Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Bottom line the list was provided to show Monumental that Seattle-as of 2007- was not economically superior to Philadelphia. It proved that quite convincingly as Philadelphias economic output is almost double that of Seattles, which predictably mirrors the population stats 2/1 towards metro Philly. I'm missing something here if Seattle is of the same ilk as Philadelphia,Bos etc. Not saying Seattle isnt a great city but its sphere of influence is 1/2 that of Philadelphia.Seattle without question belongs in a sub-tier category when compared to Philly.
Now... 40-50 years down the line Seattle might zoom by Philaldephia and leave it in the dust, that is certainly possible. But as of 2007 Seattle is not on Philadelphias level no matter how you slice or dice it.
Lets use a sports analogy. Reggie Evans led the nba last year in average rebounds per minutes played.However Tim Duncan led the Nba in total rebounds for the season surpassing Reggie Evans by 700 rebounds. Who is the better rebounder?.. Exactly
Take Mexico City out of the equation here and lets try to concentrate on the US cities on that list. The Pricewaterhouse Coopers list deals with metros. The suburbs of Philaldephia(4 million people) combined with Center City Philly are every bit as clean,prosperous and economically robust as Seattle,SF, SD etc..
Your GDP per capita figures for US cities show me one thing. The thing that stands out to me is the lack of diversity of those cities. If you want to pound the pulpit and brag about that , then I suppose that is your perogative. Philadlephia isn't going to apologize for not being your milquetoast lily white exclusive enclaves that you have in The Pacifice NW or Boston.
It's like this...........in population % in the US Seattle's (GDP) - Seattle is one of the richest cities in the US, period, and blows philly out the water from that stand point.
Now because - Philly has pretty much double the population of Seattle, brings it's % higher, and from that stand point in the world (GDP) / richest cities - Philly is around 9th or so, and Seattle is around 24th or so (2005 numbers). (in the US they are more closer together)
So in reality the city of Seattle/metro is richer than Philly/meto of course, (we have several of the richest people in the world all living in our area -billionaires - with one of the largest corporate headquarters in the world - microsoft) but......................as the world GDP goes, Philly ranks higher than Seattle, even though to most, it seems unbelievable. (it boils down to more population)
I will say.......Philly is an important city / but because it's near New York, it just gets wiped under the rug, and also the image of Philly is greatly tarnished with the average person (the slums, crime, and poverty stricken nature of the city looms heavy in Philly's image, as does other cities in the rust belt, and midwest) I believe we all know this.
When you say
San Diego
Seattle
San Francisco
people think - wow beautiful cities / very rich.
I think its no mystery what most people think about Philly. (I think you know what the perception is)
As for the race and diversity thing - The PNW yes is considerably white........but Seattle - has the most blacks (African Americans in the region) growing by 12% on average. ....with that said.......most blacks in Seattle are very wealthy and affluent.........we've had black mayors, city officials etc etc. Considering the low percentage of blacks in the city (12%) that tells you how well African Americans do in the PNW
I can't keep up with all the cities you have disparaged and then tried to kiss up to . All I know is that you needed to be taken out behind the woodshed for a spanking with your crazy assertion that Seattle,Charlotte and Austin are more important cities than Philadelphia.
What is this?................add information, and input to the discussion.
I've never seen so much, jealousy, hatred, bickering, and personal attacks in my life / over what? .......rainrock you have come in and out of so many threads and landed personal attacks on people, it really is ridiculous, and childish. We all can agree to disagree. It's just opinions. (That's what intelligent people do).
anyone getting so worked up over words typed on the internet, about a city you don't own, is ----------------- you get the picture... IMHO.
Last edited by Monumental1; 11-11-2007 at 03:56 PM..
Reason: .
I've never seen so much, jealousy, hatred, bickering, and personal attacks in my life / over what? .......rainrock you have come in and out of so many threads and landed personal attacks on people, it really is ridiculous, and childish. We all can agree to disagree. It's just opinions. (That's what intelligent people do).
anyone getting so worked up over words typed on the internet, about a city you don't own, is ----------------- you get the picture... IMHO.
