Houston Placed in Comparative Boundaries as Philadelphia (Dallas, Fort Worth: homes, DMV)

[DANNYY]

Present what we see:
Houston Metro (by total area): 10,062 square miles of total area, includes Galveston Bay, forests, other lakes, rivers, streams, etc.
Houston MSA (population): 6,022,719 people as of (August 2010)
Houston Metro (GMP): $403 Billion

What I am going to cut it down too for the comparison of statistics:
Harris County: 4,070,989 people (1,778 square miles total area)
Fort Bend County: 532,141 people (886 square miles total area)
Montgomery County: 447,718 people (1,077 square miles total area)
Galveston County: 283,987 people (873 square miles total area)
Total population: 5,334,835 people in 4,614 square miles of total area (includes water, forests, whatever) Oh and by the way, the counties I used for the population above touch/border each other, they aren't spread out across the MSA boundaries to prove a point. Lol, just thought I also clarify beforehand there before someone gets on that.

Comparatively to Philadelphia's 6,000,904 people in 5,118 square miles including rivers, lakes, etc.

By CSA, the GDP's of the Metro's in the country. Houston is the 4th largest GDP by MSA's. But its 7th by CSA's.

1. New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA CSA $1.434 Trillion
Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT Metro Area $81,389
Kingston, NY Metro Area $4,679
New Haven-Milford, CT Metro Area $37,643
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA Metro Area $1,264,896
Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY Metro Area $21,029
Torrington, CT Micro Area
Trenton-Ewing, NJ Metro Area $24,458

2. Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA CSA $866.095 Billion
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA Metro Area $717,884
Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA Metro Area $35,080
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA Metro Area $113,080

3. Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV CSA $533.542 Billion
Baltimore-Towson, MD Metro Area $133,012
Lexington Park, MD Micro Area
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV Metro Area $395,747
Winchester, VA-WV Metro Area $4,783

4. Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI CSA $526.895 Billion
Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL-IN-WI Metro Area $520,672
Kankakee-Bradley, IL Metro Area $3,094
Michigan City-La Porte, IN Metro Area $3,336

5. San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA $508.418 Billion
Napa, CA Metro Area $7,434
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA Metro Area $310,825
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Metro Area $146,687
Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA Metro Area $9,903
Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA Metro Area $20,229
Vallejo-Fairfield, CA Metro Area $13,340

6. Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-RI-NH CSA $413.930 Billion
Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH Metro Area $299,590
Concord, NH Micro Area
Manchester-Nashua, NH Metro Area $20,782
Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA Metro Area $65,152
Worcester, MA Metro Area $28,406

7. Houston-Baytown-Huntsville, TX CSA $403.202 Billion
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX Metro Area $403,202

8. Dallas-Fort Worth, TX CSA $383.082 Billion
Athens, TX Micro Area
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Metro Area $379,863
Sherman-Denison, TX Metro Area $3,219

9. Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland, PA-NJ-DE-MD CSA $351.680 Billion
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD Metro Area $331,897
Reading, PA Metro Area $14,838
Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ Metro Area $4,945

10. Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Gainesville, GA-AL $276.197 Billion
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA Metro Area $269,799
Gainesville, GA Metro Area $6,398

11. Miami-Ft Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL Metro Area $261.263 Billion

12. Detroit-Warren-Flint, MI CSA $236.457 Billion
Ann Arbor, MI Metro Area $17,891
Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI Metro Area $200,856
Flint, MI Metro Area $11,406
Monroe, MI Metro Area $6,304

Okay so the argument for me is, with Houston's new population of 5,334,835 people in 4,616 square miles still have a larger economic output then Philadelphia (in terms of GDP) or will Philadelphia have the larger economic output?

Answer:
Yes, Houston is still relatively larger by GDP than Philadelphia despite going from a larger MSA population than Philadelphia (slightly) to smaller population than Philadelphia (significantly by 600,000 people).

The Math Involved:
$403,000,000,000/6,022,719 people = $66,913
$66,913 X 5,334,835 people in 4616 () square miles = $356.971 Billion for 5,334,835 people in 4616 square miles!

