How many cities have GDP over $100 billion dollars in your country?

China will be got two cities[HK and SH] at the end of 2005.

US must have a lot.

New York, LA, Chicago, Washington, the Bay Area and Boston are all at or above $300 billion (metro, of course).

http://www.usmayors.org/metroeconomies/1004/metroeconomiestables_1004.xls

2003 numbers and for PMSA only . . . if you have time, you can add up for complete metro numbers (adding Suffolk Co to the NY number, Orange Co to the LA number, all the Bay Area counties, etc). I believe all told New York is somewhere around $1 trillion, LA around $600 billion, Chicago about $360 billion, the Bay Area about $330 billion, Washington about $310 billion and Boston $300 billion.

I dont know of any US agency or private organization that keeps track of city proper GDPs, as using municipal borders only is arbitrary and in no way reflects upon a city's true economic size.

New York, LA, Chicago, Washington, the Bay Area and Boston are all at or above $300 billion (metro, of course).

the data of CITY,plz. :drool:

you surprised me. :)

Sydney i'm sure of, maybe melbourne too

nominal or ppp?

madrid has a GDP over 100 billion$

Madrid's GDP in million of dollars (PPP)

179.609,5 $

Madrid's GDP in million of dollars (Nominal)

196.054,6 $

if you take ppp, bombay has a gdp of about $180-200 billion

nominal or ppp?

Nominal ;)

nominal is so outdated

Nobody knows exactly chinese cities' GDP(PPP).

How come Madrid's PPP is lower than it's Nominal?

Mexico City

How come Madrid's PPP is lower than it's Nominal?

Because the price in Madrid is higher than the average level of US.

very little economic data gets measured for a single city, cause the city limits are all different sizes. take for instance boston. Its metro is about 4.5 million, about the size of detroit's metro. But Boston itself only has 500,000ish people, while detroit has 1millionish. That's entirely because detroit's border's arbitrarily encompass more of its metro area than boston's do (139 sq. miles compared to 48 square miles). If Boston had annexed more of its metro area in the early part of the century, like philly, new york, and other larger 'cities proper' did, it would be much bigger.

In 2003, NYC's GDP was $413.9 billion. It's grown since then. Also, when its suburbs are included, it's over $1 trillion.

^ 1 trillion i dont belive, cant be more than whole of australia.. (bout same population)

New York's Metro GDP is around 1 Trillion Dollars....see page 4 :)
http://www.bayeconfor.org/pdf/AppendixC.pdf

^ cool! must be the exchnage rate than.. 1 AUD=.75 USD ...

OK，Shanghai‘s GDP（PPP） is about $350 bn.GDP(nominal) is about $105 bn.

Mumbai 250 Billion

Mumbai 250 Billion
so Mumbai>=1/3 India?

^ 1 trillion i dont belive, cant be more than whole of australia.. (bout same population)

Possible, if you consider the number of billionaires in New York - their companies are listed in the NYEX and Nasdaq.

No german city has a GDP of more than 100 billion dollars. Berlin, Hamburg, Munich and Frankfurt are the cities who come closest to 100 billion dollars.

Current exchange rate: 1 Euro = 1.20 Dollars
Eurostat data of these cities (population in city proper and GDP per head), last updated September 2004:

Berlin: 3,388,434 inhabitants and 22,159 Euro/capita = roughly 75 billion Euro/ 90 billion Dollar
Hamburg: 1,726,363 and 41,905 = ca. 72 billion Euro/ 86 billion Dollar
Munich: 1,227,958 and 51,803 = ca. 63 billion Euro/ 76 billion Dollar
Frankfurt: 641,076 and 68,548 = ca. 44 billion Euro/ 53 billion Dollar

i think CHENNAI(MADRAS) will have soon.

so Mumbai>=1/3 India?
more like 1/6 of India

more like 1/6 of India

1/6 is quite incredible, Mumbai's population is only 1% of India's total population.

Mumbai 250 Billion


He has NO idea what he is taking about it.

Mumbai at PPP has around $180 billion, and at MER around $50 billion or so.

1/6 is quite incredible, Mumbai's population is only 1% of India's total population.


That guy EFFER has no clue about Indian or Mumbai economy.

Mumbai gives around 5% of the national GDP. Not 1/6th. More like 1/20th.

Effer please educate yourself before coming and making such false and childish claims.

That guy EFFER has no clue about Indian or Mumbai economy.

Mumbai gives around 5% of the national GDP. Not 1/6th. More like 1/20th.

Effer please educate yourself before coming and making such false and childish claims.
ok the 1/6 maybe be wrong, but do the research Mumbai has at LEAST 200 billion by GDP.

i think CHENNAI(MADRAS) will have soon.


