U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-17-2015, 05:37 PM
 
Location: Mishawaka, Indiana
6,229 posts, read 8,379,386 times
Reputation: 4654

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by msamhunter View Post
Indy is larger than say Nash and Milwaukee so its GDP is supposed to be higher. The point of this thread at least IMO were larger metros with smaller GDP which should not happen. So in that case is Indy over performing or are these other areas under performing or a combination. No one is coming after Nashville in any way.

Your ref to counties being added not having an effect in this case is wrong to a degree. Why brown and Putnam counties are part of Indy msa is due to Madison asking omb to remove it years ago. Now omb has added Madison, which is a direct suburb of Indy back to the Indy msa, brown and Putnam should be let go because they commute to Bloomington way more than Indy by a long shot, esp brown county. So that 110k clip to your total is literally adding back a direct suburb (Madison is a donut county) back to its core city instead of standalone. So out of the 187k figure, 110 of that is Madison county (Anderson).

I thought Bea used census pop with GDP and not projected which would put Indy GDP based off of 1.83 mil instead of 1.9+. That also drops Nash and cbus well all of them leaving kc, cle, con all still over 2m census pop with C-D punching bag Indianapolis still out performing them. Keep in mind, its been outperforming cincy since 3rd qtr 2007 and only increased that margin. Been outperforming cbus longer than that but just caught kc and cle. The GDP range from mil on low end to cbus on high end is technically where Indy should be. That includes Nash and Austin in that mix. Op asked basically why isn't it, as it is higher than those it should not be like Tampa for example with nearly a million person difference.

No one is saying Indy and Nash aren't peer cities. They are actually very similar with govt. Indy is more corporate while nash is more consumer but still both are similar.
Finally, someone gets it. The question I'm asking isn't that hard, and it's not even a loaded question, but Indianapolis IS outperforming many of its peer and even larger rival cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-17-2015, 07:57 PM
 
6,385 posts, read 10,381,162 times
Reputation: 6533
Quote:
Originally Posted by msamhunter View Post
Indy is larger than say Nash and Milwaukee so its GDP is supposed to be higher. The point of this thread at least IMO were larger metros with smaller GDP which should not happen. So in that case is Indy over performing or are these other areas under performing or a combination. No one is coming after Nashville in any way.
I understand the premise of the thread, and I wasn't stating that Nashville was outperforming Indianapolis. It initially came up when a Nashville poster disputed that Nashville was "much smaller" than Indianapolis, and provided the rough MSA estimate (just short of 1.8 million) to which ColdAilment responded with "wrong".

I would also say that the response of "If I wanted to include cities like Nashville it serves mainly as an embarrassment to their city" could definitely be considered as coming after Nashville in some way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by msamhunter View Post
Your ref to counties being added not having an effect in this case is wrong to a degree. Why brown and Putnam counties are part of Indy msa is due to Madison asking omb to remove it years ago. Now omb has added Madison, which is a direct suburb of Indy back to the Indy msa, brown and Putnam should be let go because they commute to Bloomington way more than Indy by a long shot, esp brown county. So that 110k clip to your total is literally adding back a direct suburb (Madison is a donut county) back to its core city instead of standalone. So out of the 187k figure, 110 of that is Madison county (Anderson).
First of all, thanks for the explanation. The population comparison was in response to ColdAilment's assertion that a "good portion" of Nashville's MSA growth is due to "annexing counties". I showed 3 different takes on the MSA data. It doesn't really matter why counties have been added or not added, but it was simply to disprove that statement.

As for what you said, just for clarity/curiosity -- Madison/Anderson was once a part of the Indy metro area, then it became its own metro? And now it is no longer a separate metro? Also, in re: Brown and Putnam Counties, they were added simply because of Madison's departure? Did they ever meet the commuter threshold? I would agree that based simply off of geography, it seems they would be more likely to commute to Bloomington.

