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.
Nobody cares? well, its because he/she doesn't care about the future of the city he/she lives in, or people are too ignorant about the real issues nowadays.
Many people know why FDI did not name LA the city of the future and there's no need to call/write and ask them that question
No, I don't know. And really don't care either. I only care about facts and not postulations and surveys from random, no name, opinion makers.
Perhaps they felt the cities they named in their poll needed a little boost to help their weakening economies, like Chicago. Here are the latest and most updated figures released by the city of Chicago's economic development corporation, World Business Chicago. This is the kind of data I care about. So let's keep it real.
Foreign Direct Investment Group= no name? What an insult to the people's intelligence. And I am talking about the "cities of the future" here, my friend. Also, the size of the GDP is smaller/bigger partly depends greatly on the population growth of that city. Mexico city's GDP is bigger than either Boston or San Francisco and nobody cares because its GDP per capita is much less as compared to those two cities. The same goes for LA. Don't forget that LA has close to 1 million illegal aliens and the private sector job growth can benefit from that.
Btw, according to PriceWaterhouseCooper's estimate, Chicago has the annual growth between 2005-2020 around 2.3% vs. 2.2% for LA.
One important thing you should remember that LA economy is a manufacturing-based economy. Having said that means a big chunk of the LA economy is largely controlled by the global financial centers and major corporations in New York, Chicago, SF, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta..etc.
Hope the below will help to broaden your knowledge.
Cities of the Future criteria
Economic potential
* Percentage of the population under 25
* Adult unemployment level in 2005
* Change in adult unemployment 2003 to 2005
* Average annual earnings of employees in 2005
* Average annual earnings growth 2004 to 2005
* Fiscal balance 2005
* Fiscal balance 2004
* FDI stock per capita at the city level
* FDI stock per capita at the state/province level
* Foreign direct investment in 2005
* Number of foreign investment deals signed in 2005
* Three most significant inward investment projects
Based on those criteria, FDI named Chicago, Pittsburgh, Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Miami, New York City, Dallas, Seattle the cities of the future , alrite?
One of the reasons I don't think LA is viewed as the city of the future because according to the study by the California State University at Chico, LA is ranked near bottom when it comes to education and brainpower. Yet the housing market is in recession with a record number of foreclosures in LA Foreclosures hit record again (http://www.dailybreeze.com/business/articles/10834661.html - broken link), which could signal an economic downturn in the next few years.
Top 5
1. Raleigh-Durham, NC
2. Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA
3. San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA
4. Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV
5 Minneapolis--St. Paul, MN—WI 39.9%
Bottom 5
46. Northfolk-Viriginia Beach-New Port News, VA 47. Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA
48. Jacksonville, FL
49. San Antonio, TX
50. Las Vegas, NV
Smart in the Center -College Attainment
Top 5
1. New York-N. New Jersey, NY-NJ
2. Chicago-Gary, IL-IN-WI
3. Portland-Salem, OR-WA
4. San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA
5. Seattle-Tacoma, WA
Bottom 5
46. Indianapolis 47. Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA
48. Phoenix, AZ
49. San Antonio, TX
50. Las Vegas, NV
What is important (to me) is the growth rate of the Los Angeles area over the last 50 years. It's rather amazing how fast Los Angeles has surpassed Chicago in terms of population. Chicago has had a great deal of time to establish itself as a city, as has New York, but the West is still relatively young. After all, for a long time Chicago was part of the Northwestern region of the United States. So, let's see what happens in the years to come. Still, whatever happens, I do believe that NY, Chicago, AND Los Angeles will remain very meaningful cities within the US.
Also, downtown1, your link to that CSU Chico study does not work (404 error).
downtown1, I am not really interested in opinions and surveys as I said earlier. Only hard data and facts. Also, when it comes to "brainpower" LA exceeds Chicago on that front too according to World Business Chicago.
Number of 25 plus year olds who hold a bachelor's degree
New York 3.8 million
Los Angeles 2.2 million
Chicago 1.8 million
Wash., D.C. 1.5 million
Also your claim that "a big chunk of the LA economy is largely controlled by the global financial centers and major corporations in New York, Chicago, SF, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta..etc." is based on what? Do you have data to prove this? Besides, the LA area is home to more major publicly traded corporations than any metro area in the United States other than NY, according to World Business Chicago.
Number of major publicly traded companies in top U.S. metros
Also, when it comes to manufacturing, Chicago and LA are about even, with LA slightly ahead. You talk about manufacturing in such negative terms, but it actually represents a higher percentage and proportion of Chicago's overall economic output than LA's.
