of the 20 largest american cities, which is THE WORST?

(oops the other info on the baltimore line is statistical stuff i meant to delete. if you're curious, it indicates an 11.5 percent population drop since 1990, dropping from 12th-largest to 18th-largest city. the full list of the top 50 is here.)

phoenix
i imagine jacksonville to be bad, anybody been there???

san diego county is more like 2,000,000.

san jose / san francisco are basically contiguous, there should be a "bay area" of about 2,000,000 people.

yeah, the metro-area thing fuzzes it up. i've been stuck in traffic between san francisco and san jose and there was definitely no sense of leaving one place or entering another.

so anyway, of these, i haven't been to any of the sans except francisco, and also not to indianapolis, jacksonville, austin or fort worth. several others (columbus, detroit, philadelphia) have just been drive-bys for me. nevertheless of the ones i have any real experience with, houston is by far my least favorite. its music notwithstanding. phoenix would probably be 2nd.

(although san francisco proper has a distinct personality, separate from the amorphous region)

you're not from the US, right? the largest cities list is kinda useless given differences in where the political boundaries are drawn. you want the largest metropolitan areas, which are:

1 New York 18,815,988
2 Los Angeles 12,875,587
3 Chicago 9,524,673
4 Dallas-Fort Worth 6,145,037
5 Philadelphia 5,827,962
6 Houston 5,628,101
7 Miami-Fort Lauderdale 5,413,212
8 Washington 5,306,565
9 Atlanta 5,278,904
10 Boston 4,482,857
11 Detroit 4,467,592
12 San Francisco 4,203,898
13 Phoenix 4,179,427
14 Riverside-San Bernardino 4,081,371
15 Seattle-Tacoma 3,309,347
16 Minneapolis-St. Paul 3,208,212
17 San Diego 2,974,859
18 St. Louis 2,803,707
19 Tampa-St. Petersburg 2,723,949
20 Baltimore 2,668,056

Jacksonville, which may be the answer to your question, is only #40

actually i was, point of fact, born in the limbo between san francisco and san jose. i know the differences between city limits and msas. i used a list of cities because i like cities. having gone to high school in the suburbs of a city that is not on this list but that claims an msa of close to a million, i can tell you there's a big difference between living in a "city" and living in an msa.

but if you like msas, you can do an msa poll.

these are the 20 largest american cities if we replace numbers 7-10, 14-16 and 18-19 with numbers 28, 31-33, 35, 37 and 40-41

i voted houston, but there are a lot of shitty cities/metro areas in the u.s.

maybe you're swayed by the fact that SF city limits are uniquely water-bounded

fort worth by a mile

FYI, Phoenix passed Philadelphia's population in 2007 (it's at 1.5 million now)

xxpost: not really. i only lived in the bay area until i was 6 months old.

anyway, i'm interested in the characteristics of cities. most msas derive their personalities or their self-image or whatever from the cities they revolve around. (probably a lot of the cities i like least are cities that feel more like an msa than a "city". houston seemed that way to me.)

the los angeles one is weird because of how patchy the actual "city of los angeles" is within l.a. county. does it matter that someone who lives in culver city isn't counted among the 4 million l.a. residents and his neighbor in palms is? it matters in terms of service provision and local leadership, i guess...

I've been to every city on the list and voted for Houston... Pollution, traffic, civic ennui leftover from the early 90s oil bust, and land-use zoning mysteries that have encouraged mega-sprawl.

Houston is the worst, hot dry highways.

On the other hand, I quite liked Galveston.

Just realized that if Atlanta was on the list, I probably would have voted for that.

atl is #9

not fair that dallas-fort worth takes two spots, actually

oh wait no that's the msas

xpost:

galveston seemed like a good place to run away from houston to on the weekend. but not in itself enough to justify living in houston.

i'm kinda partial to atlanta though. it's ugly, but there are some nice niches. (my first impression of houston was that it was like atlanta, but worse.)

know the differences between city limits and msas

but you don't know, or are overlooking the fact, that the only reason places like indianapolis and jacksonville are on your list is because they draw their city limits further out than in-reality-vastly-larger cities like Boston and Atlanta

yeah, rapidly expanding msas often redraw their city boundaries to include the wealthy suburbs and get their tax money

right. and that has a lot to do with the characteristics and culture of those places. there are reasons atlanta's not on the city list but is on the msa list, and those reasons say a lot about atlanta.

