Now the second largest city in the US, La is aiming to become the largest city in the U.S. before the end of the 21st century. LA is already outgrowing New York and the LA metro area is expected to outgrow New York's by 2050.

Will Nyc fall to LA?

If it ever does, it won't be in our lifetime..

I doubt it.

Its getting close to NY. NY is slowing down

YES IT WILL. A HUNDRED YEARS AGO WE ONLY HAD LESS THAN A MILLION, NOW WE HAVE 18 MILLION COMPARED TO NY'S 21 MILLION. WELL CATCH THEM.

New York City will always be the largest U.S. city, and Los Angeles will always be second. If we are talking metropolitan areas then quite possibly L.A. may surpass New York. It is estimated that in 2004 Greater New York had a population of 21,850,000 and Greater Los Angeles had 17,550,000. If we take current growth rates since the 2000 census, and project them into the future Greater L.A. as defined today will surpass Greater NYC as defined today by 2040. Here's the catch, first current growth rates mean squat when you are talking about predicting 25 or 30 years into the future. Second, by then, the definition of Greater L.A. will most likely include San Diego. Also, Greater NYC will have no doubt swallowed up the Philly metro, and possibly more metros in the process. So it's really to hard to tell.

YES IT WILL. A HUNDRED YEARS AGO WE ONLY HAD LESS THAN A MILLION, NOW WE HAVE 18 MILLION COMPARED TO NY'S 21 MILLION. WELL CATCH THEM.

Please chill out. :no:

Metropolitan? Very likely. As a city? Not very likely. 4 million is a lot to make up to.

Please chill out. :no:

lol. Silverlake is always on the excited side..

Ok Lets take it by Borough (County)

New York City proper is made up of 5 Bouroughs (Counties)
Los Angeles is one city in a county .........

If Los Angeles County had one city with communites and no suburbs..Los Angeles ....it would be bigger than New York City


Los Angeles proper = Los Angeles County
New York City proper = five bouroughs (Counties)

Ok Lets take it by Borough (County)

New York City proper is made up of 5 Bouroughs (Counties)
Los Angeles is one city in a county .........

If Los Angeles County had one city with communites and no suburbs..Los Angeles ....it would be bigger than New York City


Los Angeles proper = Los Angeles County
New York City proper = five bouroughs (Counties)

Yeah but then you are comparing an area NYC all 5 bouroughs equal 365 sq miles, to LA county which is 4000 sq miles.

Yeah but then you are comparing an area NYC all 5 bouroughs equal 365 sq miles, to LA county which is 4000 sq miles.

so what. The total pop for LA metro will soon pass that of NY metro in our lives. Metros are the new cities. City populations haven't mattered since the 1960s. It is all about the Metro now.

Unless Boston and Philly and DC combine with NY. Then we have no chance.

Yeah but then you are comparing an area NYC all 5 bouroughs equal 365 sq miles, to LA county which is 4000 sq miles.and the New York CMSA consist of other states......The L.A. metro doesnt cross state lines

I think population doesn't matter too much if the rest of the world still view L.A. as a smelly, sprawly, ugly urban wasteland. Perhaps L.A. should focus more on fixing what we have rather than packing 'em in.

Metros are the new cities. City populations haven't mattered since the 1960s. It is all about the Metro now.

That's completley gross. I suspect the only reason you believe that is because of how media-friendly L.A.'s metro area is. There wouldn't be a metro if there wasn't a city. That suburban attitude is exactly what caused many would-be-great cities to fall.

I don't see it ever happening. New York is more than double the population of LA and is entering another period of growth. NYC will have over 10 million by 2030, IMO. LA will be closing in on 5 million by 2030...(still twice the size...get my drift).

Now the second largest city in the US, La is aiming to become the largest city in the U.S. before the end of the 21st century. LA is already outgrowing New York and the LA metro area is expected to outgrow New York's by 2050.

Will Nyc fall to LA?


