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 $4.367 Trillion
(AL,AR,FL,GA, KY,LA,MS,MO,NC,OK,SC,TN,TX,VA,WV)
West $3.301 Trillion
(AK,AZ,CA,CO,HI,ID,MT,NV,NM,OR,UT,WA,WY)
The South and West are now the 2 largest regional economies. Which speaks volumes about the strength of the US economy because despite the hyperdeveloped industrial complexes of the NE and Midwest, they still are now smaller economically than the South and West.
Our national economy is incredibly impressive.
These regional groups are purely artificial. Can you really call an area which spans from Arlington, VA to El Paso, TX a unified regional economy by an meaningful criteria? Likewise, what do LA and Butte, MT have in common? MT and MO probably has more economic ties to the Midwest (Chicago) than LA or Atlanta.
New York is the only US world class city by the broadest definition. Other
cities might qualify depending on which definition is used. This insecurity
of position is reflected in the comments...a lot of narcissism and ignorance in evidence. It's always been the case that facts are only part of the determination. Image also plays a role and LA and New York have been
more successful in this regard. The Midwest has traditionally been underrated but where have America's greatest economic and artisitc contributions orginated?.
I do not know but I do not think in Midwest. It may be uderrated but maybe for a good reason.
These regional groups are purely artificial. Can you really call an area which spans from Arlington, VA to El Paso, TX a unified regional economy by an meaningful criteria?
I suggest you write a stern email to the US Commerce Department telling them theyre wrong.
Quote:
Likewise, what do LA and Butte, MT have in common? MT probably has more economic ties to the Midwest (Chicago) than LA.
I suggest you write a stern email to the US Commerce Department telling them theyre wrong.
Yeah, we're talking about economics, not geography. Sure, the commerce department slices and dices the country for classification purposes. How meaningful is that in real life? Just because NJ is in a different state than NYC, is it not a part of the NYC metro economy?
Quote:
Montana is in the West. Period.
Yeah, and the sky is blue. What does that have to do with anything?
My point is that beyond very limited metro geographic areas, its difficult to speak of regional economies (IN A MEANINGFUL WAY) since the interregional ties are as strong (or stronger) than the intraregional ties.
Yeah, we're talking about economics, not geography. Sure, the commerce department slices and dices the country for classification purposes. How meaningful is that in real life? Just because NJ is in a different state than NYC, is it not a part of the NYC metro economy?
My point is that beyond very limited metro geographic areas, its difficult to speak of regional economies (IN A MEANINGFUL WAY) since the interregional ties are as strong (or stronger) than the intraregional ties.
Oh, so the data is wrong? Surprise, surprise. I think you are just nitpicking.
Yeah, we're talking about economics, not geography. Sure, the commerce department slices and dices the country for classification purposes. How meaningful is that in real life? Just because NJ is in a different state than NYC, is it not a part of the NYC metro economy?
Northern NJ is part of the NYC Metro Economy.
Quote:
Yeah, and the sky is blue. What does that have to do with anything?
It was spalekg who introduced the validity of the entire midwest into this conversation.
I simply informed him that as far as regions go, the midwest and northeast now have smaller economies than the south and west.
Quote:
My point is that beyond very limited metro geographic areas, its difficult to speak of regional economies (IN A MEANINGFUL WAY) since the interregional ties are as strong (or stronger) than the intraregional ties.
Los Angeles is to the West what Chicago is to the Midwest and what NY is to the Northeast.
Its the south that doesnt yet have a clear leader.
By the BROADEST definition used only New York IS world class. Perhaps you can check out some of the literature before reflexively disagreeing.
The fact that Chicago is in the Midwest is relevant given frequent bi-
coastal arrogance. Under-rate means something is not adequately
valued...there can be no justification.
Given regional population size as the criteria of meaurement means the
South is the dominant and most important part of the country. Perhaps
this warrants some re-evaluation of the current regional boundaries scheme. They were developed when the South was a backwater and
the West was empty.
Thank you. Can you now persuade donwtown1 to accept that fact?
In general, I try to avoid these fights about "we're #1", "we're #2", etc because they're pretty pointless. I mean its really all about chest thumping, penis length measuring, ego stroking, and I don't really see any reason to waste any more time than I already do on C-D forums.
But feel free to continue wasting your own time on this subject if you wish.
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.
Clarification
