GDP - World's Metro Areas

[Yuri]

1,700,000 - 2,300,000

Portland -------------- US$ 143.7 bi ---- 2.3 mi

Charlotte ------------- US$ 117.8 bi ---- 1.8 mi

Indianapolis ---------- US$ 111.6 bi ---- 2.0 mi

Kansas City ----------- US$ 108.1 bi ---- 2.1 mi

Cincinnati ------------ US$ 102.5 bi ---- 2.1 mi

Milwaukee -------------- US$ 94.3 bi ---- 1.8 mi

Columbus --------------- US$ 94.0 bi ---- 1.9 mi

Las Vegas -------------- US$ 92.8 bi ---- 2.0 mi

Austin ----------------- US$ 90.9 bi ---- 1.8 mi

Salt Lake City --------- US$ 90.8 bi ---- 1.7 mi

San Antonio ------------ US$ 86.4 bi ---- 2.2 mi

Vitória ---------------- US$ 37.7 bi ---- 1.9 mi

Manaus ----------------- US$ 31.2 bi ---- 1.9 mi


Portland and Charlotte with very high GDP per capita. Charlotte is banking. What about Portland?

Milwaukee, with a GDP per capita of US$ 53,700, surprised me. Although that's 6th edition of my list, I never paid much attention on it. I was expecting a GDP per capita just above US$ 40,000. The same goes for Indianapolis and Kansas City. High GDP per capita.

In Vitória, the public sector and specially the port, push the GDP up;

Manaus industrial tax-free zone is the reason why the GDP is high in a rather poor metro area.

[Minato Ku]

According Brooking data, Portland has one of the highest share of manufacturing in its local economy in the United State.
I think that Portland is specialized in the production of goods with high added value.

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by Minato Ku

According Brooking data, Portland has one of the highest share of manufacturing in its local economy in the United State.
I think that Portland is specialized in the production of goods with high added value.

Portland is a sea coast town with some very industrious small companies that have survived by excelling at metal fabrication, both doing ship repair and, now, in the railroad industry.

[Yuri]

2,300,000 - 3,000,000

-------------------- GDP 2011 (US$) -- Pop. 2011

Baltimore ------------- US$ 148.3 bi ---- 2.7 mi

Cleveland ------------- US$ 134.9 bi ---- 2.8 mi

St.Louis --------------- US$ 132.0 bi ---- 2.8 mi

Pittsburgh ------------- US$ 117.8 bi ---- 2.4 mi

Tampa ----------------- US$ 116.2 bi ---- 2.8 mi

Orlando --------------- US$ 115.2 bi ---- 2.8 mi

Sacramento ----------- US$ 98.8 bi ---- 2.3 mi

Campinas -------------- US$ 64.9 bi ---- 2.9 mi

Goiânia ----------------- US$ 32.4 bi ---- 2.6 mi

Belém ------------------ US$ 18.7 bi ---- 2.5 mi


^^
Pittsburgh posting a high GDP per capita (US$ 50,000). In my opinion, one of the most beautiful US cities, the area is finally stopping the decline. Last year, Pittsburgh CSA gained population for the first time in 50 years;

Cleveland, as Pittsburgh, a rather high GDP per capita (US$ 48,700) for a Rust Belt area. I'm not sure if the region is already profitting from the shale gas;

Campinas, high HDP per capita (US$ 22,300), is part of São Paulo macrometropolitan area. Extremely diversified economy, it's maybe the most dynamic region in Brazil;

Goiânia, despite being a state capital (and public sector makes difference in Brazil when it comes to GDP), has a rather low GDP per capita. As I used a broader definition for the metro areas, I also included Anápolis (50 km northeast), the largest industrial centre of Goiás, which helped to improve Goiânia numbers a little bit;

Belém has the lowest GDP per capita (US$ 7,500) amongst Brazilian major cities. It's a poor metro area, and aside the public sector, there's nothing to bump its GDP.

[mhays]

Wow, Portland kicks all but one of their asses too despite being smaller.

I've never thought of Portland as an economic powerhouse, and also don't understand the basis of GDP. My guess is Intel, Nike (headquarters, not production), bulk seaport goods (grain etc.), forestry products, and, per above, a lot of small production.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Wizened Variations

Portland is a sea coast town with some very industrious small companies that have survived by excelling at metal fabrication, both doing ship repair and, now, in the railroad industry.

