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.
South: +$942,567 % of Total State Contribution to Regional GDP Growth
Texas: 35.5
Florida: 16.2
Georgia: 9.3
North Carolina: 8.7
Tennessee: 6.3
Virginia: 6.0
South Carolina: 3.6
Oklahoma: 3.1
Kentucky: 3.1
Alabama: 3.0
Arkansas: 1.9
Louisiana: 1.3
Mississippi: 1.3
West Virginia: 0.7
West: +$786,957 % of Total State Contribution to Regional GDP Growth
California: 63.2
Washington: 10.4
Colorado: 7.2
Arizona: 5.5
Utah: 3.6
Oregon: 3.0
Nevada: 2.7
Hawaii: 1.6
Idaho: 1.2
Montana: 1.0
New Mexico: 0.8
Wyoming: -0.1
Alaska: -0.2
Midwest: +$621,236 % of Total State Contribution to Regional GDP Growth
Illinois: 19.6
Ohio: 18.2
Michigan: 12.8
Minnesota: 9.9
Indiana: 8.6
Wisconsin: 8.4
Missouri: 6.1
Iowa: 5.3
Nebraska: 3.6
North Dakota: 3.0
South Dakota: 1.4
Northeast: +$544,611 % of Total State Contribution to Regional GDP Growth
New York: 42.8
Pennsylvania: 18.5
Massachusetts: 14.2
New Jersey: 13.8
Maryland: 9.1
Connecticut: 5.2
DC: 3.4
Delaware: 1.9
New Hampshire: 1.8
Rhode Island: 1.4
Maine: 1.0
Vermont: 0.7
Average Total State Growth By Region, in Millions
South: $67,326.2
West: $60,535.2
Midwest: $51,769.7
Northeast: $51,648
Average State % Growth By Region
Midwest: +23.0%
South: +17.40%
Northeast: +16.0%
West: +15.5%
Dallas and Austin are the only reason that wasn't a 50+ billion figure.
Maybe. San Antonio (really all of the I-35 corridor in Texas). Most o the decline came in west Texas and the Panhandle. Houston slowed a bunch in job growth (not sure if it went negative or not...east side Houston is booming).
This thing confuses me, now that I look at the source. I see where the OP got the table shown, but what does it mean, "never developed study skills in high school?" I ask because the same Excel document says Texas's real GDP grew by 3.8% despite the other table showing a decline.
Yeah, the United Van link is completely silly. It's meaningless, for obvious reasons.
And the issues in Upstate NY have nothing to do with the issues in the NYC metro. Two totally different set of circumstances.
Actually it's a survey of HR people, not how many moving vans they lease.
As far as upstate/downstate, I thought we were talking about states, not metro areas. Heck with that in mind, let me cook the books on my state only using the best performing counties.
Interesting how GDP is generally correlated with population, but not always. Georgia and North Carolina have virtually the same population and GDP, for example. But Connecticut is well over double Mississippi's level, despite only having about 20% more population (3.6 million vs. 3 million).
My guess is that the data from a few years ago would have shown Texas and other energy dependent states with some of the nation's highest rates of GDP growth. 2015 was a down cycle, but over the long term such states will perform much better, particularly as their economies diversify.
Wages are generally low as well, even comparing them to the Midwest.
As is the cost of living so, your point is?
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.
Or is that intentional, as I don't see Maryland either?
