Quote:
Originally Posted by ue
What? Metropolitan areas correspond with connectedness to a single place, due to a shared sense of place. It's usually measured by commutershed, which I don't believe Hamilton fits the criteria for with Toronto anyways. Most Hamiltonians do not commute into Toronto and even less Torontonians commute into Hamilton. Contiguous urban development does not a single metropolitan area make. Otherwise Bos-Wash would be a single metropolitan area. You're conflating metropolitan area with megalopolis. You can't even say that Hamilton exists due to Toronto's presence, as it was founded and built out largely independent of the GTA, unlike say, the Inland Empire or Silicon Valley, which are inextricably tied to Los Angeles and San Francisco, respectively, for their respective genesis'.
|
Now you're bringing in a different factor altogether: connectivity. Connectivity is definitely key but your argument was about distinctness which has no bearing whatsoever. Has it not occurred to you that 2 distinct cities can merge into one metro? It happens all the time. Hamilton and Toronto have existed separately but I'm not sure one can say that anymore. GO Transit is changing everything.
My second point: you're extrapolating my argument that Toronto-Hamilton being one metro to mean that Hamilton owes its existence to Toronto. Nowhere have I said that and nowhere have I argued that it's an extension of Toronto. You're the only one that has said that.
Threaded Mode