Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian
Precisely the stereotype shot down by the fact that the county in which Oakland sits (surrounded by a bunch of suburbs) has a larger GDP than Philadelphia.
Thanks for making my point (however angrily).
That too is rather my point. Most of the country "looks down on" Oakland as a land of gangstas, rappers, "road shows" and an edgy football team but not a whole lot of economic activity reflected in its GDP. That's the sterotype and very different from the image of Philadelphia (in another thread, one forum participant called that "New York's little sister" or some such).
Anyway, nice to see how much economic activity is indeed happening in Alameda.
|
We shouldnt spend time trying to make people think differently, that's their problem. lol
Anyhow the Bay Area keeps growing. In 2015, 10 local counties had economies that were greater than $20B
Santa Clara, CA $262.053 Billion
San Francisco, CA $154.176 Billion
Alameda, CA $112.676 Billion
San Mateo, CA $99.019 Billion
Contra Costa $72.356 Billion
San Joaquin, CA $26.492 Billion
Sonoma, CA $25.323 Billion
Marin, CA $21.128 Billion
Solano, CA $21.213 Billion
Stansilaus, CA $20.104 Billion
Santa Cruz, CA $12.443 Billion
Napa, CA $8.923 Billion
Merced, CA $7.851 Billion
San Benito, CA $1.918 Billion
Bay Area CSA GDP 2015: $845.675 Billion
And this^ is why I now suspect the 2017 data is too low. The september metro area report pegged the region at $907B, but if we already stood at $845B 2 years earlier, the 2017 data should be closer to $1 Trillion even if we apply a modest 5% annual increase.
We'll see how the data looks next year but I am fairly certain the Bay Area has probably hit $1T this year-the economy doesnt feel like next year will be as rosy tho.