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.
Well of course, AT Kearny and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs are going to make sure SF ranks low in their little ranking. Envy leads people to do all sorts of stuff.
In the meantime, the Bay Area has a larger and more robust economy, is more international, wealthier and more diverse.
So yeah...
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrfox
This is why despite the fact that you sometimes provide good insight and information, people don't put much stock anything you say. I'm sure they were just green with envy and ranked San Francisco low as they shook their fists and frowned.
Yep, and regardless of this thread in particular (as you mention), he is, in my opinion, one of the more informative/interesting posters on here, but can be a bit homer like... funny for such a nationally important area... (just glad we didn't have to hear about how many b/millionaires per capita are in Oakland...)
2013 GDP:
Chicago: $585,900 Million
San Francisco: $360,395 Million
San Jose: $173,908 Million
Even when you combine San Francisco MSA with San Jose MSA, Chicago STILL has a higher GDP by $51.597 Billion
Haha
First off lets look a little closer at how sad this is, for you.
And btw, the Chicago MSA had a 2012 GDP of 571.008 billion according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis(bea.gov)--funny cause you correctly quoted SF and SJ but somehow padded Chicago by about 15 billion dollars. Do u happen to work at AT Kearny? LOL
Anyhow,
Chicago MSA population 2012..... 9,522,434
SF & SJ MSAs population 2012.... 6,349,848
Per Capita GDP 2012
SF & SJ MSA $84,142
Chicago MSA $59,967
And now, Inconvenient Truth Time:
4. San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA
$606.743 Billion
Napa, CA Metro Area $7.372 Billion
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA Metro Area
$360.495 Billion
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Metro Area
$173.908 Billion
Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA Metro Area $20.325
Billion
Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA Metro Area $9.574
Billion
Stockton-Lodi, CA Metro Area $20.390 Billion
Vallejo-Fairfield, CA Metro Area $14.679 Billion
5. Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI CSA $578.275
Billion
Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL-IN-WI Metro Area
$571.008 Billion
Kankakee-Bradley, IL Metro Area $3.481 Billion
Michigan City-La Porte, IN Metro Area $3.786
Billion
Yep, and regardless of this thread in particular (as you mention), he is, in my opinion, one of the more informative/interesting posters on here, but can be a bit homer like... funny for such a nationally important area... (just glad we didn't have to hear about how many b/millionaires per capita are in Oakland...)
Sorry darling, I just get sucked into these little spats.
Actually you're quoting 2012 numbers. I was quoting 2013 numbers. I also knew you'd bring up per capita GDP. You said smaller economy - per capita has nothing to do with how big or small something is.
So let me ask you this again - what proof do you have that this has anything to do with increasing Chicago's world ranking with anything, even though they aren't even in the top 2 cities ranked in NA in this list? You never answered this. Please provide me and everyone else with proof about this. I have no idea why you're even picking on Chicago with this when Toronto, Boston, and DC are also ranked above San Francisco. But I'm sure you're just going to quote that last part and not give me any proof to support your accusations that this is some magical Chicago conspiracy.
I seriously dont understand your fascination with Chicago in this instance.
The US govt has NOT released 2013 data, sorry try again.
You're right - I got the source from www.usamayors.org. It's preliminary data, not official - so yes you're correct.
Even so, and using 2012 numbers - Chicago's economy is still larger than San Francisco MSA + San Jose MSAs. Even when you expand it out to the CSA and 7 MSAs for that, the CSA still hardly has a larger economy. By $28,468 Million Fun fact: The distance from Watsonville to SF is about the same as Chicago to Milwaukee. If you added Milwaukee to the Chicago CSA, then Chicago would have a larger GDP again.
I'm also waiting for your proof that this organization and company is behind some giant conspiracy theory to make some cities look bad and others look better.
Well of course, AT Kearny and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs are going to make sure SF ranks low in their little ranking. Envy leads people to do all sorts of stuff.
In the meantime, the Bay Area has a larger and more robust economy, is more international, wealthier and more diverse.
So yeah...
You've always been such a smart and level headed poster. Why going off the deep end like this all the sudden? You sound frantic.
You've always been such a smart and level headed poster. Why going off the deep end like this all the sudden? You sound frantic.
Chicago boosterism is at an all time high, usually this happens when once firmly held territory starts to become blurry, and status threatened, 18montclair is rightfully showing stats that the Bay area has surpassed Chicago in economic output and diversity.
You're right - I got the source from www.usamayors.org. It's preliminary data, not official - so yes you're correct.
Even so, and using 2012 numbers - Chicago's economy is still larger than San Francisco MSA + San Jose MSAs. Even when you expand it out to the CSA and 7 MSAs for that, the CSA still hardly has a larger economy. By $28,468 Million Fun fact: The distance from Watsonville to SF is about the same as Chicago to Milwaukee. If you added Milwaukee to the Chicago CSA, then Chicago would have a larger GDP again.
When 15%+ of all workers in Milwaukee commute to the Chicago MSA then you will combine, thats how its done.
Not everything is random and biased like how its done at AT Kearny. LOL
Quote:
I'm also waiting for your proof that this organization and company is behind some giant conspiracy theory to make some cities look bad and others look better.
Oh I have no proof darling, its just my opinion based on the ranking not matching up with stats and growth rates, and then to read that the Chicago Council on Global Affairs is involved. Too much conflict of interest for my tastes.
But then, we have our individual thresholds of tolerance as far as corruption is concerned so...
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.