like, good luck to atlanta trying to expand its city limits.

then there are places like pdx that have very specific urban growth boundaries to keep the city the city and the suburbs the suburbs (there are MANY arguments out there about whether this is a good idea or not)

portland is like an m.i.t. lab for urban planners.

and that's why conservatives hate it

i didn't want to study planning in portland, even though i love the place -- it just seems too easy. i picked l.a. because it's been so badly planned in the past several decades, and there was a lot of good stuff to work with. plus, there's a general feeling here that things HAVE to change, and enough influential limousine liberalism to make that happen.

i have a lefty-liberal friend who eventually fled portland because he thought it was making him intellectually lazy -- nobody to argue with.

what surprised me most about portland was forest park. huge!

but anyway to gabbneb's point, i think there's a a big experiential difference between a city and an msa. i lived as an adolescent in a quasi-rural suburban area with woods all behind the house. it was within the msa of rochester, n.y., but it didn't feel anything like living in rochester. if i wanted to know what rochester was like, i wouldn't ask people who live and in a lot of cases work 10-15 miles outside the city limits and maybe come downtown for a festival or a minor-league baseball game once a year.

Gabbnet OTM about the "true" outline of the cities, but a poll is a poll.

I'm guessing Indianapolis or Jacksonville is the worst, but I've never been there, so I won't vote for either. That'd be lame.

So my vote goes to San Jose.. for the high high cost of bland shittiness. And no, San Jose/Santa Clara/lower San Mateo is not SF. You can lump East Bay with SF, but noooo, please no Silicon valley.

Houston isn't nearly as bad as most people make it out to be. The city certainly is a roulette wheel. It can either really suck or really be awesome depending on the context, who you're with, who can show you around, etc. Houston is much better than either Dallas or Fort Worth.

Jesus I'd take Houston over DFW any day of the fucking week.

Obv nobody here has been to Charlotte.

Charlotte isn't great, but there is worse on that list.

Charlotte Douglas airport doesn't suck.

i've never been to charlotte but i know they've implemented a complete streets policy so i give them a virtual fist bump.

But my first ever Waffle House experience was in Charlotte, so you know, sentimental reasons and all.

haha, I misread the word after "virtual fist" at first, and uh it was interesting.

i actually think the MSA list would give you a decent ranking of the cities, if you divest some of the more compiled areas of their adjunct cities (dropping them down the list), adjust heavily upward for the more sides of a city that are geographically-bounded, and maybe add an asterisk for the fact that DC is the capital (and has building restrictions).

I hate Charlotte but I suppose every TX city is worse but I dinna know 'cause I am deathly allergic to TX.

