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.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,041,021 times
Reputation: 4047
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
Hmm...why would you put the Bay Area over Los Angeles and Chicago, beyond the obvious personal reasons?
No I agree with him entirely, but not for the present, because of Chicago & Los Angeles's sheer size. But in a few years from now, that will be the line up.
- New York City
- Washington DC
- Bay Area
- Los Angeles
- Chicago
And I'm not talking about by GMP measurements but by influence.
Also you asked what Chicago's main industry points are? Well 1/3 of the total goods transported in the United States go through Chicago, transportation of any means is always regulated through Chicago, and of course CME. Those are Chicago's flagships.
Also Chicago boosts the most diverse economy in the United States of America, that is a factor that keeps it from falling like many other cities and will be a reason that keeps it top 5 for long to come.
IMO, I think spots 2-4 are entirely debatable presently for Washington DC, Los Angeles, & Chicago. For the present. In the future Los Angeles & Chicago are going to be 4 & 5, IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by msb0810
Sorry but size does matter. DFW is 4th in population and has a larger GDP than Boston and more fortune 500 companies. It has the world's 3rd busiest airport. It is the fastest growing metro. It's a matter of fact not opinion that Dallas ranks ahead of Boston and Houston.
Well Boston has always outranked it due to its industries and overall importance in finance, education, among other things. Houston has a flagship industry which is energy, and its GDP is larger. DFW is a very important Metropolitan area but I think that your points are best left for another thread.
Last edited by DANNYY; 08-13-2010 at 12:09 PM..
Reason: Done editing
Sorry but size does matter. DFW is 4th in population and has a larger GDP than Boston and more fortune 500 companies. It has the world's 3rd busiest airport. It is the fastest growing metro. It's a matter of fact not opinion that Dallas ranks ahead of Boston and Houston.
Hmmm...
In terms of GDP, it depends on which measure you're using...if it's MSA then yes Dallas has a larger GDP than Boston. However, if it's CSA then Boston's GDP is larger than Dallas'...but even then that doesn't mean everything.
Real Quick: Do you have stats to prove that Dallas has the world's 3rd busiest airport? I thought Chicago and Atlanta were both busier...and I'm pretty sure Heathrow in London has to be up there too. Either way, who cares? It's an airport.
There are many important things that take place in a city that you won't see just by looking at their GDP. Here's a few about Boston:
Boston's power in life sciences is unmatched. It ranks as the #1 life sciences cluster in the country by the Milken Institute. World-renowned institutions like Mass General Hospital, Dana-Farber, Brigham and Women's, Beth Israel Deaconess, Children's Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Tufts Medical Center all call the city home. The National Institute of Health awards far more grant money for medical research to Boston/Cambridge than any other city in the country.
Boston is ranked as the #3 financial center in the United States and #14 on the planet (link (http://www.investtoronto.ca/documents/global-financial-centres-report.pdf - broken link)). In terms of capital raised, Boston is #3 in the world, trailing only London and New York City. In terms of hedge funds, it again ranks #3 behind New York City and London. World-leading financial institutions like State Street Bank, Putnam Investments, Fidelity Investments, MFS, John Hancock, and Bain Capital, among others are located in Boston.
Things like assets under management will not show up in a city's GDP...if it did, Boston's GDP would be outrageous since State Street Bank alone manages over $1.9 trillion (with another $19 trillion under custody)...I think there may only be one bank that manages more than State Street.
Not to mention the impact that graduates from world-renowned universities like Harvard and MIT have on our nation every day. Harvard needs no explanation. Neither does MIT, but here's a cool fact: if you were to combine the revenues of all the active companies founded by MIT graduates, it would create the 17th largest economy on Earth (link).
For those reasons and many more, I think it's safe to say it is not a matter of fact that Dallas should rank ahead of Boston.
NYC, DC, Bay Area, LA, CHI--that's the order for current importance. It's cut and dried that these are the top five at the very least, no matter the ranking. Boston and Houston are huge, but a step down and contend with Atlanta, DFW, Philadelphia, Miami, and arguably Detroit.
