2 cities/towns that are opposites in the same state

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by edale

Are those not two defining characteristics of suburbs? I haven't spent much time in outer Queens, but I can see a comparison. LA still looks more suburban that what I'm seeing there, though.

Not any more than "towers in the park" and impressive bus ridership figures making Toronto suburbs "urban."

SF follows a traditional urban archetype, while LA doesn't. There's no disagreement there. But I think it's a bit of an oversimplification to call LA "suburban." And this is all before pointing out that SF has a high rate of car ownership (67%) and its housing garages with curb cuts and driveways.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by edale

Oh please. You cut out the second part of the sentence you quoted because it didn't fit your point, huh? "It's far more interesting to look at states where there are two cities of roughly equal size or importance (or at least in the same general league)"

San Francisco and LA are clearly both major cities, and anchors of large regions. Both cities are home to major universities, international airports, fortune 500 companies, etc. Each have all the trappings of a major city. Calexico, to use the example you put forth, has none of those things. It's a small town in the middle of desert. Of course it's radically different from San Francisco-- that goes without saying.

It makes sense to compare San Francisco and LA. They're compared all the time, actually. The fact that SF's 49 square miles have 800,000 people and LA's 400+ sq miles has 3.8 million is entirely irrelevant. They're the two largest cities/metros in the state and the entire west coast.

This thread, in the OP's words, is about "What are two cities or towns in the same state that are opposites culturally, ethnically, economically." You decided you wanted to radically change the thread, and came up with your own ad hoc rules so you could compare the most populous and the fourth-most populous cities in California. Yet you yourself note above that San Francisco and Los Angeles are quite similar, not "opposites culturally, ethnically, and economically."

[BG918]

Originally Posted by BnaBreaker

Many people, including some living in these cities themselves, would probably nominate Nashville and Memphis for this, and in some ways they are good candidates. But the two really do have a lot more in common than it might appear on the surface.

They don’t really have that much in common. Memphis is over 60% black, is one of the poorest large metros in the U.S., has one of the highest crime and murder rates and is one of the few non-Rust Belt metro areas to lose population since 2020. Nashville, in contrast, is only 25% black, is one of the fastest growing metros in the country and has the most urban development under construction of any similar-sized U.S. metro

[BillM]

San Francisco and LA immediately comes to mind.

what about Miami and some other city in northern Florida?

[homebucket]

While it's true that the OP did not specify any specific parameters, I think for the purposes of this thought exercise and discussion, it would be good to select cities with similar (but not necessarily the same, obviously it's going to be difficult to find a city that is exactly alike to another in terms of population, demographics, built form, etc) baseline characteristics.

Selecting one city that is one of the largest in the state, and another that is one of the smallest isn't really a meaningful comparison, even if it does technically meet the loose criteria specified by the OP. But then we could list any number of different combinations of large cities vs small towns in each state.

As for SF and LA, I think they do have some differences, but also have enough superficial similarities albeit to slightly different degrees (size, economic/cultural importance, weather, diverse population, politics) where I wouldn't necessarily think of them as opposites.

Maybe Berkeley and Irvine would be a good one?

[Steely Dan]

Detroit and Grand Rapids?

[iheartthed]

^Detroit and Grand Rapids aren't the same caliber of city. Flint and Grand Rapids are more evenly matched.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by BillM

what about Miami and some other city in northern Florida?

Sure, there are going to be big differences between Miami and say, Tallahassee or Gainesville, which are more "Southern" and inland. But they're also just so much smaller cities that it's hard to say that they're somehow opposites of Miami.

I don't think Florida really has any true opposites when considering its large cities. Larger Florida cities are pretty similar overall to me.

[edale]

Originally Posted by craigs

This thread, in the OP's words, is about "What are two cities or towns in the same state that are opposites culturally, ethnically, economically." You decided you wanted to radically change the thread, and came up with your own ad hoc rules so you could compare the most populous and the fourth-most populous cities in California. Yet you yourself note above that San Francisco and Los Angeles are quite similar, not "opposites culturally, ethnically, and economically."

Whatever. It's clearly more interesting to compare cities that are somewhat in the same league but have different built forms, cultures, ethnic makeups, etc. than to compare a tiny town to a huge city, where the differences are obvious and don't merit discussion. I don't even know what you're talking about with your last sentence, as my post highlighted several differences between San Francisco and LA...

Let's use your genius logic to find another good example, though, shall we? I put forth the hamlet of Cranberry Lake, NY. Population 200, located in far upstate NY. Contrast that to New York City. They're totally different!!! Discuss...

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by BnaBreaker

Many people, including some living in these cities themselves, would probably nominate Nashville and Memphis for this, and in some ways they are good candidates. But the two really do have a lot more in common than it might appear on the surface.

But Memphis and Knoxville?

[JManc]

San Francisco and Needles.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by homebucket

While it's true that the OP did not specify any specific parameters, I think for the purposes of this thought exercise and discussion, it would be good to select cities with similar (but not necessarily the same, obviously it's going to be difficult to find a city that is exactly alike to another in terms of population, demographics, built form, etc) baseline characteristics.