population density isn't a bad measure

New York 26,403.8
San Francisco 16,632.4
Cambridge, MA 15,836.7
Chicago 12,752.2
Santa Ana, CA 12,471.5
Boston 12,172.3
Philadelphia 11,232.8
Miami 10,153.2
Berkeley 9,785.0
Providence 9,384.8
Washington 9,316.9
Long Beach 9,157.2
Bridgeport 8,720.6
Baltimore 8,058.8
Los Angeles 7,876.4
Lowell, MA 7,620.8
Buffalo 7,208.1
Oakland 7,120.9
Hartford 7,027.6
Costa Mesa 6,969.5
Minneapolis 6,969.4
Detroit 6,853.5
Oxnard 6,733.5
Seattle 6,714.8
Pomona 6,555.8
New Haven 6,541.1
Milwaukee 6,212.0
Cleveland 6,165.0
Rochester 6,138.9
Allentown, PA 6,024.4
Pittsburgh 6,017.3
Syracuse 5,868.8
St. Louis 5,625.0
St. Paul 5,438.5
San Jose 5,116.9
Fort Lauderdale 4,807.5
Springfield, MA 4,737.8
Erie 4,714.4
Worcester 4,591.7
Stockton 4,456.5
Grand Rapids 4,435.0
Norfolk Virginia 4,365.0
Honolulu 4,336.7
Clearwater, FL 4,299.9
Cincinnati 4,247.2
Ann Arbor 4,223.1
Las Vegas 4,222.7
Sacramento 4,187.4
St. Petersburg 4,165.0
Louisville 4,126.1
Tempe 3,955.7
Portland, OR 3,939.8
Toledo 3,891.1
Tacoma 3,863.4
San Diego 3,772.4
Waterbury, CT 3,750.7
Flint 3,718.5
Santa Rosa, CA 3,680.7
Naperville 3,625.9
Denver 3,615.6
Fontana, CA 3,571.4
Akron 3,495.6
Dallas 3,470.3
Eugene, OR 3,404.8
Spokane 3,384.6
Columbus 3,383.1
Houston 3,371.8
Omaha 3,370.8
Richmond, VA 3,291.0
Riverside 3,267.2
Manchester, NH 3,242.6
Mesa 3,171.0
Atlanta 3,162.3
Stamford 3,105.6
Plano 3,101.0
Irvine 3,096.8
Madison 3,028.4
Lincoln, NE 3,023.9
Evansville 2,987.3
Dayton, OH 2,978.1
Baton Rouge 2,966.4
Boise 2,912.0
Hampton, VA 2,827.0
San Antonio 2,808.3
South Bend 2,785.2
Phoenix 2,781.7
Tampa 2,706.9
New Orleans 2,683.7
Provo 2,655.7
Overland Park 2,629.3
Des Moines 2,621.1
Reno 2,611.9
Austin 2,610.6
Peoria 2,543.6
Wichita 2,535.2
Tucson 2,499.7
Albuquerque 2,484.0
Raleigh, NC 2,409.2
Green Bay 2,330.6
Memphis 2,327.6
Lafayette, LA 2,316.3
Pueblo 2,264.3
El Paso 2,262.8
Laredo 2,249.4
Charlotte 2,232.1
Sioux Falls 2,202.0
Bakersfield 2,184.4
Indianapolis 2,162.8
Tulsa 2,152.5
Greensboro, NC 2,138.4
Springfield, MO 2,070.8
Springfield IL, 2,064.0
Orlando 1,988.8
Durham 1,977.1
Colorado Springs 1,943.4
Amarillo 1,931.3
Cedar Rapids 1,913.8
Knoxville 1,875.8
Fort Worth 1,828.0
Corpus Christi 1,794.7
Savannah 1,760.5
Jackson, MS 1,756.5
Lubbock 1,738.4
Virginia Beach 1,712.7
Winston-Salem 1,705.9
Mobile 1,687.2
Salt Lake City 1,665.8
Birmingham 1,619.9
Little Rock 1,576.0
Tallahassee 1,573.9
Kansas City, MO 1,408.4
Waco 1,350.7
Lancaster, CA 1,263.0
Nashville 1,152.6
Chattanooga 1,150.5
Abilene 1,103.0
Scottsdale 1,100.5
Jacksonville 970.9
Lexington, KY 915.7
Oklahoma City 833.8

Not to be a douche, but you might like to know that there are more recent figures available: the US Census releases population estimates on July 1 for the previous year. The 2007 list shows the same cities but in a slightly different order. The most significant change, however, is that Phoenix has assumed the #5 spot, ahead of Philadelphia.

answer the question or start your own poll

xpost to everyone

but especially gabbnebb

(Oh sorry, Elvis T. has already pointed that out.)

or, just the 'top 20' cities

New York 26,403.8
San Francisco 16,632.4
Chicago 12,752.2
Philadelphia 11,232.8
Baltimore 8,058.8
Los Angeles 7,876.4
Detroit 6,853.5
San Jose 5,116.9
San Diego 3,772.4
Columbus 3,383.1
Houston 3,371.8
Atlanta 3,162.3
San Antonio 2,808.3
Phoenix 2,781.7
Austin 2,610.6
Memphis 2,327.6
Charlotte 2,232.1
Indianapolis 2,162.8
Fort Worth 1,828.0
Jacksonville 970.9

i already answered the quesyion, n/a

WE DA WORST

oh sorry, it must have gotten lost in the 9,000 posts of extraneous crap on this thread

WE MAKE MOVIEEEEEES. MOSTLY JOHN WATERS MOOOOOVIEEEEEEES.

whoops, i forgot Dallas - it's between San Diego and Columbus

if it weren't for the decent weather and proximity to SF the answer so easily would be San Jo

not a fan of houston, either

and included Atlanta by mistake

been to 6, so incomplete

I have never been able to compute in my head that Columbus is bigger in population than Cincinnati or Cleveland. I would probably name Toledo, Akron, and Dayton off of the top of my head in addition before I'd hit Columbus.

