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 07-11-2008, 06:30 PM
 
1,119 posts, read 2,463,191 times
Reputation: 382

Advertisements

Ok, I respect your OPINION

Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Philadelphia had its shot at surpassing LA like a hundred years ago.

Not now. Sorry.

And its not just Philadelphia. Among the Top 20, Id only place London, NY, Tokyo and possibly Paris above LA. Nowhere else.

I dont mean to be a LA booster cause I dont even live there, but sometimes these sorts of rankings are sooo off the mark that they have to be called out for their BS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-11-2008, 06:40 PM
 
167 posts, read 457,794 times
Reputation: 91
I think they should have defined what "driving the global economy" (and maybe they did, I didn't read everything in the report).

Here's what I'm thinking: a city like Singapore has tremendous electronics trade, buying and selling, as well as finance, among many other things between multinational companies. If we're looking a LA's cinema contribution, it's no less big, but what's so "global" about it? The U.S. makes most of the money. It's more of a one-way street and doesn't really "drive the global economy." Anyway, that's my dimestore economics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2008, 06:41 PM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland/ Piedmont, CA
32,375 posts, read 55,173,351 times
Reputation: 15454
Quote:
Originally Posted by downtown1 View Post
Ok, I respect your OPINION
And I totally respect your opinion as well.

We keep clashing on this one silly topic. Sorry.

As far as Chicago, its definitely deserving of its ranking and come November, hopefully Chitown will be sending us our next President! Yes We Can!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2008, 07:30 PM
 
1,119 posts, read 2,463,191 times
Reputation: 382
The study focuses on seven dimensions: financial flow, business center, economic stability, legal & political framework, knowledge creation & information flow, livability. London, New York, Tokyo, Singapore, Chicago, Hong Kong, Paris, Frankfurt, Seoul & Amtersdam are identified as the Top Ten Centers of Commerce in the World not just because they play an important role economically in their respective regions; they constitute themselves as a commerce and financial hub of the new worldwide economy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by harahap View Post
I think they should have defined what "driving the global economy" (and maybe they did, I didn't read everything in the report).

Here's what I'm thinking: a city like Singapore has tremendous electronics trade, buying and selling, as well as finance, among many other things between multinational companies. If we're looking a LA's cinema contribution, it's no less big, but what's so "global" about it? The U.S. makes most of the money. It's more of a one-way street and doesn't really "drive the global economy." Anyway, that's my dimestore economics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2008, 07:57 PM
 
Location: Villanova Pa.
4,910 posts, read 12,526,985 times
Reputation: 2631
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Oh,
and San Francisco is not beneath Philadelphia, Atlanta or Boston economically. What a crazed thing to even suggest.

The Bay Area makes mince meat out of all those places with no effort whatsoever. Trade and Commerce? Finance? Globalization? Technology? As a magnet for talent from around the world? Even in total Gross output and so on.

Now that I think about it, The Bay Area is probably on par with Chicago and LA in its influence over the world these days.

Sorry guys but no.
Lol. A superstar collection of the worlds greatest economist with volumes of info that could fill a library are all wrong and Montclair is right. Why exactly are they wrong again Montclair ? You were evasively light on the details.

Population of metro Philaldephia 5.82 Million
Workforce of metro Philadelphia 2,733,960

Population of metro SF 4.2 Million
Workforce of metro SF 2,077,000

Metro Philadlephia having a bigger global economy than metro SF is to be expected. All you have to do is look at the data. I suppose this is where someone will chime in that metro SF is 7 M and it goes on and on all the way to San Jose.

Metro SF-OAK-Freemont is 4.2 M
metro Philadellphia-Wimington-Camden is 5.8 M

If SF is allowed to claim San Jose(50 miles away) then shouldnt Philadlephia at least be able to claim Mercer County NJ which is 10 miles away from Philly yet gets eaten up by NYC. Philadelphia would have 10 M people in their economy if they were allowed the same dimensions of the Greater Bay Area including the powerhouse Life Science + educational region of Princeton and Lawrenceville a mere 25 miles away from Philadlephia.

La definitely got disrespected on that report, not so much SF.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2008, 01:03 AM
 
Location: Northern California
935 posts, read 1,715,775 times
Reputation: 644
The SF Bay Area is around 7 million.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2008, 01:34 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
15,470 posts, read 25,420,814 times
Reputation: 8936
I would think LA having one of the biggest ports in the world that would account for something and help it be a little farther ahead than Philly.

Also the Bay Area includes San Jose, there is nothing separating it from the rest of the metropolitan region; "Silicon Valley" isn't even an actually valley and it's continuous development from SF and Oakland all the way down to SJ. A large # of people commute into and out of Santa Clara county to other parts of the Bay Area. I don't understand why the census tends to separate them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2008, 02:34 AM
 
Location: Chicagoland
4,028 posts, read 6,398,515 times
Reputation: 1305
I can see these rankings being correct. just because a city has a larger population doesn't have much to do with how it handles itself, which is how these rankings are based on for the most part.

I am surprised that Chicago is below Singapore because didn't the Chicago's Mercantile Exchange just buy the Singapore's Commodity Exchange? I know the Chicago Mercantile Exchange wanted to buy the New York Mercantile Exchange.

I will admit though, Mastercard doing this report just seems kind if stupid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2008, 08:09 AM
 
Location: Villanova Pa.
4,910 posts, read 12,526,985 times
Reputation: 2631
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
Also the Bay Area includes San Jose, there is nothing separating it from the rest of the metropolitan region; "Silicon Valley" isn't even an actually valley and it's continuous development from SF and Oakland all the way down to SJ. A large # of people commute into and out of Santa Clara county to other parts of the Bay Area. I don't understand why the census tends to separate them.
And there is nothing seperating Trenton-Ewing-Princeton(7th wealthiest pmsa in the usa) from Philadlephia except an imaginary political boundary.Trenton to NE Philly is approximately 75% closer as San Jose is to San Francisco. Yet Tenton isnt part of the Philadlephia metro, rather its part of NYC metro 70 miles away.


Distance between Trenton-NE Philly is 12 miles. Trenton is literally 1/10th of a mile from the heart of metro Philadlephia (Bucks County) and Trenton is part of the Philadlephia TV/media market . San Jose is 50 miles from SF and is NOT part of the SF TV/media market. The reality of the situation is if SF gets to include the areas of the entire Bay area then Philadlephia would have about 10 M people in that same geographic sphere of influence.

The article and the data used in that report dealt with MSA's not CMSA''s.Its a bit disingenuous to attack the report in its details.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2008, 08:29 AM
 
Location: Villanova Pa.
4,910 posts, read 12,526,985 times
Reputation: 2631
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Oh,
and San Francisco is not beneath Philadelphia, Atlanta or Boston economically. What a crazed thing to even suggest.

The Bay Area makes mince meat out of all those places with no effort whatsoever. Trade and Commerce? Finance? Globalization? Technology? As a magnet for talent from around the world? Even in total Gross output and so on.
Delusions of grandeur. The Bay Area Bubble claims yet another victim.
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.
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