I didnt know there was a city called the bay area. Philadelphia being the fourth largest urban area and the fourth largest media market should be in the discussion for the four spot. 30 years ago it would have been at least number four, but DC has caught up and the federal government has given it an edge. So DC is fourth.
Hmm...why would you put the Bay Area over Los Angeles and Chicago, beyond the obvious personal reasons?
I have no personal reasons for the Bay Area (actually, if anything, I'd have personal reasons to put LA on top). The Bay Area's been a main driver for innovation and change in such a huge array of industries and facets of life for the last few decades that its influence is far beyond what its small size suggests. There's simply a culture for incubating new ideas (either through the private sector and the available venture capital there or through the public sector with the largest collection of national laboratories and extremely prestigious schools) found almost nowhere else, at least not on this scale.
The other cities are quite important in their own right... SF with electronics... Boston big fishing industry... Houston with real estate and financial... but it all comes down to DC with the nations capitol... its where the president lives for goodness sakes... yes if you take the government away its a close fight but i give the edge to DC
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,041,021 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler
I have no personal reasons for the Bay Area (actually, if anything, I'd have personal reasons to put LA on top). The Bay Area's been a main driver for innovation and change in such a huge array of industries and facets of life for the last few decades that its influence is far beyond what its small size suggests. There's simply a culture for incubating new ideas (either through the private sector and the available venture capital there or through the public sector with the largest collection of national laboratories and extremely prestigious schools) found almost nowhere else, at least not on this scale.
Haha I think we've agreed on these points before, if not it's like a serious deja vu.
It's the exact same way I perceive it too. The Bay Area literally has its hands on everything. And it is the most innovative place on the planet when it comes to new technology.
I didnt know there was a city called the bay area. Philadelphia being the fourth largest urban area and the fourth largest media market should be in the discussion for the four spot. 30 years ago it would have been at least number four, but DC has caught up and the federal government has given it an edge. So DC is fourth.
No one's going to have this argument with you, because it's silly and we've had this a million times before. You don't know the Bay Area. We don't need to argue with you.
I would think this fact alone would place Houston a cut above San Francisco. Facebook and Google are nice things to have, but I did without those things for most of my life. My life would have been very difficult without oil, though. At this point, I think innovations in energy are just as important, if not more, than innovations in computer technologies. So I don't think you can say that the Bay Area is more important than Houston because of the presence of Silicon Valley.
There are only two "important" cities in my mind, and all of the others are pretty much interchangeable. By important, I mean "cities that people care about." Steven Hawking is arguably more important than Barack Obama, but you don't see a cadre of trained killers escorting the former to and fro, do you? I would argue that Obama is more "important" because people care about him and the things he does. Although Hawking is brilliant, nobody really cares what the hell he does on any given day of the week.
That said, I'd put the Bay Area no higher than number 5. Granted, you could ask where the country would be without computers, etc, but a Houstonian could ask where the country would be without energy. It's hard to say that one industry is more important than another. Because of Chicago and LA's size, I think they are more important than SF. I think it's also telling that Los Angeles and Chicago, particularly Los Angeles, are the focus of media attention more often than San Francisco.
The other cities are quite important in their own right... SF with electronics... Boston big fishing industry... Houston with real estate and financial... but it all comes down to DC with the nations capitol... its where the president lives for goodness sakes... yes if you take the government away its a close fight but i give the edge to DC
Uhhmm..fishing? Haha, Boston does a few things that are more important than bringing in lobsters (as delicious as they are).
I have no personal reasons for the Bay Area (actually, if anything, I'd have personal reasons to put LA on top). The Bay Area's been a main driver for innovation and change in such a huge array of industries and facets of life for the last few decades that its influence is far beyond what its small size suggests. There's simply a culture for incubating new ideas (either through the private sector and the available venture capital there or through the public sector with the largest collection of national laboratories and extremely prestigious schools) found almost nowhere else, at least not on this scale.
True, but I don't know if you could say it's more important than Boston, Houston, or even Atlanta. I mean, iPods are nice, but so are H1N1 vaccinations. And the energy research and development coming out of Houston will ensure that our iPods and touch pads will have some source of energy to run off.
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.
