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.
Umm no. You'd be wrong there. DC even without it's top industry is still top 5 GDP. Anyway you slice it, it's there. We're well past the phase of DC only great because of "government jobs". DC has more fortune 500 companies than Los Angeles.
Well I wasn’t thinking only GDP*. And I’ll leave the Baltimore question alone. But in general, I think NYC, LA, Chicago, and SF are the four main metro areas. I think at one point Philadelphia rounded out the top 5, then likely Boston. Now probably DC, but I can’t imagine it is written in stone. Outside NY for pretty much the entirety of our country’s history, the pecking order has been fairly fluid.
* But also, the government makes up around 1/5th of DC MSA’s GDP. It’s not a small percentage or anything.
I mean it is, and has been for probably the last 100 years (post WWI). But it wasn’t a top 3 city in the nation during that entire stretch. Heck, it probably wasn’t in the top 3 on the Eastern Seaboard until the last 30 years. The capital status only gets you so far, ask Sacramento.
Noted. But Sacramento isn’t in the top five in gdp
Noted. But Sacramento isn’t in the top five in gdp
But if going by gdp, DC isn’t in the top 3 nationally. DC is actually 8th in GDP of private industry, but is 5th once you add the government share. I don’t think GDP is everything to be fair. Regardless, for me, I don’t think something like “DC will always be top 3” is something I could ever endorse because I don’t think it has ever been top 3, and I don’t forsee that changing in the near-term or long-term.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,560,868 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heel82
But if going by gdp, DC isn’t in the top 3 nationally. DC is actually 8th in GDP of private industry, but is 5th once you add the government share. I don’t think GDP is everything to be fair. Regardless, for me, I don’t think something like “DC will always be top 3” is something I could ever endorse because I don’t think it has ever been top 3, and I don’t forsee that changing in the near-term or long-term.
You're a bit all over the place. One minute the government jobs is the only reason to you it matters, then when shown to you that DC's a top 5 region by GDP in private industry dollars, you say it isn't all about GDP. I agree it's not only about GDP, but that's exactly what makes DC the power it is because it's well rounded. Now you're saying well it isn't top 5 it's #8 not making any sense. When it comes to DC people always have so many excuses, it's laughable.
Since about the turn of this century, probably earlier, the top 5 certainly are in some order of NYC, Los Angeles, Chicago, DC, and San Francisco regardless of who's top 3. I don't see a path for any of the cities based in the OP article to crack the top 3 across the board. However there are cities in the aforementioned top 5, no matter where one ranks them, that can crack top 3. That's the difference. There will be aspects of Houston, Dallas, and Miami, or Atlanta that those cities will be good or great at and in some cases crack top 3/5, but I don't see any of those cities comprehensively sitting as a viable #3 in overall stature, influence, power, economic impact, education etc.
Atlanta, Charlotte, RDU…and that’s just in the southeast.
Quote:
Originally Posted by the resident09
Agreed. Odd to see a list of those that excludes Atlanta. If this list is essentially measuring hottest cities coming from the sunbelt it should be considered a part of that group.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heel82
Maybe, but that doesn’t explain Austin missing when it’s probably the gold standard for rapid growth now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOVA_guy
I don't even think it's that regarding Austin.
Y'all are overthinking this.
The ranking is not odd at all.
It is clear when you look at the criteria.
Common sense would tell you that the list is based on Southern cities most likely to earn a spot in the NFL playoffs.
It's ridiculous to inquire about Austin or Raleigh & Durham when these cities don't even have teams.
It also makes sense that Atlanta and Charlotte were omitted. The chances of those making the playoffs are poor.
If anything, New Orleans is the city that is missing. They are leading and have an easier schedule remaining. But I see how they justified leaving it off and including Nashville. Winning the NFC isn't earning a spot in the playoffs. It's more like being pushed into it.
Compared to the heft of Dallas, Houston and Miami, and their widely popular QB's, Nashville seems like a long shot, but they are still in the game in a widely fluid but interesting Division.
You're a bit all over the place. One minute the government jobs is the only reason to you it matters, then when shown to you that DC's a top 5 region by GDP in private industry dollars, you say it isn't all about GDP. I agree it's not only about GDP, but that's exactly what makes DC the power it is because it's well rounded. Now you're saying well it isn't top 5 it's #8 not making any sense. When it comes to DC people always have so many excuses, it's laughable.
Since about the turn of this century, probably earlier, the top 5 certainly are in some order of NYC, Los Angeles, Chicago, DC, and San Francisco regardless of who's top 3. I don't see a path for any of the cities based in the OP article to crack the top 3 across the board. However there are cities in the aforementioned top 5, no matter where one ranks them, that can crack top 3. That's the difference. There will be aspects of Houston, Dallas, and Miami, or Atlanta that those cities will be good or great at and in some cases crack top 3/5, but I don't see any of those cities comprehensively sitting as a viable #3 in overall stature, influence, power, economic impact, education etc.
- “[i]t could be argued that DC will always be in the top 3.”
I took issue with this. I think it only really works if you are giving bonus points for government jobs, namely the fairly siloed jobs of Congress and the President. DC has been our capital for over 200 years, and for most of that time no one would have ever called DC a top 3 city in the country. It’s never been a thing.
