Battle of "number five" US cities:SF, Houston or Boston? (skyscrapers, living)

[llmrkc07]

Its San Francisco, hands down. Very large Financial/IT Market (which is very important).

IMO opinion Boston comes before Houston due to its educated population and the amount of ivy league institutions. Houston ranks last, though the O/G industry is crucial but Boston has history and urbanity. San Francisco is just a heavy weight despite its population, its a very important city on the west coast due to Finance and IT (even more so than Los Angles IMO).

[Trafalgar Law]

Nobody should invest so much of their time on where their cities rank after the Top 5 honestly, in my opinion.

Think about it this way, when you think Brazil, how often do your thoughts start wandering to Brazil's 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, or 15th city? Hell, even getting to a Top 5 for Brazil is generous enough as it is. How often do you think people actually sit down and go like "oh Recife, I like Recife, its so awesome, one of the world's best cities, one of the most important, its a major city in a major up-and-coming country like Brazil."

Then some people will comeback with "but its Brazil and we live in America, a larger, more important, better country with more important cities, you cant compare them that way." Then what about China? The second most important country on this planet after America with even more population centers than America. How often do people outside of China actually care for its 6th - 15th most prominent city? Honestly, even a Top 5 is too much, I cant really grasp the concept of caring for 5 Brazilian or Chinese cities, I give America a pass somewhat because it really is a very important country with some distinguishable and prominent cities. I mean maybe being 6th in America means something when you discuss it with other Americans but why should people outside of America invest in the idea of caring for more than just its Top 4 or 5 cities?

That said, San Francisco is a Top 5 city.

[Fastphilly]

Originally Posted by Red John

Nobody should invest so much of their time on where their cities rank after the Top 5 honestly, in my opinion.

Think about it this way, when you think Brazil, how often do your thoughts start wandering to Brazil's 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, or 15th city? Hell, even getting to a Top 5 for Brazil is generous enough as it is. How often do you think people actually sit down and go like "oh Recife, I like Recife, its so awesome, one of the world's best cities, one of the most important, its a major city in a major up-and-coming country like Brazil."

Then some people will comeback with "but its Brazil and we live in America, a larger, more important, better country with more important cities, you cant compare them that way." Then what about China? The second most important country on this planet after America with even more population centers than America. How often do people outside of China actually care for its 6th - 15th most prominent city? Honestly, even a Top 5 is too much, I cant really grasp the concept of caring for 5 Brazilian or Chinese cities, I give America a pass somewhat because it really is a very important country with some distinguishable and prominent cities. I mean maybe being 6th in America means something when you discuss it with other Americans but why should people outside of America invest in the idea of caring for more than just its Top 4 or 5 cities?

That said, San Francisco is a Top 5 city.

Good point. San Francisco is usually ranked 4th or 5th. Interchangeable with Washington DC in most arguments and rightfully so. SF and DC are so closely matched that either side has legit reasons for the final two spots.
Honerable mention to Boston and Miami.

[Gaylord_Focker]

I'm a big fan of San Fran, how can you not be? But was someone really saying DC isn't diverse? That's one area you can't attack DC on. Literally at least one of everything is here.

[qworldorder]

Originally Posted by Red John

Nobody should invest so much of their time on where their cities rank after the Top 5 honestly, in my opinion.

Think about it this way, when you think Brazil, how often do your thoughts start wandering to Brazil's 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, or 15th city? Hell, even getting to a Top 5 for Brazil is generous enough as it is. How often do you think people actually sit down and go like "oh Recife, I like Recife, its so awesome, one of the world's best cities, one of the most important, its a major city in a major up-and-coming country like Brazil."

Then some people will comeback with "but its Brazil and we live in America, a larger, more important, better country with more important cities, you cant compare them that way." Then what about China? The second most important country on this planet after America with even more population centers than America. How often do people outside of China actually care for its 6th - 15th most prominent city? Honestly, even a Top 5 is too much, I cant really grasp the concept of caring for 5 Brazilian or Chinese cities, I give America a pass somewhat because it really is a very important country with some distinguishable and prominent cities. I mean maybe being 6th in America means something when you discuss it with other Americans but why should people outside of America invest in the idea of caring for more than just its Top 4 or 5 cities?

That said, San Francisco is a Top 5 city.

