Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

DRZ36 t1_j6wdusx wrote

Boston is part of Greater Worcester

62

MikeD123999 t1_j6wgtzi wrote

Yes, worcester should be the capitol. Easier to get to if you are coming from the western part of the state, less crowded, less crime. Boston is easier if you are coming from the middle of the ocean where nobody lives

25

AnyRound5042 t1_j6x4uq5 wrote

Surprise surprise, that's where everybody was coming from at the time they chose the capital. At least it's not Taunton

10

Weenie_Hut_Jr_ t1_j6xdu0n wrote

1630 is when Boston became the capital of the Massachusetts bay colony so that definitely checks out

2

Graflex01867 t1_j706h20 wrote

We’re the “Bay State” - not the “Berkshire State” for a reason.

Maybe you want a different…wait, no, this is the right capitol.

1

ReporterOther2179 t1_j6xkrwo wrote

North South axis was more important back in the day, as nobody much lived in the hinterlands. Until 1820 northern Mass was Portland and Bangor. Access by sea was the prime concern. Nobody lived there but many traveled there.

3

Narrow-Ad-440 t1_j6zy01h wrote

Less Crime? Pretty sure Worcester has a higher crime rate than Boston despite a way smaller population

1

ratbas t1_j6x3oxm wrote

Fix it. Bostonians must remain within the 128 holding cell.

16

transtrailtrash t1_j6wlrjs wrote

It’s part of the Boston Combined Statistical Area as defined by the government so yea, it’s part of Greater Boston

12

canadacorriendo785 t1_j6y3gtw wrote

Yeah this is the dumbest continual argument on the Massachusetts/Boston subreddits. Worcester, Manchester NH and Providence are all part of the Boston combined statistical area. Their development trends, rents, population growth are all closely tied to development in Boston.

Look up the same statistics for Holyoke and North Adams if you want to see what cities in Massachusetts that are truly outside of the orbit of Boston look like.

7

singbowl1 t1_j6wcoue wrote

not for nothing but it is true....Worcester is the support city for Boston it has the room to have the infrastructure to support the huge urban sprawl that is greater Boston. Sure it is the 2nd largest city in New England and has it's own identity

8

Hoosac_Love t1_j6wfa96 wrote

I respect Worcester and I as a kid saw the old Worcester Counts at the old Worcester centrum.But it's better the the region to make Boston as big a possible.Boston is a tiny 49 Sq. miles,New York is 250 Sq miles and LA is 450 Sq miles.If Boston was 300 square miles it would for sure in the top 5 biggest cities in the US.

5

Adorable_List3836 t1_j6wghgy wrote

No, we should keep Boston in its 49 square miles

5

Hoosac_Love t1_j6wgwu1 wrote

I'm not saying make metro Boston ,Boston proper,only saying a bigger metro Boston is better for the region.

2

AnyRound5042 t1_j6x4zw4 wrote

Only if it comes with requisite public transit

7

Hoosac_Love t1_j6x7lrh wrote

Is PT that bad a bit west of Boston,we have good buses in North Adams with even service to Pittsfield a few times a day

0

AnyRound5042 t1_j6xo0e2 wrote

We're talking about what's already an area covering over 4 million people. If you want to grow that, with Boston serving as a hub, imagine the traffic with 6 or 8 million people all trying to drive into then out of the city at the same time every day. Let alone getting to the other places without a car

1

[deleted] t1_j6y4xgp wrote

Imagine 8 million people taking the Green Line everyday.

1

AnyRound5042 t1_j6yjr6n wrote

It already feels that way most of the time. I used to work nights and trying to get home at the same time all the kids were going to school in the morning was my own little personal hell

2

Hoosac_Love t1_j6xukjh wrote

I was talking statistics not actually growing the population in real people.Making Boston look bigger on paper is good for New England I was not speaking actual population growth.

0

[deleted] t1_j6y4qrs wrote

Boston wouldn’t be Boston if it was not tiny, overcrowded, hard to navigate, expensive and parochial. Making the MSA larger would take away its charm and uniqueness.

2

Hoosac_Love t1_j6y5ddv wrote

I was talking statistics not actual population change

1

Doctor_Chow t1_j6xe6uc wrote

You know that Worcester is the 2nd largest city in New England?

1

climb-high t1_j6y1pcu wrote

Is Providence also part of greater Boston?

1

WinsingtonIII t1_j6yrirh wrote

I would say yes. It's on the commuter rail and a reasonable number of people commute from RI to Boston. Same thing for much of southern New Hampshire.

Both Worcester and Providence are part of the Boston-Worcester-Providence Combined Statistical Area.

3

11BMasshole t1_j6zhz3m wrote

So , Is Springfield part of the Greater Hartford Metro? There’s a commuter rail line between the two cities , plus they are only 22 miles apart.

1

A_Man_Who_Writes t1_j6wd0z5 wrote

I say 190 and and anything east of that is “Greater Boston”

0