| Admin,
Thanks for the response. But if you look at the 2007 census estimates by the US Census Bureau (for just cities, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population), a lot has changed, and your methodology doesn't make sense. Beyond some cities switching places, DC and Denver would have dropped off the list, and Fort Worth (17) and Charlotte (19) would have entered the list.
That's fine, but if you look at metropolitan areas (designated by the census, which still divides SF vs San Jose, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_metropolitan_areas), you're missing #7 (Miami), 9 (Atlanta), 14 (Riverside), 16 (Minneapolis), 18 (St. Louis), 19 (Tampa), 22 (Pittsburgh), 23 (Portland). DC and Denver, which will drop out of the top 25 cities proper by 2010, are still the 8 and 21 by metro. Just doesn't make sense losing such huge metro areas in favor of significantly smaller population centers (San Antonio, San Jose, Indy, Jax, Columbus, Austin, Memphis, Milwaukee, El Paso). Really? El Paso over Atlanta or Miami? 700,000 live in the El Paso region, vs over 5 million for Atlanta and Miami. |
US Cities 1900 
Cities of Spain 
Countries With the Largest Metros