I disagree staunchly. Cities after the top 5 are still very important, depending on their purpose and function, and should be ranked/discussed. Hong Kong isn't technically a top 5 Chinese city, but it's famous, disproportionately influential and the wealthy love it. Should we also ignore Macau or Lhasa? To downplay anything after the top 5 is foolish imo, especially when even in this country the gap from #5 to #10 is fairly close. I think as the world continues to globalize, cities like Recife will get more attention for the things they do bring to the table. I usually agree with your posts, but I think this one is promoting ignorance and is too America centric.

[Trafalgar Law]

Originally Posted by qworldorder

I disagree staunchly. Cities after the top 5 are still very important, depending on their purpose and function, and should be ranked/discussed. Hong Kong isn't technically a top 5 Chinese city, but it's famous, disproportionately influential and the wealthy love it. Should we also ignore Macau or Lhasa? To downplay anything after the top 5 is foolish imo, especially when even in this country the gap from #5 to #10 is fairly close. I think as the world continues to globalize, cities like Recife will get more attention for the things they do bring to the table. I usually agree with your posts, but I think this one is promoting ignorance and is too America centric.

I never said that they are irrelevant nor do I think that cities 5 - 20 in America are irrelevant.

I think America's premier cities (Top 5) have the capability to match up well with several G20 countries and come out looking good in those match-ups. I firmly believe true global caliber cities have the ability to compete with and put to shame prominent world countries. To me a country is prominent when it has an economy exceeding $500 Billion, we have to draw a line somewhere, and that's where I personally draw the line for countries. A $500 Billion economy for a city and its suburbs (so a metropolis area) is a very notable feat but my threshold for where I draw the line for cities is lower at $250 Billion (but those $200 - $400 Billion cities are more comparable to prominent American states rather than prominent G20 world countries, in my opinion -- still great but not as great as elite cities with economies over $500 Billion).

United States population centers versus the countries of the world (all places above $150 Billion):
01. United States: $16.8 Trillion
02. China: $9.240 Trillion
03. Japan: $4.901 Trillion
04. Germany: $3.634 Trillion
05. France: $2.735 Trillion
06. United Kingdom: $2.522 Trillion
07. Brazil: $2.245 Trillion
08. Italy: $2.071 Trillion
09. India: $1.876 Trillion
10. Russia: $1.857 Trillion
11. Canada: $1.788 Trillion
- Greater New York: $1.683 Trillion
12. Australia: $1.560 Trillion
13. Spain: $1.358 Trillion
14. South Korea: $1.304 Trillion
15. Mexico: $1.261 Trillion
- Greater Los Angeles: $1 Trillion
16. Indonesia: $868.346 Billion
17. Turkey: $820,207 Billion
18, Netherlands: $800.173 Billion
19. Saudi Arabia: $745.273 Billion
- Greater San Francisco Bay Area: $664.687 Billion
- Greater Washington DC and Baltimore: $657.039 Billion
20. Switzerland: $650.782 Billion
21. Argentina: $611.755 Billion
- Greater Chicago: $597.805 Billion
22. Sweden: $557.938 Billion
23. Nigeria: $522.638 Billion
24. Poland: $517.543 Billion
- Greater Houston: $517.367 Billion
- Greater Boston: $514.586 Billion
25. Norway: $512.580 Billion
26. Belgium: $$508.116 Billion
- Greater Dallas/Fort Worth: $451.436 Billion
27. Venezuela: $438.284 Billion
- Greater Philadelphia: $429.838 Billion
28. Austria: $415.844 Billion
29. Thailand: $ 387.252 Billion
30. United Arab Emirates: $383.799 Billion
31. Colombia: $378.148 Billion
32. Iran: $368.904 Billion
33. South Africa: $350.630 Billion
34. Denmark: $330.814 Billion
- Greater Atlanta: $322.089 Billion
35. Malaysia: $312.435 Billion
- Greater Seattle: $309.577 Billion
36. Singapore: $297.941 Billion
- Greater Miami: $297.071 Billion
37. Israel: $291.375 Billion
38. Chile: $277.199 Billion
39. Hong Kong: $274.013 Billion
40. Philippines: $272,017 Billion
41. Egypt: $271.973 Billion
- Greater Detroit: $262.166 Billion
42. Finland: $256.842 Billion
43. Greece: $241.721 Billion
44. Pakistan: $236.625 Billion
- Greater Minneapolis/Saint Paul: $236.389 Billion
45. Kazakhstan: $224.415 Billion
46. Iraq: $222.879 Billion
47. Portugal: $219.962 Billion
48. Ireland: $217.816 Billion
49. Algeria: $210.183 Billion
- Greater Denver: $209.648 Billion
- Greater Phoenix: $209.523 Billion
50. Qatar: $202.450 Billion
51. Peru: $202.296 Billion
52. Czech Republic: $198.450 Billion
- Greater San Diego: $197.886 Billion
53. Romania: $189.638 Billion
- Greater Portland: $189.268 Billion
54. Kuwait: $183.219 Billion
55. New Zealand: $182.594 Billion
56. Ukraine: $177.431 Billion
57. Vietnam: $171.392 Billion
- Greater Cleveland: $170.063 Billion