I think Chennai has around $ 90 billion in PPP, at MER its like $25 billion or so.

No german city has a GDP of more than 100 billion dollars. Berlin, Hamburg, Munich and Frankfurt are the cities who come closest to 100 billion dollars.

Current exchange rate: 1 Euro = 1.20 Dollars
Eurostat data of these cities (population in city proper and GDP per head), last updated September 2004:

Berlin: 3,388,434 inhabitants and 22,159 Euro/capita = roughly 75 billion Euro/ 90 billion Dollar
Hamburg: 1,726,363 and 41,905 = ca. 72 billion Euro/ 86 billion Dollar
Munich: 1,227,958 and 51,803 = ca. 63 billion Euro/ 76 billion Dollar
Frankfurt: 641,076 and 68,548 = ca. 44 billion Euro/ 53 billion Dollar

Frankfurt has 3 times the GDP per capita of Berlin?

ok the 1/6 maybe be wrong, but do the research Mumbai has at LEAST 200 billion by GDP.


:|. Go to the Indian forum and YOU do the reserch. There was a thread about Indian cities GDP. I started that thread.

:|. Go to the Indian forum and YOU do the reserch. There was a thread about Indian cities GDP. I started that thread.
give me a link and I have a feeling that it's OUTDATED.

Frankfurt has 3 times the GDP per capita of Berlin?

According to Eurostat, yes. And if you look at the GDP per employed person, the difference is still big:
Frankfurt: 75,349 Euro/ employed person
Berlin: 47,929 Euro/ employed person

The GDP per capita of Frankfurt is huge!!! far over the German average!!
In Latin America I think that the only cities that will pass the 100 billion$ PP is Sao Pablo, Mexico City and Buenos Aires. Santiago has one of 80,000 billion$ and
Lima of 60 billion$ Ithink Bogota, Caracas, Belo Horizonte and Monterrey have similar figures..

madrid has a GDP over 100 billion$

Madrid's GDP in million of dollars (PPP)

179.609,5 $

Madrid's GDP in million of dollars (Nominal)

196.054,6 $

i suppose this is for all the province, isn't it?

Top 20 U.S. Metro Areas based on Gross Metropolitan Product - 2003
Gross Product (Billions)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rank Metro Area
2003 2002 % Change

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 New York, NY $488.8 $469.5 4.1%
2 Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA $410.8 $391.5 4.9%
3 Chicago, IL $366.3 $351.4 4.2%
4 Boston, MA $298.0 $286.7 3.9%
5 Washington, DC-MD-VA-WV $255.0 $242.1 5.3%
6 Philadelphia, PA-NJ $201.0 $291.3 5.1%
7 Houston, TX $190.6 $182.9 4.2%
8 Atlanta, GA $188.2 $179.4 4.9%
9 Dallas, TX $172.0 $166.8 3.1%
10 Detroit, MI $161.7 $155.9 3.7%
11 Orange County, CA $153.8 $144.1 6.7%
12 Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI $135.0 $128.0 5.5%
13 Phoenix-Mesa, AZ $129.1 $121.7 6.1%
14 San Diego, CA $129.0 $121.4 6.3%
15 Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA $135.0 $128.0 5.5%
16 Nassau-Suffolk, NY $122.9 $116.4 5.6%
17 San Francisco, CA $125.4 $120.6 4.0%
18 Baltimore, MD $107.6 $103.5 4.0%
19 Oakland, CA $105.8 $101.6 4.1%
20 Newark, NJ $105.1 $99.2 5.9%

give me a link and I have a feeling that it's OUTDATED.


Here is the link.

http://skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=209644

Your "feeling" does not mean anything if not supported by hard facts.

Top 20 U.S. Metro Areas based on Gross Metropolitan Product - 2003
Gross Product (Billions)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rank Metro Area
2003 2002 % Change

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 New York, NY $488.8 $469.5 4.1%
2 Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA $410.8 $391.5 4.9%
3 Chicago, IL $366.3 $351.4 4.2%
4 Boston, MA $298.0 $286.7 3.9%
5 Washington, DC-MD-VA-WV $255.0 $242.1 5.3%
6 Philadelphia, PA-NJ $201.0 $291.3 5.1%
7 Houston, TX $190.6 $182.9 4.2%
8 Atlanta, GA $188.2 $179.4 4.9%
9 Dallas, TX $172.0 $166.8 3.1%
10 Detroit, MI $161.7 $155.9 3.7%
11 Orange County, CA $153.8 $144.1 6.7%
12 Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI $135.0 $128.0 5.5%
13 Phoenix-Mesa, AZ $129.1 $121.7 6.1%
14 San Diego, CA $129.0 $121.4 6.3%
15 Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA $135.0 $128.0 5.5%
16 Nassau-Suffolk, NY $122.9 $116.4 5.6%
17 San Francisco, CA $125.4 $120.6 4.0%
18 Baltimore, MD $107.6 $103.5 4.0%
19 Oakland, CA $105.8 $101.6 4.1%
20 Newark, NJ $105.1 $99.2 5.9%
The figure for New York is for the PMSA (Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area), an area including the city, westchester, putnam and rockland counties. It's population was 9.3 million in 2000.

