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.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 11 hours ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,160 posts, read 13,444,010 times
Reputation: 19454
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by manitopiaaa
1. Washington CSA has more people than the Golden Horseshoe.
2. 75 million is the population of the U.S. Midwest, of which Chicago is pre-eminent. Are you implying that Toronto is the capital of the U.S. Midwest??
3. Chicago is the weakest of the U.S. 4, but is far more of an economic juggernaut than Toronto. See below.
4. Here are the OECD metro area GDP numbers. Toronto is the weakest link in the North America cohort:
*New York: 1,720
Everyone knows that the US metro areas and US GMP are a joke.
Some of the US metro area sizes are just laughable, indeed the NYC metropolitan statistical area is around 22 times the size of London at 13,318 sq miles (34,494 km²) and with a population approaching 24 million and with 1.7 trillion in gdp.
The Chicago statistical metro area covers 10,856 sq mi (28,120 km2) with a population of 9,458,539.
The Los Angeles–Anaheim–Riverside combined statistical area covers 33,954 square miles (87,940 km2), with a population of 18.79 million (2017).
The San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA Combined Statistical Area covers 10,191 sq mi (26,390 km2).
The Baltimore–Washington metropolitan area is a combined statistical area of 12,630.2 sq miles (32712 km2), and a population of around 9,764,315.
And so it goes on and on.....
For comparison the entire country of Israel is 8,522 square miles, Belgium is 11,787 square miles, Switzerland is 15,940 square miles, the Netherlands are 16,100 sq miles and Denmark is 16,639 sq miles. Whilst Wales in the UK is 8,005 sq mi, whilst the South East of England region is 7,373 sq mi and the East Anglia region is around 7,382 sq mi.
So you can make what you want of such US Metro GDP figures, although personally I just laugh at them, as they are pure nonsense.
Last edited by Brave New World; 02-28-2021 at 03:31 AM..
Europe. Toronto is a deadweight for the North American group.
Brussels is the de facto capital of the European Union
London is the capital of a P5 Security Council State
Madrid is the least important politically, but is a gateway to Latin America
Moscow is the capital of a P5 Security Council State
Paris is the capital of a P5 Security Council State
Chicago is the premier city of a region with 75 million+ people, the world's largest financial derivatives exchange, and the most productive and fertile agricultural region in the world
Los Angeles is home to the most influential cultural apparatus in the world (Hollywood)
New York is the seat of the UN + the 2nd biggest economy (far ahead of any others on the list)
Toronto is the economic center of a small country of 38 million people. It's not a national capital and doesn't have any notable influence outside its parent country.
Washington is the capital of a P5 Security Council State and the world's only extant superpower
Toronto screws up any chance North America had. It should be replaced with Mexico City.
Madrid is not a gateway to Latin America, and has a smaller economy than Toronto as do several European cities on that list.
1. Washington CSA has more people than the Golden Horseshoe.
2. 75 million is the population of the U.S. Midwest, of which Chicago is pre-eminent. Are you implying that Toronto is the capital of the U.S. Midwest??
3. Chicago is the weakest of the U.S. 4, but is far more of an economic juggernaut than Toronto. See below.
4. Here are the OECD metro area GDP numbers. Toronto is the weakest link in the North America cohort:
New York: 1,720
Tokyo: 1,655
Los Angeles: 1,173
Washington-Baltimore: 977
Paris: 822
San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose: 801
Seoul: 796
London: 779
Chicago: 664
Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto: 628
Dallas-Fort Worth: 489
Philadelphia-Wilmington: 449
Houston: 449
Shanghai: 444
Guangzhou-Foshan: 425
Boston: 410 (does not include Providence, RI)
Beijing: 406
Nagoya: 389
Atlanta: 371
Toronto-Hamilton-Oshawa: 358
Miami-West Palm Beach: 352
Seattle: 352
Singapore: 342
Hong Kong: 341
Shenzhen: 309
Sydney: 304
Tianjin: 269
Mexico City: 257
Milan: 255
Detroit: 254
Minneapolis: 254
Madrid: 253
Melbourne: 244
Phoenix: 235
San Diego: 235
Munich: 214
Berlin: 210
Denver: 195
Rome: 184
Ruhr: 184
Amsterdam: 183
Brussels: 183
Hamburg: 177
Stuttgart: 169
Stockholm: 167
Frankfurt: 166
Montréal: 163
Barcelona: 163
Dublin: 162
Perth (Australia): 158
St. Louis: 156
Portland: 156
5. Brussels is the capital of the E.U. That alone gives it far more power and influence than Toronto will ever have. Madrid is the capital of Spain, one of Top 4 players in the E.U. And again, being a leader of the E.U. (the 2nd largest economy in the world) gives Madrid far more influence than Toronto. London, Moscow, Paris are all UN permanent Security Council members. And Berlin is the de facto leader of the E.U. It's not about population size. It's about influence. Toronto's influence (be it geopolitical, economic, sociocultural) end at Canada's borders.
