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)
View Poll Results: Most Economically Powerful:
California 25 55.56%
Mexico 2 4.44%
Canada 18 40.00%
Voters: 45. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-07-2012, 08:56 AM
 
Location: Spain
1,855 posts, read 4,351,560 times
Reputation: 955

Advertisements

Which of these 3 do you think has the most economic clout in the world today? Which has the most diverse, cutting-edge, and stable economy? Some metrics to think about: Financial power, business friendliness, FDI, natural resources, etc.

I'll start with some numbers:

GDP (Nominal), 2010:

1. California $1.936 trillion
2. Canada $1.577 trillion
3. Mexico $1.032 trillion

GDP (Per Capita), 2010:

1. California $51,914
2. Canada $46,361
3. Mexico $9,101

Exports, 2011:

1. Canada $463,100,000,000
2. Mexico $349,375,045,735
3. California $159,000,000,000

Labor Force, 2009:

1. Mexico 46.1 million
2. Canada 18.4 million
3. California 18.2 million

GDP Growth Rate:

1. Mexico 3.9%
2. Canada 2.2%
3. California 1.5%
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-07-2012, 09:44 AM
 
Location: Piedmont, CA/São Paulo, Brazil
33,064 posts, read 56,416,564 times
Reputation: 16155
As far as where the world invests its Money, California takes it by a very, very wide margin.

I created a thread a while back about North America's companies with a market cap of $5 Billion or higher and here are the results for Canada, Mexico and California:
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2012, 09:51 AM
 
Location: Northridge, Los Angeles, CA
2,685 posts, read 6,470,025 times
Reputation: 2361
It's hard to compare subnational entities to national ones since much of the money made in a subnational entity is made via trade with other subnational entities in the same nation, and is a cog in a machine as opposed to the machine itself.

Mexico obviously has higher growth rates because it has a lower base to work from but within 20-30 years, it will be more comparable to the industrialized US and Canada
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2012, 10:06 AM
 
Location: Piedmont, CA/São Paulo, Brazil
33,064 posts, read 56,416,564 times
Reputation: 16155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lifeshadower View Post
It's hard to compare subnational entities to national ones since much of the money made in a subnational entity is made via trade with other subnational entities in the same nation
Yes, for example California grows 50% of the national produce output of the United States. We trade billions with other states.

And that's just one example.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2012, 12:11 PM
 
3,305 posts, read 4,778,794 times
Reputation: 1994
It's close, but Mexico has a stronger argument to make if you adjust GDP for purchasing power. Its economy is significantly larger than Canada's in purchasing power terms, although making a comparison with California is difficult (I'm not sure individual state economies are adjusted for purchasing power).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2012, 12:47 PM
 
Location: Spain
1,855 posts, read 4,351,560 times
Reputation: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by testa50 View Post
It's close, but Mexico has a stronger argument to make if you adjust GDP for purchasing power. Its economy is significantly larger than Canada's in purchasing power terms, although making a comparison with California is difficult (I'm not sure individual state economies are adjusted for purchasing power).
I tried to find state PPP numbers but couldn't. Does anyone know where to find them?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lifeshadower View Post
It's hard to compare subnational entities to national ones since much of the money made in a subnational entity is made via trade with other subnational entities in the same nation, and is a cog in a machine as opposed to the machine itself.

Mexico obviously has higher growth rates because it has a lower base to work from but within 20-30 years, it will be more comparable to the industrialized US and Canada
I think the comparison is valid, subnational entities can trade with each other but so can other countries. In some cases subnational entities may even have more trade with their counterparts in other countries than they would would other subnational entities in their own countries. For example, I wouldn't be surprised if Washington and British Columbia trade more with each other than do Washington and say, West Virginia. All three are also covered under NAFTA as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2012, 12:49 PM
 
Location: Spain
1,855 posts, read 4,351,560 times
Reputation: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
As far as where the world invests its Money, California takes it by a very, very wide margin.

I created a thread a while back about North America's companies with a market cap of $5 Billion or higher and here are the results for Canada, Mexico and California:
I think an argument for which of the three is the most prominent in the finance sector could be interesting to see.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2012, 02:09 PM
 
Location: Northridge, Los Angeles, CA
2,685 posts, read 6,470,025 times
Reputation: 2361
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDX_LAX View Post
I
I think the comparison is valid, subnational entities can trade with each other but so can other countries. In some cases subnational entities may even have more trade with their counterparts in other countries than they would would other subnational entities in their own countries. For example, I wouldn't be surprised if Washington and British Columbia trade more with each other than do Washington and say, West Virginia. All three are also covered under NAFTA as well.
But then wouldn't the numbers for trade with other subnational entities, especially vs. countries, count as "exports" just to be fair, because it's still trade outside of the entity? (for the pro-California side)

I'm reading waaaaay too much into it. I mean, I get it, but without trade or business from other states, California's GDP may be hampered because it no longer has an automatic market of 270 billion other people to trade to, but rather have to suffer the same sort of trade barriers that Canada and Mexico do. Not to mention investment from other states. (for the not-so-pro California side)

It's not as if CALIFORNIA is trading with Japan or Mexico unilaterally. It's the United States that is, using some products which may or may not have been produced in California.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2012, 02:21 PM
 
Location: In the heights
23,727 posts, read 24,818,738 times
Reputation: 12626
California right now due to its prominence in many fields. Mexico will likely surpass it within a decade's time and be substantially more powerful. However, Mexico is an entire country with a lot more people so its per capita wealth isn't going to be too great.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2012, 02:34 PM
 
Location: Spain
1,855 posts, read 4,351,560 times
Reputation: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lifeshadower View Post
But then wouldn't the numbers for trade with other subnational entities, especially vs. countries, count as "exports" just to be fair, because it's still trade outside of the entity? (for the pro-California side)

I'm reading waaaaay too much into it. I mean, I get it, but without trade or business from other states, California's GDP may be hampered because it no longer has an automatic market of 270 billion other people to trade to, but rather have to suffer the same sort of trade barriers that Canada and Mexico do. Not to mention investment from other states. (for the not-so-pro California side)

It's not as if CALIFORNIA is trading with Japan or Mexico unilaterally. It's the United States that is, using some products which may or may not have been produced in California.
Actually the individual states do have a lot of control over foreign trade. Many trade agreements are signed between foreign governments and state governments. For example, Oregon is the only state allowed to export blueberries to South Korea. So in that situation its not really the United States as a whole trading, its really just Oregon. A lot of governors and mayors of major cities travel abroad promoting trade with their localities.
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
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, 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