very little economic data gets measured for a single city, cause the city limits are all different sizes. take for instance boston. Its metro is about 4.5 million, about the size of detroit's metro. But Boston itself only has 500,000ish people, while detroit has 1millionish. That's entirely because detroit's border's arbitrarily encompass more of its metro area than boston's do (139 sq. miles compared to 48 square miles). If Boston had annexed more of its metro area in the early part of the century, like philly, new york, and other larger 'cities proper' did, it would be much bigger.

Just for the record, the Boston metro pop. is just shy of 6M and Detroit is near 5.5 M. Boston actually has a bigger metro than Detroit (and these numbers don't even include the 1.6 M in the adjacent Providence metro).

Here is the link.

http://skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=209644

Your "feeling" does not mean anything if not supported by hard facts.
Ok the 1/6 thing was wrong,but Mumbai's GDP was 180 billion in 2001,now in 2005 I would think that it reached the 200 billion mark.

Top 20 U.S. Metro Areas based on Gross Metropolitan Product - 2003
Gross Product (Billions)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rank Metro Area
2003 2002 % Change

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 New York, NY $488.8 $469.5 4.1%
2 Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA $410.8 $391.5 4.9%
3 Chicago, IL $366.3 $351.4 4.2%
4 Boston, MA $298.0 $286.7 3.9%
5 Washington, DC-MD-VA-WV $255.0 $242.1 5.3%
6 Philadelphia, PA-NJ $201.0 $291.3 5.1%
7 Houston, TX $190.6 $182.9 4.2%
8 Atlanta, GA $188.2 $179.4 4.9%
9 Dallas, TX $172.0 $166.8 3.1%
10 Detroit, MI $161.7 $155.9 3.7%
11 Orange County, CA $153.8 $144.1 6.7%
12 Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI $135.0 $128.0 5.5%
13 Phoenix-Mesa, AZ $129.1 $121.7 6.1%
14 San Diego, CA $129.0 $121.4 6.3%
15 Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA $135.0 $128.0 5.5%
16 Nassau-Suffolk, NY $122.9 $116.4 5.6%
17 San Francisco, CA $125.4 $120.6 4.0%
18 Baltimore, MD $107.6 $103.5 4.0%
19 Oakland, CA $105.8 $101.6 4.1%
20 Newark, NJ $105.1 $99.2 5.9%


They must've used some weird Metro figures to create this list, cuz these numbers seem kinda low!

^^^ This thread is about GDP at MER, not PPP.

^ 1 trillion i dont belive, cant be more than whole of australia.. (bout same population)

it's definitely believable. metro new york is wealthier than the whole of Oz.

They must've used some weird Metro figures to create this list, cuz these numbers seem kinda low!

think, people.

that list is for PMSA, which are fractions of real metros. why would people separate oakland from SF? or long island from NYC? or orange county from LA?

Can mumbai's GDP(nominal) pass us$ 50billion??????????????????

Imagine India's GDP is us$ 800 bn.then Mumbai's GDP=800*5%=40,So Mumbai's GDP is only about $40 bn.

it's definitely believable. metro new york is wealthier than the whole of Oz.
lol lol dream on, its just cos of the exchnage rate, nyc ecomony is mostly service based, working is offices etc, australia has like resources! natural resources which are woth much more than ur silly services there, if the exchnage rate was dollar for dollar im sure it wud be a win for oz.

Toronto/GoldenHorsehoe is about about US$300billion.

lol lol dream on, its just cos of the exchnage rate, nyc ecomony is mostly service based, working is offices etc, australia has like resources! natural resources which are woth much more than ur silly services there, if the exchnage rate was dollar for dollar im sure it wud be a win for oz.
LOL, you obviously have no grasp of economics whatsoever, maybe it should be "yen for dollar" as well. :lol:

GDP of Seoul proper in 2003 was about $175 billion.

GDP of Seoul metro area in 2003 was about $350 billion.

These figures are nominal, not based on PPP.