Quote:
Originally Posted by msamhunter View Post
No one is saying Indy and Nash aren't peer cities. They are actually very similar with govt. Indy is more corporate while nash is more consumer but still both are similar.
I'll agree that there are a number of similarities. My point was never to say that Nashville and Indianapolis are currently on the same level, or will be in the very near future. It was mainly to clarify some of the incorrect points that CA was making.

Now I'll bow out and let him go back to his stubborn crusade.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2015, 09:05 PM
 
Location: Nashville, TN
4,286 posts, read 3,355,696 times
Reputation: 3001
Quote:
Originally Posted by msamhunter View Post
Indy is larger than say Nash and Milwaukee so its GDP is supposed to be higher. The point of this thread at least IMO were larger metros with smaller GDP which should not happen. So in that case is Indy over performing or are these other areas under performing or a combination. No one is coming after Nashville in any way.

Your ref to counties being added not having an effect in this case is wrong to a degree. Why brown and Putnam counties are part of Indy msa is due to Madison asking omb to remove it years ago. Now omb has added Madison, which is a direct suburb of Indy back to the Indy msa, brown and Putnam should be let go because they commute to Bloomington way more than Indy by a long shot, esp brown county. So that 110k clip to your total is literally adding back a direct suburb (Madison is a donut county) back to its core city instead of standalone. So out of the 187k figure, 110 of that is Madison county (Anderson).

I thought Bea used census pop with GDP and not projected which would put Indy GDP based off of 1.83 mil instead of 1.9+. That also drops Nash and cbus well all of them leaving kc, cle, con all still over 2m census pop with C-D punching bag Indianapolis still out performing them. Keep in mind, its been outperforming cincy since 3rd qtr 2007 and only increased that margin. Been outperforming cbus longer than that but just caught kc and cle. The GDP range from mil on low end to cbus on high end is technically where Indy should be. That includes Nash and Austin in that mix. Op asked basically why isn't it, as it is higher than those it should not be like Tampa for example with nearly a million person difference.

No one is saying Indy and Nash aren't peer cities. They are actually very similar with govt. Indy is more corporate while nash is more consumer but still both are similar.
So explain why Miami's GDP is "considerably smaller" than Atlanta and Seattle, yet it is a larger metro area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2015, 09:40 PM
 
Location: Mishawaka, Indiana
6,229 posts, read 8,379,386 times
Reputation: 4654
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shakeesha View Post
So explain why Miami's GDP is "considerably smaller" than Atlanta and Seattle, yet it is a larger metro area.
You've just asked the question this thread is about. I'm asking why Cincinnati, Cleveland, Tampa, Las Vegas, Kansas City, and Orlando are all larger yet have smaller GDP's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2015, 02:13 AM
 
Location: Nashville, TN
4,286 posts, read 3,355,696 times
Reputation: 3001
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment View Post
You've just asked the question this thread is about. I'm asking why Cincinnati, Cleveland, Tampa, Las Vegas, Kansas City, and Orlando are all larger yet have smaller GDP's.
I'll wait...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2015, 05:02 AM
 
3,008 posts, read 4,170,071 times
Reputation: 1524
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment View Post
You've just asked the question this thread is about. I'm asking why Cincinnati, Cleveland, Tampa, Las Vegas, Kansas City, and Orlando are all larger yet have smaller GDP's.
That is the question and a valid one between Miami and atl as well. Atl doesn't do any one thing spectacular you can point to.just like Indy doesn't have that one thing you can point to and say aha. A city like San Jose you can point to its tech sector dominance or Charlotte s banking as they also punch above their weight. Indy is very balanced in economy like atl which very well maybe the answer but that was the point of the question.

Sorry meant for shak
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2015, 05:26 AM
 
3,008 posts, read 4,170,071 times
Reputation: 1524
Quote:
Originally Posted by nashvols View Post
I understand the premise of the thread, and I wasn't stating that Nashville was outperforming Indianapolis. It initially came up when a Nashville poster disputed that Nashville was "much smaller" than Indianapolis, and provided the rough MSA estimate (just short of 1.8 million) to which ColdAilment responded with "wrong".

