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.
jbcmh81, we could go back and forth with this all day long but if you want to further discuss more on development then start another thread. The Indy's GDP is higher than Columbus in this thread...game over.
TheMahValley, I have been to Columbus many times to know the differences. I just call it like I see it.
jbcmh81, we could go back and forth with this all day long but if you want to further discuss more on development then start another thread. The Indy's GDP is higher than Columbus in this thread...game over.
So it's as I said. The thread wasn't meant to have any real discussion other than trying to get praise for Indy's relatively tiny difference in GDP compared to a few other cities. Enjoy it while it lasts, I guess. So far as I can tell, Indy has just a handful of claims to fame because they were the ones repeatedly mentioned again and again by Indianapolis posters...
-Small difference in GDP.
-Nice bike path.
-Monument Circle.
-Downtown suburban mall.
You go Indy! Those other poor cities just don't stand a chance!
So it's as I said. The thread wasn't meant to have any real discussion other than trying to get praise for Indy's relatively tiny difference in GDP compared to a few other cities. Enjoy it while it lasts, I guess. So far as I can tell, Indy has just a handful of claims to fame because they were the ones repeatedly mentioned again and again by Indianapolis posters...
-Small difference in GDP.
-Nice bike path.
-Monument Circle.
-Downtown suburban mall.
You go Indy! Those other poor cities just don't stand a chance!
Unfortunately there is only one metric used worldwide to guage size of economy and that is GDP. There is a direct correlation between GDP and population size. An area of 1.8 million should not have a GDP larger than say Tampa with a almost 1m pop difference. That means the smaller city, Indy is outperforming or the larger city, Tampa is underperforming. Which one is it?
For this thread topic Indy and cbus should practically be the same +/- thousands based off of pop size difference in either direction. It isn't an 8 bill did is significant in this regard. San Jose and Charlotte also over perform for their economies based off of GDP but you can point to the tech sector and banking sectors of those respective cities for the boost. Indy nor cbus has that one metric you can point to and say aha. You may be able to point to sports/conventions for Indy but that is a major stretch since neither is its largest sector.
Posting pictures or talking about how density makes one better means nothing for this topic.
Unfortunately there is only one metric used worldwide to guage size of economy and that is GDP. There is a direct correlation between GDP and population size. An area of 1.8 million should not have a GDP larger than say Tampa with a almost 1m pop difference. That means the smaller city, Indy is outperforming or the larger city, Tampa is underperforming. Which one is it?
Or it could mean neither. Tampa-St. Pete is a huge retirement community, and Indy isn't, so it's probably just that the cohort of working-age households in Indy is much higher.
It could also be that since Indy is in the middle of nowhere, and Tampa-St. Pete is adjacent to similarly large metros like Orlando, that some of the regional economic activity is being siphoned off, while in Indy it's all going directly to the metro area.
I still don't get the premise in this thread. No one has shown us anything to indicate that Indy is some major economic outperformer. It's pretty middle-of-the-pack in terms of wages, incomes and economic output.
Indianapolis has the SMALLEST metropolitan population of any of the above listed cities yet the highest GDP. It's over 18 billion higher than Sacramento, a city with an additional 1/4 million residents in the area, and nearly $4 billion higher than Tampa, a city with almost 1 million more residents in the area. Is $18 billion not a lot to you, given the obvious size difference between these metros?
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101
Well, there are obvious problems with all this.
First you claimed that Indy GDP is "so much higher". So I'm looking for some huge difference. There is no such difference. Even the worst performing city on that list does not have some huge difference in GDP with Indy...