Can mumbai's GDP(nominal) pass us$ 50billion??????????????????

Imagine India's GDP is us$ 800 bn.then Mumbai's GDP=800*5%=40,So Mumbai's GDP is only about $40 bn.


Actually the GDP is around more like $ 850 billion. So that is around 42 or 43 billion. As I said, it LESS than $50 billion

Compaq, metro New York has around 22 million people, while the entire of Australia has 20 million people. There are three methods of measuring GDP, all of which necessarily result in the same value: product approach (added market value of final goods and services newly produced), expenditure approach (added value of consumption, investment, government purchases and net exports) and income approach (added value of all incomes, including taxes and profits). Using any of these three methods, and assuming that economic output per person (whether in the form of final goods and services, consumption, whatever) for New York and Australia are roughly equal, then you would naturally expect the location with more people to have a higher output, no? If you have taken even basic macroeconomics, you will know that:

total production = total income = total expenditure

This is called the fundamental identity of national income accounting, and it applies to metropolitan economies as well. National (or metropolitan) wealth equals its physical assets, such as capital, PLUS its net foreign assets. You do realize that in the case of New York City, due to its status as the multinational firm headquarters capital of the US (and the US has a GDP nearly 21x the size of Australia's), the net foreign assets owned by NY firms is on a truly massive scale. Think General Electric, CitiGroup, JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Time Warner, Verizon, Viacom, Merrill Lynch, Bloomberg, Conde Neste, etc. General Electric alone had a first quarter 2005 market cap of $379 billion.

There is nothing outlandish about metro New York having a larger economy than the whole of Australia. I have no idea what you are going on about natural resources. The service industry, including banking and financial management, is far more profitable than mining, logging or fishing.

tokyo metropolian GDP is largest in the world,fowllow by nyc metro

Compaq, metro New York has around 22 million people, while the entire of Australia has 20 million people. There are three methods of measuring GDP, all of which necessarily result in the same value: product approach (added market value of final goods and services newly produced), expenditure approach (added value of consumption, investment, government purchases and net exports) and income approach (added value of all incomes, including taxes and profits). Using any of these three methods, and assuming that economic output per person (whether in the form of final goods and services, consumption, whatever) for New York and Australia are roughly equal, then you would naturally expect the location with more people to have a higher output, no? If you have taken even basic macroeconomics, you will know that:

total production = total income = total expenditure

This is called the fundamental identity of national income accounting, and it applies to metropolitan economies as well. National (or metropolitan) wealth equals its physical assets, such as capital, PLUS its net foreign assets. You do realize that in the case of New York City, due to its status as the multinational firm headquarters capital of the US (and the US has a GDP nearly 21x the size of Australia's), the net foreign assets owned by NY firms is on a truly massive scale. Think General Electric, CitiGroup, JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Time Warner, Verizon, Viacom, Merrill Lynch, Bloomberg, Conde Neste, etc. General Electric alone had a first quarter 2005 market cap of $379 billion.

There is nothing outlandish about metro New York having a larger economy than the whole of Australia. I have no idea what you are going on about natural resources. The service industry, including banking and financial management, is far more profitable than mining, logging or fishing.

Well, i guess we are still living in yesterday's world where natural resources supply is >> demand. Natural resources like oil are going up in price, in 25 years time, when crude oil price is $500 a barrel, Dubai will have several times the GDP of New York on a per capita basis.

Compaq, metro New York has around 22 million people, while the entire of Australia has 20 million people. There are three methods of measuring GDP, all of which necessarily result in the same value: product approach (added market value of final goods and services newly produced), expenditure approach (added value of consumption, investment, government purchases and net exports) and income approach (added value of all incomes, including taxes and profits). Using any of these three methods, and assuming that economic output per person (whether in the form of final goods and services, consumption, whatever) for New York and Australia are roughly equal, then you would naturally expect the location with more people to have a higher output, no? If you have taken even basic macroeconomics, you will know that:

total production = total income = total expenditure

This is called the fundamental identity of national income accounting, and it applies to metropolitan economies as well. National (or metropolitan) wealth equals its physical assets, such as capital, PLUS its net foreign assets. You do realize that in the case of New York City, due to its status as the multinational firm headquarters capital of the US (and the US has a GDP nearly 21x the size of Australia's), the net foreign assets owned by NY firms is on a truly massive scale. Think General Electric, CitiGroup, JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Time Warner, Verizon, Viacom, Merrill Lynch, Bloomberg, Conde Neste, etc. General Electric alone had a first quarter 2005 market cap of $379 billion.

