Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-25-2010, 09:38 AM
 
624 posts, read 908,416 times
Reputation: 436

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CHIP72 View Post
Some of the "growth" in those cities is a function of those cities annexing land and getting larger land-wise. That's not to say that those metro areas didn't grow dramatically in the last 60 years - they did. It is to say however that comparing Dallas, Houston, etc. of 1950 with Dallas, Houston, etc. of 2010 isn't exactly an apples to apples comparison. The cities' jurisdictions themselves in many cases changed. That largely wasn't true with many of the Northeast or Midwest cities.
I agree with everything you have stated. I live in San Antonio have read articles in our local newspaper on the city's past vigorous annexation policy. Leaders in that city department have stated they don't want the city to lose out on tax dollars and have the city become land locked, St Louis and Detroit were used as examples, I agree. I also think to a degree it helps prevent city vs. suburbs situation which I have read about in Detroit (not in our local paper) and us against them mentality. People who buy new homes in the unincorporated areas of the county near the city limits will get annexed at some point. SA does have about 30 incorporated suburban cities most are less than 10,000 in population and are small land wise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-22-2010, 10:18 PM
 
Location: roaming gnome
12,384 posts, read 28,557,408 times
Reputation: 5889
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHIP72 View Post
The most accurate measure of a metro area's population is its urbanized area population. That number includes the central city and the all the suburbs near the city, but excludes portions of metro area counties that are more rural and/or are not directly connected with the central city.
ahh finally somebody who gets it... I have been preaching this stat for years, but nobody seems to notice, except of course for the U.N. ...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2010, 11:05 PM
 
Location: The City
22,378 posts, read 39,002,578 times
Reputation: 7976
Quote:
Originally Posted by grapico View Post
ahh finally somebody who gets it... I have been preaching this stat for years, but nobody seems to notice, except of course for the U.N. ...


I sing it quite often - but then again great minds think alike
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2010, 08:27 PM
 
499 posts, read 1,448,725 times
Reputation: 303
Originally Posted by miamiman
I don't understand the joke. Regardless of land area, the 2.3 million in Houston and the 1.6 million in Phoenix all live within the same political boundary. It will not be long before Houston replaces Chicago as the third largest city and Phoenix makes a run to replace Chicago as the then fourth largest city.

Midwestern and Eastern cities are no longer what people want
, with the exception of New York, of course.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SewickleyPA View Post
What a horribly inaccurate and ignorant statement!
I couldn't agree with you more! Houston & Phoenix are this county's worst examples of rampant unplanned sprawl. Now that they've gobbled up miles & miles & miles & miles of land with housing & freeways, they're trying to get a handle on it by building some light rail systems. When Phoenix runs out of water & the electric power to run their airconditioners & gasoline is no longer affordable, miamiman will see which cities people will no longer want to live in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 03:52 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,083,148 times
Reputation: 4047
^ Uh my thread is about the 1950 census. Why don't you leave Houston & Phoenix to other threads that address that.

Stay on topic people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2010, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,946,997 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Awesome Danny Scraper View Post
I know how you feel! Normally I write paragraphs of things and only get like a "one word" answer.

Okay, I'd like to add something to your list/paragraph.

Back in high school we also learned in AP US History class that suburban growth also came partially because of the fear of a nuclear disaster. To get away from the core of the city and into a more spread out location would be a lot safer especially with developments of basements in the suburban locations in the Midwest and Northeast.

They would do nuclear threat tests all the time, they would display the tests on the television screens of those locals watching television, this was during the period where the Soviet Union and USA were bulking up their arms and defense and building atomic bombs at fast rates.

Plus it was the introductory phase of the Cold War and the stressed relationship with the Soviet Union post World War II.

It led to massive migration from the cities to the suburbs, and 9 out 10 of those cities suffered greatly from their 1950 peak to their 1960 drop. The only city on the list that did not suffer was Los Angeles.

I also found it quite surprising to see Buffalo on the list as one of the nations 10 largest cities! LOL, and that too for nearly 2 decades it stayed on the list!
Your teacher was nuts. I was a kid in the 50s, and never heard of these nuclear threat tests. I do remember hearing incessantly about the threat of nuclear war, and the "Doomsday Clocks".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2010, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,083,148 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Your teacher was nuts. I was a kid in the 50s, and never heard of these nuclear threat tests. I do remember hearing incessantly about the threat of nuclear war, and the "Doomsday Clocks".
We watched a documentary on it actually. People had a lot to fear at those times, because the country was at the break of war at any given point.

I think ultimately we're talking about the same thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2010, 09:55 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,946,997 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Awesome Danny Scraper View Post
We watched a documentary on it actually. People had a lot to fear at those times, because the country was at the break of war at any given point.

I think ultimately we're talking about the same thing.
Obviously you weren't alive then, and I doubt your teacher was either. "Documentaries" can prove anything. The male adults around me were all the time talking about nuclear war, while the moms were busy raising their families and doing the same things I did 30 years later.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2010, 09:58 AM
 
48,502 posts, read 96,975,479 times
Reputation: 18305
After WWII housing became a prority and people wanted to move out to raise a family.It brought about a entirely different perspective on american life really.Automobiles /highways and family doing such things as traveling on vacation. They had define views on what was the good life after experiencing the war which took many out of their environment for first time.The 60's actaully brought many of the poor into cities because of the political power to get more entitlement spending;this drove more out of the city cores that could afford it.Then the problems in the 60's made many move out and it wasn't just civil rights. We now see a tend of wantig more close off from general society with HOAs and gated communties tryig to get that 1950's family areas agian;IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top