- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If Houston had the weather Los Angeles has would it be the largest city
Posted on 8/24/14 at 8:53 pm to TxTiger82
Posted on 8/24/14 at 8:53 pm to TxTiger82
quote:houston is barely 100 years old. All the others have 100+ years of being established. I'm not saying houston is perfect, or better than any other city. I'm saying they've come a lot further in their first 100 years than all the others, and seem to be on a meteoric rise in economy and population
No way. NYC (20 mil) and LA's (16 mil) metro area populations are so much bigger than Chicago's (9.5 mil) and Houston's (6 mil).
That is a really big difference between the top two and the next two. IDK if anything could help make that up.
2
Posted on 8/24/14 at 9:00 pm to LSUTIGER in TEXAS
quote:
houston is barely 100 years old. All the others have 100+ years of being established. I'm not saying houston is perfect, or better than any other city. I'm saying they've come a lot further in their first 100 years than all the others, and seem to be on a meteoric rise in economy and population
I find this argument disingenuous, frankly. In 1820, Los Angeles was a mission town in Mexico with a population of 650.
Sure, it has been a place since the 1700s, but it was literally a mission, some indians, and some farmers for the first 100 years. Can't really make an argument that this period counts for LA's development as a city.
Posted on 8/24/14 at 9:34 pm to LSUTIGER in TEXAS
quote:
houston is barely 100 years old. All the others have 100+ years of being established. I'm not saying houston is perfect, or better than any other city. I'm saying they've come a lot further in their first 100 years than all the others, and seem to be on a meteoric rise in economy and population
You can't compare the development pace of the 1700s or 1800s to today. Plus, cities like L.A. were just tiny missions back then anyway. This is all a pointless debate. Being a huge city doesn't mean anything anyway. Case in point: Beijing.
This post was edited on 8/24/14 at 9:35 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News