Pot......Kettle.....Black!
All I'm doing is keeping it real.Providing facts to your overblown posts about Seattle.
It's like this...........in population % in the US Seattle's (GDP) - Seattle is one of the richest cities in the US, period, and blows philly out the water from that stand point.
Now because - Philly has pretty much double the population of Seattle, brings it's % higher, and from that stand point in the world (GDP) / richest cities - Philly is around 9th or so, and Seattle is around 24th or so (2005 numbers). (in the US they are more closer together)
So in reality the city of Seattle/metro is richer than Philly/meto of course, (we have several of the richest people in the world all living in our area -billionaires - with one of the largest corporate headquarters in the world - microsoft) but......................as the world GDP goes, Philly ranks higher than Seattle, even though to most, it seems unbelievable. (it boils down to more population)
No not to most, only to you.^
Monumental that per capita argument only works if you are talking about different classes of metro. Dont confuse Philaldephia with Mexico City. Yes Philaldephia has twice the population of Seattle but its economic output is also twice as big as Seattle. In effect metro Philadlephia is equivalent to 2 metro Seattles. The per capita numbers of the two metros are pretty darn close. Seattle has a very slight advantage. I'm under the impression that you think that the 6 million people who live around Philadelphia are living in poverty? Nothing could be further from the truth. The quality of living in the Philaldephia area(outside the hoods of Philly and some older industrialized cities(Camden-Chester) is on par with anything you have out there in Seattle. Trust me on that one. To put things into perspective its something ridiculous like 84 of the top 100 wealthiest zip codes in Pennsylvania are within 20 miles of center city Philadelphia.
Seattle absolutely has less poor people than Philaldephia, but in return Philadlephia also has millions of more -upper middle class people- than metro Seattle has. It all evens out in the end.
This is a thriving area that does get overlooked because its sandwiched between 2 of the worlds richest behemoths NYC and DC..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monumental
I will say.......Philly is an important city / but because it's near New York, it just gets wiped under the rug, and also the image of Philly is greatly tarnished with the average person (the slums, crime, and poverty stricken nature of the city looms heavy in Philly's image, as does other cities in the rust belt, and midwest) I believe we all know this.
When you say
San Diego
Seattle
San Francisco
people think - wow beautiful cities / very rich.
I think its no mystery what most people think about Philly. (I think you know what the perception is)
You can thank the Pacific Ocean and the Great Plains for SF ,SD and Seattle remaining sheltered lilly white pristine bubbles.Philadlephia wasn't so fortunate , its a landlocked, big city east of the Mississippi that got turned upside down- till this day- when the federal govt decided that millions of uneducated unskilled southern african americans were going to be placed and integrated into those big eastern cities. Philadlephia literally wasn't able to dodge that bullet like SF-Sea.. That being said despite the albatross of having hundreds of thousands of metro Philadlephians living on social services -metro Philadlephia still one of the most robust economic engines of this country.
Now because - Philly has pretty much double the population of Seattle, brings it's % higher, and from that stand point in the world (GDP) / richest cities - Philly is around 9th or so, and Seattle is around 24th or so (2005 numbers). (in the US they are more closer together)
So in reality the city of Seattle/metro is richer than Philly/meto of course, (we have several of the richest people in the world all living in our area -billionaires - with one of the largest corporate headquarters in the world - microsoft) but......................as the world GDP goes, Philly ranks higher than Seattle, even though to most, it seems unbelievable. (it boils down to more population)
I hope you realize that just because you have a few filthy rich billionaires living in your area that really doesn't count for much, not to mention that it skews your metro area's GDP per capita. Bill Gates skews Seattle's numbers a lot by himself, I'm sure. Intstead, what is REALLY important and more indicative of a metro area's economy is MEDIAN houshold income. That is, what the average Joes are earning in the 50th percentile, not factoring in the infinitesimal amount of people who earn billion-dollar incomes at the top .01% of the population (point in case, Manhattan compared to the rest of NYC). When it comes down to that, Seattle's metro. area is certainly RIGHT ON PAR with Philadelphia's:
I hope you realize that just because you have a few filthy rich billionaires living in your area that really doesn't count for much, not to mention it that skews your metro area's GDP per capita. Bill Gates skews Seattle's numbers a lot by himself, I'm sure. Intstead, what is REALLY important and more indicative of a metro area's economy is MEDIAN income. That is, what the average Joe is earning in the 50% percentile, not factoring in the infinitesimal amount of people who earn billion-dollar incomes at the top .01% of the population (point in case, Manhattan compared to the rest of NYC). When it comes down to that, Seattle's metro. area is certainly RIGHT ON PAR with Philadelphia's:
A cities gross domestic product, or GDP, is one of the ways of measuring the size of its economy
The GDP - is defined as the total market value of all final goods and services produced within a city in a given period of time (usually a calendar year). It is also considered the sum of value added at every stage of production (the intermediate stages) of all final goods and services produced within a city in a given period of time.