As a city, I'd guess it is inevitable that LA surpasses NYC population. NYC pretty much run out of space to build. LA on the other hand has built out to it's edge, but this trend of high-density developments means that it can probably pack in 5 to 10 times its population now. This is amazing because LA as a city didn't even have 1 million people until maybe around 80 years ago. And the population growth doesn't seem to be waning by much with still a strong influx of immigrants.

LA the largest? I hope that never happens. As far as I'm concerned, New York will always be the largest city in the US for the next hundred years. I am referring to city populations on both. For some of you who said New York has lost room to build, keep in mind that New York City gained 685,000 residents between 1990 and 2000 and that LA gained only 210,000 in that same timeframe. Ironically, I suppose New York renovated empty housing for newcomers who want to live there, and on the side built more and more of these 25 story apartment highrises overtime. But at least LA will have half the population of what NYC has come 2010.

It depends how you judge population size. While LA seems to always be listed as having 16 to 18 million inhabitants, New York varies from anywhere between 21 million and 30 million.

It also depends on how international events play out in the future. LA and NY grew out of immigration. If for some reason the state of Central America improves in the coming years, LA's growth will slow consequently. At the same time, if conditions worsen in say large areas of Eastern Europe, expect New York to grow.

LA is on pace to outgrow NY, but the pace will change. It's too far in the future to make an accurate prediciton.

That's completley gross. I suspect the only reason you believe that is because of how media-friendly L.A.'s metro area is. There wouldn't be a metro if there wasn't a city. That suburban attitude is exactly what caused many would-be-great cities to fall.

Name "many would be great cities to fall" due to a suburban attitude.

Cities are more complex. Back in the 1800s there were mpt such thing as suburbs. Metros are the new measure for the significance and importance of a city. They aren't the only yardstick but they are a big one. Here is the list of how cities are judged now.

Here are the 25 megacities

1 Tōkyō Tokyo Japan 34,000,000 incl. Yokohama, Kawasaki
2 Ciudad de México Mexico City Mexico 22,350,000 incl. Nezahualcóyotl, Ecatepec, Naucalpan
3 Seoul (Sŏul) Seoul South Korea 22,050,000 incl. Bucheon, Goyang, Incheon, Seongnam, Suweon
4 New York New York USA 21,800,000 incl. Newark, Paterson
5 São Paulo Sao Paulo Brazil 20,000,000 incl. Guarulhos
6 Mumbai Bombay India 19,400,000 incl. Kalyan, Thane, Ulhasnagar
7 Delhi Delhi India 19,000,000 incl. Faridabad, Ghaziabad
8 Los Angeles Los Angeles USA 17,750,000 incl. Riverside, Anaheim
9 Jakarta Jakarta Indonesia 16,850,000 incl. Bekasi, Bogor, Depok, Tangerang
10 Ōsaka Osaka Japan 16,750,000 incl. Kobe, Kyoto
11 Kolkata Calcutta India 15,350,000 incl. Haora
12 Al-Qāhirah Cairo Egypt 15,250,000 incl. Al-Jizah, Shubra al-Khaymah
13 Manila Manila Philippines 14,550,000 incl. Kalookan, Quezon City
14 Karāchi Karachi Pakistan 13,800,000
15 Moskva Moscow Russia 13,650,000
16 Shanghai Shanghai China 13,400,000
17 Buenos Aires Buenos Aires Argentina 13,350,000 incl. San Justo, La Plata
18 Dhaka Dacca Bangladesh 12,750,000
19 Rio de Janeiro Rio de Janeiro Brazil 12,000,000 incl. Nova Iguaçu, São Gonçalo
20 London London Great Britain and Northern Ireland 11,950,000
21 Tehrān Tehran Iran 11,650,000 incl. Karaj
22 İstanbul Istanbul Turkey 11,250,000
23 Lagos Lagos Nigeria 10,800,000
24 Beijing Beijing China 10,700,000
25 Paris Paris France 9,900,000

The industrialized ones are the most important in culture/media and economics. Tokyo, NY, LA, Shanghai, London, Bejing, Paris. Probably in 30 more years we will catch NY>

Top 10 Largest Cities in US (without declined or decayed)
1. NYC (nearly 10 million)
2. Chicago (around 4-5 million)
3. LA (4 million)
4. Philadelphia (around 3 million)
5. Detroit (between 2.5 to 3 million)
6. Houston (2 million)
7. Baltimore (between 1.6 to 1.8 million)
8. St. Louis (around 1.4-1.6 million)
9. Phoenix (1.4 million)
10. Milwaukee (around 1.2 million)

See... If all cities don't become decayed or declined since 50's so Chicago would be 2nd largest city in US.