Did you know that just 2 years ago that Russia's economy was nearly $2.3 Trillion, due to global sanctions and an economy that is far too dependent on oil (like North Dakota level of dependent) the economy has contracted to below $2 Trillion and will continue to contract even more for a year or two. Brazil's economy has contracted and is in a recession (on an on-and-off basis the past 2 years), and Canada's economy just contracted and came out of a recession that consumed the first 2 quarters of 2015. On September 23rd, 2015 BEA will release the 2014 metropolitan statistical area (MSA) GDP and I fully expect that New York CSA's economy will become the 10th largest in the world surpassing Canada and Russia.

This is an example of a legit global caliber city, a city that has attributes and aggregate purchasing power to where it can seriously rival some of the most powerful countries on planet Earth (and legitimately give them all fits too). I would say New York typifies a city of this breed, Los Angeles is also a strong contender, and I would extend the line to include stalwarts such as San Francisco Bay Area, Chicago, and the Washington DC-Baltimore Metroplex as well. I would close the door after these 5 though, for American cities, as a legit global caliber cutoff. This is the tier where a city like Chicago leaves behind other but less powerful American competitors like Dallas, Atlanta, and Philadelphia behind, for example.

Below the global level, there is the national level (well the Hemispherical level and the continent level but I haven't compiled the data for that yet). This level is for cities, in my personal opinion, that have influence that far outreaches their local regions within the United States and is directly an influencer at the national stage with some global attributes too (but not as much as the Top 5). The primary characteristic for these cities is that these cities can go toe-to-toe with entire American states and dispatch them while having a population disadvantage. This demonstrates their purchasing power, wealth, influence, and control over entire sections of the United States at large. When you see cities outdoing prominent states that are in the top 10 most populous and powerful states in the country, you're talking about a supercharged and powerful city. This is the level where a city like Dallas/Atlanta/Philadelphia leave behind other but less powerful American competitors like Denver, Minneapolis, Phoenix.

United States population centers versus the states of the United States (all places over $150 Billion):
01. California: $2.202 Trillion
- Greater New York: $1.683 Trillion
02. Texas: $1.532 Trillion
03. New York (state): $1.311 Trillion
- Greater Los Angeles: $999.661 Billion
04. Florida: $800.492 Billion
05. Illinois: $720.692 Billion
- Greater San Francisco Bay Area: $664.687 Billion
- Greater Washington DC and Baltimore: $657.039 Billion
06. Pennsylvania: $644.915 Billion
- Greater Chicago: $597.805 Billion
07. Ohio: $565.272 Billion
08. New Jersey: $543.071 Billion
- Greater Houston: $517.367 Billion
- Greater Boston: $514.586 Billion
09. North Carolina: $471.365 Billion
10. Georgia: $454.532 Billion
11. Virginia: $454.585 Billion
- Greater Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex: $451.436 Billion
12. Massachusetts: $446.323 Billion
13. Michigan: $432.573 Billion
- Greater Philadelphia: $429.838 Billion
14. Washington (state): $408.049
15. Maryland: $342.382 Billion
- Greater Atlanta: $322.089 Billion
16. Indiana: $317.102 Billion
17. Minnesota: $312.081 Billions
- Greater Seattle: $309.577 Billion
- Greater Miami/Fort Lauderdale: $297.071 Billion
18. Colorado: $294.443 Billion
19. Tennessee: $287.633 Billion
20. Wisconsin: $282.486 Billion
21. Arizona: $279.024 Billion
22. Missouri: $276.345 Billion
23. Greater Detroit: $262.166 Billion
24. Louisiana: $253.576 Billion
25. Connecticut: $249.251 Billion
Greater Minneapolis/Saint Paul: $236.389 Billion
26. Oregon: $219.590 Billion
- Greater Denver: $209.648 Billion
- Greater Phoenix: $209.523 Billion
- Greater San Diego: $197.886 Billion
27. Alabama: $193.566 Billion
- Greater Portland: $189.268 Billion
28. South Carolina: $183.561 Billion
29. Kentucky: $183.373 Billion
30. Oklahoma: $182.086 Billion
- Greater Cleveland: $170.063 Billion

