GDP - World's Metro Areas

[LA21st]

LA is 3rd? Wow.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Minato Ku

One word "huge".
Take Boston, Hartford, New York City, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington, the largest cities and you have a GDP above $3,150 billion.

It's pretty much that. I'd only add Harrisburg CSA and Lancaster MSA to it.

Originally Posted by LA21st

LA is 3rd? Wow.

Tokyo is missing, but London is oversized... Yes, Los Angeles is 3rd/4th.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Where's Munich?

Munich is in my list with maps.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

I regard Washington and Baltimore as a single multipolar metro area. The only reason I bring they separated in my list is they're historically distinct metro areas, with very distinct economic base and people might want to see separated figures for each one of them.

Santos and São Paulo are also historically and economically distinct, and as geographically distant as DC and Baltimore. And with less car commuters between them than Baltimore and DC.

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

On the other hand, although a traditional city, Santos is 25 times smaller than São Paulo. So there's no reason to keep them separated.

Baltimore has 621,000 inh. and Santos has 433,000 inh. So not very different.

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

São Paulo metro area has almost 24 million people (2013) against 9 million from the American one. So it's only natural São Paulo to be bigger.

In any case, my definition of São Paulo metro area is extremely compact (12,500 km²), way smaller than Washington-Baltimore CSA.

Latin American metro areas are less extended geographically than North American metro areas because there is less car ownership in Latin America, so less sprawl. There is nothing surprising in having a 20 million inh metro area in Latin America with less footprint than a 9 million inh metro area in the US.

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

About commute, São Paulo and Santos are linked for two highways with ten lanes each. Motorization rates (cars only) in the area is about to reach 500/1,000 inh.

In the US it's nearly 1,000/1,000 inh. So still a long way to go! And the gas spent on a daily 70 miles commute costs the average Brazilian household's budget much more than the average US household's. You're not gonna find hundreds of thousands of people in and around Santos commuting 70 miles daily to and from São Paulo, unlike in Washington DC-Baltimore, or San Francisco-San Jose.

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

Today, using the official São Paulo metro area as the definition for the actual metro area is almost as absurd as using Greater London to define London metro area.

Again, comparing first world with developing world is flawed (rate of car ownership in the UK, density of the British railway network which is non-existent in Brazil, monthly budget of the average British household compared to the average Brazilian household, etc.).

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by LA21st

LA is 3rd? Wow.

LA is BIG, and it's located in a country with one of the highest GDP per capita in the world, so it's not surprising it's the 3rd largest metropolitan economy in the world.

What LA lacks, however, is global command centers and financial markets like those Tokyo, Paris, London, and NYC possess. For example the LA metro area has the world headquarters of only four Global 500 companies (Walt Disney, Ingram Micro, DirecTV, and Occidental Petroleum), whereas the New York metro area has 28 Global 500 companies, the London metro area has 22 of them, the Paris metro area has 30 of them, and the Tokyo metro area has 50 of them.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Santos and São Paulo are also historically and economically distinct, and as geographically distant as DC and Baltimore. And with less car commuters between them than Baltimore and DC.

Baltimore has 621,000 inh. and Santos has 433,000 inh. So not very different.

Again: to me, Washington and Baltimore form A SINGLE METRO AREA. I just left them separated as some people (including myself) might want to see figures for both areas.

São Paulo area is 20 million people against 1.5 million in Santos. Washington vs Baltimore is 5 million vs 2.5 million. Clearly, there's no equivalence. The fact of they're being historically separated don't prevent them to merge into a single metro area (Rhein-Ruhr, for example).

São Paulo official metro area was established in 1970, when it was almost 3 times less populated than today. Metro areas definition must be updated. That's self-evident.

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Latin American metro areas are less extended geographically than North American metro areas because there is less car ownership in Latin America, so less sprawl. There is nothing surprising in having a 20 million inh metro area in Latin America with less footprint than a 9 million inh metro area in the US.

That's why my definition of São Paulo metro area is three times smaller than Washington-Baltimore CSA.

