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.
Gross Domestic Product's for both states and combined statistical areas is current 2013. Combined Statistical Areas are underlined, states are not.
GA and VA are virtually tied.
Also, amazing how certain CSAs dominate their states' GDP. What would Massachusetts look like without greater Boston? Would have to exclude the portion from other states, so a negative GDP is impossible--but MA would probably barely have 10% of its current total...
The most bizarre aspect of Combined Statistical Areas on C-D is the repetitive, bitter insistence by some extremely jealous and obscenely delusional individuals that there is some concerted effort to prop up some areas over others. It's absolutely hilarious.
Just to remind those who continue to get amnesia:
MSA: 25% or more workers commute from one county to another
CSA: 15%-24.99% or more workers commute from one MSA to the core counties of another.
The only reason bea.gov doesnt report CSA GDP is because they dont release Micro Area GDPs, but we can still add up the totala for the component MSAs, as Micro Area data doesnt really affect the total that much.
In any event, Ive been reading the whiners' complaints for like five years now and dont even pay attention to them anymore.
Kind of like the idea of the Bay Area being in 3rd place, no?
Also, amazing how certain CSAs dominate their states' GDP. What would Massachusetts look like without greater Boston? Would have to exclude the portion from other states, so a negative GDP is impossible--but MA would probably barely have 10% of its current total...
Great point.
In the case of California, without the LA CSA, the GDP is still about $1.3 Trillion.
I wonder if OP would still use CSA numbers if it barely benefitted the Bay Area. The Bay Area and maybe DC-Baltimore are the only areas that become much much larger as a CSA than as an MSA.
In the case of California, without the LA CSA, the GDP is still about $1.3 Trillion.
Well, yeah, California is massive in size. It's much bigger than the entire Northeast Corridor, which has like twice the economy of CA.
California and Texas are absolutely enormous states. It's not really reasonable to do a state-to-state comparison with these two states that happen to be huge in both population and geography.
Gross Domestic Product's for both states and combined statistical areas is current 2013. Combined Statistical Areas are underlined, states are not.
On the above you used Delaware Valley, a common reference But most definitions of the De Valley include additional areas like Trenton/Mercer County NJ and even sometimes Allentown etc which are now part of the NYC CSA with those the number is closer to 500B and more mirrors the Philly DMA market which as a media market are part of Philly by CSA are part of NYC
On the above you used Delaware Valley, a common reference But most definitions of the De Valley include additional areas like Trenton/Mercer County NJ and even sometimes Allentown etc which are now part of the NYC CSA with those the number is closer to 500B and more mirrors the Philly DMA market which as a media market are part of Philly by CSA are part of NYC
Yes, NY now includes Trenton and Allentown. It is quite the massive area.
You mean Los Angeles CSA, which includes way more than LA. .
You could say that about every CSA on this list
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.