See at this level, a city like New York is able to take out the second most populous and powerful state in the country and its just a city, but we always expect these things out of New York because we know how powerful of a city it is. On the other-hand, we rarely are ever reminded of how powerful cities like Philadelphia and Dallas are, both areas have around the same population, like 7.1 - 7.3 million people each, but they are able to compete with and take out top 10 most populous and important states like Virginia, Georgia, and North Carolina which have 8.3 million, 10 million, and 10.1 million people respectively (much more populous). That's pretty powerful at the United States level, for a city, I would say.

See the same way, I am sure Reciefe is able to dispatch some noteworthy provinces or states or whatever it is that brazil sub-divides itself with, because Reciefe is an elite BRAZILIAN city but where it ranks in Brazil has little to no bearing in the world outside of Brazil. So what would be the point of even ranking it at all if prominence from Brazil on the global level is specified to 1) Sao Paulo, 2) Brasilia, and 3) Rio de Janeiro?

To tie all of this back to the point I was making, America has lots of good to great cities, a whole collection of them, no other country on the planet has as many nice and relevant cities (almost all of them except for a rare few also have elite schools too - something the rest of the world seriously lacks severely in) but the scope and power and force those cities display are more within the walls of the United States and not particularly at an elite global level. I think in the United States there are 5 legit global cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, Washington DC) and after that you have cities that have strong attributes in certain global realms (Boston: Bio-technology and medicine research and finance, Houston: energy and logistics via seaport, Miami: foreign investment and leisure, so on) but not enough dominance in a broader more macro level spectrum to keep them at a true elite level globally. Plus distinguishing between which city is really 6th in the United States as opposed to like 10th in the United States is very hard. So, why does it even matter to rank them after the Top 5?

Also, I know a hella lot of people from Hong Kong and have been there twice now at this point, it is a special administrative region, has its own currency, has a fenced off border with China, and has its own economy and things like that. Most there consider themselves Hong Kong people and do not align with the rest of "Mainland" China. Hong Kong is to China, similarly what Taiwan is to China, without as much individual recognition from the United Nations.

[Trafalgar Law]

Originally Posted by Fastphilly

Good point. San Francisco is usually ranked 4th or 5th. Interchangeable with Washington DC in most arguments and rightfully so. SF and DC are so closely matched that either side has legit reasons for the final two spots.
Honerable mention to Boston and Miami.

I give the edge to San Francisco Bay Area over the Washington DC-Baltimore Metroplex in todays time and age. This is making an exception because Washington DC-Baltimore has the higher total personal income and population (so 2 of the 3 measures) but the San Francisco Bay Area has the larger GDP, is poised to also surpass Washington DC-Baltimore in TPI within the next year, but the population situation is still in Washington DC-Baltimore's favor.

The reason for that is that when we compare one American city with another American city, I look at which city has the larger portfolio in at least 2 out of 3 factors. 1) Population, 2) Gross Domestic Product (GDP), 3) Total Personal Income (TPI) -- none of them having more weight than the other. I use a 4th factor as a tie-breaker sort of situation, where I look at miscellaneous factors (see below).

Usually GDP and TPI and population aren't the end all and be all when comparing American cities with other world cities outside of America because then those cities, even if they don't have the GDP or TPI to match up with American cities (often because their governments are oriented in more socialist/communist ways), usually have geopolitical and diplomatic powers that only two American cities have; New York and Washington DC.

However, when comparing American city with American city, I don't consider GDP the end all and be all but I do consider it, Total Personal Income, and overall population to be the end all and be all when all 3 are seen together to determining which city is more powerful, since that pretty much is good enough to rout the competition at home within the United States. When two cities are really close to one another in all 3 measures, then I start looking at miscellaneous factors like which industries they influence, who they provide investment and funding too, so on.