To get a true picture of the difference in GDP one has to go with the per capita figure. The following is a list showing how big Indianapolis' GMP would be if it was at its same population size (1,971,274) but with the per capita GDP of the other metro areas listed instead. This more clearly shows the difference in productivity and output of Indianapolis' metro economy versus the others and I'd say it is much higher than most and a good bit higher than the ones next closest to it (Cleveland and Columbus):
$126,472,000,000 - Indianapolis - $64,157
$116,609,000,000 - Cleveland - $59,154
$112,920,000,000 - Columbus - $57,283
$111,665,000,000 - Kansas City - $56,646
$110,208,000,000 - Cincinnati - $55,907
$$95,002,000,000 - Sacramento - $48,193
$$93,785,000,000 - Orlando - $47,576
$$82,835,000,000 - Tampa - $42,021
As you can see, Indianapolis' economy would be about ten billion dollars smaller if it had the same output as Cleveland, 13.5 billion dollars smaller with the output of Columbus and a whopping, almost 44 billion dollars smaller with Tampa's per capita output.
This is something which has fascinated me and I've done comparisons with my own city's peers in the past
Here is the same type of listing which shows how Albuquerque stacks up to the cities closest to it in size and which it is most often compared to. Except, unlike Indianapolis, Albuquerque is not at the top in per capita GDP:
$54,845,000,000 - Omaha - $60,630
$51,332,000,000 - Tulsa - $56,746
$43,546,000,000 - Wichita - $48,139
$42,283,000,000 - Grand Rapids - $46,743
$41,970,000,000 - Albuquerque - $46,397
$41,064,000,000 - Bakersfield - $45,395
$38,768,000,000 - Boise - $42,857
$37,204,000,000 - Colorado Springs - $41,128
$34,691,000,000 - Fresno - $38,350
$31,889,000,000 - Tucson - $35,253
$29,686,000,000 - El Paso - $32,817
Again, this is Albuquerque's metro population (904,587) times these other areas' actual GDP per capita.
As you can see, Albuquerque is not nearly as productive as Omaha or Tulsa, but it does alright for itself. Especially against the two cities it is most often compared to, Tucson and El Paso, which are at the bottom for productivity. And it's pretty much on par with Grand Rapids, the largest metro among them all.
Or it could mean neither. Tampa-St. Pete is a huge retirement community, and Indy isn't, so it's probably just that the cohort of working-age households in Indy is much higher.
It could also be that since Indy is in the middle of nowhere, and Tampa-St. Pete is adjacent to similarly large metros like Orlando, that some of the regional economic activity is being siphoned off, while in Indy it's all going directly to the metro area.
I still don't get the premise in this thread. No one has shown us anything to indicate that Indy is some major economic outperformer. It's pretty middle-of-the-pack in terms of wages, incomes and economic output.
You don't have the slightest idea of what your talking about so please stop talking out of your ass. My gosh people on City data are so ignorant and never contribute anything substantive like really I mean this data is from 2013 and some things have changed since then.
Or it could mean neither. Tampa-St. Pete is a huge retirement community, and Indy isn't, so it's probably just that the cohort of working-age households in Indy is much higher.
It could also be that since Indy is in the middle of nowhere, and Tampa-St. Pete is adjacent to similarly large metros like Orlando, that some of the regional economic activity is being siphoned off, while in Indy it's all going directly to the metro area.
I still don't get the premise in this thread. No one has shown us anything to indicate that Indy is some major economic outperformer. It's pretty middle-of-the-pack in terms of wages, incomes and economic output.
Almost could have made a valid argument until you mentioned being siphoned off by other metros. Like what, Sarasota? That's like going to Lafayette. Orlando since Miami is 4 hours away that is literally all that could "siphon" off. That Orlando trip for Indy will take you to Louisville, cincy, just outside of Columbus oh, dayton and the Indiana side of Chicago msa. Hardly a metric you can use and it have validity. A little geography helps.
The no in-state competition definitely means something here. If a company wishes to incorporate itself in Ohio, it could choose from either of the three Cs for a HQ. If, however, it decides to incorporate in Indiana, Indy is basically the only option. Moving a company around a state is easier than moving a company across state borders. Also, as the state's clear #1 city AND the state capitol, that adds to it. Sacramento is the state capital, but look at its competition: LA, SF, SJ, SD, etc. The only other city that has been discussed that is also a capital (that I can think of) is Columbus. But Columbus is not the largest city in the state with a hands down stronger and better economy than anywhere in the state. Tampa and Orlando are not capitals, and also have a city in the state that blows them both out of the water.
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.