Top 10 Largest Cities in US (without declined or decayed)
1. NYC (nearly 10 million)
2. Chicago (around 4-5 million)
3. LA (4 million)
4. Philadelphia (around 3 million)
5. Detroit (between 2.5 to 3 million)
6. Houston (2 million)
7. Baltimore (between 1.6 to 1.8 million)
8. St. Louis (around 1.4-1.6 million)
9. Phoenix (1.4 million)
10. Milwaukee (around 1.2 million)

See... If all cities don't become decayed or declined since 50's so Chicago would be 2nd largest city in US.
Where....the hell did you get some dumb estimate like that from? Chicago being the 2nd largest US city? No. There's something called REALITY that makes LA the 2nd largest city, we just have more space over here than Chi-Town.

The LA Metro will eventually surpass the NY Metro in Population-Most people arent going to be surprised when it happens.

Where....the hell did you get some dumb estimate like that from? Chicago being the 2nd largest US city? No. There's something called REALITY that makes LA the 2nd largest city, we just have more space over here than Chi-Town.

Pfft. I said... IF MAJORITY CITIES THAT IS NEVER DECLINED OR DECAYED SINCE 50's. YOU FUCKING IDIOT... :bash:

CarsonCaliBrotha, You're now welcome to my ignore list so good luck to fucking ur life. I don't want see ur dipshit again. Good Bye

so what. The total pop for LA metro will soon pass that of NY metro in our lives. Metros are the new cities. City populations haven't mattered since the 1960s. It is all about the Metro now.

Unless Boston and Philly and DC combine with NY. Then we have no chance.
Well Philly will for sure be apart of Greater NYC (within 25 years or so). Thats 6 million people. Which means that the Greater NYC/Philly area by 2030 may have 30-33 million. If LaA and San Diego combined (probably within 30 years), you would be talking about a population of 26-28 million by 2030. LA will most likely be runner up to NYC in both metro and for sure city proper population for the forseable future.

Here is a map of the Boston-DC corridor:
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg1/87/38254887.gif

Chicago will most likely be 3rd with DC/Baltimore a close 4th in metro, and Houston close 4th in city proper population for the forseable future.

A side note, by 2025 Chicago will have an etimated 12 million in its CSA. If you include the Milwuakee area and Rockford, which should join Geater Chicago do to sprawl by 2020, you would have a population of 14-15 million.

If Boston and Washington/Baltimore are included in the NYC metro (which wont happen for at least 50 years) then you can add another 15-20 million. Totaling at least 60 million people in the BO-Wash megalapolis

Maybe, but how big will LA Metro be? Stretching to the Mexico border?

The LA Metro will eventually surpass the NY Metro in Population-Most people arent going to be surprised when it happens.

That's true. It's pretty certain that LA metro is going to become the largest according to most growth experts. But can you imagine how big the metro will when it reaches Las Vegas, which is THE fastest growing city in the country!

Pfft. I said... IF MAJORITY CITIES THAT IS NEVER DECLINED OR DECAYED SINCE 50's. YOU FUCKING IDIOT... :bash:
But decay is natural, it will happen. So why even bother making up numbers if there's no way they'd happen?

And how could the LA metro reach the Las Vegas metro? That's alot of mountain ranges and all that.

I can't wait until the LA metro area swallows up the Sf Metro area..

The mountain ranges don't look so big. It's just takes a water source to bring more people in. We won't see it in our lifetime, but who would have guessed that LA would be spanning 1000s of square miles? I think Las Vegas is having an LA-like development boom that we've had this century.

Yeah, and if you look at a map of the southern parts of LA, then see how it transitions into DTLA, you'll see how straightforward the street design was, a straight grid.

