Houston vs. Dallas (San Antonio, Austin, Fort Worth: to eat, office, education)

[Spade]

Originally Posted by mpope409

Clever, but Dallas would also have to direct the same line of criticism towards NYC for what they did to Brooklyn.

That's True.

[metroplex2003]

Originally Posted by mpope409

Clever, but Dallas would also have to direct the same line of criticism towards NYC for what they did to Brooklyn.

Honestly, annexation does change stats. Louisville, KT made national news when they announced an annexation deal that would virtually double their proper population and claim to be one of the largest cities in the US.

In 2000, their population was 256231. In 2005, it's 556429. Let's get real here...city propers as I have demonstrated multiple times just dont grow at that type of rate. They even admitted their reasoning for doing so. It's a great marketing tool...population entices people. It shot Louisville up into the top 30 largest cities (proper) in the US. It expanded their tax base. It also put them better on the radar for businesses to locate there. There are lots of reasons for a principle city to annex. I think it was a great move. This is where ST. Louis failed. It had the opportunity to annex its surrounding suburbs back in the earlier part of the 20th century. The suburbs wanted to be anexed. St. Louis rejected the offer, and now the principle city has a lot of problems. It is well documented and researched...the St. Louis story...it's a sad story b/c St. Louis was the 4th largest city/metro area in the US at the beginning of the 20th century...so sad to see so much potential gone.

I think anytime a city proper can add to their tax base and population base it's a good thing. So kudos to Houston. Great job. You expanded your tax base, and you were able to control a bigger sq. mileage of city planning. And you have a great marketing tool to boast a/b your city proper population being 4th largest in the country.

But I dont think there is anyone that talks a/b Louisville being more major than Atlanta....which I always get the feeling that Houstonians look at Dallas as some minor player in the US (not all of you obviously before someone gets offended by that

DFW is a major player. There is a reason why it able to support the two airports it has (it's only a handful of US cities (including Houston so you dont feel left out) that supports secondary airports. There is a reason it supports all major league sports. There is a reason it has as many corporations as it has. It's an economic engine that all Texans should be proud of...and I'm proud that we have Houston too....dont get me wrong, but I think it's great that we have both DFW and Houston in the same state...I think it measures up quite well against the likes of the Bay area and LA area, which I think personally is our closest comparison and competitor.

We need to work together in a competitive way to continue to draw Californians from Calif to Texas. And it should be to our two flagship MSA's of DFW and Houston. I think we need to continue the siphoning process that has taken place in the 1990's from Calif.

[metroplex2003]

Originally Posted by Guerilla

Haha, yet, most of Houston's skylines (Downtown, Uptown, TMC, Greenway Plaza) could all be well within Dallas' city limits.

You know, if you added Fort Worth and Dallas city limit populations and square mileage together, Houston would still have more density AND less land area.

We have shown that the DFW density and Houston densities are relatively similar on the grand scheme of things. Houston area leads DFW area by a mere 5 persons/sq. mile...to put it on a grander scale, Chicago area has a full 1000 persons more per sq. mile than Houston area.

It's the same argument you used earlier when saying that DFW only has 1 more company than Houston, which I'm too lazy to look up b/c I'm sure it changes on a monthly basis

[mpope409]

I'm not arguing that DFW isn't a major player. What I'm saying is that a lot of Dallasites want to have their cake and eat it too. Several of you all like to tag everything in North Texas as Dallas'. Yes, it may be there because of Dallas, but it's not all in Dallas...And I've said this a million times: stop pretending that Dallas+Fort Worth vs. Houston is the same thing as Dallas vs. Houston.

[Guerilla]

Originally Posted by metroplex2003

We have shown that the DFW density and Houston densities are relatively similar on the grand scheme of things. Houston area leads DFW area by a mere 5 persons/sq. mile...to put it on a grander scale, Chicago area has a full 1000 persons more per sq. mile than Houston area.

It's the same argument you used earlier when saying that DFW only has 1 more company than Houston, which I'm too lazy to look up b/c I'm sure it changes on a monthly basis

Did you know that Houston (city limits) has a "mere" 300 person lead on Dallas in density. Houston is at 3,701 people per square mile compared to Dallas' 3,400.

[mpope409]

Originally Posted by Guerilla

Did you know that Houston (city limits) has a "mere" 300 person lead on Dallas in density. Houston is at 3,701 people per square mile compared to Dallas' 3,400.

Maybe it's not as mere as you think. Take each square mile in Dallas and add 300 people to it, lol. That's Houston.

[Guerilla]

Originally Posted by mpope409

Maybe it's not as mere as you think. Take each square mile in Dallas and add 300 people to it, lol. That's Houston.

Hence the quotation marks around mere.

[Synopsis]

I think Guerilla's tongue was prominently in cheek a few posts back..

[stoneclaw]

Originally Posted by Lakewooder

The skyline of refineries puffing pollution - Does that belong to Houston, Deer Park or Pasadena?

Well tell me if the skyline of flat prarie, grazeland and cows belongs in Dallas, Grand Prarie or Mesquite?

[Guerilla]

I wonder how those cement factories are doing in Midlothian.