Geographic oddities

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

but it's very odd to speak of city isolation exclusively in terms of distance from "MEGACITIES".

chicago is not particularly close to any 20M+ metros, but it is surrounded by an entire constellation of medium sized metros in a way that santiago is not.


driving distances of 1M+ metro areas within 400 miles of chicago:

milwaukee: 92 miles
grand rapids: 178 miles
indianapolis: 185 miles
detroit: 283 miles
st. louis: 297 miles
cincinnati: 298 miles
louisville: 298 miles
cleveland: 346 miles
columbus: 359 miles

I adressed this in the previous post. 20 cities above 1 million between Santiago and those 4 South American megacities.

I know it's hard for people to know much about mid-sized cities of foreign countries, even their names are confusing, but if you pick up those night-time maps, you'll South-Southeast Brazil and that central corridor in Argentina is very populated. It looks a lot like the US eastern half. The only difference is the spot lights appear bigger in the US because the endless sprawl. Looking to densities, it's the same thing though.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

I adressed this in the previous post. 20 cities above 1 million between Santiago and those 4 South American megacities.

quick question: how many metro areas of 1M+ people can you drive to from santiago in less than 400 miles driving distance (~a half-day drive)?

chicago has 9.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

quick question: how many metro areas of 1M+ people can you drive to from santiago in less than 400 miles driving distance (~a half-day drive)?

chicago has 9.

Yeah, the region where Santiago is located is nothing like the Great Lakes/Upper Midwest region. Most people don't understand how populated that region is, much of it due to mischaracterization by the media.

But Santiago is not exactly "isolated" either. It's probably less "isolated" than any big U.S. city west of St. Louis that isn't located in California.

[Boisebro]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

quick question: how many metro areas of 1M+ people can you drive to from santiago in less than 400 miles driving distance (~a half-day drive)?

chicago has 9.

might as well throw the Twin Cities in there. it's 401 miles from Chicago to St Paul, and less than 400 if you include metro boundaries.

splitting hairs, I know, but 10 sounds so much better than 9.


(btw: that's Guinness in those glasses in honor of St Patties)

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

quick question: how many metro areas of 1M+ people can you drive to from santiago in less than 400 miles driving distance (~a half-day drive)?

chicago has 9.

I originally compared Santiago with San Francisco not with Chicago, which is evidently inserted in a densely populated region. Porto Alegre or Curitiba, would be "Chicago" in this comparison.

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Yeah, the region where Santiago is located is nothing like the Great Lakes/Upper Midwest region. Most people don't understand how populated that region is, much of it due to mischaracterization by the media.

But Santiago is not exactly "isolated" either. It's probably less "isolated" than any big U.S. city west of St. Louis that isn't located in California.

Exactly. Santiago is like any city located in the western half of the US/Can. Not densely populated regions like coastal Brazil or US eastern half, but by any means isolated.

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

Exactly. Santiago is like any city located in the western half of the US/Can. Not densely populated regions like coastal Brazil or US eastern half, but by any means isolated.

It seems way more isolated than the western US.

http://luminocity3d.org/WorldPopDen/#3/0.26/-112.41

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by badrunner

It seems way more isolated than the western US.

http://luminocity3d.org/WorldPopDen/#3/0.26/-112.41

It looks more isolated than Denver or SLC to you?

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by hauntedheadnc

Remember how for the longest time, SSP was in agreement that only if your city could boast of a statue of a guy on a horse, could it also boast of being a great city? I think it's time to set a higher standard for our SSP globetrotters... Only if you can post pictures you personally have taken of Edinburgh of the Seven Seas (although Jamestown, St Helena will do if you fill out a special waiver) can you boast of being a truly great world traveler.

haha! I agree. Yet I would bet you a shiny new dime that not one member of SSP has been to Edinburgh of the Seven Seas (except for the odd bullshitter).

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

It looks more isolated than Denver or SLC to you?

Yes. From Denver, you're a (very long) day's drive from LA, Chicago and Houston, and everything in between. It's right in the middle of one of the most developed and physically connected countries in the world. But it really depends on what you're measuring.

