Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford
What is the point of this? I hear LA has more celebrities and palm trees too. And NJ has more guidos and chicken parm.
Putting aside apparently peeved Angelinos offended about any comparison with NJ (yes, we're aware they're quite different), the larger point was that NJ's population distribution is highly concentrated in a relatively narrow corridor, not unlike LA. Whether there are 0 or 100 persons per square mile in the rural areas has no significant impact on overall population distribution. |
Please, look at a density map of NJ and LA MSA: they couldn’t be more different. Every bit of NJ is densely populated. In vast parts of Los Angeles MSA/CSA is as empty as Alaska.
It’s insane we’re discussing this at SSP. Eastern and Western urban/suburban forms are very different; rural areas, even more. LA has dense suburbs and nature emptiness; NJ is dense urban areas, low density exurbs and high density rural areas. They’re the opposite of each other.
Threaded Mode