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.
I never said that SF beats LA on the national or global level, but as far as actual influence within the borders of the State of California, SF is not really 2nd to LA, they both lead the state and we have proven that.
This is really the precise reason why you all fail in trying to deny the fact that within California, LA and SF pretty much stand on equal footing in California.
So how is it that a place can be more important at a global and national level but not be number one in its state?
This doesn't happen, anywhere. California is no different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
Facts: Within California, Finance, Technology, Manufacturing, Energy, Jobs, Politics, etc. are centered in the Bay Area in 2015.
Gross Domestic Product is the sum of all industries, goods, and services produced by an area. It is a measurement of economic output and thoroughly covers base on every industry you just named accumulated into a total sum.
Gross Domestic Product:
1. Greater Los Angeles: $999.661 Billion
2. Greater San Francisco Bay Area: $664.687 Billion
Total Personal Income
1. Greater Los Angeles: $822.975 Billion
2. Greater San Francisco Bay Area: $535.245 Billion
[quote=18Montclair;39359953]
It's not momentum + preeminence, it's that your perception not really being substantiated by facts.
/QUOTE]
Okay "facts."
Total Merchandise Exports Value
1. Greater Los Angeles: $76.3 Billion
2. Greater San Francisco Bay Area: $48.7 Billion
Quote:
CITIES OF FINANCE AND CITIES OF ARTS
London, New York and Tokyo are not just top-tier global financial centers, they are also important global cities in terms of arts (Hall, 1998; Currid, 2006, 2007). There is nothing new under the sun here, as in the past, cities such as Genoa, Florence, Antwerp, and, for instance, Amsterdam were important locations for internationally operating banks as well as centers of arts and culture (Arrighi, 1994; Braudel, 1979; Israel, 1995; O’Brien, 2001; Prak, 2005). “Entrepôts are places for cultural encounters, for the exchange of ideas as well as goods and services” according to the historian Patrick O’Brien (2001: 23) when discussing the “Golden Ages” of Antwerp, Amsterdam, and London in early modern Europe. Peter Hall (2001: 62-64) has also pointed at the “symbiotic relationship” between more mundane economic activities and arts: “These activities prove to be highly symbiotic: thus business travelers who may also use cultural facilities; urban tourism and culture are mutually supportive. The fact that London is the first international airport system in traffic reflects the fact that it is simultaneously a major business center, and a major business center, and a major cultural center, and a major tourist center, and all these are synergistic; likewise with competitor cities like Paris, Amsterdam, or Rome.” The relationship between being an international financial center and one for arts has been observed many times and, however, to a much lesser extent, actually empirically studied. Moreover, it has been mainly investigated for top-tier cities and, in addition, often on the basis of just single cases. Below, we will investigate this relationship by comparing rankings of global financial centers and global arts centers. Bringing such a comparative perspective to the research on financial and arts centers enables us to go beyond the usual suspects of the top-tier of global cities. We can, then, explore if this relationship is limited to just the top-tier global cities or if it also holds for cities further down in the global urban hierarchy. In addition, by widening the net and including a larger number of cities, we will also be able to assess if the rapidly increasing importance of Asian cities as financial centers is also linked to an ascendance as centers of arts.
The relevance of financial services for contemporary cities in general and global cities more in particular has been amply theorized and documented (Derudder et al., 2012a; Derudder et al., 2012b; Engelen, 2007, 2012; Friedmann, 1986; Sassen, 1991/2001; Taylor, 2012a). Financial services are seen as a key element in the infrastructure of producer services which are, in their turn, vital to organize, control, monitor, enable, sustain, and extend cross-border economic activities and, thus, part and parcel of complex and pervasive processes of globalization. As these high-end financial are dependent on a large and deep pool of highly-skilled specialized workers, an advanced infrastructure of ICT and transport facilities (well-connected international airport), and the ability to engage frequently and promptly in face-to-face contacts with either clients or suppliers, they are not only strongly concentrated in cities, but more precisely in a relative small number of world or global cities which form the “highly concentrated command points in the organization of the world economy” (Sassen, 1991: 3). The role of financial services in a city on a global scale, then, can be seen as an indicator or proxy of the importance of that city in the global economy. Consequently, rankings of cities according to their global financial prominence have, in principle, a wider significance and reflect the global urban hierarchy in terms of economic power and importance (Hall, 2001: 60).