So would you argue that Madrid the laggard in the European list?
New York (1)
Los Angeles (7)
Chicago (8)
Washington D.C. (10)
San Francisco (13)
Toronto (19)
European big six:
London (2)
Paris (3)
Brussels (14)
Berlin (15)
Madrid (16)
Moscow (20)
Discuss power, influence, economics, education, wealth, other cultural aspects, etc.
Hmm... I'll break it down one by one given your criteria.
New York vs. London: Effectively a wash. Subjectively, I prefer London, but, such is life.
Paris vs. Los Angeles: I'd also say this is near a wash. I actually prob prefer LA from a dynamism/modern standpoint, but there's not a huge gap here either way.
Chicago vs. Brussels: Chicago. Brussels is high because of political power concentrated there, but Chicago is almost certainly a more dynamic city, at very least. At regional level it gets more interesting. But, Chicago is a monster size-wise compared to the still quite strong (and extremely strong for it's size) Brussels.
Washington DC vs. Berlin: Washington DC has more of the political power, that said, I think these two are roughly equal.
San Francisco vs. Madrid: San Francisco is a more influential cog in the global economy than Madrid is, even though I'd prob subjectively prefer Madrid as a city. Going about this unemotionally, SF is a global head of intellectual capital.
Toronto vs. Moscow: Moscow has more hard and soft power than Toronto does at this point. Edge goes to Europe on this one.
So, to me, that's 3 that are relatively equivalent out of those, 2 that are advantage US, 1 that is advantage Europe IMO. Now, just taking the Top 6 isn't telling the whole story. Europe has more urban presence overall, with 741.4 Million people compared to 330 Million in the US, plus, it is more urban in general and thus on average, has far more influential and more urban cities that are relevant overall, as it should. But, I think it speaks volumes about the US that it holds it's own so well here.
Everyone knows that the US metro areas and US GMP are a joke.
Some of the US metro area sizes are just laughable, indeed the NYC metropolitan statistical area is around 22 times the size of London at 13,318 sq miles (34,494 km²) and with a population approaching 24 million and with 1.7 trillion in gdp.
The Chicago statistical metro area covers 10,856 sq mi (28,120 km2) with a population of 9,458,539.
The Los Angeles–Anaheim–Riverside combined statistical area covers 33,954 square miles (87,940 km2), with a population of 18.79 million (2017).
The San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA Combined Statistical Area covers 10,191 sq mi (26,390 km2).
The Baltimore–Washington metropolitan area is a combined statistical area of 12,630.2 sq miles (32712 km2), and a population of around 9,764,315.
And so it goes on and on.....
For comparison the entire country of Israel is 8,522 square miles, Belgium is 11,787 square miles, Switzerland is 15,940 square miles, the Netherlands are 16,100 sq miles and Denmark is 16,639 sq miles. Whilst Wales in the UK is 8,005 sq mi, whilst the South East of England region is 7,373 sq mi and the East Anglia region is around 7,382 sq mi.
So you can make what you want of such US Metro GDP figures, although personally I just laugh at them, as they are pure nonsense.
I would imagine the US metro (CSA) figures have huge areas of empty space and national parks etc, which generate very little in the way of GDP?