Don't underestimate Los Angeles growth...remember that a long time ago Los Angeles wasn't even a city while New York was a bustling one,but look how quickly Los Angeles caught up...

Cities in the Northeast are not growing as rapidly as the Sunbelt Cities.
I don't see it ever happening. New York is more than double the population of LA and is entering another period of growth. NYC will have over 10 million by 2030, IMO. LA will be closing in on 5 million by 2030...(still twice the size...get my drift).

I can't wait until the LA metro area swallows up the Sf Metro area..
Fat chance. The only way that will happen is when all the Central Valley farmlands disappear and turn into housing in metros like Bakersfield, Fresno and Modesto. The coastline is pretty much mountainous. Even I don't see that happen for another ten million years. But it would be the opposite: if California continues to have earthquakes on both sides of the San Andreas Fault, then it is really going to be LA that is going to be a suburb of SF. :D

Here is a map of the Boston-DC corridor:
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg1/87/38254887.gif



Megapolis here we come, this looks massive, say in 100 years time, Boston, Philly even Washington DC would all become part of one massive city, looksspectacular, and huge, I assume population of no less than 50 million in this massive place, what's the distance from Boston to Washington DC? Wow very impressive...

Fat chance. The only way that will happen is when all the Central Valley farmlands disappear and turn into housing in metros like Bakersfield, Fresno and Modesto. The coastline is pretty much mountainous. Even I don't see that happen for another ten million years. But it would be the opposite: if California continues to have earthquakes on both sides of the San Andreas Fault, then it is really going to be LA that is going to be a suburb of SF. :D
OR SF a Suburb of LA. :) I mean there's gonna be mad casualties on both sides, but there's probably gonna be more survivors in LA, it all depends on God's will.

I like L.A and all but I just don't see this happening. ;)

First off LA will never pass NYC. 2nd large population does not make a city great. I mean come on look at all the crap cities around the world with more population then LA.

LA to me is just crap sprawl. It's like one big suburb. LA may be 2nd in population in the country, but one thing is for sure it will never be America's 2nd city.

Chicago is America's 2nd city. ;)
But L.A is pretty cool also, much to do.

No way :cheers:

Chicago is America's 2nd city. ;)
But L.A is pretty cool also, much to do.
What about the hood in Chi-Town? You think they're "second class" over there or something?

First Off,L.A is capable of surpassing NYC...

2nd,L.A is a great city not because it's the 2nd largest city in the country,but because it offers such a great variety of culture,entertainment,creativity,scenery,weather,outdoor activities,job opportunities and lifestyle...

L.A is not just sprawl,it's one of the most exciting,adventurous,entertaining sprawl in America and it is one of the greatest cities in this country...

Los Angeles offers more or most of everything that other cities have.
First off LA will never pass NYC. 2nd large population does not make a city great. I mean come on look at all the crap cities around the world with more population then LA.

LA to me is just crap sprawl. It's like one big suburb. LA may be 2nd in population in the country, but one thing is for sure it will never be America's 2nd city.

Chicago is America's 2nd city. ;)
But L.A is pretty cool also, much to do.


Chicago might be always called "the 2nd city" just like it can always be called "hogbutchers to the world" just like we always will be "city of angels". But LA is america's 2nd ctiy for sure. We are the two primary coastal cities and deeply connected.

As a city, I'd guess it is inevitable that LA surpasses NYC population. NYC pretty much run out of space to build. LA on the other hand has built out to it's edge, but this trend of high-density developments means that it can probably pack in 5 to 10 times its population now. This is amazing because LA as a city didn't even have 1 million people until maybe around 80 years ago. And the population growth doesn't seem to be waning by much with still a strong influx of immigrants.

In 2000 7.5% of NYC's land was vacant or undeveloped.
Here's the link:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/landusefacts/nycvac.html

urbanized metro LA takes up far less land than metro NY, whether you're talking about overall, or for it's size. Even if LA swallowed San Diego, it would still be smaller than urbanized metro NY without Philly. Metro LA is much denser than metro NY.

