Houston's New Peers? (Dallas, Baytown, Sugar Land: places to live, to move, pollution)

[SouthernBoy205]

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regi...gdpma_0211.png

People on CD has always talked about how Houston's economy is growing faster than others.

[HtownLove]

Radial Population gives an interesting look at Houston's peers in terms of development. I am omitting NY and LA cause they are clearly ahead and not our peer.


2009 Estimates of the Downtown (2 Mile Radius)

1. Philadelphia 243K
2. Boston 213K
3. San Francisco 211K
4. Chicago 160K
5. DC 155K
6. Miami 103K
7. Houston 75K
8. Detroit 73K
9. Atlanta 72K
10. Dallas 49K

5 Mile radius numbers in millions

1. Philadelphia 1.0
2. Boston 0.9
3. Chicago 0.9
4. DC 0.7
5. Miami 0.6
6. Houston 0.5
7. Detroit 0.5
8. DFW 0.4
9. SF 0.4
10. Atlanta 0.4

10 Mile Radius

1. Chicago 2.9M
2. Philadelphia 2.2
3. DC 2.0
4. Boston 1.7
5. Miami 1.7
6. Houston 1.6
7. Detroit 1.4
8. SF 1.4
9. Dallas 1.4
10 ATL 1.2

15 Miles:

1. Chicago 4.1M
2. Philadelphia 3.2
3. DC 3.0
4. Houston 2.9
5. Dallas 2.6
6. Miami 2.5
7. Boston 2.4
8. Detroit 2.3
8. SF 2.3
10 ATL 2.2

25 miles: In Millions

1. Chicago 6.2
2 - Philadelphia 4.7
3 - DC 4.7
4 - Houston 4.6
5 - DFW 4.5
6 - ATL 4.0
7 - SF 3.8
8 - Miami 3.7
9 - Detroit 3.6
10 - Boston 3.6

Houston, DFW and ATL doesn't have dense cores, but they outpace Boston and SF after a few miles.

Houston isn't near Chicago yet, but it ranks well with Philly, DC and DFW

Source: FreeDemographics

[Oildog]

Originally Posted by SouthernBoy205

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regi...gdpma_0211.png

People on CD has always talked about how Houston's economy is growing faster than others.

Hmmm...most of the blue patches are in areas that have something to do with energy. Maybe you should forward that link to Obama.

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by 14Bricks

And yet all those people keep sneaking into this country err immigrating here. I don't care what anybody says Mexico is a Sh*t hole country. Between the drug cartels, the crime, the corruption, the dirty water, the poverty.

How do you know that they are from Mexico City? (less than 20% of their population)

[crbcrbrgv]

Originally Posted by 14Bricks

And yet all those people keep sneaking into this country err immigrating here. I don't care what anybody says Mexico is a Sh*t hole country. Between the drug cartels, the crime, the corruption, the dirty water, the poverty.

With your statement, one could argue that America is a sh*t hole county. Between the drug dealing, the crime, the corruption, the dirty water (hey, there has to be a reason we are willing to shell out a dollar for 20 ounces of something that is practically free). Oh, and the poverty.

[Cowboys fan in Houston]

Originally Posted by Dopo

How do you know that they are from Mexico City? (less than 20% of their population)

Truth be told, most of the ones that come to the states arent.

I wrote a thesis on Mexican Immigration to the US in college and what parts of Mexico people come from. In the Houston area for example, Veracruz, Tamulipas, Tampico, Quintana Roo, Nuevo Leon, Michoacan, and Yucatan are the big contributors. In Dallas, San Luis Potosi, Aguascaleintes, Nuevo Leon, Queretaro, Zacatecas, and Chihuahua are the big ones. In Chicago, Guanajuato, Durango, and Jailisco make up the majority. Phoenix has the least diversified Mexican community in that almost all come from Sonora or Chihuahua. In Los Angeles, there isnt an area of Mexico that isnt represented in large numbers.

Mexico City, Monterrey, and Guadalajara have extremely stable populations that live very well. All you have to do is tour the Santa Fe area of Mexico City to see this. The "illegals" come from the rural areas with high crime and cartel ties. Honestly, if we lived places like those, can we say we wouldnt try at all costs to leave?

