Solihull is considered "in the area" but it's a bit more distinct. It's possible Sutton was once upon a time, but not anymore. Has a good fireworks show regardless though!
Second cities
- Thread starter amadeus
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2008
- Messages
- 26,433
Atlanta is larger and more important than most of those cities you mentioned and is now the 6th largest in the US.
I agree though that Chicago, despite issues, has more value than LA.
But "second city" appears somewhat subjective unless going strictly pop. And you have a native perspective and an outsider perspective. (and locals too)
US pop cities (metro):
New York
LA
Chi-Town
Dallas
Houston
Atlanta
DC
Philthy
Miami
Phoenix
Last edited:
LA is the obvious notch for the US in my life time, though Chicago used to be the runner-up.
Funnily enough, I always thought of York as England's second city because it was 2nd on the English city list in Civ IV.
Funnily enough, I always thought of York as England's second city because it was 2nd on the English city list in Civ IV.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2008
- Messages
- 26,433
It was in medieval times although Winchester was bigger at one point, but York is rather small now relatively. 29th I think. I don't think it was affected as much when industrialization hit like Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and the like.LA is the obvious notch for the US in my life time, though Chicago used to be the runner-up.
Funnily enough, I always thought of York as England's second city because it was 2nd on the English city list in Civ IV.
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
I knew I was leaving out one of the most important. Philly and Phoenix aren't even considered.
Montreal is bilingual French-English, yes.
HOWEVER. (political rant incoming)
In RL I don't travel much. Across town is a long trip for me these days. It's been 20 years since I was out of town for any reason besides a couple of medical appointments in a nearby town.
Hypothetically, if I were to travel anywhere in Canada that I wanted, I'd be in BC thisfast. There are so many places to see in Vancouver and Victoria that I could spend a month doing them, given the mobility and means to do them. I've been out there twice before - in 1977 and in the mid-'80s - and barely scratched the surface because we had so little time (just 2-3 days on the Island, and mere hours in Vancouver).
And here's a relevant political point in favor of Vancouver. There aren't any language laws there. Quebec has language laws. Some people have reported being treated like crap in hospitals there if they don't speak French. I can read some French if it's not too complicated. I used to be able to carry on a conversation, but "use it or lose it" has meant that I haven't seriously used any spoken French in 35+ years, and the last time was just because I had my old high school French teacher as a typing client (once he found out that I charged a lot less than a lawyer to type legal documents, he came to me for that sort of thing - some of which was in French). So my conversational skills in French are rusty. I can't imagine trying to communicate medical issues in anything but English.
There are so many ways in which the current Quebec premier has basically hung an " English Canada GTFO" sign at the border, with some of what he's said, some of the policies put in, and what from this side of the border looks like a hostile attitude toward anglophone Canadians (particularly university students; apparently anglophone students studying there add nothing of value to that province even though they live there, work there, study there, socialize there, spend money there for necessities and recreation, and might have plans to live there permanently for work or family if they happen to end up in a relationship there)... nope, for all of these reasons and more, I will never set foot in Quebec (yes, I know I realistically wouldn't be able even if I wanted to, but for me this is a matter of principle and has been ever since Bill 101 was enacted decades ago).
Defining Canadian cities by population is misleading. Vancouver has been growing over the past several decades, gradually swallowing up towns around it and places that used to be distinctly not-Vancouver are now basically bedroom communities that are so close to being part of it that it makes no real difference.
Federal countries seem to have a more equal? distribution of population often without a clear primary or secondary city. They often have a relatively small capital.
Italy is relatively decentralised and it isn't obvious that Milan is a second city - it is bigger and wealthier than Rome.
In centralised countries there is often a clear pecking order with the capital at the top. Paris - Lyon - Marseille
The second city of Ireland is Cork but Belfast would be a better candidate.
Italy is relatively decentralised and it isn't obvious that Milan is a second city - it is bigger and wealthier than Rome.
In centralised countries there is often a clear pecking order with the capital at the top. Paris - Lyon - Marseille
The second city of Ireland is Cork but Belfast would be a better candidate.
You are not the only one. I just checked and nowadays it is like 1/10th of Birmingham.Funnily enough, I always thought of York as England's second city because it was 2nd on the English city list in Civ IV.
Which would never have occurred to me as #2. Might have offered Manchester in a pinch.
stfoskey12
Emperor of Foskania
I'd say ranking US metro areas in terms of importance it would go
NYC
LA
DC
Bay Area
Chicago
NYC
LA
DC
Bay Area
Chicago
There’s really no objective way to measure this, it’s much more of a collective consciousness type thing. What I’m talking here is more a sense of prominence, all of which are buoyed by population, economy, etc. but also history and how well-known the place is.
I don’t think for example Tokyo is the best place to be in Japan, I don’t know about the others that I haven’t visited but I didn’t choose to live in New York either.
I would agree. I know how Chicago has billed itself, but its metro area has been surpassed in population by Los Angeles since the 1960’s and the gap has only widened since then. I would also include the influence of Hollywood.
Narz
keeping it real
I guess the sprawl, bad traffic and massive class differences are pretty well representative of US in general 
Yeah, a lot of comments here are like "it can't be that city, because it's bad" when it's not about that...
I agree North American "city" population figures can be misleading, which is why I use the Australian definition of city population, which in North America I believe you call it "metro" population. This includes all of the nearby suburbs and some of the more integrated bedroom communities.
Even if you include the entire Lower Mainland, that's 3 million people, still smaller than Montreal.
I think Vancouver/Lower Mainland, has the potential to grow much more but you have to bring your house prices under control.
Farm Boy
they're all reactions
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 27,963
What are the selection criteria, then? Just look up metro area GDP and be done with it? Positives only? Legit question, not my thread.
Population, GDP, cultural influence, political importance, historical importance, transport links, reputation/prestige, name recognition (domestic/international)
honestly this isn't hard, unless you think a city you don't like can't also be powerful and influential... which ironically is a very "second city" mindset
Which again, fair. Not my thread.Similar threads
