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.
Per capita data is usually a really weird metric. The wrong conclusion is usually made using that data.
Some people like to infer that the area is richer. It doesn't.
Yep, if you're just taking GDP and dividing by population you're basically leaving out every wealthy person who lives in that MSA/CSA but doesn't work. Areas with higher than average retirement populations look low but it doesn't represent reality.
Per capita data is usually a really weird metric. The wrong conclusion is usually made using that data.
Some people like to infer that the area is richer. It doesn't.
There’s a median income statistic for that.
GDP per capita is good for measuring output vs. headcount. That’s all. It’s not necessarily a measure of affluence, but rather of scale and efficiency.
That being said, there’s a healthy correlation between p/capital GDP and median income.
GDP per capita is good for measuring output vs. headcount. That’s all. It’s not necessarily a measure of affluence, but rather of scale and efficiency.
That being said, there’s a healthy correlation between p/capital GDP and median income.
Well, technically, I think labor productivity would be output divided but labor input. I'm not sure if GDP per calita is technically meaningful. Nationally, GDP is roughly equal to GDI. With the idea being that income is earned for everything produced. At the regional level, Idk if that concept holds as income may be earned by people who don't live in the MSA.
But, as you note, technicalities aside, GDP per capita, labor productivity and personal income data will all be strongly correlated.
San Jose and most of the other usual suspects have the highest personal incomes.has the highest per Capita income. Naples FL is perhaps the one place that does better on income vs GDP given the large number of affluent retires. https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/index.ht...nge=5&AppId=70
Well, technically, I think labor productivity would be output divided but labor input. I'm not sure if GDP per calita is technically meaningful. Nationally, GDP is roughly equal to GDI. With the idea being that income is earned for everything produced. At the regional level, Idk if that concept holds as income may be earned by people who don't live in the MSA.
But, as you note, technicalities aside, GDP per capita, labor productivity and personal income data will all be strongly correlated.
San Jose and most of the other usual suspects have the highest personal incomes.has the highest per Capita income. Naples FL is perhaps the one place that does better on income vs GDP given the large number of affluent retires. https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/index.ht...nge=5&AppId=70
If you look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics' QCEW, it can provide wages for each MSA which can then be divided by GDP to assess labor share of GDP.
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.