The significance of arts for cities is, at first glance, less straightforward and in addition, more difficult to assess than that of financial services. Apart from having an intrinsic value, “… arts and culture can contribute to to urban life and to the economic development of towns and cities in a number of ways” (Throsby, 2010: 131). First, arts may create employment opportunities and contribute directly to economic development by attracting visitors from nearby and from afar. Second, a lively artistic milieu may contribute to the quality of place and help to attract knowledge workers, firms and inward investment to city (Evans, 2009; Florida, 2002; Kloosterman and Trip, 2011). Third, arts may help to brand a city and enhance its cultural identity (Mommaas, 2004). This branding may transcend the local or national level, as the images of New York and London as global capitals of arts attest. Arts, then, in a rather different and more elusive way are also be important for cities and may contribute to determine their standing and position within the global urban system.
Total Passenger Movement
06. Los Angeles International: 66,667,619
22. San Francisco International: 44,945,760
Total Cargo Movement
14. Los Angeles International: 1,747,284
61. San Francisco International: 363,793
The numbers before the airport names are their world ranking positions, for the record.
Anyhow all of this is a just a common courtesy. The conversation doesn't have to reach this point anyhow. The only thing that matters and the thing that summarizes everything of relevance anywhere can have:
Gross Domestic Product:
1. Greater Los Angeles: $999.661 Billion
2. Greater San Francisco Bay Area: $664.687 Billion
Total Personal Income
1. Greater Los Angeles: $822.975 Billion
2. Greater San Francisco Bay Area: $535.245 Billion
Gross Domestic Product, again, is everything put together. Hospitals, colleges, banks, ports, whatever -- all of that put together and accounted for with a monetary number value of their combined total worth.
The San Francisco Bay Area, relative to Los Angeles, is at a deficit of over $335 Billion (about half of your total GDP) compared to its larger sibling city to the south.
Los Angeles is California's only number one city. The premier city of California (Los Angeles). No tie, no 1A and 1B, no "almost even, slight edge" nonsense. It is not one of those states.
Houston is closing the gap on that. Fast I might add and it could overwhelm it if Downtown has an opening on its South, West, and Eastsides as they replace the highways. But I do love what Dallas is actually doing around the core and I don't think Houston has anything like VP as of right now.
So how is it that a place can be more
important at a global and national level but
not be number one in its state?
Welcome to California.
Facts: Within California, Finance,
Technology, Manufacturing, Energy, Jobs,
Politics, etc. are centered in the Bay Area in
2015.
No ifs, ands or buts about it.
Los Angeles is first due to it's size, but the Bay Area also first due to it's concentration of power. Period.
You have yet to really state how LA is more influential to Californians outside its proper CSA. The Bay Area employs twice as many outsiders than LA( THAT IS STAGGERING), that really should end all doubt as to SF being LAs equal in this state.
Or maybe its the fact that SF is "The City" from Southern Oregon to the middle of the Northern Nevada desert to the depths of the Central Valley.
You have yet to really state how LA is more influential to Californians outside its proper CSA. The Bay Area employs twice as many outsiders than LA( THAT IS STAGGERING), that really should end all doubt as to SF being LAs equal in this state.
Or maybe its the fact that SF is "The City" from Southern Oregon to the middle of the Northern Nevada desert to the depths of the Central Valley.
I said I wasn't going to reply to CA stuff anymore, but I'm giving in for this one because this is a flat out joke. The counties in NorCal are much smaller. The recession hit the Central Valley hard and most of those smaller counties are closer to SF than LA. Southern California counties are HUGE. San Bernardino is the largest county in the Lower 48.
From Wiki: "With an area of 20,105 square miles, San Bernardino County is the largest county in the United States by area, although some of Alaska's boroughs and census areas are larger. It is larger than each of the nine smallest states, larger than the four smallest states combined, and larger than 71 different sovereign nations."
LA and Riverside are huge as well. Obviously SF will employ more people from other counties because Santa Barbara, Ventura, LA, Riverside, OC, and San Bernardino cover a much larger area than the NorCal counties. I'd say those are the 6 main counties of Greater LA, with Santa Barbara having a closer connection to Ventura which is part of LA for sure. 6 counties in the Bay are SF, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Contra Costa, Alameda, and Marin. I just named 6. And we all know those 6 NorCal counties are WAY smaller.
