HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 2:19 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd3189 View Post
The change here wasn't really significant, if any. As soon as the first US census was made, NYC had already overtaken Philly as the largest city. Things just stayed like that ever since.
I don't agree. New York was only larger than Philadelphia on the first census because of technicality. If you compared the population in 1790 of Philadelphia with present day borders versus New York with present day borders then Philly would be the largest city.

Three of the 10 largest cities in the 1790 census are within present day borders of Philadelphia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Largest...by_decade#1790
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 2:26 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,782
Another more obvious American shift: Baltimore and Washington
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 2:30 PM
vanatox vanatox is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade View Post


English used to be Montreal's lingua franca when the city was the biggest one, right? I heard many wealthy English-speakers left in the 70's and 80's.
English was the lingua franca of business (not completely, but was very dominant) but was not the lingua franca of the majority of the population.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 2:32 PM
niwell's Avatar
niwell niwell is offline
sick transit, gloria
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Roncesvalles, Toronto
Posts: 11,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post

Although Montreal was Canada's city for over a century, it should be noted that for most of the 20th century, Toronto wasn't that far behind. It was far more industrial and less cultural (although that still existed) and its wealthy class preferred not to erect grand monuments and instead act a bit more provincial. This is still something ingrained in Toronto's psyche, even in 2014, although changing. You see it anytime an Olympic bid is brought up or someone wants to build a new landmark for the city.

It has taken awhile for Montreal to shed its importance over Canadian affairs in culture, economy, and politics. In many ways still Montreal has allure and prestige over Toronto for Canadians as our most grand city and most cultured city. Toronto has caught up remarkably fast, though, and now dominates over much of Anglo Canada's affairs (as much as is possible in such a disconnected country). It is plenty cultured and vibrant these days, not being overtly provincial (though perhaps a tad insecure), though it takes time for people to change their perceptions, which is why Montreal is still spoken of with such romanticism. That being said, Quebec growing more insular has definitely pushed things along.


I was about to write something very similar. Montreal was Canada's clear Metropolis up until the mid 70s or so - this can't be disputed. But we tend to have this idea in our national psyche that Montreal was dominant in the same sort of way London or Paris are, while Toronto was some backwater in Ontario on par with Kingston or something. In reality Toronto was never far behind and in many ways fighting for top spot for some time. Economically it was on par by the 1920s, but lagged culturally until recently.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 2:32 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G View Post
But Chicago never did overtake NYC. It was probably its fiercest competitor for awhile, but NYC solidified its dominance over all other US cities awhile ago (although Angelenos may argue otherwise...?).
It's been quite a while since people thought Chicago might overtake New York. Chicago was probably the first of the big 20th century industrial cities to start stagnating/declining in population.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 2:35 PM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,478
Baltimore

Wikimedia

vs

Washington

Wikimedia


A very important one. Washington skyrocketed with Roosevelt's New Deal and has kept growing fast as the government grows fast as well. Metropolitan areas based on "traditional" economy, such as Baltimore, cannot compete with that.

On 2000, both Washington and Baltimore MSAs were merged into a single CSA, where Washington is by far the most important partner. The final blow on Baltimore came on 2012, as Washington (city proper) overtook Baltimore for the first in history.