I mean, yes, I know that they're the home of "Family Ties" and the Blue Jackets, but still.

(Oh, and I voted for Houston. Suckit, Texas.)

more suburban and growth-oriented Columbus is a bigger 'city' but smaller than the Cincinnati and Cleveland metro areas

Phoenix is the worst because it shouldn't exist at all, and the biggest industry there is building new homes. It's like a mit model for unsustainability.

why shouldn't it exist?

It is pretty unsustainable in it's current form, it requires far too much water for being stuck in the middle of a desert.

i give phoenix a break because the nation's first school of sustainability is at ASU (over in tempe, but still).

phoenix has a lot more water than you might think for a city "stuck in the middle of a desert". which doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid for it to have a bazillion lush golf courses and tons of residents watering their tropical green grass.

indianapolis owns this thread.

which of these cities do you think most foreigners would have heard of?

DFW FTW

houston is the answer here.

which doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid for it to have a bazillion lush golf courses and tons of residents watering their tropical green grass.
this is basically what i meant, though i guess not existing is too harsh. it did support a native american population. they relied on irrigation. and i realize that phoenix is not unique in this sense. it probably boils down to: i went there and didn't like it.

Yeah re:Columbus, it occupies huge areas that in older cities would be considered stand alone suburbs. More depressingly though is that Cleveland once had over 1 million people within it's city limits and now has around 480k.

Every city on the list has at least one or two positive qualities. Except Jacksonville.

Jacksonville has a very awesome used bookstore

The only reason Indianapolis is on here is because Bill Hudnut expanded its city limits to incorporate all of Marion county back in the late 60s/early 70s. Much fewer people live in the old city limits than that 3/4 million number. I was just there a few months back to visit (having grown up on the west side of town); it's got a few things going for it: new library, art museum, Broad Ripple canal area. fwiw, I'd vote Phoenix as the worst - lived there for 10 years, nothing but sprawl as far as the eye can see, worthless public transportation, bad climate, water issues (yet all those golf courses).

indianapolis owns this thread.

^^^^^^^

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/43/98562739_e2643836dc.jpg

nothing but sprawl as far as the eye can see, worthless public transportation, bad climate, water issues (yet all those golf courses).

all that can be said about houston with the added bonus of humidity and everything smelling like an oil refinery.

(out of the ones I've been to: Dallas/Fort Worth FTW)

yes but the real question is which has the better mexican food
xpost

I have a soft spot for Detroit. Growing up, me and parents would go to the auto show, Fox Theatre, Tiger Stadium. Plus the coney island hot dog joints. And the FAO Schwartz store.

I don't think Detroit is anywhere near the worst, I just like that picture.

phoenix is pretty terrible, but at least in small doses it feels kind of exotic to an outsider. i really felt like i was on a different planet in phoenix. houston didn't feel like a different planet, just like all the worst parts of the planet i already know.

i mean, houston has all that sprawl, terrible air, insane driving to get anywhere, AND 90 percent humidity in the hot months. really pretty awful.

I've spent at least a fully day in each of these save Jacksonville and Charlotte. I think Detroit is the worst, not because of what it WAS, but because of what it IS, which is a crime-infested, decaying industrial shell of a city. Plus you get shitty northern weather.

er, full day

The only reason Indianapolis is on here is because Bill Hudnut expanded its city limits to incorporate all of Marion county back in the late 60s/early 70s.

The same is basically true for Jacksonville and Duval county and a few other cities not in the top 20. Louisville, for example, only recently jumped into the top 30 (from 60-something) after it consolidated with Jefferson county; some claim the move was spurred by a desire to retake the status of largest city in Kentucky, which had been recently lost to Lexington.

I mean, yes, I know that they're the home of "Family Ties" and the Blue Jackets, but still.

One of my favorite trivia questions is which is the largest American city without a major (MLB, NBA, NFL, NHL) sports franchise? Until 2000 the answer was Columbus: now it's Austin.

