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.
^That's using MSA designation for the US cities, which is unfair for some metro areas, such as the Bay Area, which is one region that is best reflected by it's CSA population
(and thus it's combined GDP, which comes in at just below Chicagoland's). Yet, due to the unique geography the Bay Area is split into 7 separate MSAs, some of which are split only because of arbitrary census bureau MSA definition technicalities that come into play because of that unique geography.
You have to look at the source and the year for that data. Check the BEA for current 2008 stats. You'll see that Houston MSA is larger than Philly MSA.
This may sound like sour grapes but let the record show that Houston + Washingtons metros are 2x the physical size of Philaldephias metro. Philadlephia has a 1/2 dozen nearby micro-regions($100 B GDP) such as Trenton,AC,LV which would be encaptured if they were in sunbelt region but are not included in Phillys metro for whatever reason.
Trenton is 15 miles from the NE border of Philadlephia. Trenton is as close to Philadlephia as Sugarland is to Houston or Fairfax is to Washington.Yet not included in the stats which as you can see can distort reality.
No sour grapes necessarily. I see what you're saying. But I do disagree. There are methods used to designate what areas are MSAs and whatnot. With that, whether or not Houston is larger landwise than Philly, IMO, is insignificant. Adding Trenton GDP I still don't think would give Philly a higher GDP than Houston's GDP. It may be hard for some posters to realize, not saying you specifically, but Houston really is an economic giant despite it not necessarily being "urban."
You have to look at the source and the year for that data. Check the BEA for current 2008 stats. You'll see that Houston MSA is larger than Philly MSA.
The great thing about the internet is that each individual can find a dozen group of facts + figures to support their argument. Who is right is anyones guess. I believe the lastest BEA figures you are referring to is REAL GDP which entails a complex formula involving inflation, c.o.l. and other convoluted elements.
1970 metro Philadlephia had 5 M people in its metro, Houston 2.25 M. Over the past 40 years Houston has grown at much more robust rates than Philadlephia but keep in mind that Houstons stats have been drawn from a geographical area of nearly 11,000 sq miles while Philadephia has been suppressed to 4,900 sq miles. If Philadlephia were afforded the same 11,000 sq miles it would be pushing 9 M people. Without infringing on NYC or Baltimores metro regions.
The Dc csma is a ridiculous 150-160 miles long. Everyone elses metro is 10,000 sq mi +. Philadelphia is 4,900 sq mi..
With that, whether or not Houston is larger landwise than Philly, IMO, is insignificant. Adding Trenton GDP I still don't think would give Philly a higher GDP than Houston's GDP.
You want insignificant?
How about if we take Galveston and Sugarland + all points S +W away from Houstons MSA and simutaneously add Trenton,Atlantic City,Cape May,Dover,Lancaster,Reading, Lehigh Valley to Philadlephia.
Thats the scenario if the land area was equal between the 2 metroes.
How about if we take Galveston and Sugarland + all points S +W away from Houstons MSA and simutaneously add Trenton,Atlantic City,Cape May,Dover,Lancaster,Reading, Lehigh Valley to Philadlephia.
Thats the scenario if the land area was equal between the 2 metroes.
You could go that route if you want. Or maybe the Houston area actually has a draw, kind of like the way LA and Chicago do, that its economic influence covers that large an area. This is why I say the land area is insignificant. If Houston lost 5000 square miles, do you think it would lose 100 billion dollars in economic output? This is speculation but i'd be interested in seeing your argument.
I also don't follow your issue with the BEA. And why bring up the 1970s in a current argument? I'm lost on that one too.
You could go that route if you want. Or maybe the Houston area actually has a draw, kind of like the way LA and Chicago do, that its economic influence covers that large an area.
In the 10,000 sq mi surrounding Houston there are approx 6 M people. In the 10,000 sq mi surrounding Philly there are probably 11M-12M people. 6 M in Philly metro(4900 sq mi), another 3M that should be included in Philly metro if it were given similar metro criteria as its peers, the other 2M-3M are in Central + Coastal jersey which rightfully are not part of metro Philly but are part of a continuous intermetropolitan region nonetheless.
The Philaldephia region is every bit of a draw as Houston. the only difference I see is that the counties in Houston are 2x as large allowing Houston 2x the land area of Philadelphia. Remove the N W county lines of Chester,Montgomery,Bucks Counties,New Castle Counties and Phillys metro baloons to about 9M and is still smaller than Houstons geographical metro area.
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.