There is nothing outlandish about metro New York having a larger economy than the whole of Australia. I have no idea what you are going on about natural resources. The service industry, including banking and financial management, is far more profitable than mining, logging or fishing.

usa's gdp is about 12 trillion, aus's is around 700billion, not 21x !
resources r of a more value, demand than finance dealrs, anyway australian popultion is 20.4 atm and last time i checked NYC's was 21. something ...
dont get me upset and try tell me a city in usa can subside whole of aus. just dont!

Melbourne probably just creeps in at around US$108b. Sydney is probably US$140b?

NYC Metro will certainly have a greater GDP than the whole of Australia. Easily. Compaq - I suggest a basic arithmetic course long before you make comments on macro economics

^ meh fine, sydney has a greater GDP then the WHOLE of NZ ..

Melbourne probably just creeps in at around US$108b. Sydney is probably US$140b?

NYC Metro will certainly have a greater GDP than the whole of Australia. Easily. Compaq - I suggest a basic arithmetic course long before you make comments on macro economics

Compaq - no need to get sore over this, Australians live better lives than New Yorkers in almost all aspects of life. GDP isn't the gauge to the standard of living.

Safe
Lower Cost of living
Cleaner Air
Larger Apts/Houses/Cheap Land
No Congestion
Better climate

asianguy probably isnt talking about Sydney

^ thanx.

asianguy probably isnt talking about Sydney

I'm comparing the whole of Australia to NY, since the debate is about Australia's 20 million versus New York's 22 million people.

^ let me repeat my self, aus is 20.4, NYC is 21.something, u'r rounding australia down, and nyc up, population.

Compaq, you are anally splitting hairs. Metro NYC is roughly 22 million, and it can easily be argued that many areas of southern New Jersey, which are under 60 miles from NYC but are counted as part of the Philly metro area instead, contribute to the NYC economy significantly. Regardless, metro NYC is about 1 million people larger than Australia.

Secondly, using PPP method, Australia's GDP in 2004 was not $700 billion, but $605.9 billion, according to the World Bank. (http://www.worldbank.org/data/databytopic/GDP_PPP.pdf) When using nominal purchasing power to calculate, Australia's 2004 GDP was only $502.9 billion, according to The Economist. (http://www.economist.com/countries/Australia/profile.cfm?folder=Profile-Economic%20Structure) What is $11,628 billion over $605.9 billion? About 19.2. So using PPP method, the US GDP is roughly 19 times that of Australia's. Using nominal calculations, the US economy is roughly 21 times larger than that of Australia's. Simple arithmetic, my friend.

Asianguy, only 8 million of metro NY’s citizens live in municipal New York City; the other roughly 14 million live in suburban areas that are nearly identical to those found in any of Australia’s larger metro areas. You will have a hard time convincing anyone who has been to both NYC and, for example, Sydney that New York/New Jersey/Connecticut suburban sprawl is qualitatively worse than Australian suburban sprawl – they are spitting images of one another. Someone living in Stamford, CT or Bergen County, NJ certainly does not have a lower quality of life than someone living in suburban Melbourne.

Rank Country 2005 GDP
(nominal)
millions of USD
— World 44,168,157
— European Union 13,926,873
1 United States 12,438,873
2 Japan 4,799,061
3 Germany 2,906,658
4 United Kingdom 2,295,039
5 France 2,216,273
6 People's Republic of China (Mainland) 1,843,117
7 Italy 1,836,407
8 Spain 1,120,312
9 Canada 1,098,446
10 Russia 755,437
11 India 749,443
12 Brazil 732,078
13 South Korea 720,772
14 Mexico 714,530
15 Australia 692,436

Compaq, you are anally splitting hairs. Metro NYC is roughly 22 million, and it can easily be argued that many areas of southern New Jersey, which are under 60 miles from NYC but are counted as part of the Philly metro area instead, contribute to the NYC economy significantly. Regardless, metro NYC is about 1 million people larger than Australia.

Secondly, using PPP method, Australia's GDP in 2004 was not $700 billion, but $605.9 billion, according to the World Bank. (http://www.worldbank.org/data/databytopic/GDP_PPP.pdf) When using nominal purchasing power to calculate, Australia's 2004 GDP was only $502.9 billion, according to The Economist. (http://www.economist.com/countries/Australia/profile.cfm?folder=Profile-Economic%20Structure) What is $11,628 billion over $605.9 billion? About 19.2. So using PPP method, the US GDP is roughly 19 times that of Australia's. Using nominal calculations, the US economy is roughly 21 times larger than that of Australia's. Simple arithmetic, my friend.