In Australia we kind of use the American Definitions, Sydney for instance recorded 4.5 Million people in its urban area (1,687 km s) in 2016. However the more widely quoted Metropolitan (12,367 km 2) area had 4.8 million, while a huge portion of the 10,500 or so km 2 not in the urban area, is actually national park.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 11 hours ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,160 posts, read 13,444,010 times
Reputation: 19454
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielsa1775
I would imagine the US metro (CSA) figures have huge areas of empty space and national parks etc, which generate very little in the way of GDP?
In Australia we kind of use the American Definitions, Sydney for instance recorded 4.5 Million people in its urban area (1,687 km s) in 2016. However the more widely quoted Metropolitan (12,367 km 2) area had 4.8 million, while a huge portion of the 10,500 or so km 2 not in the urban area, is actually national park.
I should imagine many countries have such areas, and some US statistical areas are much bigger than many countries and are not really reflective of a cities gdp.
New York-Newark, NY-NJ-CT-PA Combined Statistical Area is around 22 times the size of London at 13,318 sq miles (34,494 km²) and with a population approaching 24 million and with 1.7 trillion in gdp.
It's worth noting that if you were to add a similar area as the CSA to say London, which would involve adding the South East and East of England (East Anglia),which is largely rural with London, and you would then have a GDP of $1.35 Trillion (USD).
South East of England region is 7,373 sq mi and includes the Thames Valley, whilst the East Anglia region is around 7,382 sq mi.
The South East Region has a population of 9.175 million (2019), the East of England has a population of 6.235 million (2019), whilst London's population is 9,304,000 (2020). The gives a grand total of 24,714,000.
We can all play silly games based on a cities surrounding regions, and it should be noted the regions around London have better public transport connectivity than most of their US counterparts, and the same applies to Paris, Berlin, Madrid etc.
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 manitopiaaa
1. Washington CSA has more people than the Golden Horseshoe.
2. 75 million is the population of the U.S. Midwest, of which Chicago is pre-eminent. Are you implying that Toronto is the capital of the U.S. Midwest??
3. Chicago is the weakest of the U.S. 4, but is far more of an economic juggernaut than Toronto. See below.
4. Here are the OECD metro area GDP numbers. Toronto is the weakest link in the North America cohort:
New York: 1,720
Tokyo: 1,655
Los Angeles: 1,173
Washington-Baltimore: 977
Paris: 822
San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose: 801
Seoul: 796
London: 779
Chicago: 664
Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto: 628
Dallas-Fort Worth: 489
Philadelphia-Wilmington: 449
Houston: 449
Shanghai: 444
Guangzhou-Foshan: 425
Boston: 410 (does not include Providence, RI)
Beijing: 406
Nagoya: 389
Atlanta: 371
Toronto-Hamilton-Oshawa: 358
Miami-West Palm Beach: 352
Seattle: 352
Singapore: 342
Hong Kong: 341
Shenzhen: 309
Sydney: 304
Tianjin: 269
Mexico City: 257
Milan: 255
Detroit: 254
Minneapolis: 254
Madrid: 253
Melbourne: 244
Phoenix: 235
San Diego: 235
Munich: 214
Berlin: 210
Denver: 195
Rome: 184
Ruhr: 184
Amsterdam: 183
Brussels: 183
Hamburg: 177
Stuttgart: 169
Stockholm: 167
Frankfurt: 166
Montréal: 163
Barcelona: 163
Dublin: 162
Perth (Australia): 158
St. Louis: 156
Portland: 156
5. Brussels is the capital of the E.U. That alone gives it far more power and influence than Toronto will ever have. Madrid is the capital of Spain, one of Top 4 players in the E.U. And again, being a leader of the E.U. (the 2nd largest economy in the world) gives Madrid far more influence than Toronto. London, Moscow, Paris are all UN permanent Security Council members. And Berlin is the de facto leader of the E.U. It's not about population size. It's about influence. Toronto's influence (be it geopolitical, economic, sociocultural) end at Canada's borders.
True, although this doesn't support your point of Mexico City or Montreal replacing Toronto well here.
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.
