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.
We already discussed this in the other thread, didn't we? According to the Brookings institution, Chicago is second most global city in the US. Learn to accept it, milky
Chicago is Second Most Global City in U.S.: Brookings
February 24, 2005
by Scott Goldstein, Metropolitan Planning Council Vice President of Policy and Planning
A new study by Peter J.Taylor and Robert E. Lang, "U.S. Cities in the 'World City Network " identifies the most globally connected cities in the nation and why this matters. Among the findings:
Campaign for Sensible Growth (http://www.growingsensibly.org/news/releaseDetail.asp?objectID=1830 - broken link)
Quote:
Originally Posted by milquetoast
Absolutely no way Chicago is a more global contributer than L. A. The port system and Hollywood see to that permanently. I said "Good Day!"
Last edited by downtown1; 11-03-2007 at 08:42 AM..
I just gave an example of what "GLOBAL IMPORTANCE" really means.Things like DIVERSITY, ENTERTAINMENT are just an indirect influence.
Actually it appears that you believe economics as the principal factor when determining what global importance "really means", but that's just your opinion.
The fact is,
the same folks who produced the graph you cite are the exact same ones who produced the ranking that I cite-only the one that I cite take into account things other then the number of law firms, accounting firms etc.
We already discussed this in the other thread, didn't we? According to the Brookings institution, Chicago is second most global city in the US. Learn to accept it, milky
Chicago is Second Most Global City in U.S.: Brookings
February 24, 2005
by Scott Goldstein, Metropolitan Planning Council Vice President of Policy and Planning
A new study by Peter J.Taylor and Robert E. Lang, "U.S. Cities in the 'World City Network " identifies the most globally connected cities in the nation and why this matters. Among the findings:
Campaign for Sensible Growth (http://www.growingsensibly.org/news/releaseDetail.asp?objectID=1830 - broken link)
from that link^
Quote:
New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles are the most globally connected. The study defines the relative economy of each region as being locally or internationally driven, important because the greater the global, or "external" investment, the greater the local economic gains that spins off the external investment.
I dont know where they get their stats from, but I suspect that they probably use that GAWC study regarding lawfirms and the like.
The reason I say that is because the Metropolitan Area in the US where foreign trade accounts for the greatest percentage of its total GDP is Seattle and San Francisco is 2nd. This is according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
In fact,
according to that same study released by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
Top 5 US Metropolitan Areas by value of exports(products made there and sold abroad)
1 New York $46.6 Billion
2 San Francisco $45.6 Billion
3 Los Angeles $34.7 Billion
4 Seattle $33.0 Billion
5 Detroit $30.5 Billion
Top 5 US Metros by value of manufactured imports
1 Los Angeles $51.8 Billion
2 New York $43.3 Billion
3 San Francisco $43.1 Billion
4 Detroit $33.7 Billion
5 Boston $28.5 Billion
So while I agree that law firms are important, there is much broader array of criteria to be considered when determining how globalized a place is.
The way I try to think about it is, this may sound a bit weird, but if a city was destroyed by some reason would the country go on as it usually does or would the whole country be affected by that event. Base my point off of Katrina. New Orleans was shut down for quite a while and despite a rise of gas prices (which happen all the time anyways) it really didn't affect the whole country as far as economically speaking
The study identifies world cities with strong ties to other cities and regions worldwide in order to determine how globally connected those cities are. It uses stats from the advanced producer service firms in each city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
from that link^
I dont know where they get their stats from, but I suspect that they probably use that GAWC study regarding lawfirms and the like.
The reason I say that is because the Metropolitan Area in the US where foreign trade accounts for the greatest percentage of its total GDP is Seattle and San Francisco is 2nd. This is according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
Your not gonna want to hear what Im about to uh-say, but in most rankings of these sorts, the entire Bay Area usually falls under San Francisco.
And San Jose doesnt suck at all. Its the best city to live in among the nation's 10 largest imo. People look at the skyline and think that gives them a correct view on the place. The fact is, San Jose really kicks some major butt.
You can't convince people here (this forum) of that. That's why the SF and SJ boards remain separate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
In fact,
according to that same study released by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
Top 5 US Metropolitan Areas by value of exports(products made there and sold abroad)
1 New York $46.6 Billion 2 San Francisco $45.6 Billion
3 Los Angeles $34.7 Billion
4 Seattle $33.0 Billion
5 Detroit $30.5 Billion
Top 5 US Metros by value of manufactured imports
1 Los Angeles $51.8 Billion
2 New York $43.3 Billion 3 San Francisco $43.1 Billion
4 Detroit $33.7 Billion
5 Boston $28.5 Billion
So while I agree that law firms are important, there is much broader array of criteria to be considered when determining how globalized a place is.
What are they exporting? Souvenirs on top of banking? That can't include SV numbers because, like I said, they've been declared separate.
You can't convince people here (this forum) of that. That's why the SF and SJ boards remain separate.
What are they exporting? Souvenirs on top of banking? That can't include SV numbers because, like I said, they've been declared separate.
Then why does Dallas and Fort Worth have separate boards but in the same metro? Houston would have won the largest metro in Texas easily and fourth-largest in the United States.
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.
