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.
I disagree, because stripped to its simplest form, does Raleigh give you a lived experience more comparable to cities in Richmond's general tier or Pittsburgh's general tier?
MSA Raleigh's size by population and economy illustrate where Raleigh is. CSA Triangle is the same size as these other cities' MSAs, by population and economy, so it still isnt a comparison of relatable "cities"...
I think the conundrum for Raleigh/Durham is that they are two cities which share employers, employees, and amenities, and the 2003 MSA split takes a hacksaw when even a scalpel would mess things up. And then people take the MSA info and try and compare it to Nashville or Richmond without context. The city of Durham, the city of Raleigh, and the Research Triangle Park are split between 2 MSA’s yet you are using one MSA worth of info for comparison.
Thankfully there is now county-wide GDP info for your hearts content. Wake/Durham sits at $105 billion. Davidson/Williamson/Rutherford counties (Nashville) is at $97 billion. Richmond/Henrico/Chesterfield is at $59 billion. There has been, is, and will continue to be a separation of the Triangle from the Greater Richmond area.
That seems strange. Dallas has been growing jobs but the overall GDP is down from the 2017 numbers? A news feed also just came out saying that Dallas has lost a lot of tech jobs. I thought they would eventually overtake Chicago but now Chicago has widened the lead. Oh well, we still have the Cowboys to watch.
I mean, maybe that's based on feeling but when you do the actual statistical analysis at current rates, Dallas isn't overtaking Chicago anytime even close to soon in terms of GDP.
Between 2013 and 2018, the average change per year for Chicago MSA's GDP was $22,360,087.60 while Dallas MSA averaged $23,576,436.40. That is a difference of $1,216,348.80 per year. As of right now, the GDP of the Chicago area is $176,954,966 above that of the Dallas MSA GDP. That means at the current 5 year average, Dallas will overtake Chicago's GDP in about 145.5 years (from 2018). So I guess we can expect that to happen sometime in mid 2163.
Of course, that's a long time - and nobody even knows what's going to happen in 20 years. But yeah, not happening anytime soon. Sorry to burst your bubble. Although Chicago's population is stagnant, it's gaining around the same amount of GDP as the Dallas area does on average each of the last 5 years.
At current 5 year averages, if anybody is going to overtake Chicago it's going to be San Francisco MSA (not counting San Jose - just the SF MSA) which would be on track for an overtake sometime in 2031.
I think the conundrum for Raleigh/Durham is that they are two cities which share employers, employees, and amenities, and the 2003 MSA split takes a hacksaw when even a scalpel would mess things up. And then people take the MSA info and try and compare it to Nashville or Richmond without context. The city of Durham, the city of Raleigh, and the Research Triangle Park are split between 2 MSA’s yet you are using one MSA worth of info for comparison.
Thankfully there is now county-wide GDP info for your hearts content. Wake/Durham sits at $105 billion. Davidson/Williamson/Rutherford counties (Nashville) is at $97 billion. Richmond/Henrico/Chesterfield is at $59 billion. There has been, is, and will continue to be a separation of the Triangle from the Greater Richmond area.
One way to look at it, sure, especially given the context of this thread. Thankfully we know that cities are graded with more nuance and context than this...
Here is the five-year real GDP per person change by MSA between 2013-2018 (I did over 700,000 because I was interested in seeing where Akron fit in).
For example, San Jose's GDP per person in 2013 was $111,966; in 2018 that went to $165,583. I subtracted the 2018 number by 2013 to get the per person increase of $53,617 (I used American Fact Finder's 5-year MSA estimates to get the yearly populations). This doesn't take cost of living into consideration, but it does add a layer of perspective.
I also am hoping to do it by CSA, though since it doesn't appear that 2018 CSA population estimates have been released, I would have to add up the estimates for each individual county in each CSA, which will be a lot of work.
1. San Jose: +$53,617
2. San Francisco: +31,232
3. Seattle: +20,794
4. Boston: +17,336
5. New York: +16,367
6. Los Angeles: +16,228
7. Salt Lake City: +14,540
8. San Diego: +13,683
9. Portland: +13,357
10. Denver: +12,930
It's a little absurd that SJ grew over 50k GDP per capita in just 5 years. The US GDP per capita is 62k as a whole so SJ has almost increase the entire US GDP per capita in just 5 years! Bubble anyone? I wonder how big the effects the next big Tech downturn will have on cities like SJ, SF, Seattle, Boston, and other big Tech centers?
One way to look at it, sure, especially given the context of this thread. Thankfully we know that cities are graded with more nuance and context than this...
Well, you were trying to use GDP as a vindication of the two areas being the same. But by all measures involving GDP, they are nothing alike. The Triangle is considerably wealthier, growing considerably faster, and few have viewed them being in the same tier in a long time.
Did you guys remember to calculate cost of living into these figures? Let's have this discussion right now before we continue because I know it will come up.
Well, you were trying to use GDP as a vindication of the two areas being the same. But by all measures involving GDP, they are nothing alike. The Triangle is considerably wealthier, growing considerably faster, and few have viewed them being in the same tier in a long time.
Few have viewed Richmond in the same tier as the Raleigh-Durham? Or Nashville is not in the same tier as Raleigh-Durham?
That’d be crazy if you were suggesting that. Austin, Charlotte, Tampa, Orlando, Nashville, San Antonio, New Orleans, Richmond, Jacksonville, Memphis easily seem like peers to me. Some bigger than others.
GDP is useful for lots of things. I wouldn’t necessarily use it as a “my city is in XYZ tier” in a vacuum.
Last edited by Charlotte485; 12-13-2019 at 07:35 AM..
Few have viewed Richmond in the same tier as the Raleigh-Durham? Or Nashville is not in the same tier as Raleigh-Durham?
That’d be crazy if you were. Austin, Charlotte, Tampa, Orlando, Nashville, San Antonio, New Orleans, Richmond, Jacksonville, Memphis easily seem like peers to me. Some bigger than others.
GDP is useful for lots of things. I wouldn’t necessarily use it as a “my city is in XYZ tier” in a vacuum.
There was a time in my lifetime where Raleigh and Richmond were the same size in city population, and I think both were thought of as the sleepy Southern capitals. GDP among other things have separated them out from each other for most people. I don’t think anyone is lumping in Tampa with Richmond or Memphis, your tiers seem all out of whack unless you only have like 3 tiers.
Though to be clear, Nashville and the Triangle are in the same tier to me.
Last edited by Heel82; 12-13-2019 at 07:51 AM..
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.
