Did the gap between IL and PA grow? I thought they were neck and neck for a while. I'm surprised by how close FL are IL are given the differences in population. Ohio is surprising as well.
If these numbers can be believed the gap did grow. IL added approx 120 billion to PA adding 90 billion YOY. However, I think these numbers are way too high when compared to 2016 to be accurate.
I thought the idea of GDP rank vs. Population rank was interesting so I made the following table. The 2016 population ranks came from Wikipedia and are the Census Bureau's July 1, 2016 estimates. States with the same over/under number are ordered alphabetically. I also corrected the Vermont/Rhode Island issue JManc noted above in the OP's GDP column.
Fascinating, thanks for putting together what most of us are probably trying to figure out in our heads. It's actually pretty amazing how few states are punching significantly above or below their population rank. DC is an anomaly; but otherwise all but 14 states are are between +2 and -2.
If these numbers can be believed the gap did grow. IL added approx 120 billion to PA adding 90 billion YOY. However, I think these numbers are way too high when compared to 2016 to be accurate.
You may be comparing real gdp figures from 2015 to current dollar gdp in 2016. The OP posted 2016 current dollar GDP.
Fascinating, thanks for putting together what most of us are probably trying to figure out in our heads. It's actually pretty amazing how few states are punching significantly above or below their population rank. DC is an anomaly; but otherwise all but 14 states are are between +2 and -2.
This isn't as useful as GDP per capita though. A ranking like this will tend to smooth out differences at the top or bottom of either ranking, where GDP per capita will show the true differences (California punches far above its weight in GDP, for example, where this list just shows it as #1)
I'd love to know the GDP per capita of just the CA counties within 75 miles of the ocean and from Sonoma (call that the northern limit of the Bay Area) to the Mexican Border. In other words, cut out the rural parts of the state--the northern third and the Central Valley and deserts--and see what only the urbanized parts do.
Washington state isn't used to ranking below our population, so the -1 is interesting. But it's Massachusetts who stayed a little ahead of our GDP, so that probably isn't surprising.
I'd love to know the GDP per capita of just the CA counties within 75 miles of the ocean and from Sonoma (call that the northern limit of the Bay Area) to the Mexican Border. In other words, cut out the rural parts of the state--the northern third and the Central Valley and deserts--and see what only the urbanized parts do.
I didn't realize the Central Valley had no urbanized areas
Maybe your question is meant what would it be if you only looked at the 3 largest metro areas? (LA, Bay Area and SD--though I still find it hard to exclude Sac out of that).
Only the US, China, Japan, Germany and UK outrank California if it were a nation. California was expected to outpace the UK by this year but we'll have to wait to see if it did. At one point in the past during CA's dotcom boom era, it had reached #4 in the global ranks.
I didn't realize the Central Valley had no urbanized areas
Maybe your question is meant what would it be if you only looked at the 3 largest metro areas? (LA, Bay Area and SD--though I still find it hard to exclude Sac out of that).
It has 3, essentially: Sacramento, Fresno and Bakersfield. But 2 of those are still centered in largely agricultural counties the effect of which would skew county data. Actually, the Sacramento area and the Bay Area are gradually growing together into a megalopolis. So fine, add that one in to the coastal counties. I'm just interested in the CA per capita GDP and productivity exclusive of the rural and agricultural areas which are a very large part of the state. The Mojave Desert alone is a lot of land.
I thought the idea of GDP rank vs. Population rank was interesting so I made the following table. The 2016 population ranks came from Wikipedia and are the Census Bureau's July 1, 2016 estimates. States with the same over/under number are ordered alphabetically. I also corrected the Vermont/Rhode Island issue JManc noted above in the OP's GDP column.
Very interesting, I was surprised at how small the gap was between IL and FL given the 8+million pop difference.
It has 3, essentially: Sacramento, Fresno and Bakersfield. But 2 of those are still centered in largely agricultural counties the effect of which would skew county data. Actually, the Sacramento area and the Bay Area are gradually growing together into a megalopolis. So fine, add that one in to the coastal counties. I'm just interested in the CA per capita GDP and productivity exclusive of the rural and agricultural areas which are a very large part of the state. The Mojave Desert alone is a lot of land.
Yea good point. I would be curious how much of the economy in CA is actually agriculture. Someone once told me 50% of all fruits, veggies and nuts grown in the US is grown in CA.
Prev
Linear Mode