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

In the US it's nearly 1,000/1,000 inh. So still a long way to go! And the gas spent on a daily 70 miles commute costs the average Brazilian household's budget much more than the average US household's. You're not gonna find hundreds of thousands of people in and around Santos commuting 70 miles daily to and from São Paulo, unlike in Washington DC-Baltimore, or San Francisco-San Jose.

Almost 1 million cars leaves São Paulo to the coast on an average weekend. That shows how those areas are intrinsecally connected. On daily basis, there are a very decent commute flow between the two areas. My brother, for instance, drives 200 miles everyday between work and university.

Said that, I don't think many people commute from Dortmund to Bonn.

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Again, comparing first world with developing world is flawed (rate of car ownership in the UK, density of the British railway network which is non-existent in Brazil, monthly budget of the average British household compared to the average Brazilian household, etc.).

Wrong. In the UK, there are 520 cars/1,000 people. In São Paulo area, around 470. The borders between first world and developing countries are no longer that rigid, Brisavoine.

[Yuri]

As we're talking too much about São Paulo, figures for its expanded area:

GDP 2011 for São Paulo Macrometropolitan area*



---------------------------------------------- GDP 2011 ------ Pop. 2011
São Paulo Macrometropolitan Area ------ 681,530,000,000 -- 31,701,724

GDP per capita: US$ 21,498. Comprising the southeast quarter of São Paulo state (63,072 km²), it's as 2011, the third largest GDP of Americas, just behind New York-Philadelphia-Hartford corridor and Southern California; overtopping Chicago-Milwaukee corridor, expanded Bay Area and Washington-Baltimore. The weak Brazilian real (2012-2013) will flatten the GDP of São Paulo region, but it'll probably be able to hold the 3rd place.

Definition: Mesorregião de Campinas, Mesorregião Macrometropolitana de São Paulo, Mesorregião Metropolitana de São Paulo, Mesorregião de Piracicaba, Mesorregião do Vale do Paraíba Paulista and Microrregião de Itanhaém

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

Almost 1 million cars leaves São Paulo to the coast on an average weekend.

Weekend, not week day.

70 miles * 8 liters of gas/100 miles * 2.9 R$ * 5 days * 50 or so weeks is still way too expensive for the average Brazilian household's annual budget.

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

Wrong. In the UK, there are 520 cars/1,000 people. In São Paulo area, around 470.

But the UK, and especially the south-east of England, has a very dense railway network. Brazil has no railway network. People from Santos need to drive if they want to work in São Paulo.

[New Brisavoine]

Actually I've just made the calculation. Santos-São Paulo is in fact 90 miles round trip (not 70 as I said, because the road winds and turns through the mountains). 90 miles * 8 liters/100 miles * 2.9 R$/liter * 5 days = 104 R$ (US$44) per week, or about 5,100 R$ (US$2,150) per year assuming 3 weeks off work. I wonder how many people can afford that. Especially considering that people in Santos are not that rich (lots of blue collars).

If we factor in congestion and assume a gas consumption of 11 liters/100 miles due to traffic jams, then that would be 7,200 R$ (US$3,050) per year for our worker from Santos commuting to São Paulo. To that we would of course have to add the cost of buying a car in the first place (cars are very expensive in Brazil, much more than in the US), plus the various repair costs at the mechanics (and here again I believe mechanics cost much more in Brazil than in the US). Don't forget that in the US, not only the motorization rate is much higher than in Brazil, but gas is also cheap, and going to the mechanics is cheap.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

But the UK, and especially the south-east of England, has a very dense railway network. Brazil has no railway network. People from Santos need to drive if they want to work in São Paulo.

There are hundreds of buses daily between the coast and São Paulo. It takes just about one hour. People who live on East Zone of São Paulo usually spent two hour to get to work.

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Actually I've just made the calculation. Santos-São Paulo is in fact 90 miles round trip (not 70 as I said, because the road winds and turns through the mountains). 90 miles * 8 liters/100 miles * 2.9 R$/liter * 5 days = 104 R$ (US$44) per week, or about 5,100 R$ (US$2,150) per year assuming 3 weeks off work. I wonder how many people can afford that. Especially considering that people in Santos are not that rich (lots of blue collars).

