Is it a mistake to concentrate industries and airport hubs into mega cities?

The cities make bids for these companies via cheap land, tax incentives and financial packages.

Also port locations, trucking routes, rail access, access to major rivers, and access to materials plays a part.

It's not a mistake. It's how cities grow.

Kinda hard not to without having to spend a ton of money on new infrastructure

One company in any given industry gives rise to other competing companies in said industry. Not sure how a monopoly benefits anyone except the owner of a monopoly.

Also, cost is reduced for bulk shipments of raw materials or parts typically, which affects the bottom line, which in turn affects the final price at market. The modern economy thrives or perishes on its ability to streamline processes. Forcefully fragmenting industries and services has more cons than pros in my opinion.

quote:

---

Any metro over 5 million is not worth living in. Just my 2 cents

---

How do, living in the downtown of a city of 9 million people, I think the cost of living is rather expensive dive but I don't need a car, can get anywhere in the city within half an hour for two dollars, have access to any dining/shopping/entertainment venue I want, and can make every weekend an adventure.

Now would I mind living in suburbs or rural? No. but to dismiss cities, I think you don't really know what it's like to live in a real city. Example you used as New York being the evidence.

For business it often makes it easier. Locate in a city where everyone in an industry has an office, and you will always find employees, outside expertise, and the related service companies and/or suppliers you need. You will also be in the midst of where any trends or developments take place.

Tech fields are extremely sensitive to this, but many sectors show this as well. It sucks for other cities who lose out. New Orleans and really La as a whole has lost pretty much every public company it ever had. Start ups grow and typically move away once hitting critical levels or when they're bought.

Not if you believe in a federal system. Each state plays to its strengths and resources.

quote:

---

Is it a mistake to concentrate industries and airport hubs into mega cities?

---

They go where the infrastructure is.

Louisiana doesn't make real investments in infrastructure like Houston or Atlanta - particularly in growing parts of the state like Lake Charles, Lafayette, and Baton Rouge. Those areas are growing (slowly compared to Texas) despite the lack of new highways, bridges, diversion canals, etc.

If they really want Baton Rouge and the north shore to grow, they'd add 3-4 new gates to BTR (and try to attract more nonstop flights to existing hubs as well as discount service from Spirit, Frontier, etc), expand Airline Highway throughout the entire metro, widen US 190 to Hammond (and make improvements to it west towards Opelousas), widen LA30 to Gonzales, build a bridge crossing at Hooper Road/Watson, and build a new Mississippi River bridge south of I-10 around Dow Chem - all while Baton Rouge tries to gentrify parts of town that are relatively safe from flooding.

New Orleans desperately needs better drainage infrastructure, improved/replaced locks at their ship channels, improved public safety, replaced and expanded rail links (including passenger service to Baton Rouge), and to somehow attract a low cost airline hub at MSY. The last thing alone would make New Orleans much more competitive than it is today. I think the new terminal will help them achieve that. Baton Rouge and the north shore will also benefit from that.

Lafayette and Lake Charles also have major needs...namely the completion of I-49, the replacement of the aging bridge over Lake Charles, and probably the eventual relocation and expansion of Lake Charles regional airport to somewhere along I-10 east of town. Lake Charles and Lafayette also need improved collector road networks, drainage infrastructure, and land use controls south of both cities.

All of those cities listed above would benefit from a wider I-10 and I-12 with updated bridge crossings and interchanges. I can definitely see how Lake Charles will become much larger in the not to distant future. I also think that Baton Rouge, north shore, and New Orleans will eventually grow into one another if they can offer better regional infrastructure.

I've lived in Dallas

quote:

---

I also think the mid sized and large flyover metro areas between 800,000 - 2,000,000 (Baton Rouge/Tulsa/Oklahoma City/Memphis/Nashville/Omaha/Birmingham/Pittsburgh/Indy) need to start planning for local rail-based street car lines or transit lines if they haven't already. The initial investment is scary-high, but I think the federal government should help with some of it. Once the initial line and running gear are installed and operational, incremental expansion is a little easier to swallow.

I think regional rail lines will be pushed by the federal government in the future between places like Baton Rouge and New Orleans, Pittsburgh and Cleveland, Tulsa to Oklahoma city, etc. They will make a much bigger dent in local traffic movement if they are met with better local public transit.

---

I would agree with that if I didn't think that autonomous driving is going to be such a ridiculous game-changer with regards to public transportation, individual vehicle ownership, and commercial freight shipping. I don't think it makes sense for metro areas that size to invest in legacy rail lines until they see how autonomous driving shakes out. I live in a city with a great rail system, love it, and use it all the time, but I'd exercise caution even if I were a larger city (Denver, Miami, Seattle, etc.) thinking about a big movement in that direction.