[14Bricks]

Originally Posted by crbcrbrgv

With your statement, one could argue that America is a sh*t hole county. Between the drug dealing, the crime, the corruption, the dirty water (hey, there has to be a reason we are willing to shell out a dollar for 20 ounces of something that is practically free). Oh, and the poverty.

Unless we get our act together in this country, we are on our way to becoming a sh*t hole third world country ourselfs. So you're right on that front.

[Spade]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

The GDP numbers that guy poster was deceptive. For SF for example, it included 3 large city GDPs. It included SF, Oakland AND SJ. for Houston he only used the Houston MSA. This wasn't an apples to apples comparison. It was a deceptive MSA to CSA comparison.

In fact, for Houston, DFW and Chicago the MSA was used, for Philly, SF and DC the CSA was used.

don't fall for cheap tricks

here is how the poster should have represented the info:
Chicago- 9.4M, $532B

DC- 5.58M, $425B
Houston- 6M, $385B
DFW- 6.37M, $378B
Philly 6M, $347B


SF- 4.3M, $325B
ATL- 5.2M, $272B

so Yeah, Houston may not yet be comparable to Chicago yet on GMP, although it has a higher per capita GMP than Chicago, but it has a higher GMP than SF. Don't be fooled, SF and SJ are NOT an MSA yet. Neither is DC and Baltimore. They have separate metros and separate things going on.

SF on numbers are rather unimpressive without SJ.

I would say that Houston is more in line with DFW, DC and Philly (I would also throw in Boston), and lower than Chicago but above ATL and SF.

People on here just rave about SF because it has a lot of people cramped into a small area. But it aint all that. Trust me, I have been there loads.
People are always pulling the wool over others eyes on here. Watch how they are gonna respond and try and twist the stats.


Edit:

Source:

Gross Metropolitan Product - Greyhill Advisors

Actually, I find SF number with 4.3 million pretty impressive myself.

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by Spade

Actually, I find SF number with 4.3 million pretty impressive myself.

It is, but you of all people should know that when multiple large cities/ metros run into each other, one should not take credit for all that is the area.

The Bay is a phenonenal area, SF may have drawn more than the others, but not all 8M people in the area are there because of SF.

Baltimore-NOVA area attracted a lot of individuals, but it is unfair to swallow up Baltimore, that has long been a big City, and say DC has a GDP of so and so.

And of course we have North Texas, where Dallas and FW has been working together and pulling resources to make the area great for 150 yrs. It is unfair to diminish FW's had in the deals. Dallas may have been the bigger player for most of the area's history but FW had a heavy influence too.

I am not saying that only these metros, absorb other metros without credit, Every last city in the country does. NY has swallowed countless large cities, but it is hard to deny that the zillions of people moving anywhere close to NY are moving there to take advantage of NY. What I am saying is that on CD people look at the proximity part of development and ignore the fact that San Jose is NOT SF. San Jose has its own history, its own economic engines, its own huge population. In Fact SJ is bigger than SF and gets 1st billing on the CSA name, and yet people still call it the SF CSA. SF does not in anyway or form have 8M people, neither does DC or Boston (don't get me started on that one)

[SouthernBoy205]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

It is, but you of all people should know that when multiple large cities/ metros run into each other, one should not take credit for all that is the area.

The Bay is a phenonenal area, SF may have drawn more than the others, but not all 8M people in the area are there because of SF.

Baltimore-NOVA area attracted a lot of individuals, but it is unfair to swallow up Baltimore, that has long been a big City, and say DC has a GDP of so and so.

And of course we have North Texas, where Dallas and FW has been working together and pulling resources to make the area great for 150 yrs. It is unfair to diminish FW's had in the deals. Dallas may have been the bigger player for most of the area's history but FW had a heavy influence too.

I am not saying that only these metros, absorb other metros without credit, Every last city in the country does. NY has swallowed countless large cities, but it is hard to deny that the zillions of people moving anywhere close to NY are moving there to take advantage of NY. What I am saying is that on CD people look at the proximity part of development and ignore the fact that San Jose is NOT SF. San Jose has its own history, its own economic engines, its own huge population. In Fact SJ is bigger than SF and gets 1st billing on the CSA name, and yet people still call it the SF CSA. SF does not in anyway or form have 8M people, neither does DC or Boston (don't get me started on that one)

Exactly!