Jump to content

Largest 15 US cities by GDP

closetohumping

By closetohumping
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

choripan

choripan 790

Posted
Posted (edited)

😡 <--Me, a Detroit homer, pissed we just missed at $284B. Our MSA should include Washtenaw County/Ann Arbor, which would put us around $313B (313 y'all!)

Source material if you're interested in going beyond the top 15: https://apps.bea.gov/itable/index.html?appid=70&stepnum=40&Major_Area=5&State=5&Area=XX&TableId=533&Statistic=3&Year=2021&YearBegin=-1&Year_End=-1&Unit_Of_Measure=Levels&Rank=1&Drill=1&nRange=5&AppId=70

Edited by choripan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captain Ron

Captain Ron 12935

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/us-cities-by-gdp-map/

TLDR - The south has risen, but looks like some of the coastal cities can still hang.  Boston is doing well for such a tiny geographic spot, Seattle tambien. 

 

We pack it in here. Though I think the place is much larger than most would give it credit for. I mean Boston georgraphically is pretty small, but the metro area goes pretty much north, south and west to claim a lot of area.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RDCanecutter

RDCanecutter 26514

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

Where does the metro breakoff point happen? They have Dallas including Ft Worth, but San Jose is distinct from San Fran/Oakland and Oakland to San Jose is roughly 10 miles further than Ft Worth to Dallas.

Well, this whole thing is just who knows who. Then over here you have favoritism.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19453

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Captain Ron said:

 

We pack it in here. Though I think the place is much larger than most would give it credit for. I mean Boston georgraphically is pretty small, but the metro area goes pretty much north, south and west to claim a lot of area.

Yeah, I think technically the Boston MSA (depends on if you use census version or media market version) extends all the way up into New Hampshire, down into Rhode Island, and extends a few dozen miles inland into Eastern Mass.  But for comparison, Boston the city...is as you say rather modest in size.  It's smaller then El Paso by 50,000 people and barely larger than Portland, OR.  It's also tiny, geographically.  City proper covers just 48 square miles.  That's smaller than mid-sized Texas suburbs like Pearland, Garland, and Mesquite.  

That map, no CR, should also drive the point home that this Red State/Blue State is fabricated bullshit.  Yes, that's important for the Electoral College, but that's it.  The real divide in this country as that map screams out---is urban/college-educated suburban v. rural/non-college suburban.  Or less-politically stated, places with private capital and jobs, and places without it.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
closetohumping

closetohumping 17504

Posted
  • Author
Posted
15 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

Where does the metro breakoff point happen? They have Dallas including Ft Worth, but San Jose is distinct from San Fran/Oakland and Oakland to San Jose is roughly 10 miles further than Ft Worth to Dallas.

I’m not really sure why but SJ is treated as a seperate gdp from sf.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bevo

Bevo 13609

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

I’m not really sure why but SJ is treated as a seperate gdp from sf.  

It should be, but it is kind of weird. San Jose to Redwood City is constant without breaks and San Francisco to Redwood City is constant with no breaks. So, the cutoff is purely arbitrary - Maybe they just split it at the halfway point.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
closetohumping

closetohumping 17504

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

How do you measure gdp for cities with corps that have national or international operations?   Does Spring get full credit for XOM by housing their HQ?  

Also who gets credit for Boeing?  lots of stuff in Seattle but they're moving their HQ from Chicago to Arlington.  Speaking of Chicago, some Texan needs to buy them back from them Yankees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Blotto

Blotto 23608

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, Bevo said:

It should be, but it is kind of weird. San Jose to Redwood City is constant without breaks and San Francisco to Redwood City is constant with no breaks. So, the cutoff is purely arbitrary - Maybe they just split it at the halfway point.

As their dataset has 384 members, it appears they just used the metropolitan statistical areas as defined by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/msa.asp). 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
52-80

52-80 19275

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

How do you measure gdp for cities with corps that have national or international operations?   Does Spring get full credit for XOM by housing their HQ?  

You dont sum the just the business entities, so you dont need to parse their geographic distribution.

Different ways to measure, but one way is measuring all the local spending

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elfenix

elfenix 34365

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, SimonBolivar said:

Where does the metro breakoff point happen? They have Dallas including Ft Worth, but San Jose is distinct from San Fran/Oakland and Oakland to San Jose is roughly 10 miles further than Ft Worth to Dallas.

OMB/census looks at commuting patterns.

Quote
Profile photo for Nancy Fagenson Potok
 
 
Former Deputy Director and Chief Operating Officer at U.S. Census Bureau (2012–2017)6y

Ok This may be more info than you asked for but, in short, San Jose is in a different Core Based Statistical Area from San Francisco because it doesn’t meet the criteria to be in the same one. Here are the key critieria summarized:

A core county with at least 10,000 people in adjacent territory to another county must share a high degree of social and economic integration with an adjacent county as measured by commuting ties. More specifically, there is an area containing a large population nucleus and adjacent counties that have a high degree of integration with that nucleus. For the outlying county, at least 25% of workers living in that county must work in the core area of the adjacent CBSA. In addition, 25% of employment in that adjacent county must be performed by people who live in the core CBSA.

