Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
SF is without a doubt the second city in California. I would consider Dallas to be the primary city in Texas, and Houston the second city. But they're probably too close together in population now for first city/second city designation.
|
I would agree. But San Jose and San Diego do have a claim for #2, but as the capitol/"downtown"/"city" of the second largest metro area in the state, plus for a lot of other reasons SF has the #2 crown. L.A. is clearly number one for its gigantic size alone, although SF does lead in some important categories--tech, finance etc. Which is the #1 metro area is more problematic--Is it the greater SF metro area (including San Jose/Oakland etc.) or is it the greater L.A. metro area (including Orange Co., Riverside, San Bern, eastern Ventura)? L.A. metro still is #1 in GDP, but in world importance it could be a tie. They are both gigantic and influential. They may share the title.