Houston vs. Dallas (Fort Worth, Plano, Richardson: flower, lists, golden)

[JJG]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

That building may not be flashy, but at least its not ugly tho.

Oh YES IT IS. Trust me...

[casimpso]

Originally Posted by R1070

Houston has almost twice as many people living in its city limits, but the difference here isn't off by much. So of course Houston will have more overall having more people. Dallas has an impressive percentage and the actual number of Billionaires in the Metroplex is very impressive.

I'd be willing to bet that you're right, but since the poster provided only an orphan graph, with no link so we could know the criteria for the stat, we can only guess.

My guess is that it is cities only, no metros, which would explain why NYC, LA and Chicago are near the top: They have large populations. San Fran is there because it is a "mecca" city, an iconic place, one that attracts people of wealth because it is such an expensive place to live. DC is there because it is the seat of political power in America. Lobbyists and moguls want to be close to power, since we live in an oligarchy.

If my supposition is true it would seem, since the city of Houston has over a million more people than the city of Dallas, that the difference between the two should be a lot larger than the paper-thin margin shown in the graph.

[llmrkc07]

Originally Posted by casimpso

I'd be willing to bet that you're right, but since the poster provided only an orphan graph, with no link so we could know the criteria for the stat, we can only guess.

My guess is that it is cities only, no metros, which would explain why NYC, LA and Chicago are near the top: They have large populations. San Fran is there because it is a "mecca" city, an iconic place, one that attracts people of wealth because it is such an expensive place to live. DC is there because it is the seat of political power in America. Lobbyists and moguls want to be close to power, since we live in an oligarchy.

If my supposition is true it would seem, since the city of Houston has over a million more people than the city of Dallas, that the difference between the two should be a lot larger than the paper-thin margin shown in the graph.

Thats true and it not that big of a difference...I believe there is more money in Dallas

[Cowboys fan in Houston]

Originally Posted by llmrkc07

Thats true and it not that big of a difference...I believe there is more money in Dallas

Depends on the metric. Dallas has more billionaires, but Houston has a lot more millionaires.

The whole Dallas is rich, Houston is poor thing doesnt really hold up in 2011. Both have lots of rich and poor.

[Exult.Q36]

I like Houston city Hall much better than Dallas city hall.

[blkgiraffe]

People have this image and perception of Dallas being richer simply because of its reputation; however, it's exaggerated. Both have many wealthy citizens. Dallasites just tend to be more flashy and dressy.

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by casimpso

I'd be willing to bet that you're right, but since the poster provided only an orphan graph, with no link so we could know the criteria for the stat, we can only guess.

My guess is that it is cities only, no metros, which would explain why NYC, LA and Chicago are near the top: They have large populations. San Fran is there because it is a "mecca" city, an iconic place, one that attracts people of wealth because it is such an expensive place to live. DC is there because it is the seat of political power in America. Lobbyists and moguls want to be close to power, since we live in an oligarchy.

If my supposition is true it would seem, since the city of Houston has over a million more people than the city of Dallas, that the difference between the two should be a lot larger than the paper-thin margin shown in the graph.

if you could read you would see that this is by metro, not city!!!!!! So your silly idea that Houston has more people goes out the window.

stop being daft an open your eyes and read. With 400,000 LESS people, Houston has more super rich people.

It is funny how you guys are quick to ditch Fort Worth when it boosts your image but latch on to them to bolster your population rankings

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by blkgiraffe

People have this image and perception of Dallas being richer simply because of its reputation; however, it's exaggerated. Both have many wealthy citizens. Dallasites just tend to be more flashy and dressy.

I agree, I have met many low key multimillionaires here. Some of them dress so modestly and are so modest in manner, you would think they were as broke as me.

[Fillmont]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

if you could read you would see that this is by metro, not city!!!!!! So your silly idea that Houston has more people goes out the window.

stop being daft an open your eyes and read. With 400,000 LESS people, Houston has more super rich people.

It is funny how you guys are quick to ditch Fort Worth when it boosts your image but latch on to them to bolster your population rankings

If we could read what? All you ever provided was that graph with no actual data points behind it. It is impossible to read because it doesn't actually tell us anything, like if it was by city or metro.

But since you seem incapable of actually doing the due diligence on things you posted yourself, here it is:

All the links I've found (such as this one) says it's by city, not metro. So yea, before you freak out over what other people can or can't read, maybe you should do some reading yourself.

Oh, and here's another one (where your version of the infographic came from), and it again states that is, in fact, citites.

The report does mention that the NYC Metro has 13% of the nation's super rich, but that is the only mention of metro areas in the news blurb. Every other data point is for cities.

I fully expect you to apologize to casimpso for your rudeness, thanks.

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

not so fast. I thought these were by metro.

DFW has more people in its metro,

Originally Posted by Fillmont

If we could read what? All you ever provided was that graph with no actual data points behind it. It is impossible to read because it doesn't actually tell us anything, like if it was by city or metro.

But since you seem incapable of actually doing the due diligence on things you posted yourself, here it is:

All the links I've found (such as this one) says it's by city, not metro. So yea, before you freak out over what other people can or can't read, maybe you should do some reading yourself.

Oh, and here's another one (where your version of the infographic came from), and it again states that is, in fact, citites.

The report does mention that the NYC Metro has 13% of the nation's super rich, but that is the only mention of metro areas in the news blurb. Every other data point is for cities.

I fully expect you to apologize to casimpso for your rudeness, thanks.

all the numbers are for metro. People use the term city but for all of them they are metro. No rudeness here and no apology is coming either. I mentioned they were metro in a post earlier, so it seems we have more than one poster who practices selective reading.

In Fact for SF and DC they include the whole darn CSA.

even the links you posted said city area, but you should know by now that metro areas are synonymous with city nowadays. It is done on here everyday.