Asianguy, only 8 million of metro NY’s citizens live in municipal New York City; the other roughly 14 million live in suburban areas that are nearly identical to those found in any of Australia’s larger metro areas. You will have a hard time convincing anyone who has been to both NYC and, for example, Sydney that New York/New Jersey/Connecticut suburban sprawl is qualitatively worse than Australian suburban sprawl – they are spitting images of one another. Someone living in Stamford, CT or Bergen County, NJ certainly does not have a lower quality of life than someone living in suburban Melbourne.

ok australia is poor

What is your source? I am highly suspicious of a GDP list for 2005 when fiscal year 2005's third quarter hasn't even ended yet. At best, that list is of projected GDP. I trust the World Bank and the Economist over a random, uncited list.

Australia is not poor. And even if we are to use whatever values you are providing, you are still splitting hairs, as they are all roughly the same.

In this list, by the economist, aus is better of, us worse, (than previous list)
Oz richer than Russia .. cool

Rank Country 2004 GDP
(nominal)
millions of USD
— World 40,885,976
— European Union 11,139,013
1 United States 11,667,515
2 Japan 4,623,398
3 Germany 2,714,418
4 United Kingdom 2,140,898
5 France 2,002,582 +
6 Italy 1,672,302
7 People's Republic of China (Mainland) 1,649,329
8 Spain 991,442
9 Canada 979,764
10 India 691,876
11 South Korea 679,764
12 Mexico 676,497
13 Australia 631,256

What is your source? I am highly suspicious of a GDP list for 2005 when fiscal year 2005's third quarter hasn't even ended yet. At best, that list is of projected GDP. I trust the World Bank and the Economist over a random, uncited list.

Australia is not poor.

"The first list was produced by the World Bank in July 2005 for GDP figures in 2004.

The second list includes ranking for the world economies with estimates for the year 2005 produced by the International Monetary Fund in April 2005."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29

Fine then, we'll use projections for 2005 - nothing substantial changes. Metro NYC's economy is still considerably larger than that of Australia's, which in no way reflects negatively on Australia. Let's consider this issue closed.

New York metro GDP: $984.7 billion (2003)
New York, NY: $488.8 billion
Nassau-Suffolk, NY: $122.9 billion
Newark, NJ: $105.1 billion
New Haven, CT: $85.4
Middlesex-Somerset-Hunterdon, NJ: $65.7 billion
Bergen-Passaic, NJ: $63.0 billion
Jersey City, NJ: $31.3 billion
Trenton, NJ: $22.5 billion

source (http://www.usmayors.org/metroeconomies/1004/metroeconomiestables_1004.xls)

Meh ok, Aus Rules either way to me.

I think Chennai has around $ 90 billion in PPP, at MER its like $25 billion or so.

chennai is not 2.5% of india's gdp. bombay is 5%, delhi around 3%. chennai will be somewhere between 1.25-1.75%. so ppp would be say $45-63 billion

chennai is not 2.5% of india's gdp. bombay is 5%, delhi around 3%. chennai will be somewhere between 1.25-1.75%. so ppp would be say $45-63 billion

Chennai is just 1.25-1.75%? I thought it could be more. With all the investments pouring into the city, I don't think it will take a long time for it to become the second most important city in India :cheers:.

Chennai is just 1.25-1.75%? I thought it could be more. With all the investments pouring into the city, I don't think it will take a long time for it to become the second most important city in India :cheers:.

2nd most important? Chennai has to beat Bangalore first.

bangalore would at best be 4th right now. both delhi and chennai would be above it

Chennai is just 1.25-1.75%? I thought it could be more. With all the investments pouring into the city, I don't think it will take a long time for it to become the second most important city in India :cheers:.
So your saying that its GDP will be bigger then Delhi and Calcutta?

bangalore would at best be 4th right now. both delhi and chennai would be above it


Wouldn't Kolkata be 4th? Or has the commie rule pushed it down?

2nd most important? Chennai has to beat Bangalore first.

Well Chennai is pretty important. Altho Bangalore is the poster child of Indian IT, not many people know about Chennai. Chennai is also a huge IT centre,and is the second biggest IT centre in India IIRC. Chennai has the largest purpose built IT park in Asia. www.tidelpark.com is the webiste of that IT park. I think Intel also announced setting up a plant. This (http://skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=180484) thread has more details about Chennai IT stuff.

Also Chennai is called the Detroit of South Asia(Indian subcontinent), it contributes over 40% of the Indian auto industry. Recently(I think yesterday), BMW announced plans to set up a plant near Chennai. Mitsubishi, Ford, Hyundai all have plants near Chennai. Major Indian two-wheeler company, TVS also has a plant. So Chennai IS important and is ahead of Bangalore. In a few more years, I guess it can go ahead of NCR too.

