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.
NYC metro area(the tri-state) is like DC metro area....I live in Jersey but can get into manhattan in like 10mins...am much more closer to the city than people in Queens, the bronx ....and CT is like 20mins away.....Same as DC which borders Montgomery County & PG County of Maryland ....and part of Northern virginia
What do you think? I think it's possible since pretty much the only desirable area that people want to move to in NYC is Manhattan and there is no more room for Manhattan to grow in population. LA has a lot of room to expand it's downtown area by using emminent domain on those crappy poor cheap homes near DT LA. If we can get more density in LA, we can definitely surpass NYC in a decade or two.
What do you think?
Manhattan is the only desireable area? Isn't that just like saying West LA is the only desirable place in LA? Can West LA hold another 4 million people?
It will never happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by terryclinker
Probably not in our lifetime.
DEFINITELY not in our lifetime. I don't think it ever will.
New York ads more people than Los Angeles so I don't see how it's possible.
I agree, unless the U.S. Census decides to declare the whole state of NJ and half of PA as part of the NY metro area.
Why not? And SD can include Mexico?
My dad works with two people who commute from the suburbs of Philly in PA to work in NYC every day.
It is true that NYC adds more people to its population every year than LA. Suburban living is dying down and considering much of LA is suburban-like, I don't see how it'll be such a hot spot with clubs and nightlife for the young college kids and yuppies that NYC has claimed over the past 10 years. And the rising gas prices won't support the massive amount of driving you have to do in LA for young college grads getting started. NYC was rated as the most desired place to live for college graduates. The Sun Belt's popiulation surge has also died down a bit... There will always be surges in population... But it doesn't mean LA is going to pass NYC. In the mid-1900s the film industry moved to LA for better weather for year-round filiming... Now that technology has allowed a lot of filming to be indoors and onm green screens, NYC is beginning to come back in the film industry. Right now NYC produces 1/3 of the movies in this country and we already have 7 of the 8 largest record companies where most of the recording for songs are done.
If LA ever does surpass New York in population (which is probably never will, LA's actually growing at a relatively slow rate compared to many other booming cities), it won't last for long.
The water situation is so killer, I don't think the area can handle so many people.
My dad works with two people who commute from the suburbs of Philly in PA to work in NYC every day.
Oy! I have a relative who did that for years. Bucks County, PA to Lower Manhattan every day. Now I have a relative who does the reverse, Middlesex County NJ to Center City Philadelphia!
The big point to look at is that the actual city of LA has within the past few years finally run out of room to throw up housing on vacant land. The metro will grow, but it's physically hard to imagine it growing like it did during the 20th century without open land to quickly build housing.
Chicago grew by hundreds of thousands of people for over 100 years until it finally exhausted it's available land. The city stopped growing and shrunk as families moved out of the densely packed city for the suburbs and the economy went through issues.
Just because the city stopped growing doesn't mean that "Chicago" stopped growing. Another SIX million people moved to "Chicago", they just lived in the new municipalities that sprang up around the actual city of Chicago, but didn't want to BECOME the specific City Of Chicago.
In the 20th century new little towns and villages would spring up, but then be absorbed by the central city (like Chicago absorbing Lakeview and dozens of other little towns in the early 20th century) because at the time the small villages couldn't provide the services of the city. During the mid-20th century this began to change and the smaller suburbs had the new technology, transportation and desire to actually keep their own identity. This created a block from the historic cities of the 1800's and 1900's from just naturally absorbing everything as they marched outward. It blocked them in and gave them their present boundries. The "new" cities along the south and western parts of the United States obviously saw this, and their obvious reaction was to annex in MASSIVE tracks of land to their borders before these little suburbs sprang up around the original city and blocked them from the land. Look at the city boundries of sunbelt cities and you can obviously see the competition between the central cities and their suburbs which sprang up racing for the available land. Phoenix is pretty obvious, as they made the mad dash up north for the only still-free land in the area.
Older cities boundries grew up slowly with the physical growth, and would just casually eat up smaller towns as it became feasable. Once this stopped in the mid 20th century as the small suburbs refused to be annexed, the cities that could started the sprint for vacant land that they knew would be vacant for sometimes decades until the growth zone reached them. Otherwise they would have been penned in within just a few years.
The same will happen with LA. It will get more dense and grow, but nowhere near as fast as the actual metro area along the places where free land exists. That will naturally grow much faster unless we see any huge cultrual changes due to gas prices and transportation options.
Ya. I find it funny that NYC Metro is sometimes considered part of 3 different states (NJ,NY, and CT). I don't know if that's true, but I read somwhere that some stastics include those areas. In LA, we keep it all in one state and almost half in one county.
There's different ways that you can compare population in cities. If you're talking about the city limits of a city then it's true that Phoenix is now larger than Philadelphia as someone mentioned. If you measure the population in terms of the metropolitan area then you get different results. Sometimes a metro area such as New York City does encompass parts of other states because all of that area has grown together into a single mass of humanity and it only makes sense to recognize that fact. I do think it's possible that metro LA could surpass New York at some point although New York and LA both have a large number of immigrants moving in.
This makes me think how misleading just using the population of a specific city compared to another can be.
Everyone threw a fit that Phoenix is now larger than Philadelphia; yet Phoenix sits on almost three times as much land. Pound for pound Philly is still larger, you're just comparing 125 square miles of population of the Philly urban area to 520 square miles of land in the Phoenix area.
I've always thought urban area comparisons are a much better scale of a Cities true size. In this case the NYC to LA comparison gets much more interesting, the urban areas are closer in size, and LA is growing quite quickly.
If Phoenix is sitting on more land and has a greater population, I fail to see how Philadelphia is larger "pound for pound." Do you mean that the density is greater? Phoenix is classified as being urban, too.
Anyway, Los Angeles will not pass New York. Not enough space and the growth rate in the city of Los Angeles is pretty low.
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.
