San Francisco surpassing L.A in Global Influence? (state, compared, place)
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.
This article came out in the LA Times yesterday...it's titled: Why San Francisco's way of doing business beat Los Angeles'
It simply reiterates what Ive been saying. The Bay Area has taken over as the primary engine of economic growth in California. The Bay Area is the epicenter of the most dynamic industries in California while Los Angeles, once a worthy rival, has really declined over the past 40 years, unable to keep up with San Francisco. This is not hyperbole, it's statistical fact based on years of jobs data, gdp growth data, income growth data, financial markets data etc.
It's almost as if we are now comparing two different countries with different standards of living, at least that's what the LA Times says...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Los Angeles Times
Today, the five-county Los Angeles region is ranked 25th on the income scale, while the 10-county Bay Area region remains No. 1. Per capita, workers in the Bay Area make 30% more than those in greater Los Angeles. That's almost as great a difference as divides high-income and middle-income countries...
...What happened to Southern California?
Put simply, Los Angeles' business class, its movers and shakers, were too conservative, too backward looking in their goals and their style to recognize and nurture what would become the new economy...
...In the end, there is no single explanation for L.A.'s long fall from economic grace. It is a story of good intentions and mistaken beliefs, of fragmented business relationships and out-of-date ideas...
Why do people always equate San Francisco as the epicenter of the Bay Area? And tech?
San Jose is larger and Silicone Valley isn't San Francisco.... it's much farther down the peninsula.
San Jose is the anchor city for the CSD - Bay Area.... #5th in the US.
Incorrect. The San Francisco Metro Area accounts for the majority of the Bay Area population and economy. The San Jose Metro Area is less than half the size of SF.
Quote:
The problem with the Bay Area is it is too reliant on technology... it's in these listings because of tech. Similarly, Detroit was once the "Paris of America." A region completely dominated by one industry is too specialized to wield far reaching influence in areas outside its specialty.
The problem with this statement is that 'tech' is not just websites and semiconductors. Every industry in the world is now reliant on technology to grow their business and to become more efficient.
And as such, the Bay Area is now also a major player in automotive, energy, telecommunications, media, life sciences, medical devices etc.
Quote:
LA is similar to NYC -
No actually economically, the Bay Area is a bit more similar to NY while Los Angeles has languished.
Quote:
Don't get me wrong - I love the Bay Area. It's quirky and weird with lots of really bright people. The World is being revolutionized here through technology, but that doesn't mean it's Los Angeles... far from.
Correct. The Bay Area is very far from LA these days. LA is way behind.
Cuz the list criteria is contiguous zip codes. SF is small and incomes vary drastically zip code to zip code, too much to string enough zip codes together that meet the other criteria.
understood and the same dynamic plays out everywhere else as well. SF is higher income per capitia generally so am surprised actually and SF is by no means alone with disparity by zip, actually probably less so compared to others on the list
This article came out in the LA Times yesterday...it's titled: Why San Francisco's way of doing business beat Los Angeles'
It simply reiterates what Ive been saying. The Bay Area has taken over as the primary engine of economic growth in California. The Bay Area is the epicenter of the most dynamic industries in California while Los Angeles, once a worthy rival, has really declined over the past 40 years, unable to keep up with San Francisco. This is not hyperbole, it's statistical fact based on years of jobs data, gdp growth data, income growth data, financial markets data etc.
It's almost as if we are now comparing two different countries with different standards of living, at least that's what the LA Times says...
Can we close this thread yet? Everyone else seems to know the answer.
Yes, the Bay Area economy is booming. Good for them. But there is hardly any cultural output from the bay relative to greater LA. It's biggest strength is economics, and it falls pretty far after that.
Can we close this thread yet? Everyone else seems to know the answer.
Yes, the Bay Area economy is booming. Good for them. But there is hardly any cultural output from the bay relative to greater LA. It's biggest strength is economics, and it falls pretty far after that.
So you're saying that no one cares about SF's economic output compared to "cultural output"? Right...
Can we close this thread yet? Everyone else seems to know the answer.
Yes, the Bay Area economy is booming. Good for them. But there is hardly any cultural output from the bay relative to greater LA. It's biggest strength is economics, and it falls pretty far after that.
Nope. This is 2015, nobody cares about the fall TV lineup on the CW--and quite frankly, nothing very important happens there to be honest. What happens in LA is shocking celebrity gossip...how does that equate to global influence exactly?
Furthermore,
LAs cultural contribution is very weak compared to how the Bay Area has permeated into people's daily lives. LA creates some creative content but at this point, the Bay Area controls the flow of information around the world.
Lol, you do know Netflix takes up more bandwith than anything else. It's not Netflix itself. It's the movies and TV shows, which comes from LA.
Nobody cares about Netflix if LA doesn't supply the content. It's a no brainer.
I dont think you understand people go to the internet to watch movies and their tv shows rather than watch it on cable. Broadcast and TV are stuff that's headquartered in NYC more than LA.
All LA does is provide the content for the channels.
Lol, you do know Netflix takes up more bandwith than anything else. It's not Netflix itself. It's the movies and TV shows, which comes from LA.
Nobody cares about Netflix if LA doesn't supply the content. It's a no brainer.
I dont think you understand people go to the internet to watch movies and their tv shows rather than watch it on cable.
Yawns and it's so SAD that you refuse to see what everyone else sees. THIS WAS IN THE LA TIMES YESTERDAY:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Los Angeles Times
...What happened to Southern California?
Put simply, Los Angeles' business class, its movers and shakers, were too conservative, too backward looking in their goals and their style to recognize and nurture what would become the new economy...
...In the end, there is no single explanation for L.A.'s long fall from economic grace. It is a story of good intentions and mistaken beliefs, of fragmented business relationships and out-of-date ideas...
You pin all of your hopes on LA's sickly and shrinking entertainment industry. I actually feel sorry for you.
I can talk about the Bay Area kicking serious @** in many industries, it's quite breathtaking. On the other hand, your biggest bragging point is Bay Area companies expanding their presence in LA. That's really telling.
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.