[mythtv-users] the US being, considerably less urbanized than either Australia or Britain

[Steve Hodge]

On 2/19/06, ffrr <ffrr at tpg.com.au> wrote:
> Steve Hodge wrote:
> >Australia has a similar landmass to the continental USA and much lower
> >population but a much larger percentage of Australian's live in an
> >urban area: 93% v 81%. Essentially almost everyone lives in costal
> >cities in Oz.
>
> Yep, so most of Australia is less urbanised.  I think it's just I had a
> different interpretion of 'urbanised'.  I would use the term
> 'centralised' instead, to describe how the population lives.  To me,
> spreading cities out into the country is urbanisation of the country.
> It seems that the original poster means the population is 'urbanised'
> but I meant that the country is less urbanised (if that makes any sense
> :-) )

You are talking about the percentage of land that is urban (i.e. the
US is more urbanised because more land is urban), but it's more common
to talk in terms of population percentage. If you do a search on
Google you'll struggle to find examples of the word used in terms of
area.

Of course "urbanised" and "urbanisation" are also used to describe the
process by which an area becomes urban.

"Centralised" implies concentration of a population in a single area.
I don't think that's a good description of either the US or Australia.

Steve