Manufacturing GRP for LA and Chicago in 2005 in millions
Number of 25 plus year olds who hold a bachelor's degree
New York 3.8 million
Los Angeles 2.2 million
Chicago 1.8 million
Wash., D.C. 1.5 million
Considering how much bigger than L.A. is than Chicago, it would be natural for Angelinos to hold more bachelors degrees. Chicago is close behind, despite being down in the population department by a million.
Considering how much bigger than L.A. is than Chicago, it would be natural for Angelinos to hold more bachelors degrees. Chicago is close behind, despite being down in the population department by a million.
That same point can be made when comparing Chicago to Washington, D.C. Chicago is nearly twice the size of the DC metro area and there is only a gap between them of 300,000 people who hold bachelor degrees.
That same point can be made when comparing Chicago to Washington, D.C. Chicago is nearly twice the size of the DC metro area and there is only a gap between them of 300,000 people who hold bachelor degrees.
Washington is a magnet for very highly educated people.
US Metro Areas by Graduate Degrees, 2007 American Factfinder
New York 2,082,537
Washington DC 1,026,501
Los Angeles 1,016,776
San Francisco 775,535
Chicago 740,960
Boston 636,587
Philadelphia 465,673
Atlanta 381,390
Detroit 373,203
Dallas 356,438
Houston 316,430
Opinions/surveys? you did not even know about FDI and its role (no name organization according to you) so don't even bother...
Well, according to the link you posted, the percent of total population of 25+-year-olds who hold at least a bachelor’s degree is what matters most. It shows LA is in the last place among major U.S cities when it comes to "brainpower". Using the raw data for your claim is just plain ridiculous because the LA metro population is much larger than most metros below.
Percent of total population of 25+-year-olds who hold at least a bachelor’s degree
Washington DC: 42%
San Francisco: 38%
Boston:37%
Atlanta:31%
New York: 30%
Chicago: 29%
Dallas: 29%
Philadelphia:28%
Houston: 27% Los Angeles:26%
The problem I see is that sometimes you blindly posted the stats without knowing what they really mean. An example of this is the stats regarding the private sector job growth. Read the below
"
Indeed, L.A.'s status as one of the nation's capitals of economic deprivation remains unchanged, with nearly 40 percent of the county's residents unable to meet their basic needs, close to one third of full-time workers earning less than $25,000 a year and more than 20 percent of children living in extreme poverty. This picture is aggravated further by low rates of health insurance and the rising cost of living
One of the chief causes of Los Angeles’ woes is an economy that produces too many low-wage jobs. Indeed, the Census data bear out that many of the very poor are working people. Los Angeles County has shed 170,000 manufacturing jobs in the past decade—jobs that were more likely to provide a decent standard of living for working people—and replaced them with service sector jobs, many of them paying meager wages. The rise in low-wage jobs is likely to continue; half the occupations with the most projected new jobs pay low wages. In addition, the number of jobs in the formal economy has declined since 1990, while there has been growth in the often marginal and low-paying informal sector and in the number of self-employed."
Also, as you already know that LA ranks fifth in the U.S where the Fortune 500 companies are headquartered. It is ranked after New York, Chicago, Houston, Dallas. And many of the major corporations that build facilities in LA are in New York, Chicago, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, San Francisco, Seattle. i.e Boeing, Motorola, Exxon Mobil, Verizon, IBM, HP, Mc Donald's, Sears, Time Warner, Pfizer, Coca Cola, Pepsi Co...etc. Stocks and futures contracts of these companies are traded daily on the New York and Chicago's financial exchanges.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRealAngelion
downtown1, I am not really interested in opinions and surveys as I said earlier. Only hard data and facts. Also, when it comes to "brainpower" LA exceeds Chicago on that front too according to World Business Chicago.
Number of 25 plus year olds who hold a bachelor's degree
New York 3.8 million
Los Angeles 2.2 million
Chicago 1.8 million
Wash., D.C. 1.5 million
Also your claim that "a big chunk of the LA economy is largely controlled by the global financial centers and major corporations in New York, Chicago, SF, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta..etc." is based on what? Do you have data to prove this? Besides, the LA area is home to more major publicly traded corporations than any metro area in the United States other than NY, according to World Business Chicago.
Number of major publicly traded companies in top U.S. metros
Also, when it comes to manufacturing, Chicago and LA are about even, with LA slightly ahead. You talk about manufacturing in such negative terms, but it actually represents a higher percentage and proportion of Chicago's overall economic output than LA's.
Manufacturing GRP for LA and Chicago in 2005 in millions
Last edited by downtown1; 11-05-2007 at 10:28 AM..
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.
