U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-14-2012, 03:09 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
286 posts, read 351,119 times
Reputation: 233

Advertisements

if Silicon valley has 500 thousand jobs in the tech sector and it adds another 500 thousand jobs
it has an percentage growth of 100%
and if Houston had 3 tech jobs and now it has 8 it had a 149% incremental growth...

I know this is an overwhelming exageration, but it will bring my point across.
The lower down you are, the chances for growth is higher and it seems out of proportion because
your base is small so that anything will make it look like a huge gain percentage wise.
Either way it sounds like good news for Houston, but is funny to see magazines resorting to that
type of hype to get their point across.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-14-2012, 03:16 PM
 
Location: The land of sugar... previously Houston and Austin
5,429 posts, read 13,181,597 times
Reputation: 3642
Quote:
Originally Posted by daortiz View Post
if Silicon valley has 500 thousand jobs in the tech sector and it adds another 500 thousand jobs
it has an percentage growth of 100%
and if Houston had 3 tech jobs and now it has 8 it had a 149% incremental growth...
This may help, though it's 2007 numbers:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HouTXmetro View Post
http://www.milkeninstitute.org/pdf/N...mmry_Final.pdf
Total number of Tech jobs by city 2007
1. Los Angeles 376,400
2. Washington DC 275,700
3. New York 262,000
4. San Jose 244,00
5. Seattle 226,300
6. Chicago 200,00
7. Dallas 187,700
8. Atlanta 164,100
9. Boston 163,600
10. Houston 151,700
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2012, 03:19 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
286 posts, read 351,119 times
Reputation: 233
^^^
Thanks for the data
I always thought that Silicon valley had more tech jobs than LA

Impresive grown for both places may I add
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2012, 10:23 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 28,187,635 times
Reputation: 7598
Quote:
Originally Posted by daortiz View Post
^^^
Thanks for the data
I always thought that Silicon valley had more tech jobs than LA

Impresive grown for both places may I add
one more thing I would add, the article never hinted at 100% increase in jobs.

It hinted at an increase in Job growth.

so if SJ had a 5% job growth the year before the following year a 10% job growth would amount to a 100% increase in job growth over the year before.

If Houston had 5% job growth the year before and a 13% increase the next then its year over increase in job growth was 147%

a looooooot of people confuse percentage increase in growth with flat out percent growth.

an increase in growth is totally different from percent increase.

that is why people are really impressed with SJ without looking at the actual numbers.

the actual numbers are needed for context.

you don't not know what actual number SJ is doubling. They may have increased by 100 new jobs the year before so don't be impressed before you find out what exactly is being doubled. a city that did horribly the year before is easy to increase by 100% the next.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2012, 11:11 PM
 
Location: Where Else...?
740 posts, read 1,020,807 times
Reputation: 657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neworleansisprettygood View Post
And that would speak more to your paranoia than anything else. This article comes from PR Newswire, whose explicit purpose is to pump companies; it doesn't claim to be an unbiased source.
there's no paranoia on my part. I see these kinds of reactions a lot on this forum in regards to Houston. When it's other cities, the responses are pretty natural and the exchanges are less defensive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2012, 07:56 AM
 
Location: The City
22,341 posts, read 32,187,488 times
Reputation: 7744
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove View Post
one more thing I would add, the article never hinted at 100% increase in jobs.

It hinted at an increase in Job growth.

so if SJ had a 5% job growth the year before the following year a 10% job growth would amount to a 100% increase in job growth over the year before.

If Houston had 5% job growth the year before and a 13% increase the next then its year over increase in job growth was 147%

a looooooot of people confuse percentage increase in growth with flat out percent growth.

an increase in growth is totally different from percent increase.

that is why people are really impressed with SJ without looking at the actual numbers.

the actual numbers are needed for context.

you don't not know what actual number SJ is doubling. They may have increased by 100 new jobs the year before so don't be impressed before you find out what exactly is being doubled. a city that did horribly the year before is easy to increase by 100% the next.
Actually no, the denominator on growth changes, but are pretty close

Regardless; the original post was useless and not at all realted to actual job growth in any of these.

Also for growth one would typically use the total number of the prior year as the denominator.

So if there were 100 last year and 5 new ones added (less any lost, will assume 0) it would be 5% growth

If there were 12 the next year it would be about 11% - now for sensationalism you could say 140% 12/5; but really that is not relvant

On the original list and their formula, it was rubbish

Assuming the 85K jobs (all not just IT as this is also an important clrifier) added in Houston, the increase was about 3% over the prior year (Believe there were about 2.8 million employed in Houston the prior year). Not sure what the population growth rate was during the same time but it looks like Houston stayed about whole, a good thing these days
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2012, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 28,187,635 times
Reputation: 7598
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly View Post

Also for growth one would typically use the total number of the prior year as the denominator.
job growth? yes.
percent increase in job growth? no.


Some writers over-standardize numbers too much. In this case raw numbers are much more useful.

Personally think raw numbers for growth are most often the best way to present data.
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.
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top