METROPOLITAN AREA

1800
Baltimore -------- 26,514
Washington ------- 8,144

1810
Baltimore -------- 46,555
Washington ------ 15,471

1820
Baltimore -------- 62,738
Washington ------ 23,336

1830
Baltimore -------- 80,620
Washington ------ 30,261

1840
Baltimore ------- 102,313
Washington ------ 33,745

1850
Baltimore ------- 169,054
Washington ------ 51,687

1860
Baltimore ------- 266,553
Washington ------ 75,080

1870
Baltimore ------- 330,741
Washington ----- 131,700

1880
Baltimore ------- 415,649
Washington ----- 177,624

1890
Baltimore ------- 507,348
Washington ----- 230,392

1900
Baltimore ------- 639,332
Washington ----- 378,605

1910
Baltimore ------- 720,387
Washington ----- 445,401

1920
Baltimore ------- 852,051
Washington ----- 571,882

1930
Baltimore ------- 984,606
Washington ----- 672,198

1940
Baltimore ----- 1,083,300
Washington ----- 967,985

1950
Washington --- 1,464,089
Baltimore ----- 1,337,373

1960
Washington --- 2,001,897
Baltimore ----- 1,727,023

1970
Washington --- 2,861,123
Baltimore ----- 2,070,670

1980
Washington --- 3,060,922
Baltimore ----- 2,174,023

1990
Washington --- 3,923,574
Baltimore ----- 2,382,172

2000
Washington --- 4,923,153
Baltimore ----- 2,552,994

2010
Washington --- 5,636,232
Baltimore ----- 2,710,489

2012
Washington --- 5,860,342
Baltimore ----- 2,753,149


----------------------------------------------------------------------------


CITY

1800
Baltimore -------- 26,514
Washington ------- 8,144

1810
Baltimore -------- 46,555
Washington ------ 15,471

1820
Baltimore -------- 62,738
Washington ------ 23,336

1830
Baltimore -------- 80,620
Washington ------ 30,261

1840
Baltimore ------- 102,313
Washington ------ 33,745

1850
Baltimore ------- 169,054
Washington ------ 51,687

1860
Baltimore ------- 212,418
Washington ------ 75,080

1870
Baltimore ------- 267,354
Washington ----- 131,700

1880
Baltimore ------- 332,313
Washington ----- 177,624

1890
Baltimore ------- 434,449
Washington ----- 230,392

1900
Baltimore ------- 508,957
Washington ----- 278,718

1910
Baltimore ------- 558,485
Washington ----- 331,069

1920
Baltimore ------- 733,826
Washington ----- 437,571

1930
Baltimore ------- 804,874
Washington ----- 486,869

1940
Baltimore ------- 859,100
Washington ----- 663,091

1950
Baltimore ------- 949,708
Washington ----- 802,178

1960
Baltimore ------- 939,024
Washington ----- 763,956

1970
Baltimore ------- 905,759
Washington ----- 756,510

1980
Baltimore ------- 786,775
Washington ----- 638,333

1990
Baltimore ------- 736,014
Washington ----- 606,900

2000
Baltimore ------- 651,154
Washington ----- 572,059

2010
Baltimore ------- 620,961
Washington ----- 601,723

2012
Washington ----- 632,323
Baltimore ------- 621,342
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 2:44 PM
dave8721 dave8721 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Miami
Posts: 4,036
Jacksonville vs Miami for Florida would be a good comparison.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 2:49 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade View Post
iheartthed, do you have detailed data on those shifts?
Admitted, I don't know much about Houston or Galveston but I do know that Galveston was once the dominant city of that region. Some people point to the 1900 hurricane hitting Galveston as the turning point, but Houston had already slightly overtaken Galveston by the time it hit. However, Houston's growth rate does seem to have accelerated quite a bit after the hurricane. I'll do the others a little later.

Houston vs Galveston (percentages represent Houston's population as percentage of Galveston's population)
Houston
1850 2,396 ----- 57.36%
1860 4,845 ----- 66.31%
1870 9,332 ----- 67.54%
1880 16,513 ----- 74.22%
1890 27,557 ----- 94.75%
1900 44,633 ----- 118.11%
1910 78,800 ----- 213.08%
1920 138,276 ----- 312.45%
1930 292,352 ----- 552.25%
1940 384,514 ----- 631.78%
1950 596,163 ----- 895.57%
1960 938,219 ----- 1396.68%
1970 1,232,802 ----- 1994.53%
1980 1,595,138 ----- 2576.88%
1990 1,630,553 ----- 2760.37%
2000 1,953,631 ----- 3412.63%
2010 2,100,263 ----- 4399.10%



Galveston
1850 4,177
1860 7,307
1870 13,818
1880 22,248
1890 29,084
1900 37,789
1910 36,981
1920 44,255
1930 52,938
1940 60,862
1950 66,568
1960 67,175
1970 61,809
1980 61,902
1990 59,070
2000 57,247
2010 47,743
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 2:59 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Chicago was probably the first of the big 20th century industrial cities to start stagnating/declining in population.
actually, cleveland (city proper) experienced its first decade of population loss in the 1930s. chicago (city proper) didn't experience its first decade of population loss until the 1950s, just like the vast majority of the other industrial rust belt cities.

when you look at things at the metro level, your argument that chicago was the first to stagnate/decline in population becomes even weaker, as the data shows metro areas like pittsburgh, detroit, and cleveland stagnated/declined earlier than chicago. in fact metro chicago has never experienced a single decade of population decline, ever, unlike those other metro areas. now, chicagoland's growth in the 70s/80s was indeed quite anemic, but at least it was still positive growth.

here's a graph of the major midwest metro areas through the 20th century:

__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 3:08 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 52,200
In 1950 it was expected that Montreal would have 7 million by 2000.
__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 3:10 PM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,478
The first metro areas to decline was Wheeling-Steubenville, WV-OH and Scranton-WilkesBarre, PA, both with constant population losses since 1930. The major one, was Pittsburgh, peaking in 1960. Cleveland peaked in 1970, and Detroit in 2000.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 3:12 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Sin Jaaawnz, Newf'nland
Posts: 34,658
"Cities", - but the extreme age and long time frames makes it interesting, I guess.