SF+SM+SC+CC+Alameda+Marin=4732 sq mi.
Los Angeles County ALONE=4751 sq mi.
The SJ-SF-Oak CSA=11,654 sq mi.
LA+OC+Ventura=7907 sq mi.
Riverside County alone=7303 sq mi.
San Bernardino County alone=20,105 sq mi.
LA+OC+Ventura+Riverside+SB=35,315 sq mi.
The Greater LA area is 23,661 sq mi larger than the SF CSA. So it is clear and obvious to the world that yes, more people outside the counties that make up the SF CSA would be commuting to it than the Greater LA area because GREATER LA COVERS THREE TIMES THE LAND AREA AS THE SF CSA!!
And the term "The City" is irrelevant as well because by that standard there are only two cities in the country. NYC and SF. We just don't call every city of a metro area "The City." We just call LA "LA" and San Diego "San Diego" it is obvious that when that's what SF is called, that it's going to be called that. Mind you, also, that there not many other cities for a long time around SF. Phoenix is only 5 hours east of LA. Vegas is only 4. San Diego is only 2. The only other real city besides LA close to SF is Portland and that's 10 hours away. I don't consider Reno anything important and Sacramento might as well be part of the Bay Area CSA. A friend's mom drove from there to the Bay for work. I had a professor that lived in Davis. Vallejo and Fairfield and Vacaville are basically almost to Sac but are part of the Bay. So clearly Sactown is gonna call SF "The City" too since it's the only place called "The City" on the west coast. The only other one in the country being NYC. I guess LA isn't a city. DC, Boston, Philly, Miami, NoLa, Houston, basically any large cultural city with strong relevance to the country is not considered a city just because it's not called "The City" for a certain geographic radius around the the city being called "The City."
These are the two worst arguments for SF being the dominant CA city that you have ever made. They're laughable. You've posted them before and nobody commented on them so I felt the need to.
Once again, I'm done with you. But that was something so blatantly and obviously idiotic that it needed to be commented on.
Last edited by jessemh431; 04-25-2015 at 11:04 PM..
jessemh431, Im *really* glad that you brought up counties.
First off, I consider the two most important areas of the state to be LA County and the Central Bay Area which I define as the SF MSA and Santa Clara County. I removed the OC and San Benito counties because I dont consider them parts of the main economic zones. The OC is too independent and SB is too far removed.
So I calculated their GDPs based on their county share of the total personal income, in the case of the OC, about 26% of the LA MSA and San Benito is about 2% of the SJ MSA.
Not a perfect formula since bea.gov doesnt disclose county gdp but I think doing it like that is not an illogical way to hypothesize.
Those deductions left the primary GDPs as follows:
From this perspective, I am comfortable in saying its really a tie at the top.
Then we can expand to the entirety of NorCal and SoCal and that reveals that as we speak, NorCal probably already has a $1 Trillion economy which is wayyy too big for LA to claim primacy over. As if.
Notice how NorCal's GDP actually raises the entire state per capita? lol
On the national level, NorCal would top all but 3 states( TX, NY and SoCal)
Oh look, TX now has a slightly higher per capita gdp than us because SoCal cant get its sh** together.
ijs you guys talk a lot but you arent really disproving the notion that the Bay Area is as powerful within CA as LA, and that LA does NOT dominate NorCal. Thats because SF does.
Maybe for tourism, but that's about it. Tampa is much larger and has more business. Unlike Orlando, Tampa has a port as well. Tampa also benefits from the beach and a decent tourism industry of its own (Clearwater Beach). Tampa has more historical significance to Florida than Orlando. There's no doubt that Orlando is an up and coming city, but it is still far behind Tampa IMO.
Fair assessment but wouldn't say Tampa is much bigger. Polk county is actually serviced by both Orlando and Tampa media outlets. Orlando's economy is made up of more than just tourism. I would also mention that Orlando's downtown is far more vibrant than downtown Tampa. It's pretty close if you ask me. I personally would agree on Tampa being #2 but Orlando isn't far behind.
You know LA is a beast when you have to remove part of its MSA to make it a fair fight.
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.
