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.
Here's why the CSA numbers are all off: there are plenty of micropolitan areas that are part of CSA's in most of the country, but the BEA source doesn't have it.
That's why all that's on the BEA website are MSA numbers. Don't misquote the source
True. Even at $700 Billion, the Bay Area is locking horns with top 5-6 economies in the world.
Here are the top 20 according to the Brookings Institute (2012). SF doesn't show because they split SF/SJ, but we all know better.
1. Tokyo - $1520 billion
2. New York - $1210 billion
3. Los Angeles - $790 billion
4. Seoul - $774 billion
5. London - $731 billion 700 Billion Goes Here
6. Paris - $669 billion
7. Osaka - $655 billion
8. Chicago - $525 billion
9. Moscow - $520 billion
10 Shanghai - $517 billion
11. Sao Paulo - $473 billion
12. Rhine - Ruhr - $465 billion
13. Beijing - $427 billion
14. Washington - $415 billion
15. Mexico City - $411 billion
16. Houston - $400 billion
17. Dallas - $368 billion
18. Nagoya - $367 billion
19. Hong Kong - $350 billion
20. Buenos Aires - $348 billion
Im also very interested in the Bay Area's emerging megaregion and in 2013 the area in question which is the Bay Area+Sacramento+Salinas+Modesto+Merced+Yuba City had a combined GDP of $785 Billion.
This is pertinent because these surrounding areas are fast becoming bedroom communities. By next years report, I project around 850 billion dollars for 12 million people
Not sure of the methodology, but do they include all of the oil from the gulf into Houston's GDP or something? Otherwise Houston's numbers make it top5 richest places on the planet, above Switzerland, Bay Area, NYC, etc... For example, the difference between Houston and Dallas is like $10,000 per capita, which is crazy.
I have heard that everything in Houston costs less and the jobs pay more.
2013 Metropolitan Area(MSA) Gross Product, $200 Billion+
New York $1.471 Trillion
Los Angeles $826.826 Billion
Chicago $590.248 Billion
Houston $517.367 Billion
Washington DC $463.925 Billion
Dallas $447.524 Billion
San Francisco $388.272 Billion
Philadelphia $383.401 Billion
Boston $370.769 Billion
Seattle $307.769 Billion
Atlanta $307.233 Billion
Miami $281.076 Billion
Minneapolis $227.793 Billion
Detroit $224.726 Billion
Phoenix $209.523 Billion
*Current Dollar GDP using data beginning on page 5 of the pdf
*Micropolitan Area GDPs are not published.
I was really impressed by Seattle...but I think you may have put it down incorrectly. According to the link you provided, its GDP is $284.967 billion. Still extremely impressive, but also sizeably different than the $307+ listed above. Did I miss something?
Seattle +4.1%
Portland +4.2%
San Fran +2.6%
LA +2.6%
SD +3.7%
SanJose +5.7
SLC +3.7%
Sacramento +4.4% Denver +6%
Phoenix +2.9%
LasVegas +4.3%
Austin +3.7%
SA +4.4%
Dallas +3.5%
Houston +5.7%
Minneapolis +3.6%
Atlanta +3.6%
Miami +4.2%
Orlando +3.8%
Tampa +4.1%
Detroit +2.9%
Raleigh +5.9%
Charlotte +5.5%
DC +0.8%
NYC +2.5%
Chicago +2.5%
Boston +3.3%
Philly +2%
Cleveland +2%
Again on the official BEA release you can find the growth rate for this year (its all by MSA). These numbers don't actually
agree very well with official ones.
For instance: Seattle is shown at 2.4%, Houston 5.2%, Dallas is 2.1%, Denver 4.3% etc.
Again on the official BEA release you can find the growth rate for this year (its all by MSA). These numbers don't actually
agree very well with official ones.
For instance: Seattle is shown at 2.4%, Houston 5.2%, Dallas is 2.1%, Denver 4.3% etc.
Where is everyone getting this data from?
Ben
The 2.4% increase for Seattle your using is for REAL GDP. Seattle's 4.1% increase is GDP. Etc...
Again on the official BEA release you can find the growth rate for this year (its all by MSA). These numbers don't actually
agree very well with official ones.
For instance: Seattle is shown at 2.4%, Houston 5.2%, Dallas is 2.1%, Denver 4.3% etc.
Where is everyone getting this data from?
Ben
No mainstream economist uses CSAs for economic comparisons. The OP compiled the numbers I believe. BEA does not produce the numbers. Those growth rates may nominal which are pretty meaningless from an economic perspective. Real GDP growth rates are what to look at.
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.