This (http://skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=139631) thread is about the developments in rest of Chennai. That thread btw, has around 12,800 views, the maximum of any thread in the Indian forum.

Well Chennai is pretty important. Altho Bangalore is the poster child of Indian IT, not many people know about Chennai. Chennai is also a huge IT centre,and is the second biggest IT centre in India IIRC. Chennai has the largest purpose built IT park in Asia. www.tidelpark.com is the webiste of that IT park. I think Intel also announced setting up a plant. This (http://skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=180484) thread has more details about Chennai IT stuff.

Also Chennai is called the Detroit of South Asia(Indian subcontinent), it contributes over 40% of the Indian auto industry. Recently(I think yesterday), BMW announced plans to set up a plant near Chennai. Mitsubishi, Ford, Hyundai all have plants near Chennai. Major Indian two-wheeler company, TVS also has a plant. So Chennai IS important and is ahead of Bangalore. In a few more years, I guess it can go ahead of NCR too.

This (http://skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=139631) thread is about the developments in rest of Chennai. That thread btw, has around 12,800 views, the maximum of any thread in the Indian forum.
I think Honda announced that it was setting up a plant in Chennai ,not BMW.

all those plants are not really in chennai. that would be more like tamil nadu, the state. or are they in the chennai metropolitan region?

Some european cities/ regions gdp nominal/ppp in €


fr10 Île de France 431532,3 413911
uki London 331418,9 294911,7
uki1 Inner London 216637,2 192773,7
fr101 Paris 151194,1 145020,2
itc45 Milano* 126827 132736,8
es30 Comunidad de Madrid 121664,6 141407,7
es300 Madrid* 121664,6 141407,7
uki2 Outer London 114781,7 102138
fr105 Hauts-de-Seine 102686,4 98493,3
ite43 Roma* 102137,7 106897
es511 Barcelona* 95548,3 111053,4
de300 Berlin 76991,3 69346
de600 Hamburg 76267,3 68693,9
se01 Stockholm* 73144,5 61774,6
ukg3 West Midlands 69434,8 61786,3
ukd3 Greater Manchester 65267,6 58078,1
de212 München, Kreisfreie Stadt 65193,9 58720
at13 Wien 60178,5 56982,8
itc11 Torino* 57546,9 60228,4
uke4 West Yorkshire 55875,5 49720,6
fr301 Nord 55002,2 52756,2
gr300 Attiki 53467,8 68111,8
fr716 Rhône 51946,6 49825,4
nl326 Groot-Amsterdam 50302,6 47160,6
be100 Arr. de Bruxelles-Capitale/Arr. van Brussel-Hoofdstad 50006,7 48897,3
ie021 Dublin* 49345 42517,9
de712 Frankfurt am Main, Kreisfreie Stadt 47700,6 42963,9
fr824 Bouches-du-Rhône 46745,1 44836,3
itf33 Napoli* 43468,6 45494,2
pt171 Grande Lisboa 41566,8 54510,9
dea23 Köln, Kreisfreie Stadt 40695 36654
nl335 Groot-Rijnmond 38749,4 36329
fr103 Yvelines 37874,7 36328,1
dea11 Düsseldorf, Kreisfreie Stadt 36327,2 32719,9
de111 Stuttgart, Stadtkreis 32972,5 29698,3
fr106 Seine-Saint-Denis 32302,7 30983,6
de929 Region Hannover 31908,4 28739,9
hu10 Közép-Magyarország 31429,7 57467,3
fr107 Val-de-Marne 29921,3 28699,5
ukg31 Birmingham 29042 25842,9
ukd5 Merseyside 28221,9 25113,1
uke3 South Yorkshire 27069,6 24087,7
fr104 Essonne 26490,5 25408,8
fr108 Val-d'Oise 26271 25198,2
pl127 Miasto Warszawa 25918,8 47288,2
nl332 Agglomeratie 's -Gravenhage 24900,5 23345,2
hu101 Budapest 24872,6 45478
fr102 Seine-et-Marne 24791,6 23779,3
uke42 Leeds 23987,6 21345,3
es618 Sevilla* 23448,1 27253,2
ukm34 Glasgow City 21312,6 18964,9
itc33 Genova 20839,5 21810,6
ukm25 Edinburgh, City of 20671,6 18394,6
ukc22 Tyneside 20304,8 18068,2
de254 Nürnberg, Kreisfreie Stadt 20133,5 18134,3
cz010 Hlavní mesto Praha 20123,3 37495,5

Names marked with * are regions, not cities.

