Will Houston Surpass Chicago? (San Jose, Stanford: 2014, house, neighborhood)

[mjtinmemphis]

I can't believe that we are into the my city is better than yours because of population and land.

If someone thinks that Houston is better, it probably is for them.

I've lived all over the place and bigger doesn't mean better.

[marothisu]

Here's some interesting statistics. These were taken from the 2012 and 2010 5 year ACS. While Houston is growing pretty much faster than most cities in the US, it's fun to look at which populations are increasing. I thought it would be fun to compare the increase of the population aged 25+ with a Bachelor's degree or higher between Chicago and Houston.


* Chicago: Increase of 13,593 people aged 25+ between 2010 and 2012. Increase of 28,646 people with a Bachelor's or higher aged 25+. This net percentage is 205.3%

* Houston: Increase of 35,634 people aged 25+ between 2010 and 2012. Increase of 16,939 people with a Bachelor's or higher aged 25+. This net percentage is 47.54%

Although Houston gained over 2.5X more people aged 25+ in this time period than Chicago, Chicago still managed to gain almost 1.75X the number of people in that age group with at least a Bachelor's degree than Houston. We can also look at the MSA level of this:

* Chicago MSA: Increase of 97,062 people aged 25+ between 2010 and 2012. Increase of 89,839 people with Bachelor's or higher aged 25+. This net percentage is 92.56%

* Houston MSA: Increase of 180,280 people aged 25+ between 2010 and 2012. Increase of 71,290 people with Bachelor's or higher aged 25+. This net percentage is 39.54%

Even though the Houston MSA added almost double the amount of people aged 25+ to its population between 2010 and 2012, Chicago added 18,549 more people with a Bachelor's or higher in that same age bracket than Houston did. While Houston is growing fast (one of the fastest in the US), Chicago is still easily getting more people with college degrees in both percentage and raw number.

[NOLA101]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

Well, I don't really care if Houston gains population to a point that it is larger than Chicago. With cities, bigger isn't better. Many cities around the world have passed up New York over the last century, but would you rather live in New York or Mumbai? How about Lagos? Mexico City?

Houston has higher household median income than Chicago. How is Houston "Lagos" (and, for that matter, how is Chicago "New York")?

And none of these cities have passed New York. Lagos is considerably smaller, Mexico City and Mumbai are roughly the same size. The only city on earth considerably larger than NYC is Tokyo, and that's been true for 40 years now.

[Maintainschaos]

Originally Posted by NOLA101

Houston has higher household median income than Chicago. How is Houston "Lagos" (and, for that matter, how is Chicago "New York")?

And none of these cities have passed New York. Lagos is considerably smaller, Mexico City and Mumbai are roughly the same size. The only city on earth considerably larger than NYC is Tokyo, and that's been true for 40 years now.

According to the census bureau, Chicago has the higher median household income in both the city and the metro area:

Houston (city) QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/17/1714000.html

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highe..._United_States

But yes, Chicago is not NYC and Houston is not Lagos; I think the point still stands: bigger is not necessarily better.

[NOLA101]

Originally Posted by Maintainschaos

According to the census bureau, Chicago has the higher median household income in both the city and the metro area:

Oops, you're right, Chicago has very slightly higher median household income.

But, in any case, the two cities are basically the same in terms of household wealth. Comparing Houston to Lagos is absurd.

[Vlajos]

It's inevitable that Houston will have a bigger population, due to this:

Originally Posted by Bluefox

Houston annexed its way to the top and it shows. At 627 square miles, it is approximately 2.7 times the land area of Chicago (234 square miles). I wonder what Chicago's population would be if it were 627 square miles?

[iNviNciBL3]

Yes. but nothing really to brag about if you are from Houston.

Houston surpassing Chicago in population is basically just like how Indianapolis surpassed Boston in population.

[edsg25]

Houston could have twice the population of Chicago….but it will never surpass Chicago.

Think of poor, little, unloved San Francisco, the second largest city in its own Bay Area, beyond San Jose (not to mention 4th biggest in its own state). And we all know that San Jose has surpassed San Francisco in every category imaginable. Right?

Does anyone seriously think Houston will ever be in the same league as Boston, New York, Washington, Chicago, Los Angeles, or San Francisco?

[dalparadise]

Originally Posted by edsg25

Houston could have twice the population of Chicago….but it will never surpass Chicago.

Think of poor, little, unloved San Francisco, the second largest city in its own Bay Area, beyond San Jose (not to mention 4th biggest in its own state). And we all know that San Jose has surpassed San Francisco in every category imaginable. Right?

Does anyone seriously think Houston will ever be in the same league as Boston, New York, Washington, Chicago, Los Angeles, or San Francisco?

Houston has some work to do to surpass Dallas. It's a non-issue for a city like Chicago.

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by dalparadise

Houston has some work to do to surpass Dallas. It's a non-issue for a city like Chicago.

totally agree on Dallas. And as for your and Herb Cain's Baghdad by the Bay, let's remember that they might be playing in Santa Clara, but they're still called the San Francisco 49ers, not the San Jose 49ers.