New Houston population of 5,334,835 people in 4,614 square miles of total area.

So the new GDP by consistent numbers will equal out to: $356.971 Billion comparatively to Philadelphia's $351.680 Billion.

Thorough Explanation:
Given Houston's population drop to 5,334,835 because the boundaries went from 10,000 square miles of total area to 4,616 square miles of total area the GDP dropped from $403 Billion to 356.971 Billion and is STILL larger slightly than Philadelphia's GDP which has 5,190 square miles with a population of 5,968,252.

I even gave Philadelphia every advantage I could in these estimates, just to see if Houston has successfully surpassed Philadelphia by economic output. For example I took Houston's 2010 census population (6,022,780) with its 2008 GDP (2 years outdated) compared to Philadelphia's 2008 GDP & Population estimates from 2009, and they still fell short to Houston even by slightly while having more land area (5,190) and more population.

My Side Notes:
Cool, Houston's GDP has played out to be even slightly larger than Philadelphia's even by taking away a good segment of Metro Houston's population.
In all seriousness that is still a very strong economic output to have.

As stated earlier by MSA, Houston has the 4th largest GDP in the country only behind New York City, Los Angeles, & Chicago. But by CSA, Houston has the 7th largest GDP in the country (before I chopped some of it off to reconfigure with its new population).

My Motive:
Well lately people have been focussing too much on "Oh Houston only has a large population because it has 10,000 square miles, or Houston's GDP is only larger than Philadelphia's because it has 10,000 square miles". So I decided to take it upon myself to see if Houston's economic output falls short to Philadelphia or competitive with Philadelphia by putting it in similar metro boundaries (4,616 square miles of Metro Houston compared 5,118 square miles of Metro Philadelphia with a population of 5,334,885 compared to Philadelphia's 5,968,252).
- I was surprised by my expectations that its GDP is still slightly even so larger than Metro Philadelphia.

So by size in population by putting it in the same boundary levels, No it did not surpass Philadelphia. But given the current trends on growth in population by next census it wont even be a matter up for debate. (if things continue given present trends only, which is subjective to happen or not)

But by economic output, Houston restricted back and dropped from $403 Billion to something more comparable boundaries and population to Philadelphia's size still surpasses it by economic output.

Ah man, I'm done doing math for today at least. Haha.

[Spade]

What it is is that you have some people from the Northeast that do not want to accept that sunbelt cities have caught up to them in many ways and it makes them very upset. It's like they feel threatened by these cities.

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by Spade

What it is is that you have some people from the Northeast that do not want to accept that sunbelt cities have caught up to them in many ways and it makes them very upset. It's like they feel threatened by these cities.

My sentiments exactly

+1

[DANNYY]

Mehh the thing I hate the most about it is how Houston posters and Dallas-Fort Worth posters always have to go that extra mile just to even show their city belongs in the discussion.
Like I literally when conducting this mathematically gave Philadelphia every single advantage and gave Houston every single disadvantage to be more "fair" and more critical on my city. I do the same when it comes to Chicago, its the city I come from where I am most critical.

And in the end, even at being in a disadvantage of 650 square miles of land, using the August 2010 population estimates to divide the 2008 GDP (2 years outdated), Houston still comes out on top of Philadelphia with $356.9 Billion compared to Philadelphia's 351.7 Billion.

Anyways just some things to play around with.

GDP Growth Rates for 3 years (2005-2008):
Washington DC-Baltimore CSA: +12.3%
Dallas-Fort Worth: +16.9%
Los Angeles CSA: +10.9%
Chicago CSA: +11.8%
Houston CSA: +22.4%
Bay Area CSA: +13.1%

Given current trends or even a slight or moderate slowing:
Houston will have surpassed Bay Area, DMV, & Chicagoland by GDP measurements by 2018 at the latest to become the 3rd largest economy in the USA only after New York City & Los Angeles. 2018 is also when the Bay Area surpasses both Chicagoland & DMV.

