I saw a thing on this and to my surprise there was actual debate out there as to which four cities should be defined as THE four U.S. cities.
What say you?
What say you?
I feel like the only debate is number 4. Top 3 seem pretty obvious.
Straight up by population it’s NYC, Chicago, LA, and DFW.
Houston is not too far behind DFW by just over half a million, and similar in regional location and economic impact so I think you could debate it if you wanted to.
Could maybe argue Miami, ATL, or San Fran if you’re looking at broader categories- but on what planet would Minneapolis or Indianapolis be in this debate?? DC, Philly, Phoenix, and Boston easily beat them out.
I kind of see it as more cultural and regional than population. NYC... Northeast. Chicago... Midwest. LA... West Coast. Atlanta... Southeast.By metro population you've got NY\LA\Chicago clearly up at the top.
After that though it gets a bit closer, as while you've got DFW and Houston at 8.3 and 7.3 million, respectively, DC and Atlanta aren't far behind at just a bit above 6 million each. DFW and Houston's metro areas are both such sprawling megaplexes it feels like that kind of cancels out some of the population weight.
If you looked at it by CSA the DC CSA actually comes in at #3
I get that, but I don't mind not giving the southeast a top 4 city. It's definitely the grossest area of the country.I kind of see it as more cultural and regional than population. NYC... Northeast. Chicago... Midwest. LA... West Coast. Atlanta... Southeast.
DC, Philly and Boston, I'll agree. But Phoenix?!Straight up by population it’s NYC, Chicago, LA, and DFW.
Houston is not too far behind DFW by just over half a million, and similar in regional location and economic impact so I think you could debate it if you wanted to.
Could maybe argue Miami, ATL, or San Fran if you’re looking at broader categories- but on what planet would Minneapolis or Indianapolis be in this debate?? DC, Philly, Phoenix, and Boston easily beat them out.
Why isn't Ankeny on this list?