Actually, in 1990 the answer was San Jose. From 1991-94 it was Jacksonville. From 1995-99 it was Columbus. And from 2000-present it's Austin.

some claim the move was spurred by a desire to retake the status of largest city in Kentucky

there's a christopher guest movie in there somewhere. with catherine o'hara as head of the louisville metropolitan planning commission.

Fred Willard as a Lousiville news anchor who at the end of every broadcast encourages civic pride.

i like detroit!

but i cant decide whether to answer this as like the worst as in non-descript boring worst, or LA.

I've been to five of these. Phoenix>>>LA>>Philly>>>>>>>>SF>NYC.

That's worst to best, the arrows should be the other way round.

aw i was hoping for a challenging opinion there.

Philly over LA - if you like English-style parks, I guess

I just really didn't like LA. I was only eleven when I visited, maybe I'd get more out of it now.

i really like philly. i more or less lived there for 2 months and i don't think i had a single bad meal. note: meals were paid for by client, so i ate lots of places i probably would not on my own.

I had no idea Phoenix was so huegs!

where is riverside/sanbernadino?? i just thought those were like suburbs of LA

ok i just got around to actually reading thread and gabbneb's list makes more sense

Any answer not Houston is RONG

xxp - they're the inland empire

part of the LA consolidated metro area but not the LA metro area, and 70-75 miles from LA proper

I lived in Phoenix for about 6 months, then later again for a summer, I liked it quite a lot. Mind you the town I lived in immediately before Phx was Windom, MN (pop 4,300) and had done so my entire life apart from a few very, very early years in some no-name towns in TX and OK.

I met some really great people in Phoenix but the impression I got was that most people didn't really want to be there. Super easy city to drive in, I'll give it that.

My sister's living in Tempe after living in Idaho Falls, ID, her whole life, and damn if she don't love it. But she just turned 21 and loves it for the 'omg if I get all dolled up and go to a club people will buy me expensive drinks' aspect.

Phoenix (specifically Tempe) cannot be the worst solely by virture of the fact that their are a plethora of nubile woman who are forced to clad scantily due to the weather. Plus, you can climb a mountain in the middle of the city.

I HAVE BEEN TO NONE OF THESE and forget how i voted.

also i guess these #s aren't including metro area? even so i am surprised by how low the #s are... toronto and montreal would slot in at spots 3 and 5!

l.a. has a lot wrong with it still but i can see a great band or movie or art exhibit any day of the week, the diversity (interpret that how you like) is unrivaled, there's an ocean and hills and mountains, the weather is nice when it's not too smoggy, tons of amazing chefs/restaurants here, tacos tacos tacos, liberals and gays, i could go on.

Phoenix has scorpions and centipedes. Houston might, as well. Whichever, I hate them and won't willing live anywhere chittering poisonous things like that live ever again.

(n.b. I have to go to Phx for a visit at the end of this month and am possibly resentful.)

sf and chicago in a dead heat for best, phoenix and dfw in a dead heat for worst

Scorpions are only in the rich parts of town here! Ha. A big "fudge you" from the barrio, fules. All I have in my house is geckos. And cockroaches, but geckos eat cockroaches so...awesome.

http://www.glencampbellshow.com/images/g_b1.jpghttp://www.nndb.com/people/899/000023830/glenn-campbell-mugshot.jpg

That phoenix sun is a bitch.

i think i would rate phoenix higher if it wasn't in the middle of the desert

i'd rate it lower!

of the cities I've visited and am familiar with the inner workings of - hands down LA is the worst.

Philly is my fave, not sure which i hate the most.

lol at the tiny burg i live in not making the list

three way tie for last between Indianapolis, Jacksonville and Ft. Worth.

I suspect Dallas or Fort Worth is the worst, although I can't imagine Jacksonville or Columbus is much better. Out of the ones I've spent significant enough time in to judge, Phoenix is really awful.