If we factor in congestion and assume a gas consumption of 11 liters/100 miles due to traffic jams, then that would be 7,200 R$ (US$3,050) per year for our worker from Santos commuting to São Paulo. To that we would of course have to add the cost of buying a car in the first place (cars are very expensive in Brazil, much more than in the US), plus the various repair costs at the mechanics (and here again I believe mechanics cost much more in Brazil than in the US). Don't forget that in the US, not only the motorization rate is much higher than in Brazil, but gas is also cheap, and going to the mechanics is cheap.

Santos is actually one of the wealthiest municipalities in Brazil. Full of old, wealthy retirees. São Paulo is about to reach 1 car for every group of 2 people. If people can buy cars which are very expensive, they certainly will have no problem to afford fuel.

My definition of São Paulo is very very strict. It's the smallest of all. We shouldn't have spent so much time talking about it. There's no point to be that attached to an arbitrary definition taken 40 years ago.

BTW, how many people from Dortmund works on Bonn?

[Crawford]

I don't know if Mexico City is similar to Sao Paulo in commuting patterns, but I assume yes, as they are somewhat similar size, layout and economic status.

I can tell you in Mexico City people do NOT commute long distances like in the U.S. The reason has nothing to do with the price of cars or the availability of transit, however; it's congestion that limits the commutes. The arterials are so packed that a 20 mile commute can easily take 2 hours so an 80 mile commute would be insane, and you wouldn't get to work until after lunch.

[StethJeff]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

LA is BIG, and it's located in a country with one of the highest GDP per capita in the world, so it's not surprising it's the 3rd largest metropolitan economy in the world.

What LA lacks, however, is global command centers and financial markets like those Tokyo, Paris, London, and NYC possess. For example the LA metro area has the world headquarters of only four Global 500 companies (Walt Disney, Ingram Micro, DirecTV, and Occidental Petroleum), whereas the New York metro area has 28 Global 500 companies, the London metro area has 22 of them, the Paris metro area has 30 of them, and the Tokyo metro area has 50 of them.

Despite that we still kick ass. The again it helps that LA has such a massive port complex.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

As we're talking too much about São Paulo, figures for its expanded area:

GDP 2011 for São Paulo Macrometropolitan area*



---------------------------------------------- GDP 2011 ------ Pop. 2011
São Paulo Macrometropolitan Area ------ 681,530,000,000 -- 31,701,724

GDP per capita: US$ 21,498. Comprising the southeast quarter of São Paulo state (63,072 km²), it's as 2011, the third largest GDP of Americas, just behind New York-Philadelphia-Hartford corridor and Southern California; overtopping Chicago-Milwaukee corridor, expanded Bay Area and Washington-Baltimore. The weak Brazilian real (2012-2013) will flatten the GDP of São Paulo region, but it'll probably be able to hold the 3rd place.

Definition: Mesorregião de Campinas, Mesorregião Macrometropolitana de São Paulo, Mesorregião Metropolitana de São Paulo, Mesorregião de Piracicaba, Mesorregião do Vale do Paraíba Paulista and Microrregião de Itanhaém

Pera ai um momentinho por favor. LOL

One of the advantages of being isolated from the East and far apart from one another means that both Los Angeles and San Francisco have developed their own massive mega areas.


http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2885/1...8c458906_o.jpg


http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5489/1...4f6884ab_o.jpg

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

Pera ai um momentinho por favor. LOL

You used 2012's figures. But yes, expanded Bay Area would be slightly ahead São Paulo macrometropolitan area.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

You used 2012's figures. But yes, expanded Bay Area would be slightly ahead São Paulo macrometropolitan area.

Here are 2011 and 2012 figures and their growth rates:

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3678/1...072d1ddf_b.jpg

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

Here are 2011 and 2012 figures and their growth rates:

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3678/1...072d1ddf_b.jpg

Bay Area is indeed a monster.