One really important thing to keep in mind is that the CBSA is delineated for one purpose: to provide nationally consistent delineations for collecting, tabulating, and publishing federal statistics for a set a geographic areas. Here is what these delineations are NOT for: designating urban or rural areas or designating geographies for political boundaries or for formula based funding programs.

And one other thing: The definitions, criteria, and delineations are the responsibility of the US Office of Management and Budget (OMB), part of the Executive Office of the President. These delineations have been used for about 60 years and are made based on data collected by the Census Bureau. However, it is an interagency group that makes recommendations to OMB on the criteria for how these should be formed. The last time this happened was during the 2008–2010 timeframe, in preparation for the 2010 Census. After the census, the Census Bureau used the criteria to calculate the delineations.

If you want to know more about the process, the definitions, etc., you can read all about it in the Federal Register Notice that was published by OMB in 2010, in Volume 75, No 123. There is a link to it on Census.gov

or you can just google it.

There are lots of other details and some exceptions to the high level summary I just gave you, but the key points are that the topography of an area is completely irrelevant except as it may affect people’s commuting behavior.

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-Census-Bureau-consider-San-Jose-to-be-a-separate-urban-area-from-San-Francisco-Oakland

Edited by elfenix
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19453

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

That's a staggering statistic. The rest of the US accounts for only 3 trillion dollars. I would have thought agriculture alone would have been 5 trillion.

that part gets muddied up, as with many stats, with where exactly the wealth is produced.  And then where the corporate HQ that cash gets cleared through is located.  But yeah, this notion of the big cities is filled with welfare folk on the government teet while the countryside done be folks pulling demsvelves up by the boostraps is complete bullshit.  This site as much as anywhere should know that.  Most of us spend our days making sure the rubes in the rural/exurb areas get just enough government aide while we bleed them dry and create no jobs and  bleed their communities into oblivion.  And then the other part of our day is attracting talent, capital, and government obliviousness to the cities/MSA's we need it to be to prop up our way of life.  But tell me again how it's a culture war.  It's a cold war of attrition and that map proves it.  We're gonna keep the stupid, stupid.  And 20 or so MSA's gonna get so fucking well in the meantime, regardless of state.  America doesn't need 50% of America anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
goodiemob

goodiemob 13

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

that part gets muddied up, as with many stats, with where exactly the wealth is produced.  And then where the corporate HQ that cash gets cleared through is located.  But yeah, this notion of the big cities is filled with welfare folk on the government teet while the countryside done be folks pulling demsvelves up by the boostraps is complete bullshit.  

Who thinks this?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captain Ron

Captain Ron 12935

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, gsoda3 said:

That's a staggering statistic. The rest of the US accounts for only 3 trillion dollars. I would have thought agriculture alone would have been 5 trillion.

 

9 hours ago, YGIFS said:

that part gets muddied up, as with many stats, with where exactly the wealth is produced.  And then where the corporate HQ that cash gets cleared through is located.  But yeah, this notion of the big cities is filled with welfare folk on the government teet while the countryside done be folks pulling demsvelves up by the boostraps is complete bullshit.  This site as much as anywhere should know that.  Most of us spend our days making sure the rubes in the rural/exurb areas get just enough government aide while we bleed them dry and create no jobs and  bleed their communities into oblivion.  And then the other part of our day is attracting talent, capital, and government obliviousness to the cities/MSA's we need it to be to prop up our way of life.  But tell me again how it's a culture war.  It's a cold war of attrition and that map proves it.  We're gonna keep the stupid, stupid.  And 20 or so MSA's gonna get so fucking well in the meantime, regardless of state.  America doesn't need 50% of America anymore.

 

As a side to this - it would be interesting to see the GDP per capita and how that map would compare to this.

Chatted about this over dinner last night, you have the big cities making this, while the country makes ag/food. Its an interesting contrast/comparison. It sort of would put this into perspective.

There are some weird culture wars, but we do need each other in this whole thing. Those of us in cities need to eat, and those in the country need people to make money to be able to buy their food.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19453

Posted
Posted

Less than 2% of the country is involved in agriculture anymore.  And half of those folks are under the thumb of BigAg/Private Equity/Foreign Corporations.  We don't need them at all.  We just need their land.  They're walking dead and they don't know it yet.  The conversations in dark corners would terrify the shit out of these people.  They're worried about voting when they should be worried about their very survival.  They worry about friendly bank terms and subsidies when what they should be worried about is insignificance.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BabaYaga

BabaYaga 15332

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

^

be even funnier if China wasn't the main institutional investor in non-corporate owned U.S. farmland.  

Yep, they've been hoarding food for decades now - to the tune of a significant percentage of the world's reserves.  They have a generational food insecurity that stems from obvious reasons.  Shoring up the supply lines is the obvious play.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105487

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, gsoda3 said:

That's a staggering statistic. The rest of the US accounts for only 3 trillion dollars. I would have thought agriculture alone would have been 5 trillion.

