Gross Domestic Product

[tamtagon]

Houston edges out Dallas in GDP race (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/092707dnbusmetrogdp.30a93aa.html)

08:21 AM CDT on Thursday, September 27, 2007
By BRENDAN M. CASE / The Dallas Morning News
bcase@dallasnews.com


Bad news in the battle between Dallas and that other large town to the southeast: Houston edged out Dallas in a new ranking of the largest U.S. metropolitan economies.

Revised GDP shows 3.8% growth in U.S. economy
The Houston area's gross domestic product came in at $316.3 billion in 2005, a hair ahead of Dallas-Fort Worth's $315.5 billion.

That's one of the conclusions in a new study by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, a unit of the U.S. Commerce Department. The report attempts to measure total output by metropolitan area through 2005.

The Texas titans rank as fifth- and sixth-largest metro economies in the nation, following New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and the Washington area.

According to the study, the top 10 metropolitan areas accounted for 34 percent of the total U.S. gross domestic product of nearly $12.4 trillion in 2005.

The Bureau of Economic Analysis called the study a prototype that was open to tweaking. Its analysis relied heavily on industry earnings data from the state and county levels.

In Texas at least, the federal estimates track calculations by Waco economist Ray Perryman. He estimates total output in the Dallas-Fort Worth area at about $315.4 billion in 2005. The Houston area stood at $316.1 billion.


METRO ECONOMIES
Gross domestic product in billions of dollars by metro area for 2005:
$1,056.4 New York
$632.4 Los Angeles
$461.4 Chicago
$347.6 Washington DC
$316.3 Houston
$315.5 Dallas-Fort Worth
$295.2 Philadelphia
$268.3 San Francisco
$261.1 Boston
$242.4 Atlanta
SOURCE: U.S. Commerce Department

[tamtagon]

getting started

http://www.bea.gov/regional/gdpmetro/

FIPS Metropolitan Area 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

New York (MSA) 898,039 908,053 940,950 1,002,279 1,056,381

Los Angeles (MSA) 506,513 524,451 551,338 595,079 632,407
Riverside (MSA) 73,791 77,889 84,033 93,246 101,561

Washington (MSA) 264,478 278,074 296,109 322,563 347,631
Baltimore (MSA) 95,869 100,646 104,351 111,403 118,063

Chicago (MSA) 396,279 404,593 419,436 441,835 461,374

San Francisco (MSA) 230,363 229,704 235,762 250,458 268,300
San Jose (MSA) 119,750 111,025 110,885 116,918 123,305

Houston (MSA) 230,404 233,811 252,663 280,731 316,332

Dallas-Fort Worth (MSA) 255,038 264,806 273,362 293,812 315,544

Philadelphia (MSA) 241,831 253,505 267,316 281,455 295,236

Boston (MSA) 230,658 231,908 238,419 252,109 261,086

Atlanta (MSA) 202,783 207,950 214,480 227,994 242,382

[I45Tex]

Journal articles say that the creative high-value-added productivity of urban areas increases more than proportionally with the size of the urban area (this isn't proven to be causal, as far as I know, but patent output and concentration of creative trades is observed to be more present per capita in places like SoCal, Lower New York State and so forth than in the typical smaller metro).
These numbers are interesting because large Texan cities, Houston moreso than Dallas because of Dallas' high-tech electronics, have historically done lower value-added bulk work with rawer resources - the more informational barriers to entry there are in a 'skilled' business, like international corporate law, the easier it is to trump up a higher GDP. But when you look at the 2005 FIPS metropolitan areas:

Greater Nyc 18.498 million ppl (100%)
Greater La 12.146 (66%)
Chicagoland 8.711 (47%)
NatlCapitol 4.190 (23%)
Metroplex 4.612 (25%)
Houston area 4.283 (23%)

and their economies:
NYC 100%
LAx 60%
Chi 44%
D.C. 33%
DFW 30%
Hou 30%

something else is going on, too. Any thoughts as to what it is? (Maybe lower income families are less crowded out of improving socioeconomic positions because the price threshold is so much lower in Texas? Maybe the price threshold is so high on the coasts because of NIMBYism amid existing density and because of skilled professionals who demand to stay there but ultimately pull less weight for their metroes' economies than the working class families allowed to fully participate in upwardly mobile business-ownership and urban economic dynamism where prices and regulations allow them to keep doing so? Boston could be the poster child for NIMBYism amid existing density and for skilled professionals who demand to stay there for the fellowship of their kind, and at 4.313 million in 2005 it too was 23% of greater NYC's population size, but its GMP of $261B makes it basically no higher than its first percentage; Atlanta is along Texan lines in certain ways, and it's also 23% NYC's population size, but its GMP is no more supralinear than Boston's, so something is going on that my conjecture doesn't include yet. North Georgia has about as much new construction as Dallas or Houston areas, so that may at least indicate that value of new real estate production isn't really skewing the productivity figures upwards for high-growth areas compared to older areas.)

[jdwillis]

$316.3 Houston
$315.5 Dallas-Fort Worth


This stastic was also talked about by Dr. Lyssa Jenkens, Chief Economist of the Greater Dallas Chamber of Commerce (http://www.dallaschamber.org/index.aspx), at a recent MetroMorphosis (http://www.gdpc.org/blog/159) event hosted by the Greater Dallas Planning Council (http://www.gdpc.org/).

The price of oil has gone up a bit in the recent past.

Of course there was a lot more that was covered by the two speakers at that Forum. The Dallas Mayor also gave a short, introductory speech, although he didn't stay for the Forum. He is probably pretty well booked up and has to schedule his time closely.

Don't be fooled by the GDP numbers. Dallas is at the top of the second tier of World Class Cities (this according to both speakers at the event - the second being Dr. Robert Lang, of Virginia Tech University, also coauthor of Boombergs: The Rise of America's Accidental Cities). It was mentioned in the presentation that the only city above Dallas in this second tier of world class cities is Boston. Houston was somewhere lower on the list...

[tamtagon]

http://www.bea.gov/regional/gdpmetro/


Today is 09/02/2008. Next release date: September 25, 2008.

I can hardly wait until Sept 25.

[gc]

^ Ditto.

I wonder how much, if anything, has really changed (In terms of rankings).

[tamtagon]

http://www.bea.gov/regional/gdpmetro/

Metropolitan Area 2006

New York (MSA) 1,123,532
Los Angeles (MSA) 680,230
...Riverside (MSA) 110,735
Wash DC (MSA) 366,660
...Baltimore (MSA) 125,918
Chicago (MSA) 485,002
San Francisco (MSA) 292,078
...San Jose (MSA) 135,080
Houston (MSA) 344,516
DFW (MSA) 338,493
Philadelphia, PA(MSA) 311,662
Boston (MSA) 275,756
Atlanta (MSA) 257,032

[psukhu]

^
Post IKE must have DFW ahead. I have clients in metro Houston who haven't been getting much done in the past couple of weeks.