[Wizened Variations]

There are at least two ways to approach this question:

A) City GDP (Official Exchange Rate)
B) City GDP (purchasing power parity)

IMO

Based on "A"- I would suspect, in order:

Metropolitan Tokyo, Metropolitan NYC, Metropolitan London, Metropolitan Paris, Metropolitan Los Angeles, Metropolitan Osaka, Metropolitan Seoul, Metropolitan Shanghai, Metropolitan Moscow

Based on B, in order

Metropolitan NYC, Metropolitan Tokyo, Metropolitan Shanghai, Metropolitan London, Metropolitan Seoul, Metropolitan Paris, Metropolitan Beijing, Metropolitan Moscow, Metropolitan LA, Metropolitan Osaka.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

There are hundreds of buses daily between the coast and São Paulo.

Hundreds of buses don't have the same capacity as hundreds of trains.

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

Santos is actually one of the wealthiest municipalities in Brazil. Full of old, wealthy retirees.

If they are retirees, they don't commute to São Paulo, so Santos cannot be construed as being part of the São Paulo metro area. QED

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

BTW, how many people from Dortmund works on Bonn?

There are plenty of other towns and cities between Dortmund and Bonn, with lots of commute between them, hence a metro area, whereas there is nothing between Santos and São Paulo, only some mountainous jungle.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Wizened Variations

There are at least two ways to approach this question:

A) City GDP (Official Exchange Rate)
B) City GDP (purchasing power parity)

IMO

Based on "A"- I would suspect, in order:

Metropolitan Tokyo, Metropolitan NYC, Metropolitan London, Metropolitan Paris, Metropolitan Los Angeles, Metropolitan Osaka, Metropolitan Seoul, Metropolitan Shanghai, Metropolitan Moscow

Based on B, in order

Metropolitan NYC, Metropolitan Tokyo, Metropolitan Shanghai, Metropolitan London, Metropolitan Seoul, Metropolitan Paris, Metropolitan Beijing, Metropolitan Moscow, Metropolitan LA, Metropolitan Osaka.

As you can see on the first post (using "A"), São Paulo's GDP is the same size of Shanghai and Beijing's combined.

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Hundreds of buses don't have the same capacity as hundreds of trains.

If they are retirees, they don't commute to São Paulo, so Santos cannot be construed as being part of the São Paulo metro area. QED

There are plenty of other towns and cities between Dortmund and Bonn, with lots of commute between them, hence a metro area, whereas there is nothing between Santos and São Paulo, only some mountainous jungle.

So Niterói is not Rio de Janeiro's metro, Oakland is not San Francisco's, etc. My São Paulo definition is 12,500 km² only. As I said, several times smaller than all the others in the list.

More and more São Paulo macrometropolitan areas is being regarded as São Paulo metropolitan area, going far away into São Paulo's hinterland with a 32 million population. Metro area definitions are a fluid concept. We are not in 1970 anymore, so changes most be expected.

P.S. There are several towns between São Paulo and Santos as well (and big ones): São Bernardo do Campo, Santo André, São Caetano do Sul, etc.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Wizened Variations

There are at least two ways to approach this question:

A) City GDP (Official Exchange Rate)
B) City GDP (purchasing power parity)

IMO

Based on "A"- I would suspect, in order:

Metropolitan Tokyo, Metropolitan NYC, Metropolitan London, Metropolitan Paris, Metropolitan Los Angeles, Metropolitan Osaka, Metropolitan Seoul, Metropolitan Shanghai, Metropolitan Moscow

Based on B, in order

Metropolitan NYC, Metropolitan Tokyo, Metropolitan Shanghai, Metropolitan London, Metropolitan Seoul, Metropolitan Paris, Metropolitan Beijing, Metropolitan Moscow, Metropolitan LA, Metropolitan Osaka.

Nope. Based on A it's Tokyo, NY, LA, Paris, Osaka-Kyoto-Kobe, London (see my list with maps; all figures are official figures at 2010 exchange rates; in 2011 Osaka-Kyoto-Kobe should move ahead of Paris due to the appreciation of the yen).

Based on B it's absolutely impossible to tell, because there exist no PPP data for metro areas (large metro areas have PPPs completely different from the national PPP of the country within which they are located).