Wait, what? Is this supposed to be sarcasm?

I would assume Portland is highly ranked because of tech, mostly, and entreprenuership, broadly. I don't think it has anything to do with ship repair or railroads, and Portland obviously isn't a coastal city.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Wait, what? Is this supposed to be sarcasm?

I would assume Portland is highly ranked because of tech, mostly, and entreprenuership, broadly. I don't think it has anything to do with ship repair or railroads, and Portland obviously isn't a coastal city.

Good lord. Have you heard of rivers?!

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by mhays

Good lord. Have you heard of rivers?!

What do rivers have to do with the conversation? I have never heard an inland river city referred to as "coastal".

[mhays]

Semantics. It's a seaport. It even focuses on trans-ocean transport in addition to river transport.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by mhays

Semantics. It's a seaport. It even focuses on trans-ocean transport in addition to river transport.

well, a seaport alone doesn't determine whether a city is "coastal". i mean, Duluth (or any other city on the great lakes) has a seaport that receives internationally-flagged ocean-going cargo ships, but surely Duluth isn't "coastal" in the way we conventionally use the word in this country.

but yeah, Portland is one of those "close enough" river seaports to count as "coastal" in my mind, much like Philadelphia on the east coast.

[mhays]

I don't consider Portland coastal either. We're talking about job base, not what zone the city belongs to. It's a fairly major seaport and has a lot of seaport jobs.

[Yuri]

3,000,000 - 5,000,000

-------------------- GDP 2011 (US$) -- Pop. 2011

Seattle ---------------- US$ 264.2 bi ---- 4.1 mi

Minneapolis ------------ US$ 215.6 bi ---- 3.5 mi

Phoenix ---------------- US$ 194.8 bi ---- 4.3 mi

Denver ---------------- US$ 188.9 bi ---- 3.2 mi

San Diego ------------- US$ 172.6 bi ---- 3.1 mi

Brasília ---------------- US$ 106.3 bi ---- 3.8 mi

Monterrey -------------- US$ 84.4 bi ---- 4.8 mi

Porto Alegre ------------ US$ 70.2 bi ---- 4.2 mi

Curitiba ----------------- US$ 60.8 bi ---- 3.2 mi

Salvador ---------------- US$ 44.2 bi ---- 3.8 mi

Recife ------------------- US$ 44.0 bi ---- 4.4 mi

Fortaleza ---------------- US$ 35.0 bi ---- 3.7 mi


Seattle, unsurprisingly, with a very high GDP per capita (US$ 64,000);

Minneapolis has a very high GDP per capita (US$ 61,400). Very impressive for a such large, yet low-profile, metro area. I guess agribusiness is the main reason, right?

Brasília's GDP (US$ 28,100 per capita) is completely deformed by the huge Brazilian public sector. Same phenomena is seen elsewhere (including in the US), but in Brazil the impact is much bigger;

Monterrey has the highest GDP per capita of Mexico (US$ 17,600) and it's about to overcome Texan border towns;

Porto Alegre (US$ 16,700) is the capital of Rio Grande do Sul state and has a very diversified economy. The region (as the state as a whole) has the lowest economic growth of Brazil for the past 15 years. Although the local society is aware of it, there isn't much being done to change the picture;

Curitiba (US$ 18,900) very strong industrial base plus state public sector pushing the GDP up.

[Centropolis]

I mean Portland has a seaport capable of servicing ocean going vessels, so for the purposes of this discussion it's undoubtedly a coastal city by the very fact that it grew as a seaport. Otherwise, as a midwesterner I consider Portland somewhat a coastal city, anyway. Perhaps just not quite in the way the very maritime influenced Seattle is, more in the way say London is.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

I mean Portland has a seaport capable of servicing ocean going vessels so for the purposes of this discussion it's undoubtedly a coastal city.

the same can be said for any great lake/st. lawrence port city - montreal, toronto, hamilton, buffalo, cleveland, toledo, detroit, sault ste. marie, chicago, milwaukee, duluth, etc., but they are not coastal cities in the conventional sense.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

the same can be said for any great lake/st. lawrence port city - montreal, toronto, hamilton, buffalo, cleveland, toledo, detroit, sault ste. marie, chicago, milwaukee, duluth, etc., but they are not coastal cities in the conventional sense.