Charlotte is pretty terrible too. Jeez this is tough. Still think I'm voting for Phoenix though.

i like Charlotte :-\

Columbus is OK, but it's starting to get really sprawly. I don't think there's much in the way of Public Trans, and from what I saw last fall they aren't putting much effort into upgrading infrastructure to deal with the new developments -- lots of traffic backups everywhere.

columbus aint bad, just boring

columbus is ok by me. home to the cheater slicks = can't be all bad.

xpost- not boring, great for my purposes.

hitting on ohio state freshman?

zing! no.

haha i dated a girl @ ohio state for awhile
long distance is lame, esp when your weekends are spent in columbus

columbus is the atlanta of ohio

yes but the real question is which has the better mexican food

San Antonio

there's a decent garage/punk scene there. guinea worms, grave blankets, cheater slicks, etc.

xpost to deej.

Another problem with Columbus is they hate everyone from Michigan, which I'm.

What I find interesting is the population rate of change. For example, St. Louis was consistently in the top 10 until 1980 when it falls off entirely. Here's the 1960 list:

1. New York, N.Y. 7,781,984
2. Chicago, Ill. 3,550,404
3. Los Angeles, Calif. 2,479,015
4. Philadelphia, Pa. 2,002,512
5. Detroit, Mich. 1,670,144
6. Baltimore, Md. 939,024
7. Houston, Tex. 938,219
8. Cleveland, Ohio 876,050
9. Washington, DC 763,956
10. St. Louis, Mo. 750,026
11. Milwaukee, Wis. 741,324
12. San Francisco, Calif. 740,316
13. Boston, Mass. 697,197
14. Dallas, Tex. 679,684
15. New Orleans, La. 627,525
16. Pittsburgh, Pa. 604,332
17. San Antonio, Tex. 587,718
18. San Diego, Calif. 573,224
19. Seattle, Wash. 557,087
20. Buffalo, N.Y. 532,759

More here: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0922422.html

1960 list >>>>>>>>> 2005 list

SF has less people today than in 1960 lol

lol @ buffalo being in the top 20

That phoenix sun is a bitch.

-- Pleasant Plains, Tuesday, July 15, 2008 1:17 PM (33 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

No kidding. All we had during the summer I spent there was a swamp cooler, which doesn't really do anything past 100. But man, if you ever get a stain on a white shirt, just leave it out on the clothesline to dry (summer only)--that sun will bleach it the FUCK out.

Also with all that pavement it just doesn't cool off at night like in the rest of the desert.

wah @ 1960 Milwaukee population

SF has less people today than in 1960 lol

So does every other city on that list besides NYC and those in the Sun Belt (lol suburbanization).

yeah, Baltimore's population dropped a lot since the 60s too, lot of major employers closing down, white flight, etc.

"So does every other city on that list besides NYC and those in the Sun Belt (lol suburbanization)."

There is a difference though (hint: no one wants to live in those cities.)

xp The textbook example is Detroit, which has shrunk by almost exactly half since 1950 (1.85 million --> 880,000).

More than half, that should say.

hint: no one wants to live in those cities

oh right, no one wants to live in LA, Chicago, Seattle, DC, Boston, Philly, etc.

It's slightly weird to me that I know more people that live inside the city limits of Detroit (incl. Hamtramck and Royal Oak) than in the burbs.

"oh right, no one wants to live in LA, Chicago, Seattle, DC, Boston, Philly, etc."

LA's population rose, doofus. People want to live in Chicago, I guess. Otherwise my snappy one-liner stands.

get off your provincial coast some time

toronto and montreal would slot in at spots 3 and 5

Will, it's the city proper vs metro area thing. The general trend in Canada AFAICT is amalgamation. Virtually all the major suburbs of Ottawa and Toronto have been amalgamated into the cities of Ottawa and Toronto. 20 years ago Nepean was a city of over 100 000 with its own city hall, mayor, etc. Now it's just one part of Ottawa. Witness the amalgamation of the school boards in the Ottawa area. Ditto e.g. North York.

At least in upstate NY, the opposite tendency seems really strong. AFAICT every place indicated here is its own municipality with its own school district and police force. You could easily drive for 10-15 minutes and pass through 3 municipalities. I would tend to still think of all of this as the 'Buffalo area', at least until you hit Depew or go further south than Lackawanna. While the metropolitan area of Buffalo is slightly greater in population than Ottawa, 'Buffalo' has maybe a third of the population of 'Ottawa'. (Tipsy mothra is quite right, however, that this does make a real difference in how the cities are organized.)