These days, San Francisco Bay Area is a real force, I would say its the 3rd most prominent place in the United States after New York and Los Angeles. Silicon Valley is now the second largest money machine for politicians on Capitol Hill after the Energy industry.

To understand the political power that largesse represents, context is key: An analysis by International Business Times shows that Silicon Valley has now surpassed many traditional political powerhouses as a source of campaign cash. In the last election cycle, technology firms delivered more money to candidates for president and Congress than defense contractors, pharmaceutical manufacturers, the automotive industry and Hollywood.

“Silicon Valley woke up to the importance of influencing public policy,” said Vivek Wadhwa, a fellow at the Rock Center for Corporate Governance, a joint effort by Stanford's law school and graduate school of business.

In 2012, that influence was on display when Internet firms notched an unexpected victory over the Hollywood studios that were pushing legislation to hold Internet companies responsible for the illegal transmission of pirated movies and television shows. Despite the so-called Stop Online Piracy Act being backed by the powerful Motion Picture Association of America, the bill was defeated by tech firms’ furious campaign against the measure.

Of Silicon Valley’s ability to defeat Hollywood-backed legislation, MPAA Chairman Chris Dodd, a former Democratic U.S. senator from Connecticut, said at the time: "It's a watershed event, what happened.”

Election 2016: Silicon Valley Becomes Major Money Force In Politics

Politicians are increasingly flocking more often to Silicon Valley to get their investments and funding. Increasingly Silicon Valley (San Francisco Bay Area), Energy Corridor (Houston), and Wall Street (New York) are becoming the mouths that feed Capitol Hill in Washington DC. Then again, data would argue these three have retained this role since 1992. This is why I would give San Francisco Bay Area the edge over Chicago and Washington DC-Baltimore in todays time.

[Dave120]

Though I'm not sure I'd place Boston ahead of Washington or the Bay area, it's probably not far behind either. Thanks to it's place in higher ed and biotech (and it's no slouch when it comes to IT either), it has a very important role within the US and globally just as those other places do. To some degree, you could say that after New York, all of these cities are important because of their niche (Bay area - IT, Washington - politics, Boston - biotech and higher ed, etc.).

[InternetUser2015]

Originally Posted by Red John

I never said that they are irrelevant nor do I think that cities 5 - 20 in America are irrelevant.

I think America's premier cities (Top 5) have the capability to match up well with several G20 countries and come out looking good in those match-ups. I firmly believe true global caliber cities have the ability to compete with and put to shame prominent world countries. To me a country is prominent when it has an economy exceeding $500 Billion, we have to draw a line somewhere, and that's where I personally draw the line for countries. A $500 Billion economy for a city and its suburbs (so a metropolis area) is a very notable feat but my threshold for where I draw the line for cities is lower at $250 Billion (but those $200 - $400 Billion cities are more comparable to prominent American states rather than prominent G20 world countries, in my opinion -- still great but not as great as elite cities with economies over $500 Billion).

