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.
Yeah, I certainly get preferring San Diego simply because it's in a much nicer spot on the continent.
I'd consider San Diego weak from an economic perspective, however. It has a high cost of living yet lower incomes and education levels compared to Austin. San Diego is also a footnote when it comes to innovation in California, whereas Austin is the startup capital of not only Texas but the entire south. So in the context of this thread, I have no idea how VC funding is supposed to be points for San Diego.
Where did you get these ideas?? San Diego is primarily an innovation economy. It's one of the top three biotech centers in the world. Torrey Pines Mesa is the single greatest concentration of medical research in the world. SD is the global center of the wireless communications industry. Only San Jose has more patents per capita than SD. In 2020, SD pulled in $6B in venture capital versus $2B for Austin. The reason venture capital is important is that it's an indication of investment in innovative companies.
A lot of people mistake Austin for an innovation economy because many tech companies have offices there. The truth is, these tech companies move their low value/low cost operations to Austin.
Directly compared they’re not on the same level, and San Diego definitely holds the more desirable region, but when considering their economic output vs population they are very similar when looking at them in terms of percentages. Both hit hard with smaller populations. And they hit at very similar GDP per capita levels. Austin’s GDP is also increasing much faster than San Diego’s is as well.
But I don't get why this makes a difference or really matters at all. Boulder has a similar GDP per capita to NYC...which is interesting, but otherwise pretty much just some fact.
Are you doing the comparison of Austin vs. San Diego relative to their respective in-state competition? If so, I can see why Austin is more impressive. (sorry, this thread wasn't exactly clear on how we were supposed to compare the third city)
EDIT: saw your other post clarifying. Sorry--it seems you interpreted the thread similar to me (and also concluded that Austin is more impressive as a third city, respective to its in-state peers)
Quote:
That is to state, Austin has a similar level of affluence in terms of population. Austin particularly has also not been a destination for anywhere near as long as San Diego has and for it to have obtained 2/3rds of its population and GDP isn’t exactly something to sneeze at.
Austin has been a state (and for a short period, national) capital since...1839? The city has grown by 20% each decade since 1850, with the exception of 1910s at 17% growth. It has very much been a destination for its entire existence and has grown by relatively similar rates (%). San Diego simply outperformed it--historically, even though they had similar sizes up until the 1930s. Austin did not have any more disadvantages than San Diego relative to its in-state peers.
Last edited by newgensandiego; 02-13-2021 at 04:20 PM..
Yeah, I certainly get preferring San Diego simply because it's in a much nicer spot on the continent.
I'd consider San Diego weak from an economic perspective, however. It has a high cost of living yet lower incomes and education levels compared to Austin. San Diego is also a footnote when it comes to innovation in California, whereas Austin is the startup capital of not only Texas but the entire south. So in the context of this thread, I have no idea how VC funding is supposed to be points for San Diego.
Sort of an exaggeration...
You do realize that we are comparing two regions that outperform regions of similar size economically, right? I mean, San Diego's economy is the same size as Phoenix (which has 50% more people)...and that's not even including Tijuana's economy, which is very much intertwined with San Diego's. Austin might perform better than San Diego respective to its population, but to say SD is "weak from an economic perspective" is just patently false.
...but also, Austin wins because of a single industry...tech? There are other industries beyond tech
But I don't get why this makes a difference or really matters at all. Boulder has a similar GDP per capita to NYC...which is interesting, but otherwise pretty much just some fact.
Are you doing the comparison of Austin vs. San Diego relative to their respective in-state competition? If so, I can see why Austin is more impressive. (sorry, this thread wasn't exactly clear on how we were supposed to compare the third city)
EDIT: saw your other post clarifying. Sorry--it seems you interpreted the thread similar to me (and also concluded that Austin is more impressive as a third city, respective to its in-state peers)
Austin has been a state (and for a short period, national) capital since...1839? The city has grown by 20% each decade since 1850, with the exception of 1910s at 17% growth. It has very much been a destination for its entire existence and has grown by relatively similar rates (%). San Diego simply outperformed it--historically, even though they had similar sizes up until the 1930s. Austin did not have any more disadvantages than San Diego relative to its in-state peers.
Austin generally speaking was not seeking growth for a large portion of its existence early. Historically from its inception up until about the 70's, San Diego grew faster. Austin did not seek to acquire any industry outside of government operations until the 80's when tech companies started to seek Austin due to UT. It was a laid back college town mainly intended for the retirement of elites in the oil industry or employees in government. It was tech that brought exponential numbers people in terms of raw numbers to Austin and did so rather hastefully for the time period speaking where as percentage numbers dropped off for SD for comparable periods of time (although growth in raw numbers may have remained consistent in SD, in raw numbers tech has undoubtedly brought considerable increase to Austin which allows its growth percentages year over year to remain consistent.)