[edale]

Originally Posted by badrunner

Yes. From Denver, you're a (very long) day's drive from LA, Chicago and Houston, and everything in between. It's right in the middle of one of the most developed and physically connected countries in the world. But it really depends on what you're measuring.

Denver, to me, feels very isolated. It's a solid 9 hour drive east to Kansas City, and 8 hours west to SLC, and there's no large cities to the north or south. Coming from Ohio, where you can't drive more than a few hours without running into another metro area, I find that type of isolation kind of unsettling.

[iheartthed]

Speaking of Santiago/South America. If you're familiar with the climate variation from the east coast to west coast of North America (humid in the east to arid in the west), what I find odd is that you have essentially the same variation across this the narrow southern section of South America. Buenos Aires is climatically similar to Charleston, S.C., and Santiago is similar to Los Angeles. Between BsAs and Santiago you experience a similar transition in climate that you would experience going from Charleston to L.A. But the change happens in a distance equivalent to going from Charleston to Little Rock.

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by edale

Denver, to me, feels very isolated. It's a solid 9 hour drive east to Kansas City, and 8 hours west to SLC, and there's no large cities to the north or south. Coming from Ohio, where you can't drive more than a few hours without running into another metro area, I find that type of isolation kind of unsettling.

Denver itself doesn't feel very isolated at all since there's a lot of sprawling development up and down the front range. It's not like a Las Vegas which truly feels isolated within its immediate vicinity. And you're within a day's drive to literally dozens of "big cities" that all share the same language and culture and that adds a lot to how "connected" a place feels. In contrast, to get to the nearest bigger city from Santiago you have to cross an international border and drive for hours on a tiny two lane highway.

On a more quantifiable level, according to this population finder tool, there are ~164m people within a 1000 miles of Denver, while there are only ~63m people within a 1000 miles of Santiago. As you shrink the radius though, Santiago will pull ahead, so it really depends on how you're measuring the isolation of a city.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by badrunner

Denver itself doesn't feel very isolated at all since there's a lot of sprawling development up and down the front range. It's not like a Las Vegas which truly feels isolated within its immediate vicinity. And you're within a day's drive to literally dozens of "big cities" that all share the same language and culture and that adds a lot to how "connected" a place feels. In contrast, to get to the nearest bigger city from Santiago you have to cross an international border and drive for hours on a tiny two lane highway.

On a more quantifiable level, according to this population finder tool, there are ~164m people within a 1000 miles of Denver, while there are only ~63m people within a 1000 miles of Santiago. As you shrink the radius though, Santiago will pull ahead, so it really depends on how you're measuring the isolation of a city.

1,000 mile radius of Santiago hits both the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. Not exactly a fair comparison.

[edale]

Originally Posted by badrunner

Denver itself doesn't feel very isolated at all since there's a lot of sprawling development up and down the front range. It's not like a Las Vegas which truly feels isolated within its immediate vicinity. And you're within a day's drive to literally dozens of "big cities" that all share the same language and culture and that adds a lot to how "connected" a place feels. In contrast, to get to the nearest bigger city from Santiago you have to cross an international border and drive for hours on a tiny two lane highway.

On a more quantifiable level, according to this population finder tool, there are ~164m people within a 1000 miles of Denver, while there are only ~63m people within a 1000 miles of Santiago. As you shrink the radius though, Santiago will pull ahead, so it really depends on how you're measuring the isolation of a city.

Well the entire western portion of Santiago's radius is the Pacific Ocean, so that's not an entirely fair comparison. But I'll take your word on Santiago being more isolated than Denver. I've never been to South America (though I would love to go), so I really have no clue.

