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.
Wow! Some great facts that make a strong point 18Montclair. I think San Francisco plays a larger part in the global economy also. SF airport also sees just over 8 million international passengers per year, while Philadelphia airport only sees just over 2.5 million international passengers. If Philly played a larger role in the global economy, there would be more international passengers there in my opinion. It would be nice if Mastercard showed a breakdown of how they awarded points instead of just releasing a a big list.
imagine if LAX was 90 miles away from the SF airport. we have to compete with 3 NYC airports. not an easy task. and Philly had over 4 million international passengers in 2005.
imagine if LAX was 90 miles away from the SF airport. we have to compete with 3 NYC airports. not an easy task. and Philly had over 4 million international passengers in 2005.
You should fix this wikipedia article then. It has incorrect info and says PHL only sees 2.5 million international passengers. Only two of the NYC airports have international service also, La Guardia is only domestic.
Wow! Some great facts that make a strong point 18Montclair. I think San Francisco plays a larger part in the global economy also.
The facts aren't great, the facts are distorted.
The report dealt with MSA's. The census bureau has clearly defined SF-OAK-
Fremont as a seperate msa than San Jose and points south. If you honestly believe San Jose and San Francisco(50 mile gap)are joined at the hip yet Trenton and Philadlephia are not (20 mile gap) then I cant help you, you are beyond hope. The CMSA is assinine. Santa Cruz is part of the self annointed Bay area. San Francisco is part of this same
Bay area and they are 80 friggin miles apart. I mean give me a break people. Thats the same distance as Philly is from NYC, you are talking about 25 million people.Ill bet my last dollar that Santa Cruz has as much in common with SF than Philly does to NY. Nothing.
The CMSA is nothing but a crutch for a couple of lesser known wannabees trying to make a name for themselves. If SF was so mighty it wouldnt need to rely on San Jose's msa to put it in the company of Philadelphia and Boston.
You do not understand the concept of Metropolitan Areas.
I understand it perfectly. I simply believe the combined statistical areas are a joke.
This report was based on MSA's which is an honest measure of how a region revolves around its core city. Backed by census data Philadelphia's msa is clearly bigger and subsequently more economically robustthan SF which is what the report entailed. Throw out the CMSA gang, its garbage. Its tough too swallow Bay Bubblers but get over it. You can't claim a disjointed 100 mile swath of land wrap a bow-tie around it, give it a hip name, and expect to be in the same ballpark as NY and LA. Doesnt work that way.
Population, 2006
Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland, PA-NJ-DE-MD CSA 5,981,565
San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA 7,226,651
For the last time. The report is talking about MSA's. San Jose,SF.Oak is a CMSA which is an insidious ruse anyway. This bogus information has absolutely nothing to do with this report. Every point you made has to be disposed due to incorrect data in regards to this report.
Philadlephia most likely beats SF-Oak-Fremont in every category you listed except perhaps exported goods and per capita income. But thats not to disparage Philaldephia as it more than holds its own in per capita income #5 in the usa in major metroes behind SF,Wash Dc,Bos and NYC.
Philaldephia doesnt have the Pacific Ocean which cuts potential housing areas by 50% , causing housing and economic indexes to soar. Philadelphia does alright for itself for being a land locked metro. Its per capita income is higher than Miami,San Diego,La,Chicago. Nothing to sneeze at especially considering the deadweight the region has to carry with inner city Philadlephia. Something the west coast cities would know nothing about.
I try to avoid these p******* contests, but sometimes arguments are made so loudly and relentlessly which are so fundamentally flawed, that a response is necessary.
The fact that San Jose is not part of the SF MSA is an artifact of Census Bureau methodology that will not allow a suburb to be larger than the central city in an MSA. This caused the Bureau to put San Jose into its own MSA when in fact anyone who lives in the Bay Area or has travelled through it, knows that it is one metropolitan area. The 50 miles of separation between SF and SJ is one continuous stretch of block by block urban sprawl. San Francisco was prevented from annexing these cities down the peninsula due to the fact that in California, one city can not be in two separate counties. There are no parks, farms, mountains or other natural barriers anywhere going down the bayside of the peninsula between SF and SJ. You wouldn't take Wilmington out of the Philly MSA because it's 50 miles away from Warminster. San Francisco is the central city and San Jose is essentially a suburb. The Bay Area's population is 7+ million. Not under 5 million.
