I agree, not many people in real life would actually care about this. People in NYC don't think much about LA as much as I'm sure people in LA don't think much about NYC either.

Yes, I wanted an answer, and I don't care who sees it. It is an open board on the internet so I don't think anyone who post things are worried about other people seeing it.

anyway it is a good answer. Yes I don't think people realised that the old definition restricted New Yorks metropolitan area to little more than the city. But still I don't know why people got so wrked up about it

[drizzyy]

And what answer could we possibly come up with? What type of answer are you looking for?

First of all, LA's metros population has never been greater than NYC. Ever.

In the real world, I'm guessing 98% of NYers don't give a crap about NYC metro's classification using old metro metrics or LA.

Please get a life.

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by drizzyy

And what answer could we possibly come up with? What type of answer are you looking for?

First of all, LA's metros population has never been greater than NYC. Ever.

In the real world, I'm guessing 98% of NYers don't give a crap about NYC metro's classification using old metro metrics or LA.

Please get a life.

lol, you get a life, one that can read, if you go to the link you would see that under the old definition LA metro was larger.

you don't have to be so mean and nasty, calm down sheesh

[marilyn220]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

lol, you get a life, one that can read, if you go to the link you would see that under the old definition LA metro was larger.

you don't have to be so mean and nasty, calm down sheesh

The problem is NYers don't care if LA is larger in size or population. We really don't. Why people would think we would is puzzling.

We don't care about the size of any other city outside of NY either. Why should we???