Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-08-2010, 01:37 PM
 
672 posts, read 1,781,993 times
Reputation: 499

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by killakoolaide View Post
Dallas and ATL worth more than SF. I learned something today
That number is derived from half the actual metro. Add San Jose, and the Bay Area is on par with the output from London, Paris, and Chicago despite having far less people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-08-2010, 01:42 PM
 
2,419 posts, read 4,698,585 times
Reputation: 1317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhymes with Best Coast View Post
That number is derived from half the actual metro. Add San Jose, and the Bay Area is on par with the output from London, Paris, and Chicago despite having far less people.
But of course
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2010, 02:04 PM
 
Location: West LA
2,318 posts, read 7,813,415 times
Reputation: 1125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
If it weren't for the entertainment business, Los Angeles would be Phoenix with beaches.
LOL, that's such an ignorant statement I don't even know where to begin... from Wikipedia (sources provided on Wikipedia as well):

"The Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside combined statistical area (CSA) has a gross metropolitan product (GMP) of $831 billion (as of 2008), making it the third largest economic center in the world, after the Greater Tokyo Area and the New York-Newark-Bridgeport CSA. If counted as a country, the surrounding CSA has the 15th largest economy in the world in terms of nominal GDP, placing it just below Australia and above the Netherlands, Turkey, Sweden, Belgium, and Indonesia."

You think Phoenix is a close fourth behind NYC, Tokyo, and LA? It helps that LA has one of the busiest ports in the world... last time I checked Phoenix was landlocked.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2010, 02:15 PM
 
2,556 posts, read 3,595,255 times
Reputation: 3424
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjacobeclark View Post
I'm talking population. NYC has 22 million in its metro, LA has 18 million, London has 13 million, Paris has 10 million, Tokyo has 33 million, Mexico D.F. has 25 million, and São Paolo has 20 million.
For the record, that's really an apples to oranges comparison. LA is sprawled on an area much larger than Paris, London et al. Even though LA has a larger metro pop., it feels small -- at least in urbanity-- to Paris and London, and for that matter, Chicago. Chicago actually seems much bigger than LA as far as urban core, amentities, infrastructure (except highways), etc. LA is a region, it's not a city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2010, 02:16 PM
 
Location: Englewood, Near Eastside Indy
8,940 posts, read 17,162,269 times
Reputation: 7270
Omaha
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2010, 02:24 PM
 
2,419 posts, read 4,698,585 times
Reputation: 1317
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigLake View Post
For the record, that's really an apples to oranges comparison. LA is sprawled on an area much larger than Paris, London et al. Even though LA has a larger metro pop., it feels small -- at least in urbanity-- to Paris and London, and for that matter, Chicago. Chicago actually seems much bigger than LA as far as urban core, amentities, infrastructure (except highways), etc. LA is a region, it's not a city.
LA is a city in every respect, it just looks and feels much different to people because it was the first major city to come of age in the time of the automobile(an understated revolutionary change).

Once a more effecient mode of transportation is created in the distant future cities will be even larger and more sprawled out, and even make LA(as we know it) look antiquated.

driving is the new walking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2010, 02:50 PM
 
Location: Lower East Side, Milwaukee, WI
2,943 posts, read 5,042,260 times
Reputation: 1113
Quote:
Originally Posted by mammamia01 View Post
"Feminized"? "Disneyfied"? "Urban themed amusement park"? 10M very REAL people live in this amusement park, from the richest to the poorest. Most of them working class, even if it means 300K a year or a few millions a year.
What's up with this communist propaganda?
$300k a year isn't working class.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2010, 02:52 PM
 
Location: Lower East Side, Milwaukee, WI
2,943 posts, read 5,042,260 times
Reputation: 1113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhymes with Best Coast View Post
That number is derived from half the actual metro. Add San Jose, and the Bay Area is on par with the output from London, Paris, and Chicago despite having far less people.
Prove it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2010, 03:01 PM
 
2,556 posts, read 3,595,255 times
Reputation: 3424
Quote:
Originally Posted by killakoolaide View Post
LA is a city in every respect, it just looks and feels much different to people because it was the first major city to come of age in the time of the automobile(an understated revolutionary change).

Once a more effecient mode of transportation is created in the distant future cities will be even larger and more sprawled out, and even make LA(as we know it) look antiquated.

driving is the new walking.
fair enough. I just callibrate on a more urban tangent. Agree that LA is a different animal. I don't like the quote "driving is the new walking".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2010, 03:08 PM
 
672 posts, read 1,781,993 times
Reputation: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjacobeclark View Post
Prove it.
http://www.pwc.co.uk/pdf/pwc_ukeo-section3-march07.pdf (broken link)

Page 20

GDP rank (using City Estimated Components of estimated GDP)
UN data in GDP in 2005 Population GDP per capita (brackets) ($bn at PPPs) (millions) ($k at PPPs)
1 New York 1325 21.9 60.5
2 Tokyo 1157 34.2 33.8
3 Los Angeles 934 18 51.9
4 London 638 12 53.2
5 Washington DC* 575 8.15 70.6
6 San Francisco/Oakland 518 7.25 71.4
7 Chicago 510 9.75 52.3
8 Osaka/Kobe 508 16.8 30.2
9 Seoul 503 22.3 22.6
10 Paris 466 9.95 46.8

Last edited by Rhymes with Best Coast; 06-08-2010 at 03:19 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top