3 ms·

> To a degree that stands in stark contrast to Europe. Over 60% of the population of Germany's capital lives in the city proper. Just 11% of the population of A

> To a degree that stands in stark contrast to Europe. Over 60% of the population of Germany's capital lives in the city proper. Just 11% of the population of America's capital lives in the city proper. Eh, D.C. is an outlier due to its special legal/territorial status. And the numbers are uneven in Europe as well. In Los Angeles, 3,976,322/13,131,431 (30.3%) of the population of the metro area lives in L.A. proper. Compare to Paris, where only 2,206,488/12,405,426 (17.8%) of the population of the metro area lives in Paris proper.

rayiner 9y ago
Out of the 10 largest U.S. cities, only San Antonio has a majority of the population of its metro area. Most aren't even close, at 20-30%. Out of the 10 largest EU cities, only three have less than half the population in the core city: Madrid, Paris, and Hamburg. And Madrid is close to the line--48%.
- dionidium 9y ago
  You can't use political borders in this way. You're trying to make an argument about population differences between cities and their suburbs, but every city defines these borders differently (to sometimes include almost all of their "suburbs", sometimes none, and everything else in between). The key to recognizing how absurd this is: your argument would have to drastically change if each city moved its political borders +/- 15 miles in either direction, but nothing on the ground would actually be any different (that is, there wouldn't suddenly be more people living in one kind of environment and fewer in the other, although, definitionally, that would appear to be the case). These lines are politically drawn. They don't support arguments of the kind you're making. Why does San Antonio have a much larger share of its metro's population than does San Francisco? Because the borders of San Antonio extend to cover ~465 square miles to San Francisco's ~44. What does that tell us about these two cities? Basically nothing. (In fact, this information directly misleads us into thinking all sorts of things that aren't true (for example, that San Antonio might be bigger than San Francisco).
littlestymaar 9y ago
Paris is also an outlier, and the administrative distinction between Paris and the «petite couronne» is kind of artificial. In an urbanistic point of view, there is not much difference between inside and outside the «périphérique ».

rayiner 9y ago

Out of the 10 largest U.S. cities, only San Antonio has a majority of the population of its metro area. Most aren't even close, at 20-30%. Out of the 10 largest EU cities, only three have less than half the population in the core city: Madrid, Paris, and Hamburg. And Madrid is close to the line--48%.

dionidium 9y ago
You can't use political borders in this way. You're trying to make an argument about population differences between cities and their suburbs, but every city defines these borders differently (to sometimes include almost all of their "suburbs", sometimes none, and everything else in between). The key to recognizing how absurd this is: your argument would have to drastically change if each city moved its political borders +/- 15 miles in either direction, but nothing on the ground would actually be any different (that is, there wouldn't suddenly be more people living in one kind of environment and fewer in the other, although, definitionally, that would appear to be the case). These lines are politically drawn. They don't support arguments of the kind you're making. Why does San Antonio have a much larger share of its metro's population than does San Francisco? Because the borders of San Antonio extend to cover ~465 square miles to San Francisco's ~44. What does that tell us about these two cities? Basically nothing. (In fact, this information directly misleads us into thinking all sorts of things that aren't true (for example, that San Antonio might be bigger than San Francisco).

littlestymaar 9y ago

Paris is also an outlier, and the administrative distinction between Paris and the «petite couronne» is kind of artificial. In an urbanistic point of view, there is not much difference between inside and outside the «périphérique ».