Looking at growth in percentages, San Diego did receive a larger portion of growth between the 1900's and 1970's but that has largely cooled off where Austin remained fairly consistent in growth trajectory.
If it wasn't specifically for tech, then Austin probably wouldn't sit in the light of even San Antonio but it is the reason that I bring up because Austin has not been actively seeking to become a major destination until fairly recently in the grand scheme of things as it did not have a premier industry outside of Government until mostly after much of SD's growth stabilized.
Austin through most of its history actually resisted growth either through local opposition or environmental concerns, it is also why Austin has terrible infrastructure. People thought if they didn't build it, people wouldn't come.
Last edited by Need4Camaro; 02-13-2021 at 05:08 PM..
You do realize that we are comparing two regions that outperform regions of similar size economically, right? I mean, San Diego's economy is the same size as Phoenix (which has 50% more people)...and that's not even including Tijuana's economy, which is very much intertwined with San Diego's. Austin might perform better than San Diego respective to its population, but to say SD is "weak from an economic perspective" is just patently false.
...but also, Austin wins because of a single industry...tech? There are other industries beyond tech
I won't deny that Austin is definitely a media darling. I get why that gets annoying and it does take digging to get real information and facts but just considering where Austin is coming from, the political challenges it faces at state level, and how its attracting so many high level tech companies, I mean yes we can say its because tax incentives but those companies could also choose DFW and Houston, of which Austin is much smaller than - its doing remarkably well for the hand it has to deal with.
I will agree that Austin could use more investment outside of tech specifically and diversity in the job market but can also understand why it may be unlikely. In terms of VC, Austin's hands are tied by the state, California will always out-perform in this arena, however; if Austin were to magically overnight land somewhere in California it probably wouldn't take even 5 years before it was pretty much another city in California ventura-wise.
Note: Excuse any perceived attitude in my response. I love this conversation and agree with your points! Also, it's been incredibly enlightening in seeing how these two cities' stories have similar parallels
You are doing a lot of storytelling, but I'm just not sure what (new) point you are making. Austin has had impressive growth...that's obvious. San Diego also had impressive growth. What more is there to say? Is it more impressive that Austin's growth has been fueled from one industry? Not really. Is it more impressive that Austin's has been more recently (vs. San Diego in the 80s)? No.
Can't we just stick to the current day comparison of the two? What does their historical development have to do with anything? San Diego's growth curve was higher and earlier than Austin's. Austin's current growth is driven by tech. That's all fine and dandy, but let's stick with comparing the cities as they exist now and as they relate to their in-state neighbors. And in that comparison, we both agree that Austin is more impressive.
There's also this pointless argument that Austin could have/should have/would have done even better if it actually tried to grow. Honestly, I don't care for the speculation. Also, it's completely ignoring the fact that San Diego's history (and California) has also been marked by anti-growth as well. The 30ft coastal height limit was enacted in 1970. Huge swaths of the county and urban areas have significant restrictions on development to preserve nature corridors. NIMBYism has existed in San Diego since the 1960s at the latest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro
Austin generally speaking was not seeking growth for a large portion of its existence early. Historically from its inception up until about the 70's, San Diego grew faster. Austin did not seek to acquire any industry outside of government operations until the 80's when tech companies started to seek Austin due to UT.
There are definitely a lot of parallels between the two. San Diego's relevance was because the government built up the area. Defense arguably was the only state- or nationally-relevant industries until the 80s as well, when life sciences started moving there. This was also in response to UC San Diego (founded 1960) and the growth of the Torrey Pines cluster. Trade became a big deal after NAFTA in the '90s.
Also, remember that San Diego didn't actively seek to acquire industry outside defense until the 80s when it began to build life sciences and telecommunications. Since then, San Diego is now a global center for biotech & life sciences and has the 2nd most patents per capita behind San Jose. San Diego "actually trying" resulted in a more impressive outcome than Austin "actually trying". The timelines are closer than you think, so props to SD for building these industries.
Quote:
It was a laid back college town mainly intended for the retirement of elites in the oil industry or employees in government.
And San Diego was a laid back beach town with active-duty military and retired military.
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.
okay you got us there.. ..its fracking cold here right now, like an ungodly, undeserving, untexan, unbelievable, fracking COLD.