Selecting one city that is one of the largest in the state, and another that is one of the smallest isn't really a meaningful comparison, even if it does technically meet the loose criteria specified by the OP. But then we could list any number of different combinations of large cities vs small towns in each state.

As for SF and LA, I think they do have some differences, but also have enough superficial similarities albeit to slightly different degrees (size, economic/cultural importance, weather, diverse population, politics) where I wouldn't necessarily think of them as opposites.

Maybe Berkeley and Irvine would be a good one?

Redding and Chico?

[montréaliste]

Originally Posted by edale

Whatever. It's clearly more interesting to compare cities that are somewhat in the same league but have different built forms, cultures, ethnic makeups, etc. than to compare a tiny town to a huge city, where the differences are obvious and don't merit discussion. I don't even know what you're talking about with your last sentence, as my post highlighted several differences between San Francisco and LA...

Let's use your genius logic to find another good example, though, shall we? I put forth the hamlet of Cranberry Lake, NY. Population 200, located in far upstate NY. Contrast that to New York City. They're totally different!!! Discuss...

Right, I sure as hell never heard of the place. It’s hard to compare those two.

New York City, isn’t that hamlet located somewhere South of Poughkeepsie, NY?

[dktshb]

Yeah, the LA San Francisco comparison that they are opposites is a really weak one. I live in both cities and they are more similar than opposites even in urban form which was not even a criteria. I have homes in both cities . Certainly economically SF is more AI and Tech and LA is more entertainment, but there is still a big tech presence in LA.

[iheartthed]

Newark and Jersey City. These neighboring cities aren't historical opposites, in fact, they have historically been quite similar. But for about the past 20 years they have been on pretty divergent paths, with JC catering to the professional class and adopting the glass tower looks of lower Manhattan, while Newark has remained scruffy looking and solidly working class.

[Obadno]

Prescott and Flagstaff

They are only about an hour apart and of similar size but one is Yeehaw cowboy conservative town, and one is a hippy dippy college town.

They are both mighty fun to party in.

Prescott:


Flag:



I suppose you could also do something like Lake Havasue/Parker Strip and Sedona. Both cater to older retirees. but one is a wellness mecha filled with crystals and winerys and the other is a redneck riviera boating hotspot

Sedona:



Lake Havasue City:



And if you want to go with economics and human development you could always compare something like Paradise valley with the arguably third world Navajo Nation or any of the Indian reservations really

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

^Detroit and Grand Rapids aren't the same caliber of city. Flint and Grand Rapids are more evenly matched.

Flint/Genesee county are still in decline while Grand Rapids/Kent county and surrounding area is growing at a good clip. Grand Rapids certainly seems like one of Michigan's gems.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Wigs

Flint/Genesee county are still in decline while Grand Rapids/Kent county and surrounding area is growing at a good clip. Grand Rapids certainly seems like one of Michigan's gems.

Flint briefly overtook Grand Rapids to become Michigan's second largest city in the 1960s. GR caught up again after a large 1960s growth spurt fed by a large annexation of land in the 1950s. Flint went into free fall in the 1970s and never pulled out of the tailspin.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by edale

I don't even know what you're talking about with your last sentence, as my post highlighted several differences between San Francisco and LA...

I'm talking about this quote of yours, to which I responded: "San Francisco and LA are clearly both major cities, and anchors of large regions. Both cities are home to major universities, international airports, fortune 500 companies, etc. Each have all the trappings of a major city." You admit these two cities are more similar than not in a thread about "opposites." Whatever, indeed.

Let's use your genius logic to find another good example, though, shall we? I put forth the hamlet of Cranberry Lake, NY. Population 200, located in far upstate NY. Contrast that to New York City. They're totally different!!! Discuss...

If you think San Francisco and Los Angeles are great candidates for the "2 cities/towns that are opposite in the same state" thread, because you think the two fit the OP's criteria of being "opposites culturally, ethnically, and economically," then have at it. I will continue to point out that they are more alike than not. Sue me.

[edale]

Originally Posted by craigs

I'm talking about this quote of yours, to which I responded: "San Francisco and LA are clearly both major cities, and anchors of large regions. Both cities are home to major universities, international airports, fortune 500 companies, etc. Each have all the trappings of a major city." You admit these two cities are more similar than not in a thread about "opposites." Whatever, indeed.

Yes, both are major cities and have the amenities that one would expect from major cities. The take away from that is not that they are similar, but that they are able to be compared in a way that makes sense. Reading comprehension is key!

Originally Posted by craigs

If you think San Francisco and Los Angeles are great candidates for the "2 cities/towns that are opposite in the same state" thread, because you think the two fit the OP's criteria of being "opposites culturally, ethnically, and economically," then have at it. I will continue to point out that they are more alike than not. Sue me.

Where did you do that? I haven't seen you make a case for them being more alike than not. Maybe you could quote the post where you made that point.

Consider yourself sued