The most common approach to measuring and understanding GDP is the expenditure method: GDP = consumption + investment + (government spending) + (exports − imports), or, GDP = C + I + G + (X-M) with that said - no one persons consumption, can alter the outcome of the GDP no matter how rich they are. They would have to consume everything, and sustain it over a years time, and we all know that is not possible.
The city of Seattle is just a wealthy city (and that's in the city limits)
either way it goes / Seattle and Philly are in the world rankings.
In the US, Seattle is the richer city % wise.
GDP I believe philly is 5th or so in the US
Last edited by Monumental1; 11-11-2007 at 05:07 PM..
Reason: .
This website is way off.San Antonio metro is listed as having a projected 1.6 million in 2020.Thats almost a million less than what is projected by the U.S. census.It has it listed as having 1.4 million metro population in 2006.Maybe in 1989 San Antonio had 1.4 million.Also GDP is missing many American cities.I think they need a lil email sent to them.
City mayors
CITIES
Core cities: Largest world core cities | Capital cities |2005
Richest cities and urban areas in 2005
Rank City/Urban area Country GDP in US$bn
1 Tokyo Japan 1191 2 New York USA 1133
3 Los Angeles USA 639 4 Chicago USA 460
5 Paris France 460
6 London UK 452
7 Osaka/Kobe Japan 341
8 Mexico City Mexico 315 9 Philadelphia USA 312 10 Washington DC USA 299 11 Boston USA 290 12 Dallas/Fort Worth USA 268
13 Buenos Aires Argentina 245
14 Hong Kong China 244 15 San Francisco/Oakland USA 242 16 Atlanta USA 236 17 Houston USA 235 18 Miami USA 231
19 Sao Paulo Brazil 225
20 Seoul South Korea 218
21 Toronto Canada 209
22 Detroit USA 203
23 Madrid Spain 188 24 Seattle USA 186
25 Moscow Russia 181
26 Sydney Australia 172 27 Phoenix USA 156 28 Minneapolis USA 155 29 San Diego USA 153
30 Rio de Janeiro Brazil 141
31 Barcelona Spain 140
32 Shanghai China 139
33 Melbourne Australia 135
34 Istanbul Turkey 133 35 Denver USA 130
36 Singapore Singapore 129
37 Mumbai India 126
38 Rome Italy 123
39 Montreal Canada 120
40 Milan Italy 115 41 Baltimore USA 110
42 Metro Manila Philippines 108 43 St Louis USA 101
44 Beijing China 99
45 Cairo Egypt 98
46 Jakarta Indonesia 98 47 Tampa/St Petersburg USA 97
48 Pusan South Korea 95
49 Kolkata India 94
50 Vienna Austria 93
51 Delhi India 93
52 Tel Aviv-Jaffa Israel 92
53 Santiago Chile 91 54 Cleveland USA 90
55 Bangkok Thailand 89
56 Tehran Iran 88 57 Portland USA 87
58 Bogotá Colombia 86
59 St Petersburg Russia 85
60 Guangzhou China 84
61 Pittsburgh USA 80
62 Riyadh Saudi Arabia 80
63 Lisbon Portugal 79
64 Vancouver Canada 79
65 Johannesburg South Africa 79
66 Monterrey Mexico 78
67 Stockholm Sweden 76
68 Cape Town South Africa 75
69 Berlin Germany 75
70 Athens Greece 73
71 Birmingham UK 72