Secondly, regarding Los Angeles, it would be interesting to know how this study counts information flows. How could a movie that is seen on millions of screens by a billion people not count as a massive information flow. I suspect that Mastercards methodolgy did not take into account cultural information flows, and cultural impact.
Philly is what Philly is, a major US metropolitan area, but SF is more significant, and LA is substantially moreso.
In other points, I was surprised that Vancouver, BC made the list but Seattle did not.
There is definitely a bias towards the financial side of the equation. London's finance markets are currently slightly larger than NYCs so that explains it's number one ranking. And the importance of financial markets also explains the high rankings of Singapore, Hong Kong, and Chicago. However, again, I believe the methodology underweights the cultural import (for better or worse) of a place like LA. As someone else said, I am not an LA booster, but LA matters a great deal in the globalization of trends in fashion, culture, mores, and language.
Philadelphia had its shot at surpassing LA like a hundred years ago.
Not now. Sorry.
Not quite. Population trends hardly stay the same forever. Los Angeles, being one of America's first Sun Belt cities, obviously took the upper-hand in population growth during most of the 20th century, but it's fallacious to think that Philadelphia's economic growth would have stunted forever.
I'm leery of these lists sometimes, too, but since we don't know the EXACT criteria behind these rankings; those who make silly, childish comments relating in no way whatsoever (i.e., SF is SOOOO much better, OMGGG!!! Philly SUXXX!!! There's no WAY it could possibly be out of the top 10) adds nothing to this discussion. Provide us evidence contrary to the list, and then you might have a point.
MSA population (2007 estimates):
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington MSA - 5,827,962 San Francisco-Oakland-Freemont MSA - 4,203,898
Based on integral MSA (note: not CSA) measures exclusively, Philadelphia ranks higher. We can argue until we're blue in the face about whether it's fair or unfair to rank metropolitan or combined statistical areas -- but since the former is much more widely used in studies such as what is posted in the OP, the point that San Jose would boost the SF ranking is null and void.
You do not understand the concept of Metropolitan Areas. It has very little to do with distance and everything to do with interdependence.
Of course, but so long as metropolitan areas and combined statistical areas are not used interchangeably, your figures are comparing apples to oranges -- not to mention measures such as per capita income and median income have nothing to do with this discussion, as we all know that cost-of-living is not the same from region to region.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
For any two areas to combine, at least 15% of their workers have to commute to the other place.
Right, but New Jersey, for example, is a very compact state -- and particularly in the middle of the state you have large swaths of residents commuting to either Philadelphia or New York, making the inclusion of counties much less clear cut than, say, the possibility of Santa Clara county being included in the Sacramento MSA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
In this instance, More of them to commute to the NY Metro instead of Philly so they are considered part of NY.
You cannot compare the Philadelphia to The Bay Area in size because quite frankly, they just arent the same.
1.) Do you have figures for New Jersey commuting patterns? In Mercer County, for example, commuting residents practically split evenly between both cities.
2.) Yes, but that only gives credence to the notion that San Francisco can infringe on a lot more geographical population without coming into close contact with another major metro area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
Sorry. We are not all created equal and SF vs Philadelphia is a painful reminder of that. Like I said Philadelphia is not above San Francisco and its certainly not above or even just below Los Angeles. Sorry.
Your condescending attitude is greatly unappreciated and completely unnecessary. Comments like this don't bolster your argument - numbers do.
The fact that San Jose is not part of the SF MSA is an artifact of Census Bureau methodology that will not allow a suburb to be larger than the central city in an MSA. This caused the Bureau to put San Jose into its own MSA when in fact anyone who lives in the Bay Area or has travelled through it, knows that it is one metropolitan area. The 50 miles of separation between SF and SJ is one continuous stretch of block by block urban sprawl. San Francisco was prevented from annexing these cities down the peninsula due to the fact that in California, one city can not be in two separate counties. There are no parks, farms, mountains or other natural barriers anywhere going down the bayside of the peninsula between SF and SJ. You wouldn't take Wilmington out of the Philly MSA because it's 50 miles away from Warminster. San Francisco is the central city and San Jose is essentially a suburb. The Bay Area's population is 7+ million. Not under 5 million.
Central to what? Jobs? Nope. You should try gaining a better understanding of cities and metros beyond "OH LOOK IT HAVE BIG SKYLINE."
Last edited by krudmonk; 07-15-2008 at 01:02 PM..
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.
