US City Tiers: (largest, America, population, metropolitan)

[DevanXL]

Originally Posted by Mezter

My list would go...
Tier 1
A) New York City

Tier 2
A) Los Angeles
B) Chicago, Washington DC

Tier 3
A) Boston, San Francisco
B) Houston, Miami, Atlanta, Dallas-Ft. Worth, Philadelphia

Tier 4
A) Seattle
B) Minneapolis, Denver, San Diego
C) St. Louis, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Tampa, Phoenix

Tier 5
A) Charlotte, Las Vegas, San Antonio, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Orlando, Indianapolis, Sacramento, etc

...It's just a big blah after that. I think my list is somewhat accurate.

Looks like you just ranked them by GDP

[Mezter]

Originally Posted by DevanXL

Looks like you just ranked them by GDP

A lot of them are ranked by GDP, but there are a few exceptions.

[DevanXL]

Originally Posted by Mezter

A lot of them are ranked by GDP, but there are a few exceptions.

I mean there is nothing wrong with that but if I was doing that I would put LA andChicago in the first tier and have every other city move up one tier with the exception of a few

[Lucky Clover]

Originally Posted by DevanXL

I mean there is nothing wrong with that but if I was doing that I would put LA andChicago in the first tier and have every other city move up one tier with the exception of a few

NYC belongs on its own tier for everything that it is.

I can see why LA and Chicago are tier 2.

You can at least make somewhat of an argument for LA with NYC, that's about it.

[Almont1]

NYC is in its own tier, no debate.

LA is probably in its own tier, though a bit debatable.

Chicago probably with DC, arguably SF too.

Then Boston, Philly, Dallas, and Houston.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by DevanXL

Looks like you just ranked them by GDP

No, this would be the latest CSA GDP ranking, and this is based on the latest economic data available.

2011 CSA GDP

1. New York-Newark, NY-NJ-CT-PA CSA $1.486 Trillion

2. Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA CSA $897.207 Billion

3. San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA $594.977 Billion

4. Washington-Baltimore-Arlington, DC-MD-VA-WV-PA CSA $594.845 Billion

5. Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI CSA $554.511 Billion

6. Boston-Worcester-Providence, MA-RI-NH CSA $454.648 Billion

7. Houston-The Woodlands, TX CSA $419.636 Billion

8. Philadelphia-Reading-Camden, PA-NJ-DE-MD CSA $396.263 Billion

9. Dallas-Fort Worth, TX-OK CSA $394.902 Billion

10. Atlanta-Athens/Clarke County-Sandy Springs, GA-AL $296.453 Billion

11. Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Port St Lucie, FL $287.616 Billion

[Lucky Clover]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

No, this would be the latest CSA GDP ranking, and this is based on the latest economic data available.

He wasn't referring to CSA. He was talking about city GDP, which pretty much makes sense although Philadelphia has a higher GDP than D.C.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by tawfiqmp

He wasn't referring to CSA. He was talking about city GDP, which pretty much makes sense although Philadelphia has a higher GDP than D.C.

The US Govt doesn't release data on city only GDP.

And Houston would definitely be 4th in a city only ranking.

In the meantime, this is the broadest and most accurate ranking of cities by regional economic size:

2011 CSA GDP

1. New York-Newark, NY-NJ-CT-PA CSA $1.486 Trillion

2. Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA CSA $897.207 Billion

3. San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA $594.977 Billion

4. Washington-Baltimore-Arlington, DC-MD-VA-WV-PA CSA $594.845 Billion

5. Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI CSA $554.511 Billion

6. Boston-Worcester-Providence, MA-RI-NH CSA $454.648 Billion

7. Houston-The Woodlands, TX CSA $419.636 Billion

8. Philadelphia-Reading-Camden, PA-NJ-DE-MD CSA $396.263 Billion

9. Dallas-Fort Worth, TX-OK CSA $394.902 Billion

10. Atlanta-Athens/Clarke County-Sandy Springs, GA-AL $296.453 Billion

11. Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Port St Lucie, FL $287.616 Billion

[Mr. Joshua]

Originally Posted by kgartm1185

They are bigger cities.

DC is a small city. It is about 1/10 the size of the other cities you put in the top tier.

[Lucky Clover]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

The US Govt doesn't release data on city only GDP.

And Houston would definitely be 4th in a city only ranking.

In the meantime, this is the broadest and most accurate ranking of cities by regional economic size:

I'm aware that the U.S. govt doesn't. But that doesn't mean it isn't acceptable because the information isn't straight from the U.S. govt.

Houston would be ahead of Philadelphia as would Dallas, but both behind D.C.

Regardless, I was just letting you know what he meant when he said the GDP comment.

Tiers shouldn't be based on one thing anyway, it should be a handful of things.