On the one hand, there's a huge political movement that demonizes cities, "urban inner cities!", they're all dangerous and deadly places, all that shit.  On the other hand....cities ARE the economic engine.  America is wealthy in very large part because of the economic activity of its urban areas.  Cold hard fact.

11 hours ago, YGIFS said:

that part gets muddied up, as with many stats, with where exactly the wealth is produced.  And then where the corporate HQ that cash gets cleared through is located.  But yeah, this notion of the big cities is filled with welfare folk on the government teet while the countryside done be folks pulling demsvelves up by the boostraps is complete bullshit.  This site as much as anywhere should know that.  Most of us spend our days making sure the rubes in the rural/exurb areas get just enough government aide while we bleed them dry and create no jobs and  bleed their communities into oblivion.  And then the other part of our day is attracting talent, capital, and government obliviousness to the cities/MSA's we need it to be to prop up our way of life.  But tell me again how it's a culture war.  It's a cold war of attrition and that map proves it.  We're gonna keep the stupid, stupid.  And 20 or so MSA's gonna get so fucking well in the meantime, regardless of state.  America doesn't need 50% of America anymore.

Harsh, a bit over the top....but not a LOT over the top.  The economic future isn't "the heartland."  It is still needed, though, and has value:

2 hours ago, Captain Ron said:

As a side to this - it would be interesting to see the GDP per capita and how that map would compare to this.

Chatted about this over dinner last night, you have the big cities making this, while the country makes ag/food. Its an interesting contrast/comparison. It sort of would put this into perspective.

There are some weird culture wars, but we do need each other in this whole thing. Those of us in cities need to eat, and those in the country need people to make money to be able to buy their food.

The fact that there is a movement aimed at demonizing cities and urban dwellers is fucking social poison.  Not that urbanites haven't looked down on rural types with derision or contempt on their own, but that's an organic social phenomenon (self-styled sophisticates will look down on what they see as "hayseeds").  A better path would have been a simple reminder that we're all in this together.  Society needs much of what happens in rural America (esp. agriculture).  Society also needs the massive economic engines that cities are.  Some messaging that we all need to cooperate and collaborate, instead of treating each other as demons, would be mighty fucking helpful.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19453

Posted
Posted

I've noticed though the ratcheting up of demonizing urban dwellers has kicked up a notch in the last decade.  Mainly because "urban" went from being people of...you know.  But we can all acknowledge, politics aside, that college-educated people have started back into urban cores/CBD's in many metro areas.  Tens of thousands in several Texas cities, to the tune of tens of millions nationwide.  Capital and jobs are not just metaphorically, not geographically, insulating themselves into smaller spaces.  the club inside the club is getting more restrictive.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19453

Posted
Posted

So again, it's not red state/blue state, it's places with education & capital and places without them?  Actually, they have them, they're just provided by the government.  

so places with irony and places without irony?  Talent is moving to the south in droves.  But they're moving to urban/educated suburban areas.  No CR, just stats.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
closetohumping

closetohumping 17504

Posted
  • Author
Posted
59 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

On the one hand, there's a huge political movement that demonizes cities, "urban inner cities!", they're all dangerous and deadly places, all that shit.  On the other hand....cities ARE the economic engine.  America is wealthy in very large part because of the economic activity of its urban areas.  Cold hard fact.

Harsh, a bit over the top....but not a LOT over the top.  The economic future isn't "the heartland."  It is still needed, though, and has value:

The fact that there is a movement aimed at demonizing cities and urban dwellers is fucking social poison.  Not that urbanites haven't looked down on rural types with derision or contempt on their own, but that's an organic social phenomenon (self-styled sophisticates will look down on what they see as "hayseeds").  A better path would have been a simple reminder that we're all in this together.  Society needs much of what happens in rural America (esp. agriculture).  Society also needs the massive economic engines that cities are.  Some messaging that we all need to cooperate and collaborate, instead of treating each other as demons, would be mighty fucking helpful.

I'm far more creeped out in the country than I am the city.  Getting gas in a city vs getting gas in a rural gas station with Cletus hanging out in a booth.....

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Don't want to derail this to the CR, but the map below is instructive of the "divide":

muddy_america_2016_weru_animated-1.gif

Grab the 2020 one.  The Republican candidate one a couple of counties on the Texas border.  Insane.  NO cr

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PTINS

PTINS 3486

Posted
Posted

This is based on 2021 Data, during the period of the peak Covid impact.

That distortion is not necessarily representative of the "normal" US GDP. The whole sale shut down of the oil & gas industry, with negative oil prices, had a severe negative impact on Texas. The tech companies plugged into the "work from home" dynamic was a short term economic boom that bridged a couple of years. 

Overall, the data is somewhat representative of the GDP distribution across the country, but Covid had a significant impact on the discreet metro area GDP's.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...