Haha well if these cities were so popular to live in their populations wouldn't be sinking like stones, right </provincial hick>

Anyway the amusing thing about San Francisco is actually that the population is basically EXACTLY the same. I doubt there are too many cities anywhere where the population has stayed within a thousand people over the course of the last 50 or so years.

I suspect Dallas or Fort Worth is the worst,

The douchebag suburbs are further away (unlike Dallas, where they pretty much are N. Dallas), two world-class and one excellent art museum within walking distance of each other, the Stockyards, etc.. It was better before gas interests bought off city hall, but they haven't fucked up most of the good parts of town.

(Will: Also, go to Boston and drink beer.)

if Canadian cities were included, Toronto would be #10 between Atlanta and Boston, Vancouver would be #16 between the Inland Empire and Seattle, Montreal would be #27 between Cincinnati and Cleveland, and Ottawa would be #49 between Hartford and Buffalo

metro-wise

gabbnepedia

inside the city limits of Detroit (incl. Hamtramck and Royal Oak)

How are Hamtramck and Royal Oak within the city limits of Detroit? I thought Hamtramck was its own municipality and just surrounded by Detroit like San Marino or Lesotho. And I thought Royal Oak was just another suburb like Troy or Dearborn or Bloomfield Hills.

I always thought Atlanta was big until now. Hey Las Vegas didn't even make the cut either soooo... god I hate Florida, this poll is easy.

You're right about Hamtramck. It's an enclave within the city limits. Royal Joke is somewhat similar although it does have one side open to the burbs.

Hey Las Vegas didn't even make the cut either

It'll be on the list before long. It grew 13.6% between 2000 and 2005 and is currently #28.

lol @ me avoiding doing work by consulting stuff I've done for work

Phoenix is fucking disgusting. Seriously-- worst place in the US, as far as I'm concerned.

At least in upstate NY, the opposite tendency seems really strong.

yeah rochester is a very similar case to buffalo -- lots of densely populated, separately incorporated towns and villages all around the periphery. the northeast tends toward that pattern more, which i think is because a lot of those small incorporated towns and villages are really old (by american standards), dating to the early 19th century, and so are much less likely to accept amalgamation into the city. whereas cities that grow via sprawl tend to have younger and in a lot of cases unincorporated suburbs on their fringes.

but one result of that is that, say, in rochester, all those little incorporated towns and villages really do have their own personalities, very much distinct from rochester proper. if you're in penfield, you feel like you're in penfield. so i think city limits do actually count for something. (in sprawlier cities obviously you can say that separate districts have separate personalities too, but because they're younger they tend to be more culturally and historically consonant with the broader city.)

Atlanta is just too spread out... the roads make no logical sense and where Atlanta begins is a mystery. I like the place though, since I'm from Georgia and I won't drive anywhere further for clubbing.

atlanta confused the hell out of me the first time i had to drive around it. i would keep thinking i had somehow wandered out into the country, and then i'd turn a corner and be back in an urban neighborhood.

whoa, there are centipedes and scorpions in phoenix.. what about tucson? is it at all possible you'd ever run across those things in the city??

unfortunately yes. Tucson also has tarantulas. Which are scary and big, but not as horrific as scorpions.

I have lived in places with all three of those - there is nothing serious to fear. stop being such pussies.

http://ag.arizona.edu/pubs/insects/az1223/

in the past 20 years there have been no reported fatalities in the US due to scorpion stings.

Complainant Sub-Zero could not be reached for comment.

I still hate them, they are creepy.

Shakey, there are lots of people with involuntary fears of one or more of spiders, scorpions, snakes, etc. that can't be controlled easily as you suggest

is there a tucson sports team named the tarantulas? there should be.

No one said it was easy to stop being a pussy!

HAHA

yeah, if you're not one of these people or don't know one of these people, i imagine it would be difficult to understand

lol gabbneb is afraid of spiders

presumptuous gabbneb is presumptuous

hey don't get me wrong I totally jumped the handful of times I was surprised by a scorpion - but I was never hurt, and the shock certainly wasn't enough for me to say "holy shit I'm never going there!" Christ don't get me started about the UBERGARGANTUAN insects in India...

Being scorpion-stung twice and waking up to a centipede in the bed is enough to make me say "holy shit I'm never living here again". But then I'm a girl.

stop being such pussies.

-- Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, July 15, 2008 3:33 PM (Tuesday, July 15, 2008 3:33 PM) Bookmark Link

calling girls pussies, stay classy shakes!

my mom got stung by a scorpion once, in santa fe. it took her a few minutes to figure out what had happened (it was hiding in a shoe). when they called the local hospital, a nurse asked "is she still breathing? still conscious? ok, she'll be fine. if it was poisonous she'd by dying by now."

She called the hospital. What a pussy.

(NB this story has undoubtedly been exaggerated in the family lore. i don't think people really die scorpion stings that quickly.)

Yeah, true. I had some paralysis for a few days (stung on the shoulder, it was in a bath towel) the first time.

Mosquitos scare me more than centipedes which are basically harmless. I can understand being uncomfortable around poisonous scorpions and snakes cuz THEY ARE POISONOUS!

lolz like I know who the girls are on here

(x-post)

fwiw, most people who die do so from anaphalactic reactions, which can be awfully quick. (xpost)

"Mosquitos scare me more than centipedes which are basically harmless."

You can cross New Jersey off your list of vacation destinations then.

I voted San Jose more because it's the worst city for the cost. There are a few worse cities on the list, sure, but greater Santa Clara Co. metro being as expensive as SF = wtf. (It makes sense for the demand, but you get Google, Apple, and CNet employees instead of, you know, San Francisco.)

When my youngest brother was eight, he asked me to draw him a picture of a scorpion with Mickey Mouse's head. He still has it framed on his wall.

The frame is a nice touch.

(Mackro, CNet is based in SF)

Anyway the amusing thing about San Francisco is actually that the population is basically EXACTLY the same. I doubt there are too many cities anywhere where the population has stayed within a thousand people over the course of the last 50 or so years.

-- Alex in SF, Tuesday, 15 July 2008 19:26

740,000 immortal vampires

Jacksonville fucking rotted away nearly 20 years of my life.

On the plus side, Dennis Yost & The Classics IV are from there.

I once slept on the dirt floor of a half-built adobe hut about an hour outside of Taos, NM, on the opposite side of where we were told there was a black widow's nest. A life moment that in hindsight occurs to me as really really dangerous and stupid. And then I go, "IN HINDSIGHT!?!?!?!!" and feel paralyzed with astonishment for a few minutes.

Also, the only other things in the entire "building" apart from the nest and us were a) one of those love seats with a pull out mattress, but the mattresses that have no frame, just like a sleeping pad that pulls out onto the ground, and b) a half empty bottle of peach scented hand lotion, both of which belonging to someone called "Critter", who we were told had just been kicked out by his wife.

I slept in a sleeping bag many feet from the lotion-- I did one thing right.

Classics IV!

Even hearing that band's name makes me happy.

Other Jax highlights:

CC Orange of 95 South/69 Boyz/Quad City DJs

Uh, unless you count Limp Bizkit, Lynard Skynard, Molly Hatchet, or .38 Special, we're done here.

And yeah, Chamblin's Bookmine is as awesome of a used bookstore as mentioned here.

skynyrd and proximity to the beach are the only good things i can imagine about jacksonville

And then I met my ex.
-He had this band. Skeeter Meter.
-Like a rock band?
They were big around Tampa.
You listen to the Allman Brothers?
Lynyrd Skynyrd?
Then you've heard Skeeter Meter.
He was Greek and good-looking.
His daddy was a sponge diver
before they died out.
-What did they die of?
-Boredom.

LA. For international tourists, it never improves after the shithole Bradley International at LAX.

i voted houston, but there are a lot of shitty cities/metro areas in the u.s.

-- get bent, Tuesday, July 15, 2008 4:58 AM (Yesterday) Bookmark Link

hell yeah dude

pro-tip: houston eats shit

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

just glad to know jax will win

Hah NEW YORK 6!

jax >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> indianapolis

Los Angeles (3,844,829) 8
New York (8,143,197) 6
Detroit (886,671) 6

lol

I've never been to Texas or LA (or a few of these other spots), but I can't imagine any reasonable set of criteria by which Jacksonville could be ranked as generally superior to NYC, Detroit, San Fran, Philly, Boston, or even Baltimore. Jacksonville is a wretched place.

works for me: http://www.walkscore.com/rankings/most-walkable-cities.php