72 Fukuoka Japan 72
73 Manchester UK 69
74 Lima Peru 67
75 Belo Horizonte Brazil 65
76 Guadalajara Mexico 60
77 Hamburg Germany 58
78 Turin Italy 58
79 Lyon France 56
80 Jiddah Saudi Arabia 55
81 Karachi Pakistan 55
82 Dhaka Bangladesh 52
83 Munich Germany 50
84 Dublin Ireland 49
85 Leeds UK 48
86 Warsaw Poland 48
87 Tianjin China 45
88 Bangalore India 45
89 Porto Alegre Brazil 44
90 Helsinki Finland 43
91 Naples Italy 43
92 Budapest Hungary 43
93 Zurich Switzerland 42
94 Ankara Turkey 42
95 Amsterdam Netherlands 42
96 Auckland New Zealand 41
97 Copenhagen Denmark 41
98 Recife Brazil 41
99 Rotterdam Netherlands 40
100 Brussels Belgium 39
101 East Rand South Africa 39
102 Brasilia Brazil 38
103 Salvador El Salvador 38
104 Wuhan China 38
105 Chennai India 38
106 Ho Chi Min City Vietnam 38
107 Hyderabad India 38
108 Fortaleza Brazil 37
109 Prague Czech Republic 36
110 Chongqing China 35
111 Algiers Algeria 35
112 Medellin Colombia 34
113 Taegu South Korea 34
114 Curitiba Brazil 33
115 Ahmadabad India 32
116 Oslo Norway 31
117 Izmir Turkey 31
118 Lagos Nigeria 30
119 Pune India 30
120 Alexandria Egypt 30
121 Cologne Germany 29
122 Lahore Pakistan 28
123 Caracas Venezuela 28
124 Hanoi Vietnam 28
125 Shenyang China 27
126 Puebla Mexico 27
127 Lille France 27
128 Bandung Indonesia 26
129 Casablanca Morocco 24
130 Khartoum Sudan 23
131 Surat India 22
132 Baghdad Iraq 22
133 Chengdu China 21
134 Xian China 19
135 Kanpur India 17
136 Yangon Burma 16
137 Chittagong Bangladesh 16
138 Changchun China 15
139 Jaipur India 15
140 Lucknow India 14
141 Luanda Angola 12
142 Abidjan Ivory Coast 11
143 Pyongyang North Korea 10
144 Faisalabad Pakistan 10
145 Kinshasha Congo 10
146 Krakow Poland 10
147 Kabul Afghanistan 9
148 Nairobi Kenya 8
149 Addis Ababa Ethiopia 7
150 Kano Nigeria 7
151 Dar es Salaam Tanzania 5
In bold above all the US cities listed in top 150 urban centers. I agree with rainrock, PWC (price water house) would'nt f up statistics, and they aren't some hobos in a basement.
This is probably on of the most valid lists I've seen in "city rankings" of tiers. There are 20 cities bolded. Does that imply the top 20 most significant cities?
Last edited by chitownwarrior; 11-11-2007 at 05:15 PM..
Midwest:
Chicago
Detroit
Minneapolis
St. Louis
Cleveland
West:
Los Angeles
San Fran
Seattle
Phoenix
San Diego
Denver
Portland
I think this makes sense too. These are the cities I personally think of when I think of the specific region.
This list makes sense, seems pretty accurate.
(in Tiers)
In the northeast - I'd maybe put D.C. over Philly
South - Atlanta, and Houston over Dallas
Midwest looks good (could argue Minn over Detroit maybe)
The west looks perfect - L.A., San Fran, Seattle are pretty much 1,2,3 like you said.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Pot......
Kettle.....Black
!
