What makes Indianapolis GDP so much higher than its peer cities? (south, living)
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.
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.
So....every company in the state of IN incorporate d in Indianapolis. Really.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABQalex
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.
Read the above. ^
Indianapolis to Cincinnati is 113 miles
Indianapolis to Louisville is 114 miles
Indianapolis to Columbus is 175 miles
Indianapolis to Chicago is 182 miles
Indianapolis to St. Louis is 242 miles
Indianapolis to Cleveland is 317 miles
Looks like Indianapolis is pretty centrally located between a LOT of big players in the midwest, not exactly the middle of nowhere in my book. More so than Tampa, which you're trying to defend as a retirement city, even though its metro population has over 1 million more people. Orlando hosts 65 million visitors per year and is ranked as the number 1 destination city in the country for travelers, yet its GDP is still beat out by Indy. I'm sure $16 billion to you is a small and insignificant number, since that's what separates the two. I'm convinced there really is no reasoning with you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jessemh431
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.
Interesting that Tire Rack decided to relocate in South Bend Indiana, that's where their headquarters is. First Source Bank is also headquartered out of South Bend, not Indianapolis. I guess even smaller cities compete, this should really take a chunk out of Indy's GDP.
Point in case, Indianapolis has a higher GDP than 8 cities that are ALSO larger than it. No city has a higher GDP than Indianapolis with a lower population, or even a population that's reasonably close to it. Indy metro GMP is over $62,000. Noticeably higher than its competition.
Indianapolis to Cincinnati is 113 miles
Indianapolis to Louisville is 114 miles
Indianapolis to Columbus is 175 miles
Indianapolis to Chicago is 182 miles
Indianapolis to St. Louis is 242 miles
Indianapolis to Cleveland is 317 miles
Looks like Indianapolis is pretty centrally located between a LOT of big players in the midwest, not exactly the middle of nowhere in my book. More so than Tampa, which you're trying to defend as a retirement city, even though its metro population has over 1 million more people. Orlando hosts 65 million visitors per year and is ranked as the number 1 destination city in the country for travelers, yet its GDP is still beat out by Indy. I'm sure $16 billion to you is a small and insignificant number, since that's what separates the two. I'm convinced there really is no reasoning with you.
Interesting that Tire Rack decided to relocate in South Bend Indiana, that's where their headquarters is. First Source Bank is also headquartered out of South Bend, not Indianapolis. I guess even smaller cities compete, this should really take a chunk out of Indy's GDP.
Point in case, Indianapolis has a higher GDP than 8 cities that are ALSO larger than it. No city has a higher GDP than Indianapolis with a lower population, or even a population that's reasonably close to it. Indy metro GMP is over $62,000. Noticeably higher than its competition.
Charlotte and San Jose have larger gdp's than Indy and in the same population bracket.
Charlotte and San Jose have larger gdp's than Indy and in the same population bracket.
The difference is that Charlotte's economy is heavily based on banking then energy, just as San Jose's is based on computer science/technology. Those industries are very high paying. Indianapolis has no such dominant industry and still manages to produce a high gdp. Indianapolis's economy is more diverse than either.
Again, Indy is nowhere near the top for either period.
So to me, the conclusion is that Indy is doing better than many of its peers economically, but it's still within the range of performance and not exceptionally different... not like say, San Jose or Portland.
Again, Indy is nowhere near the top for either period.
So to me, the conclusion is that Indy is doing better than many of its peers economically, but it's still within the range of performance and not exceptionally different... not like say, San Jose or Portland.
These numbers are directly from the BLS site.
Dont think anyone expects Indy to be #1 in too many things, let alone everything but it does tend to punch above its weight class while c-ders tend to just think Indy is at the bottom of everything. In regards to the MW, Indy usually towards the top. Let's face MW just not seen like its WC,ec and southern friends even though its a great area to live.
I liken it to living down in the suncoast. Things people hype here in Tampa esp downtown your like this is it compared to a similar event/function in downtown Indy. A completely different vibe. Now st Pete is better than tampa IMO but hey.
Again, Indy is nowhere near the top for either period.
So to me, the conclusion is that Indy is doing better than many of its peers economically, but it's still within the range of performance and not exceptionally different... not like say, San Jose or Portland.
These numbers are directly from the BLS site.
San Jose and Portland's Core based Statistical Area is much larger than Indianapolis' CSA. Not a fair comparison.
I don't know if Indy is punching above it's weight because the BLS that releases this in it's 2013 report had Indy in 2011 at 103.815 billion but it's most recent has 2011 at 114.17 billion. It also was Indianapolis-Carmel in the old report and now Indianpolis-Carmel-Anderson, IN. So there is more population included. The pop base in the first report is 2 million at 103.815b, about $52k and the second is 2.4m, putting per capita at $52.6k.
That would put Indy below Chicago, Columbus, Cleveland and Kansas City
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.