United States population centers versus the countries of the world (all places above $150 Billion):
01. United States: $16.8 Trillion
02. China: $9.240 Trillion
03. Japan: $4.901 Trillion
04. Germany: $3.634 Trillion
05. France: $2.735 Trillion
06. United Kingdom: $2.522 Trillion
07. Brazil: $2.245 Trillion
08. Italy: $2.071 Trillion
09. India: $1.876 Trillion
10. Russia: $1.857 Trillion
11. Canada: $1.788 Trillion
- Greater New York: $1.683 Trillion
12. Australia: $1.560 Trillion
13. Spain: $1.358 Trillion
14. South Korea: $1.304 Trillion
15. Mexico: $1.261 Trillion
- Greater Los Angeles: $1 Trillion
16. Indonesia: $868.346 Billion
17. Turkey: $820,207 Billion
18, Netherlands: $800.173 Billion
19. Saudi Arabia: $745.273 Billion
- Greater San Francisco Bay Area: $664.687 Billion
- Greater Washington DC and Baltimore: $657.039 Billion
20. Switzerland: $650.782 Billion
21. Argentina: $611.755 Billion
- Greater Chicago: $597.805 Billion
22. Sweden: $557.938 Billion
23. Nigeria: $522.638 Billion
24. Poland: $517.543 Billion
- Greater Houston: $517.367 Billion
- Greater Boston: $514.586 Billion
25. Norway: $512.580 Billion
26. Belgium: $$508.116 Billion
- Greater Dallas/Fort Worth: $451.436 Billion
27. Venezuela: $438.284 Billion
- Greater Philadelphia: $429.838 Billion
28. Austria: $415.844 Billion
29. Thailand: $ 387.252 Billion
30. United Arab Emirates: $383.799 Billion
31. Colombia: $378.148 Billion
32. Iran: $368.904 Billion
33. South Africa: $350.630 Billion
34. Denmark: $330.814 Billion
- Greater Atlanta: $322.089 Billion
35. Malaysia: $312.435 Billion
- Greater Seattle: $309.577 Billion
36. Singapore: $297.941 Billion
- Greater Miami: $297.071 Billion
37. Israel: $291.375 Billion
38. Chile: $277.199 Billion
39. Hong Kong: $274.013 Billion
40. Philippines: $272,017 Billion
41. Egypt: $271.973 Billion
- Greater Detroit: $262.166 Billion
42. Finland: $256.842 Billion
43. Greece: $241.721 Billion
44. Pakistan: $236.625 Billion
- Greater Minneapolis/Saint Paul: $236.389 Billion
45. Kazakhstan: $224.415 Billion
46. Iraq: $222.879 Billion
47. Portugal: $219.962 Billion
48. Ireland: $217.816 Billion
49. Algeria: $210.183 Billion
- Greater Denver: $209.648 Billion
- Greater Phoenix: $209.523 Billion
50. Qatar: $202.450 Billion
51. Peru: $202.296 Billion
52. Czech Republic: $198.450 Billion
- Greater San Diego: $197.886 Billion
53. Romania: $189.638 Billion
- Greater Portland: $189.268 Billion
54. Kuwait: $183.219 Billion
55. New Zealand: $182.594 Billion
56. Ukraine: $177.431 Billion
57. Vietnam: $171.392 Billion
- Greater Cleveland: $170.063 Billion

Did you know that just 2 years ago that Russia's economy was nearly $2.3 Trillion, due to global sanctions and an economy that is far too dependent on oil (like North Dakota level of dependent) the economy has contracted to below $2 Trillion and will continue to contract even more for a year or two. Brazil's economy has contracted and is in a recession (on an on-and-off basis the past 2 years), and Canada's economy just contracted and came out of a recession that consumed the first 2 quarters of 2015. On September 23rd, 2015 BEA will release the 2014 metropolitan statistical area (MSA) GDP and I fully expect that New York CSA's economy will become the 10th largest in the world surpassing Canada and Russia.

This is an example of a legit global caliber city, a city that has attributes and aggregate purchasing power to where it can seriously rival some of the most powerful countries on planet Earth (and legitimately give them all fits too). I would say New York typifies a city of this breed, Los Angeles is also a strong contender, and I would extend the line to include stalwarts such as San Francisco Bay Area, Chicago, and the Washington DC-Baltimore Metroplex as well. I would close the door after these 5 though, for American cities, as a legit global caliber cutoff. This is the tier where a city like Chicago leaves behind other but less powerful American competitors like Dallas, Atlanta, and Philadelphia behind, for example.

Below the global level, there is the national level (well the Hemispherical level and the continent level but I haven't compiled the data for that yet). This level is for cities, in my personal opinion, that have influence that far outreaches their local regions within the United States and is directly an influencer at the national stage with some global attributes too (but not as much as the Top 5). The primary characteristic for these cities is that these cities can go toe-to-toe with entire American states and dispatch them while having a population disadvantage. This demonstrates their purchasing power, wealth, influence, and control over entire sections of the United States at large. When you see cities outdoing prominent states that are in the top 10 most populous and powerful states in the country, you're talking about a supercharged and powerful city. This is the level where a city like Dallas/Atlanta/Philadelphia leave behind other but less powerful American competitors like Denver, Minneapolis, Phoenix.