I know that Denver does have other nearby communities along the front range. I've not been north of Denver, but I've driven through Colorado Springs and Pueblo to the south, and neither really felt like you were entering a real sizable metro area. CS felt more or less like an oddly conservative satellite of Denver, and Pueblo just felt small. Put it this way...Denver has a pretty huge catchment area for people wanting to experience a big city amenity. Be it taking in a pro sports game, visiting a quality museum, seeing a concert, catching an international flight, etc. People in Pueblo and Cheyenne and wherever go to Denver for that stuff. That's what I mean by isolation. In LA, you can easily drive down to San Diego to go to a Padre game or visit the zoo or whatever and come back on the same day. In Cincinnati you can day trip to Columbus/Indianapolis to see an art exhibit or go to an NHL or NBA game. That type of thing is just not a reality in the Mountain West. It's not a bad thing, just something that is different than the experience I grew up with and have always lived.

[iheartthed]

79M people live in a 1,000 mile radius of L.A. By that logic, L.A. is more isolated than Denver.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by edale

Well the entire western portion of Santiago's radius is the Pacific Ocean, so that's not an entirely fair comparison. But I'll take your word on Santiago being more isolated than Denver. I've never been to South America (though I would love to go), so I really have no clue.

I know that Denver does have other nearby communities along the front range. I've not been north of Denver, but I've driven through Colorado Springs and Pueblo to the south, and neither really felt like you were entering a real sizable metro area. CS felt more or less like an oddly conservative satellite of Denver, and Pueblo just felt small. Put it this way...Denver has a pretty huge catchment area for people wanting to experience a big city amenity. Be it taking in a pro sports game, visiting a quality museum, seeing a concert, catching an international flight, etc. People in Pueblo and Cheyenne and wherever go to Denver for that stuff. That's what I mean by isolation. In LA, you can easily drive down to San Diego to go to a Padre game or visit the zoo or whatever and come back on the same day. In Cincinnati you can day trip to Columbus/Indianapolis to see an art exhibit or go to an NHL or NBA game. That type of thing is just not a reality in the Mountain West. It's not a bad thing, just something that is different than the experience I grew up with and have always lived.

Santiago also has its "front range" too. Valparaíso-Vina del Mar is almost 1 million people, and southwards, heading to Concepcion (700k), there are several dots on the link he posted above. The difference is this region has like 12 million people compared to 5 million around Denver. Moreover, Mendoza (1.2 million inh.) is just across the Andes, while Kansas City is much farther away from Denver.

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

Talking of South America, Lima is very similar to Los Angeles. There is nothing outside its urban area, no small cities, farmland, nothing. Even their geographic shape is similar, both near the Pacific Ocean while their Downtowns are not near the coast.

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

79M people live in a 1,000 mile radius of L.A. By that logic, L.A. is more isolated than Denver.

Yeah I already said it's an arbitrary measure . 1000 miles is just a nice round number. Travel time is more important than distance in any case.

But looking at that population density map, and considering things like cultural and economic connections, as well as physical infrastructure connections like road and rail, I think it's fair to say that the western US is less isolated than Santiago.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by badrunner

Yeah I already said it's an arbitrary measure . 1000 miles is just a nice round number. Travel time is more important than distance in any case.

But looking at that population density map, and considering things like cultural and economic connections, as well as physical infrastructure connections like road and rail, I think it's fair to say that the western US is less isolated than Santiago.

I think this is getting a bit away from what we were measuring, but Chile and Argentina speak a common language and have friendly relations. I'd be surprised if there is a Chilean alive that has never been to Argentina.

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I think this is getting a bit away from what we were measuring, but Chile and Argentina speak a common language and have friendly relations. I'd be surprised if there is a Chilean alive that has never been to Argentina.

Right, but to go from Santiago to Buenos Aires (the nearest city that's equal or bigger than it) is a 17.5 hour drive, including hours on a tiny two lane mountain road. I don't think there's a direct rail link. I'm saying it's much less connected to other comparable cities in the region. Within 17.5 hours of Denver is everything from Chicago to LA, via rail or interstate. I will grant that Santiago has a greater population within its immediate vicinity than Denver though. It's just more isolated on a larger scale. I mean, there's nothing to the south or west for thousands of miles. It's literally the most south-westerly large city in the entire world.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

haha! I agree. Yet I would bet you a shiny new dime that not one member of SSP has been to Edinburgh of the Seven Seas (except for the odd bullshitter).

At least two of us have been to the South Pole though