And yes at current growth rates, LA could surpass NY in the ext 25 years.

Los Angeles is the Nation's Biggest Market for New Urban Development
Tuesday July 26, 9:30 am ET

SYDNEY, July 26 /Xinhua-PRNewswire/ -- Leading business advisory firm KPMG today released its Population Growth Report 2005, a landmark international study of demographic trends aimed at business.

According to the key finding of the report, there is no other city in America quite like Los Angeles when it comes to population growth or to the business opportunities that flow from the urban development associated with that growth.

"The five counties comprising Los Angeles attracted 260,000 new residents over the 12 months to July 2004 or more than double the number added to the next fastest growing city, Phoenix, and almost four times the number added to the nation's largest city, New York," said report author and partner in KPMG's Risk Advisory Services practice, Bernard Salt.

"Population growth supports demand for new housing and for new retail property and there's more of this in LA than in any other town in the US," added Mr Salt, an advisor in business demographics.

The report also found that Arizona's County of Maricopa embracing Phoenix added more people than any other single county over the year to July 2004 making it the nation's No. 1 growth county.

"Phoenix is an important destination for lifestylers who prefer golf in the desert rather than the beach in Florida," Mr Salt added.

Florida's Flagler County north of Daytona Beach increased its population by 10.1 per cent over the 12 months to July 2004, making it the nation's fastest growing county in percentage terms. "Towns growing rapidly off a small population base often present opportunities for new business that have yet to be discovered by others," Mr Salt said.

Other key findings:

Fastest growing counties: 19 of the 20 fastest growing counties in terms of the absolute growth in population over the year to July 2004 were located in the sun states of Florida, Georgia, Texas, Arizona, Nevada and California. Only Chicago's Will County bucked this national trend. Will County is growing rapidly because of urban overspill from Chicago.

Fastest declining counties: 16 of the 20 fastest declining counties in terms of the absolute population growth over the year to July 2004 were located in the North-East. Many comprised the central core of larger urban masses where the population is transferring to fast-growing areas beyond the urban fringe, such as the shift underway from Chicago's central Cook County to the fringe's Will.

Sponge city Sioux Falls: The population of South Dakota's Sioux Falls increased by 52 per cent to 198,000 over 27 years to 2003. The number of people in all age groups in Sioux Falls increased over this period. But in nearby Miner County 50 miles north-west of Sioux Falls the population dropped by 35 per cent, and across most age groups. This pattern was repeated in many counties adjacent to Miner. It's almost as if Sioux Falls is soaking up the population of the surrounding prairie. Business needs to be aware of "sponge cities" across the mid-west which are growing strongly often at the expense of smaller farmland communities.

Bachelors and bachelorettes: The report measures the number of single men and single women aged 25-35 in all counties at the time of the 2000 census. Across much of the mid-west there was an over-supply of young bachelors (especially in North Dakota) whereas in the South there was an over-supply of young bachelorettes (especially in Mississippi). These figures have an impact on the rate of household formation, or non-formation, in areas where the numbers are out of kilter. In Hardee County Florida there are 5.69 bachelors per bachelorettes whereas in Dallas County Alabama there are 1.43 bachelorettes per bachelor.

Ride the subway of love: At the 2000 census there were 106,000 never-married men and 104,000 never-married women living on Manhattan Island. However in one Lower East Side neighbourhood there were 2.41 never-married young men per never-married young woman. Tell the girls from Sex and the City that this is Manhattan's bachelor hotspot. The bachelorette hotspot was a precinct in the Upper East Side where there were 2.45 bachelorettes per bachelor. The bachelorette hotspot is linked to the bachelor hotspot by the Bronx/Brooklyn Subway lines 4, 5 and 6. When you next visit New York perhaps you might like to ride this "subway of love."

The Leaving of Loving: The American county to have suffered the greatest percentage loss in population over the 12 months to July 2004 is the County of Loving in south-west Texas. This county lost 11 people or 17.5 per cent of its local population in this year, leaving only 52 Lovers left in Loving.

About the report

Population Growth Report 2005 is the signature annual demographics report prepared by KPMG for business. This year's report covers the United States, Australia and New Zealand.

