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.
Yeah I didn’t mean to say it was a blowout (it’s not) but it is a bit noticeable. AASB’s numbers pretty much paint the picture. You also have to take into account that Chicago has ~2 million people than Houston when looking at those numbers as well, so those areas where the numbers are close might actually tip in Houston’s favor proportionately. Not a blowout but it is something I’ve noticed. Chicago does have a lot more ethnic whites though by far. Houston is more diverse in both its Latin American population (Chicago’s foreign born population is substantially more Mexican than Houston’s) and African population. Chicago has far more of a Korean presence and a decently bigger Japanese population but they’re probably the same when it comes to Chinese population. Houston seems to come ahead by a decent margin in Southeast Asia. South Asia is pretty similar in terms of shear numbers relative to size but Houston’s population seems to concentrate in one part of the metro so I think that’s a bigger plus for Chicago for being more integrated on that front. Houston does seem to have the advantage when it comes to South Asian diversity though since a lot more of Chicago’s South Indian population is Indian. More Pakistani’s, Bangladeshi’s, Iranian’s, etc. Canada (Vancouver, Calgary, etc.) though is by far the worst I’ve seen for South Asian Diversity lol I’ve only ran into Punjabis in those cities. Chicago is definitely very diverse but I still think Houston comes ahead here and it is only getting more diverse faster.
Most of this is fair, though the highlighted is playing with the city vs CSA game to fit an argument. The "cities" of Chicago and Houston at this point have nearly the same population. Chicago's is only about 400K larger, but as everyone always points out here, Houston will overtake it soon. It's only at a CSA level that Chicago has 2 million more people. I'm referring to the cities themselves. Comparing the "cities" themselves, you are looking at roughly equal populations. Houston still probably gets the nod, but not by much IMO.
Most of this is fair, though the highlighted is playing with the city vs CSA game to fit an argument. The "cities" of Chicago and Houston at this point have nearly the same population. Chicago's is only about 400K larger, but as everyone always points out here, Houston will overtake it soon. It's only at a CSA level that Chicago has 2 million more people. I'm referring to the cities themselves. Comparing the "cities" themselves, you are looking at roughly equal populations. Houston still probably gets the nod, but not by much IMO.
So the numbers I provided are not city nor metro area, they are urban area. This includes the core cities and only the inner suburbs.
Most of this is fair, though the highlighted is playing with the city vs CSA game to fit an argument. The "cities" of Chicago and Houston at this point have nearly the same population. Chicago's is only about 400K larger, but as everyone always points out here, Houston will overtake it soon. It's only at a CSA level that Chicago has 2 million more people. I'm referring to the cities themselves. Comparing the "cities" themselves, you are looking at roughly equal populations. Houston still probably gets the nod, but not by much IMO.
No one gives a crap about city limits. And who are these people talking about One city passing another.
Everyone uses MSA. Chicago MSA (not CSA) is over 2M people larger than Houston. By CSA it's more like 2.5M people larger but CSA is a thing that westerners like to use.
If Chicagoans are worried about anywhere passing them up they should look at DFW. They are closer and would probably get there much quicker. Not sure why Houston is the one they are worried about when DFW is closer and growing faster.
Quote:
Originally Posted by As Above So Below...
So the numbers I provided are not city nor metro area, they are urban area. This includes the core cities and only the inner suburbs.
By urban area Chicago has almost 3M more people than Houston giving more credence to DaBears point
No one gives a crap about city limits. And who are these people talking about One city passing another.
Everyone uses MSA. Chicago MSA (not CSA) is over 2M people larger than Houston. By CSA it's more like 2.5M people larger but CSA is a thing that westerners like to use.
If Chicagoans are worried about anywhere passing them up they should look at DFW. They are closer and would probably get there much quicker. Not sure why Houston is the one they are worried about when DFWis closer and growing faster.
Urban Area is honestly the best compromise. It isn't gathering all the far flung reaches of places that interact rarely with the city, but rather its focused on the core and the inner suburbs that interact with the core more.
Urban Area is honestly the best compromise. It isn't gathering all the far flung reaches of places that interact rarely with the city, but rather its focused on the core and the inner suburbs that interact with the core more.
100 percent agree. UA is the best metric since it includes the areas surrounding a city but cuts all the fluff out. Chicago’s UA is around 8.6 million and Houston’s UA is around 5.8-5.9 million.
No one gives a crap about city limits. And who are these people talking about One city passing another.
Everyone uses MSA. Chicago MSA (not CSA) is over 2M people larger than Houston. By CSA it's more like 2.5M people larger but CSA is a thing that westerners like to use.
If Chicagoans are worried about anywhere passing them up they should look at DFW. They are closer and would probably get there much quicker. Not sure why Houston is the one they are worried about when DFW is closer and growing faster.
By urban area Chicago has almost 3M more people than Houston giving more credence to DaBears point
Yeah "everyone" uses MSA in C-D world I forgot, you speak for "everyone"......
Not just the CD world...it's much more relevant than city proper or CSA.
In the real world...when people mention Chicago they're talking about Chicago not the suburbs...1) Because no one knows the suburbs and 2) because they dont visit the suburbs.
It's really only academic publications and C-D nerds that do that. Thats why phrases like Chicagoland exist to the point where it will correct to "Chicagoland" in spellcheck. No ones says "yea I spent a weekend in Philly" and meant Bristol PA.
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.
I forgot, you speak for "everyone"......