Harbour Grace versus St. John's.

Beginning in the early 1600s, Harbour Grace became the dominant English-speaking community in Newfoundland. It was where the richest of the upper classes lived, where the first rail lines ended, where the grandest courts and public buildings were erected. As recently as the late 1700s, it was, in every way, Newfoundland's dominant community.

Harbour Grace was a permanent settlement, where people lived year-round and built the amenities such wealthy people expected. St. John's was a largely transient community, centered on trade with Europe, where people came and went with the work and the seasons. Brothels, pubs, and fish warehouses, slums.

Then trade with Europe boomed and, as the closest fine harbour to the European mainland, so did St. John's. The two cities were last comparable in size when both had about 18,000 people in the early/mid-1800s.

Since then, Harbour Grace has fallen back to 3,500. St. John's has surged ahead to 206,000.
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 3:21 PM
brickell's Avatar
brickell brickell is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: County of Dade
Posts: 9,379
If we take the whole southern US, there was a big shift from the coasts (Charleston, Savannah, Wilmington) to points further inland (Atlanta, Colombia, Charlotte).
__________________
That's what did it in the end. Not the money, not the music, not even the guns. That is my heroic flaw: my excess of civic pride.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 3:24 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by brickell View Post
If we take the whole southern US, there was a big shift from the coasts (Charleston, Savannah, Wilmington) to points further inland (Atlanta, Colombia, Charlotte).
that's a shift that has always perplexed me because in the northeast the early colonial seaport powerhouses (NYC, Philly, boston) have maintained their stature for centuries. why did the south flip? why isn't savannah a metro area of 4-5 million people today?
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 3:24 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
actually, cleveland (city proper) experienced its first decade of population loss in the 1930s. chicago (city proper) didn't experience its first decade of population loss until the 1950s, just like the vast majority of the other industrial rust belt cities.

when you look at things at the metro level, your argument that chicago was the first to stagnate/decline in population becomes even weaker, as the data shows metro areas like pittsburgh, detroit, and cleveland stagnated/declined earlier than chicago. in fact metro chicago has never experienced a single decade of population decline, ever, unlike those other metro areas. now, chicagoland's growth in the 70s/80s was indeed quite anemic, but at least it was still positive growth.
Well, my point was that Chicago was never really thought of as much of a threat to take over New York as the nation's largest city. It's been a century since Chicago's growth rate was high enough for the thought to even enter someone's mind.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 3:27 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 67,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanatox View Post
English was the lingua franca of business (not completely, but was very dominant) but was not the lingua franca of the majority of the population.
English was the lingua franca of anything that was "important".
__________________
Amber alerts welcome at any time
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 3:31 PM
Centropolis's Avatar
Centropolis Centropolis is offline
disneypilled verhoevenist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: saint louis
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
that's a shift that has always perplexed me because in the northeast the early colonial seaport powerhouses (NYC, Philly, boston) have maintained their stature for centuries. why did the south flip? why isn't savannah a metro area of 4-5 million people today?
my guess? they were isolated from the northern industrial economic system that was fueled by the workhorses of the industrial midwest, the fruits of which were funneled to the northeast and mid-atlantic coast. the south had no internal engine on the vast scale of the urban midwest to fuel its port cities, with the exception of what st. louis and other river cities sent through new orleans. even then, new orleans had long ceased to be a command and control point for everything the mississippi touched.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 3:32 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Well, my point was that Chicago was never really thought of as much of a threat to take over New York as the nation's largest city. It's been a century since Chicago's growth rate was high enough for the thought to even enter someone's mind.
oh, of course. and i think that the only minds that ever honestly entertained the notion of chicago actually overtaking new york belonged to chicago's most vociferous boosters. i think you'd be hard-pressed to find any historical new york figure who felt seriously threatened by chicago's explosive growth in the latter half of the 19th century. at that time, chicago was growing at a pace never before seen in world history, but new york was already much larger than chicago at the time, and new york was itself growing pretty explosively in the latter half of the 19th century as well. chicago's growth rate may have been a bit higher then, but that's only because chicago began from essentially nothing, and then 50 years later there were 2 million people living there. new york was growing at an extremely impressive clip as well, a rate that was never going to allow chicago to catch up given its much larger starting size.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 3:37 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Another flip that bears mention is LA taking over Chicago as America's '2nd most populous' city in the early 1980's, and never looking back.
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q

Last edited by the urban politician; Jan 17, 2014 at 4:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 3:43 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
America's 'most populous' city
uhhh, i take it that is just a mistake and you forgot to type "America's '2nd most populous' city", right?
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:19 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.