Sure, I mean great lakes ports are sort of in their own category. I'm talking about trans-oceanic vessels, I don't know how many of those arrive at american great lakes ports. It was my understanding that it's not a lot.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

Sure, I mean great lakes ports are sort of in their own category. I'm talking about trans-oceanic vessels, I don't know how many of those arrive at american great lakes ports. It was my understanding that it's not a lot.

oh, it's not a lot compared to "lakers" (traditional lake freighters), but "salties" (as ocean going ships are called on the great lakes) can and do regularly visit great lakes ports, making them seaports, albeit much, much smaller than true seaports on the ocean.

my only point was that the presence of a seaport does not automatically equal coastal.


salties waiting to come into port at duluth.

source: http://www.emily.net/~schiller/nshore.html

[Yuri]

5,000,000 - 8,000,000

-------------------- GDP 2011 (US$) -- Pop. 2011

San Francisco --------- US$ 575.2 bi ---- 7.6 mi

Washington ------------ US$ 438.3 bi ---- 5.8 mi

Houston --------------- US$ 419.7 bi ---- 6.1 mi

Dallas ----------------- US$ 394.9 bi ---- 6.6 mi

Boston ---------------- US$ 378.3 bi ---- 5.8 mi

Philadelphia ---------- US$ 373.2 bi ---- 6.6 mi

Atlanta --------------- US$ 290.0 bi ---- 5.5 mi

Madrid ---------------- US$ 265.1 bi ---- 6.5 mi

Miami ----------------- US$ 263.4 bi ---- 5.7 mi

Singapore ------------- US$ 259.8 bi ---- 5.2 mi

Hong Kong ------------- US$ 243.7 bi ---- 7.1 mi

Rome ------------------ US$ 238.3 bi ---- 5.6 mi

Detroit ---------------- US$ 233.1 bi ---- 5.2 mi

Berlin ------------------ US$ 219.7 bi ---- 5.8 mi

Napoli ----------------- US$ 133.5 bi ---- 5.8 mi

Santiago --------------- US$ 109.3 bi ---- 6.0 mi

Belo Horizonte --------- US$ 86.8 bi ---- 5.5 mi

Bogotá ------------------ US$ 80.3 bi ---- 7.6 mi


^^
US$ 76,000 for San Francisco. The Bay Area is in a whole different level. It's too much money;

Washington at US$ 75,100. Even in a rich country like the US, government makes the difference;

Not a surprise, but still impressive: Dallas (US$ 59,400), and specially Houston (US$ 69,000), posting very very strong numbers;

Boston at US$ 65,300;

Philadelphia at US$ 56,900. Not bad as the city is on New York's shadow and its rustbeltish credentials;

Considering Hong Kong and Singapore are two the main financial hubs in the world, they have a quite low GDP per capita;

Detroit at US$ 44,800 GDP per capita is not as bad as people might think. For instance, above European capitals such as Berlin, Rome and Madrid;

Napoli at US$ 23,000 per capita, has the lowest in Western Europe;

[mhays]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

the same can be said for any great lake/st. lawrence port city - montreal, toronto, hamilton, buffalo, cleveland, toledo, detroit, sault ste. marie, chicago, milwaukee, duluth, etc., but they are not coastal cities in the conventional sense.

There's a huge difference between being hours from the open ocean, on a wide open deep-channel river, vs. being days from it.

The shipping industry treats Portland as coastal. One definition for that is "where do shipments trade modes for the ocean trip." Like from ship to train, or in reverse from barge to ship. Portland fills that role like any coastal city. Even if it's not technically coastal itself.

[Austinlee]

When you post PPP per capita, isn't that a bit misleading? Wouldn't median income show the true picture? As we all know, the US is quickly becoming very uneven in wealth inequality so any metros with huge corporations are going to skew the results.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Austinlee

When you post PPP per capita, isn't that a bit misleading? Wouldn't median income show the true picture? As we all know, the US is quickly becoming very uneven in wealth inequality so any metros with huge corporations are going to skew the results.

I don't do PPP. Here, it's nominal figures only.