United States population centers versus the states of the United States (all places over $150 Billion):
01. California: $2.202 Trillion
- Greater New York: $1.683 Trillion
02. Texas: $1.532 Trillion
03. New York (state): $1.311 Trillion
- Greater Los Angeles: $999.661 Billion
04. Florida: $800.492 Billion
05. Illinois: $720.692 Billion
- Greater San Francisco Bay Area: $664.687 Billion
- Greater Washington DC and Baltimore: $657.039 Billion
06. Pennsylvania: $644.915 Billion
- Greater Chicago: $597.805 Billion
07. Ohio: $565.272 Billion
08. New Jersey: $543.071 Billion
- Greater Houston: $517.367 Billion
- Greater Boston: $514.586 Billion
09. North Carolina: $471.365 Billion
10. Georgia: $454.532 Billion
11. Virginia: $454.585 Billion
- Greater Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex: $451.436 Billion
12. Massachusetts: $446.323 Billion
13. Michigan: $432.573 Billion
- Greater Philadelphia: $429.838 Billion
14. Washington (state): $408.049
15. Maryland: $342.382 Billion
- Greater Atlanta: $322.089 Billion
16. Indiana: $317.102 Billion
17. Minnesota: $312.081 Billions
- Greater Seattle: $309.577 Billion
- Greater Miami/Fort Lauderdale: $297.071 Billion
18. Colorado: $294.443 Billion
19. Tennessee: $287.633 Billion
20. Wisconsin: $282.486 Billion
21. Arizona: $279.024 Billion
22. Missouri: $276.345 Billion
23. Greater Detroit: $262.166 Billion
24. Louisiana: $253.576 Billion
25. Connecticut: $249.251 Billion
Greater Minneapolis/Saint Paul: $236.389 Billion
26. Oregon: $219.590 Billion
- Greater Denver: $209.648 Billion
- Greater Phoenix: $209.523 Billion
- Greater San Diego: $197.886 Billion
27. Alabama: $193.566 Billion
- Greater Portland: $189.268 Billion
28. South Carolina: $183.561 Billion
29. Kentucky: $183.373 Billion
30. Oklahoma: $182.086 Billion
- Greater Cleveland: $170.063 Billion

See at this level, a city like New York is able to take out the second most populous and powerful state in the country and its just a city, but we always expect these things out of New York because we know how powerful of a city it is. On the other-hand, we rarely are ever reminded of how powerful cities like Philadelphia and Dallas are, both areas have around the same population, like 7.1 - 7.3 million people each, but they are able to compete with and take out top 10 most populous and important states like Virginia, Georgia, and North Carolina which have 8.3 million, 10 million, and 10.1 million people respectively (much more populous). That's pretty powerful at the United States level, for a city, I would say.

See the same way, I am sure Reciefe is able to dispatch some noteworthy provinces or states or whatever it is that brazil sub-divides itself with, because Reciefe is an elite BRAZILIAN city but where it ranks in Brazil has little to no bearing in the world outside of Brazil. So what would be the point of even ranking it at all if prominence from Brazil on the global level is specified to 1) Sao Paulo, 2) Brasilia, and 3) Rio de Janeiro?

To tie all of this back to the point I was making, America has lots of good to great cities, a whole collection of them, no other country on the planet has as many nice and relevant cities (almost all of them except for a rare few also have elite schools too - something the rest of the world seriously lacks severely in) but the scope and power and force those cities display are more within the walls of the United States and not particularly at an elite global level. I think in the United States there are 5 legit global cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, Washington DC) and after that you have cities that have strong attributes in certain global realms (Boston: Bio-technology and medicine research and finance, Houston: energy and logistics via seaport, Miami: foreign investment and leisure, so on) but not enough dominance in a broader more macro level spectrum to keep them at a true elite level globally. Plus distinguishing between which city is really 6th in the United States as opposed to like 10th in the United States is very hard. So, why does it even matter to rank them after the Top 5?

Also, I know a hella lot of people from Hong Kong and have been there twice now at this point, it is a special administrative region, has its own currency, has a fenced off border with China, and has its own economy and things like that. Most there consider themselves Hong Kong people and do not align with the rest of "Mainland" China. Hong Kong is to China, similarly what Taiwan is to China, without as much individual recognition from the United Nations.

Are you seriously using CSA GDP figures (ie: Washington-Baltimore being more than Chicago, Boston being that high with Providence)

[rainrock]

Originally Posted by InternetUser2015

Are you seriously using CSA GDP figures (ie: Washington-Baltimore being more than Chicago, Boston being that high with Providence)

Whats wrong with Fredericksburg Va and Havre De Grace Md being part of the same metro? They're only 150 miles apart. Not to mention Completely detached currently and historically



When you are a mid tier city like Washington, San francisco,Boston you make up a new category(CMSA) so you can pretend that you are up there with the big boys.