I would also say that the response of "If I wanted to include cities like Nashville it serves mainly as an embarrassment to their city" could definitely be considered as coming after Nashville in some way.



First of all, thanks for the explanation. The population comparison was in response to ColdAilment's assertion that a "good portion" of Nashville's MSA growth is due to "annexing counties". I showed 3 different takes on the MSA data. It doesn't really matter why counties have been added or not added, but it was simply to disprove that statement.

As for what you said, just for clarity/curiosity -- Madison/Anderson was once a part of the Indy metro area, then it became its own metro? And now it is no longer a separate metro? Also, in re: Brown and Putnam Counties, they were added simply because of Madison's departure? Did they ever meet the commuter threshold? I would agree that based simply off of geography, it seems they would be more likely to commute to Bloomington.



I'll agree that there are a number of similarities. My point was never to say that Nashville and Indianapolis are currently on the same level, or will be in the very near future. It was mainly to clarify some of the incorrect points that CA was making.

Now I'll bow out and let him go back to his stubborn crusade.
To clarify, yes Madison, a direct donut county wanted to be its own msa. Omb granted it. To offset Putnam and brown were added. Putnam is an hour east of Indy and brown is an hour south next to Bloomington. Brown and Indy do not share everyday commuter patterns, for employment and even first ring entertainment, they go to Bloomington or columbus. Indy tends to be the big deal trips/excursions, not the normal weekend thing.

Depending on where you live in Marion, you will reach Bloomington before brown county. The fall season is generally when you see Indy residents take the trip to brown county for the changing of the leaves at brown county state park in Nashville. Other than that...

As far as reverse commute, south siders travel to Bloomington or Columbus for employment if they work south, not brown county.

There is more direct commute between Indy and kokomo by a wide margin than Indy and brown, yet kokomo is also its own msa. That's how omb has it so that's how it is. As far as Anderson, obviously, they couldn't make it on their own, very depressed area. Now why omb added it back, who knows but Anderson has always been a direct suburb of Indy. Its a donut county. They commute in and out of the city like Carmel in neighboring Hamilton or greenwood which is the county just south of Marion (one of the reasons for the gazillion parking lots downtown). Indy is the entertainment area for Anderson. Sure a few younger people might try to get into a frat party or two at ball state but Indy is their entertainment.

But adding Anderson back, omb should have dropped brown and Putnam. Brown should be part of Bloomington msa knocking out Greene which doesn't make a lick of sense and Putnam a micropolitan area at least but part of the csa. Odly enough Columbus is CSA yet Bloomington isn't which also doesn't make sense but it is what it is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2015, 07:45 AM
 
9,701 posts, read 6,689,136 times
Reputation: 9781
Does anyone besides the thread starter actually think there's a point to this thread? It's just cherrypicking numbers.

There are smaller cities than Indy that have bigger GDP and bigger cities than Indy that have smaller GDP. The fact is that Indy is not an outlier, so the entire premise of this thread is nonsense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2015, 12:20 PM
 
5,625 posts, read 13,317,172 times
Reputation: 2887
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101 View Post
Does anyone besides the thread starter actually think there's a point to this thread? It's just cherrypicking numbers.

There are smaller cities than Indy that have bigger GDP and bigger cities than Indy that have smaller GDP. The fact is that Indy is not an outlier, so the entire premise of this thread is nonsense.
And since nobody has a definitive answer and the OP doesn't like a single theory presented to him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2015, 04:35 PM
 
Location: Mishawaka, Indiana
6,229 posts, read 8,379,386 times
Reputation: 4654
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101 View Post
Does anyone besides the thread starter actually think there's a point to this thread? It's just cherrypicking numbers.

There are smaller cities than Indy that have bigger GDP
and bigger cities than Indy that have smaller GDP. The fact is that Indy is not an outlier, so the entire premise of this thread is nonsense.
Wrong, there is not one city smaller than Indianapolis that has a bigger GDP. We've already established this and you tried to use San Jose, the most recent estimates have San Jose leading Indy in population by several thousand. Anything else?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top