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.
Who cares? As long as the money is being produced in LA and stays the companies may belong to the Japanese. (and many belong)
That shows how LA isn't financially relevant as Chicago. Economic conditions in LA DEPEND on how the major companies elsewhere are doing. Now that's called relevance. I don't think people in India or Brazil find LA relevant if there are fewer major international companies there as well as NO major financial institutions which would indicate how economy is doing.
Larger does not mean more relevant. It's as simple as that. We figured it out as soon as you first said LA is $200 billion more...but it's taking you too long to figure it out
At stake? You do not think this money would be lost, do you? Competition would quickly take over. What really counts is how much of this money stays in Chicago and judging by Chicagos $500B GMP it is still less than what comes from LA. Even without the 60B a day
You do not think the $700 billion in LA would be lost do you, since major companies NOT located in LA have significant presence in LA's economy?
That's exactly what I was referring to earlier. Despite having a large GDP, LA is still not considered an important node point in the global economic system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
You do not think the $700 billion in LA would be lost do you, since major companies NOT located in LA have significant presence in LA's economy?
That shows how LA isn't financially relevant as Chicago. Economic conditions in LA DEPEND on how the major companies elsewhere are doing. Now that's called relevance. I don't think people in India or Brazil find LA relevant if there are fewer major international companies there as well as NO major financial institutions which would indicate how economy is doing.
Larger does not mean more relevant. It's as simple as that. We figured it out as soon as you first said LA is $200 billion more...but it's taking you too long to figure it out
That can be said about any city in the country. No city or region is not intertwined financialy with another. In economics larger actually does mean more relevant. That why the US economy is so relevant in the world.
That can be said about any city in the country. No city or region is not intertwined financialy with another. In economics larger actually does mean more relevant. That why the US economy is so relevant in the world.
You don't even know what you're saying. Economies are interwined with one another. Chicago has some tie to every port and financial center in the U.S. Chicago and New York are very intertwined. That's why Chicago is more affected by the recession than say Houson, who is very distant from the economy of NYC.
Classic. That's the typical "la-la land" reaction of folks who are insecure about their city.
No, he's okay. He was talking ABOUT L.A.! He was turning the comment around on the Cali dude. We're all on the same team here. Simple misunderstanding (I made it myself before I re-read the post).
In fact, I was referring my comment to that "la-la land" dude. I am sure Spire knew it
Quote:
Originally Posted by chitown2pa
No, he's okay. He was talking ABOUT L.A.! He was turning the comment around on the Cali dude. We're all on the same team here. Simple misunderstanding (I made it myself before I re-read the post).
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.