Note to editors

The report is available in electronic format. Please contact Anita Poppi on the details below if you would like a copy.

Report availability and access to author Population Growth Report 2005 is published by KPMG in Australia and is available for purchase at a cost of AUD595 including GST. This annual report is sold to business to assist with strategic planning. The report's author is KPMG partner Bernard Salt. See also www.kpmg.com.au .

Interesting article. It's amazing to see how much growth Greater L.A. is experiencing. Overall I think you will hit 19.2 million by 2010. The only thing that will slow L.A's continued population growth, is the cost of affordable housing. It's fast becoming too expensive for many to buy homes. Just look what happened to parts of the Bay area. They have had little or no growth since 2000, mainly because of the tech bubble bursting, and a ridiculous housing market. So Cal may be headed in that direction.
By decade, during the 1980's the L.A area grew by 25%. The 90's it grew by 12%, and so far this decade, it's on pace to grow by 17% by 2010. That's pretty amazing considering it's overall size. The Chicago area population grew only 1.5% during the 80's, 11% during the 90's, and is on pace to grow by about 10% by 2010. It's interesting that parts of Chicagoland are growing at the same pace as are some fast growing sunbelt cities. As for out east, I also read that parts of the DC/Baltimore area are rapidly growing.

LA will never pass NYC in terms of city, metro wise LA will pass NYC. LA will never be as dense as NYC and cant build as tall as NYC its not gon happen.

LA will never pass NYC in terms of city, metro wise LA will pass NYC. LA will never be as dense as NYC and cant build as tall as NYC its not gon happen.
Yeah true, because NY was starting to be built up way earlier than LA.Alot of people from Europe and Africa came to NY to start a new life in America, and even if LA wanted to build up like NY, alot of people would move away because they came to LA because that free feeling you get, and if you take that away, you just got another bigass city were everything feels distant.

LA proper is virtually built out. Yes, there's lots of room for highrise condos, particularly in places like downtown, but the infrastructure for most of LA is not as accommodating. I'll guesstimate LA's maximum population at 4,000,000. Once the Mexican immigrants stop doubling up in apartments and move out to single family houses elsewhere, LA's population may well begin dropping.

NEVER!!
(((((((((((THIS IS NOT RELEVANT BUT>>>>>>>>>>>
On montel Silvia Brown said there will be a TERRIBLE earthquake in California. Her cracky accent kinda faded out the details as well as something tragic happening to florida.

She also said something about the war in iraq ending.

Chris is just ignorant and let him to make shitty opinion.

I'm highly sure that LA metro will suprass NYC metro soon ;)

LA growth will slow down as less immigrants from Mexico arrive to the US, and maybe one day Las Vegas and Pheonix will be the new destinations for immigants and people coming to the west.

It'll never happen.

NEVER!!
(((((((((((THIS IS NOT RELEVANT BUT>>>>>>>>>>>
On montel Silvia Brown said there will be a TERRIBLE earthquake in California. Her cracky accent kinda faded out the details as well as something tragic happening to florida.

She also said something about the war in iraq ending.
Well I guess she needs to stop smokin that sticky-icky-icky crack :rofl: . And I'm pretty sure Mexican immigrants will live anywhere were there's a couple feet of space, haha.

New york suck...freaking expensive =/

Only parking for half an hour, they charge 50 bucks. What a loser law, and also people are so rude there. L.A are like okay, NY are even rudiER than L.A.
whatever, New york won't be so much to watch. Tall buildings everywhere, bunches of people walking. blahhh. lol It just my opinion.

New york suck...freaking expensive =/

Only parking for half an hour, they charge 50 bucks. What a loser law, and also people are so rude there. L.A are like okay, NY are even rudiER than L.A.
whatever, New york won't be so much to watch. Tall buildings everywhere, bunches of people walking. blahhh. lol It just my opinion.

I did have some issue with NYC too but what's deal with cost of living?

LA might probably not become the largest. LA will probably beat NYC in Metro numbers, if NYC or LA dont gain any new metros, such as SD or Philly.