Houston by MSA has already surpassed everyone besides New York City, Los Angeles, & Chicago.
Houston by CSA is going to surpass Boston by GDP in 2 more years, its right on Boston's neck, literally.

By next census, Houston's population, Houston's GDP, & Houston's stature amongst cities in its peer levels will no longer be a matter of debate, as it already shouldn't be right now. Houston will firmly take its place where it aspires to be, and the same with Dallas-Fort Worth, without questioning.

[jfre81]

What's funny is that nobody cares about this **** in real life, just on the Internet.

[DANNYY]

Originally Posted by jfre81

What's funny is that nobody cares about this **** in real life, just on the Internet.

Pretty much everyone or most people who would care for these things do get on this site or sites similar to it though.
We're all in good company.

But yeah, I cant imagine someone whose career is not into this and has no connections taking this very literally in real life. That would just be odd.

[Trae713]

Originally Posted by jfre81

What's funny is that nobody cares about this **** in real life, just on the Internet.

Yeah, but the Internet is a big place. While we're discussing this like this (great info by the way Awesome Danny), there is probably another forum somewhere where people are arguing over tupperware.

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by Awesome Danny

Mehh the thing I hate the most about it is how Houston posters and Dallas-Fort Worth posters always have to go that extra mile just to even show their city belongs in the discussion.
Like I literally when conducting this mathematically gave Philadelphia every single advantage and gave Houston every single disadvantage to be more "fair" and more critical on my city. I do the same when it comes to Chicago, its the city I come from where I am most critical.

And in the end, even at being in a disadvantage of 650 square miles of land, using the August 2010 population estimates to divide the 2008 GDP (2 years outdated), Houston still comes out on top of Philadelphia with $356.9 Billion compared to Philadelphia's 351.7 Billion.

Anyways just some things to play around with.

GDP Growth Rates for 3 years (2005-2008):
Washington DC-Baltimore CSA: +12.3%
Dallas-Fort Worth: +16.9%
Los Angeles CSA: +10.9%
Chicago CSA: +11.8%
Houston CSA: +22.4%
Bay Area CSA: +13.1%

Given current trends or even a slight or moderate slowing:
Houston will have surpassed Bay Area, DMV, & Chicagoland by GDP measurements by 2018 at the latest to become the 3rd largest economy in the USA only after New York City & Los Angeles. 2018 is also when the Bay Area surpasses both Chicagoland & DMV.

Houston by MSA has already surpassed everyone besides New York City, Los Angeles, & Chicago.
Houston by CSA is going to surpass Boston by GDP in 2 more years, its right on Boston's neck, literally.

By next census, Houston's population, Houston's GDP, & Houston's stature amongst cities in its peer levels will no longer be a matter of debate, as it already shouldn't be right now. Houston will firmly take its place where it aspires to be, and the same with Dallas-Fort Worth, without questioning.

lol, but Houston relies too much on cars. And peoples homes are too big here. Great cities don't allow people to have homes that are sizable, with yards big enough for dogs to run around. psssh the economic output of a city means nothing about how great the city is.

A city is not great unless people are tripping over each other. That is why these cities are the best in the World:

1. Manila
2. Cairo
3. Lagos
4. Macau
5. Seoul
6. Dhaka
7. Buenos Aires
8. Jakarta
9. Kaohsiung, Taiwan
10. Santo Domingo

These are some of the densest cities in the world, so who can beat them.
Forget about London. That place covers 659 sq miles. 3 more than Houston. obviously it is a loser

[blkgiraffe]

Originally Posted by Scarface713

Yeah, but the Internet is a big place. While we're discussing this like this (great info by the way Awesome Danny), there is probably another forum somewhere where people are arguing over tupperware.

Please don't insult my mom lol

[stoneclaw]

great info awesome danny. I'm just timing how long it will take the northeasterners to try to counter these claims and try to convince everyone to degrade Houston's importance.