Current Events > What do you consider to be the major American cities?

(+) Yeah! (+)

It doesn't have to just be the super major cities, i.e. NYC, Los Angeles, Houston, Chicago and Boston. What do you think the major cities in general are?

The capitals and major tourist cities for sure, and anything with a population in the 5 figures, 6 in states with a population of over 1 million

DarkFists posted...

The capitals and major tourist cities for sure, and anything with a population in the 5 figures, 6 in states with a population of over 1 million

There are quite a few captials that aren't major cities. Like nobody gives a shit about Topeka or Jefferson City. The most prominent metropolitan areas in Kansas and Missouri are Kansas City and St. Louis.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


I'd also argue that raw population figures aren't always accurate because when people think of "cities" what they really mean is metropolitan areas, which might include several cities but are still largely culturally the same.

For example, Oklahoma City is bigger than Kansas City, MO, Kansas City, KS or Overland Park, KS. But those three along with a lot of smaller cities make up the Kansas City Metro area. And that is much bigger than the Oklahoma City metro. And that's why Kansas City is generally considered more notable and can have amusement parks and multiple professional sports teams and the like.

Shoot_FTH posted...

It doesn't have to just be the super major cities, i.e. NYC, Los Angeles, Houston, Chicago and Boston. What do you think the major cities in general are?

Boston is actually pretty small it's 24th in population

DarkFists posted...

The capitals and major tourist cities for sure, and anything with a population in the 5 figures, 6 in states with a population of over 1 million

5 figures major? What?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Jacksonville has about 70,000 more people than San Francisco.

#12 Jacksonville: 747.3 sq mi
#17 San Francisco: 46.9 sq mi

And follow up which do you consider a more major city?

Professional, top-tier sports teams is a useful measure of this, IMO. If you have an NBA team or whatever, you're a major city.

Ohio has

Cleveland
Columbus(capital)
Cincinnati
Toledo?
and I guess Dayton

Antifar posted...

Professional, top-tier sports teams is a useful measure of this, IMO. If you have an NBA team or whatever, you're a major city.

I'd argue that having multiple professional Big 4 sports teams is probably the line. Cities like Green Bay are not major cities, despite the presence of a very notable professional sports team.

New York
Los Angeles
Chicago
Washington
Philadelphia
Boston
Miami
Dallas
Houston
Atlanta
San Francisco

Everything else is a regional city. Some damn good, like San Diego and Louisville, but those are the major ones even if there are other cities that are larger than some on the list.

Compsognathus posted...

I'd argue that having multiple professional Big 4 sports teams is probably the line. Cities like Green Bay are not major cities, despite the presence of a very notable professional sports team.

Fair. Sorry, Sacramento!

Would this be a better point of reference?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_statistical_area

Even if it isn't as populated, Las Vegas is a major city. It is widely used and parodied in media and is well known among people from other countries.

DFW I read,is now considered the biggest airport hub which I believe. Also if you add all of DFW together its stupid big with the fastest growing economy.

Still NY,Chicago,LA are the top 3 imo. Jacksonville FL is just way to spread out,not much travelers unless passing through on I-10/I-95.

IMO, you need at least 6-digits worth of permanent residents to be called a City.
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/7/9/8/AAAFvAAAEWg-.png
Otherwise, you can use the other definitions.

Antifar posted...

Professional, top-tier sports teams is a useful measure of this, IMO. If you have an NBA team or whatever, you're a major city.

The Patriots play in Foxborough, MA, which has a population of about 16,000.

The_Popo posted...

The Patriots play in Foxborough, MA, which has a population of about 16,000.

For all intents and purposes, the Patriots are a Boston team

metro area is way more interesting than strict city populations

DarkFists posted...

anything with a population in the 5 figures

Carlsbad, New Mexico is a major city.

Kamen_Rider_Blade posted...

IMO, you need at least 6-digits worth of permanent residents to be called a City.

At least in the US, city is just a term for a municipality that has a certain type of government. There are loads of cities with just a few hundred or a few thousand residents, and villages that have tens of thousands of residents.

For instance, the village of Skokie in Illinois has a population of almost 70,000.

Antifar posted...

For all intents and purposes, the Patriots are a Boston team

Fair enough.

How about Green Bay, then? Population right around 100,000, good for roughly 300th in the country.

K181 posted...

At least in the US, city is just a term for a municipality that has a certain type of government. There are loads of cities with just a few hundred or a few thousand residents, and villages that have tens of thousands of residents.

For instance, the village of Skokie in Illinois has a population of almost 70,000.

That's the problem with different definitions being established in the past when population demographics were different.

There's no common modern defintion that we can easily apply to everybody and have apt names associated with your area.

Skokie, Illinois should be upgraded from a Village to a Borough.

So you should call it "The Borough of Skokie, Illinois".

NYC, LA, Chicago. and Philadelphia. Houston and Phoenix are huge suburbs pretending to be cities.

YellowSUV posted...

NYC, LA, Chicago. and Philadelphia. Houston and Phoenix are huge suburbs pretending to be cities.

Those suburbs are part of the same County that the City lives in.

They're part of the large metropolitan area.

Otherwise, if you limit the definition of a city to only the tall buildings, the land area of a city would be tiny in comparison.

Kamen_Rider_Blade posted...

the land area of a city would be tiny in comparison.

This isn't a topic about land area, though.

Antifar posted...

This isn't a topic about land area, though.

The population count would be tiny as well if you only factor in the land area that has big buildings for a city.

That's why when you talk about the big Metropolitan cities, you usually factor in the county and the surrounding suburbs land area and resident population.

Kamen_Rider_Blade posted...

That's the problem with different definitions being established in the past when population demographics were different.

There's no common modern defintion that we can easily apply to everybody and have apt names associated with your area.

Skokie, Illinois should be upgraded from a Village to a Borough.

So you should call it "The Borough of Skokie, Illinois".

Theres no upgrading. Its just terminology to describe incorporation type.

In Illinois, for instance, we only have cities, towns, and villages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_municipalities_in_Illinois

If you ever want to be a wiseass, you can tell people that Illinois only has sixteen towns.

Philly
Nashville