I think you brought up CSA GDP. I bristled at both GDP and the CSA designation. I’ve been at the same place this entire time. DC MSA’s private industry is 8th in GDP ($471 billion in 2021), behind Boston ($489b) and Houston ($492b). It’s 5th in total GDP, so if looked at narrowly through total economic value very much including government, I could see how one could say DC was a top 5 city. With the caveat it’s not solidified in that 5th spot, I don’t think GDP is everything, and it still wouldn’t be top 3.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,560,868 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heel82
- “[i]t could be argued that DC will always be in the top 3.”
I took issue with this. I think it only really works if you are giving bonus points for government jobs, namely the fairly siloed jobs of Congress and the President. DC has been our capital for over 200 years, and for most of that time no one would have ever called DC a top 3 city in the country. It’s never been a thing.
I think you brought up CSA GDP. I bristled at both GDP and the CSA designation. I’ve been at the same place this entire time. DC MSA’s private industry is 8th in GDP ($471 billion in 2021), behind Boston ($489b) and Houston ($492b). It’s 5th in total GDP, so if looked at narrowly through total economic value very much including government, I could see how one could say DC was a top 5 city. With the caveat it’s not solidified in that 5th spot, I don’t think GDP is everything, and it still wouldn’t be top 3.
Well that was just one person's quote, not mine. I think it's pretty well cemented as in the conversation for anything 3-5 going forward the way things have shaped up the past few decades. DC is the least likely IMO to be bumped from top 3-5 status IMO, and yes that does go beyond GDP figures. If anything Chicago or SF would be closer to being bumped out the top 5 than DC. It's a national capital that's the global epicenter for policy which is not changing our lifetime. So I actually can see where he pointed out DC potentially becoming or remaining "top 3" because with a continued trajectory the next 50 years anything similar to the last 50 that would be true.
The private industry GDP #'s I only had for CSA, and that's why it was posted. It's also CSA for every other region on that list which includes many combined metro regions, so again let's stop making exceptions for DC CSA. I still take the numbers for face value. Once you get into MSA designations you start cutting off certain jurisdictions of areas that have clear overlap. We don't make excuses for LA that has less Fortune 500 companies than Minneapolis, let alone metro DC, nor do we take away it's primary industry that yes is private, but is not nearly as important to the nation as DC's top industry. Try taking out the top industry from the majority of that list and see if any of them still rank anywhere close to top 5 GDP.
I think what we're seeing happen is the stature of many major cities is increasing tremendously in places away from the coasts and clusters of population most known in the past. It's good for the US to have a strong combo over HOU, DAL, MIA, ATL and other upcoming cities in the Sunbelt that can absorb a lot of the growth and attention to balance out the nation.
But if going by gdp, DC isn’t in the top 3 nationally. DC is actually 8th in GDP of private industry, but is 5th once you add the government share. I don’t think GDP is everything to be fair. Regardless, for me, I don’t think something like “DC will always be top 3” is something I could ever endorse because I don’t think it has ever been top 3, and I don’t forsee that changing in the near-term or long-term.
Are we talking about commercial gdp or just overall influence? Can’t argue with the first part. But jmo DC is at worst the fourth most important city in our nation. I have no connection to DC as most of my life has been spent in texas
The private industry GDP #'s I only had for CSA, and that's why it was posted. It's also CSA for every other region on that list which includes many combined metro regions, so again let's stop making exceptions for DC CSA. I still take the numbers for face value. Once you get into MSA designations you start cutting off certain jurisdictions of areas that have clear overlap.
Bruh....lol. We both know it's sleight of hand to post CSA GDP figures and then declare "DC even without it's top industry is still top 5 GDP" when "DC" includes Baltimore simply due to proximity. They aren't regarded as a being anchors of a larger singular region with a distinct regional identity, and "DC" alone isn't used as shorthand for the DC/Baltimore CSA in real life as SF sometimes is for the Bay Area (which has long had a distinct regional identity). Along with LA whose CSA includes the Inland Empire, those are the only other CSAs on the list that combined sizable MSAs but they are often regarded as being more representative of reality on the ground than OMB delineations that result in a small handful of flukes due to natural and political geographical factors, especially in the West with its mountainous terrain and wildly varying county sizes. So yeah, the "DC" CSA is very much the exception in that listing. I honestly don't even know why the point would be argued as it's not a value judgement in any way; it just is what it is.
Also what you say of MSAs can be said of CSAs also, so the overlap factor doesn't automatically favor CSAs as the default statistical area to be used when looking at GDP. It's hardly a consensus that DC is truly handicapped in some way by its MSA delineation, and even if it were, no reasonable person would argue that the CSA delineation by contrast provides a much more accurate depiction of "DC's" reality.
I do believe there's an argument for DC at #3 but not by an inconsistent use of parameters (top 3/top 5, MSA/CSA, etc) that suggest a desired outcome.
But I absolutely agree with you that minimizing or downplaying a place's most dominant, influential, or visible sector is a nonstarter. There must be something to those government jobs the way other cities and states jockey over mere rumors of a sizable federal installation expansion or relocation and the complaints over high county household incomes in the DC region.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,560,868 times
Reputation: 5785
^^^ it's not an exception at all. There's no more excuses to be made just for DC. People will need to accept what it's definition includes at each level. The entire list consists of all of those regional GDP, by Combined Statistical area consisting of multiple cities. None of those places represent any singular city influence. That's the list and the measurement. It was the only list I had to go by, so it's why I was posted it. Otherwise we need to start doing these comparisons by city proper only. Again by MSA DC punches above weight across so many metrics, and it's why I'd say it can remain there or rise even more.
Last edited by the resident09; 11-19-2023 at 08:32 PM..
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.
Think about this calmly...