Some european cities/ regions gdp nominal/ppp in €


fr10 Île de France 431532,3 413911
uki London 331418,9 294911,7
uki1 Inner London 216637,2 192773,7
fr101 Paris 151194,1 145020,2
itc45 Milano* 126827 132736,8
es30 Comunidad de Madrid 121664,6 141407,7
es300 Madrid* 121664,6 141407,7
uki2 Outer London 114781,7 102138
fr105 Hauts-de-Seine 102686,4 98493,3
ite43 Roma* 102137,7 106897
es511 Barcelona* 95548,3 111053,4
de300 Berlin 76991,3 69346
de600 Hamburg 76267,3 68693,9
se01 Stockholm* 73144,5 61774,6
ukg3 West Midlands 69434,8 61786,3
ukd3 Greater Manchester 65267,6 58078,1
de212 München, Kreisfreie Stadt 65193,9 58720
at13 Wien 60178,5 56982,8
itc11 Torino* 57546,9 60228,4
uke4 West Yorkshire 55875,5 49720,6
fr301 Nord 55002,2 52756,2
gr300 Attiki 53467,8 68111,8
fr716 Rhône 51946,6 49825,4
nl326 Groot-Amsterdam 50302,6 47160,6
be100 Arr. de Bruxelles-Capitale/Arr. van Brussel-Hoofdstad 50006,7 48897,3
ie021 Dublin* 49345 42517,9
de712 Frankfurt am Main, Kreisfreie Stadt 47700,6 42963,9
fr824 Bouches-du-Rhône 46745,1 44836,3
itf33 Napoli* 43468,6 45494,2
pt171 Grande Lisboa 41566,8 54510,9
dea23 Köln, Kreisfreie Stadt 40695 36654
nl335 Groot-Rijnmond 38749,4 36329
fr103 Yvelines 37874,7 36328,1
dea11 Düsseldorf, Kreisfreie Stadt 36327,2 32719,9
de111 Stuttgart, Stadtkreis 32972,5 29698,3
fr106 Seine-Saint-Denis 32302,7 30983,6
de929 Region Hannover 31908,4 28739,9
hu10 Közép-Magyarország 31429,7 57467,3
fr107 Val-de-Marne 29921,3 28699,5
ukg31 Birmingham 29042 25842,9
ukd5 Merseyside 28221,9 25113,1
uke3 South Yorkshire 27069,6 24087,7
fr104 Essonne 26490,5 25408,8
fr108 Val-d'Oise 26271 25198,2
pl127 Miasto Warszawa 25918,8 47288,2
nl332 Agglomeratie 's -Gravenhage 24900,5 23345,2
hu101 Budapest 24872,6 45478
fr102 Seine-et-Marne 24791,6 23779,3
uke42 Leeds 23987,6 21345,3
es618 Sevilla* 23448,1 27253,2
ukm34 Glasgow City 21312,6 18964,9
itc33 Genova 20839,5 21810,6
ukm25 Edinburgh, City of 20671,6 18394,6
ukc22 Tyneside 20304,8 18068,2
de254 Nürnberg, Kreisfreie Stadt 20133,5 18134,3
cz010 Hlavní mesto Praha 20123,3 37495,5

Names marked with * are regions, not cities.

I think you mean "Some european cities/ regions gdp nominal/ppp in millions of €"

And Ile de France is roughly Paris Metro and is a region.

Can you give us the source please?

Edit: So Paris metro (IDF, around 11 millions inh.) is around 525 billion dollars and Paris inner city (2.2 millions inh.) is around 183 billion dollars in nominal, using nowdays change rates.

Brazil 2004 GDP : R$1.841.795,70
São Paulo (Metro) 2004 GDP : R$295 (billion)

By the time, US$1,00 = R$3,04

So:

Brazil 2004 GDP : US$605 (billion)
São Paulo (Metro) 2004 GDP : US$97 (Billion)

But thats all relative, because the brazilian currency has changed a lot since 1999, it has climbed into 1 USD = 4 REAIS and today it is 2,36!!!

So, if we make US$1,00 = R$2,36:

Brazil 2004 GDP : US$780 (billion)
São Paulo (Metro) 2004 GDP : US$125 (Billion)

all those plants are not really in chennai. that would be more like tamil nadu, the state. or are they in the chennai metropolitan region?


I think they are all in and around Chennai. I guess Anniyan would have more details.

Fine then, we'll use projections for 2005 - nothing substantial changes. Metro NYC's economy is still considerably larger than that of Australia's, which in no way reflects negatively on Australia. Let's consider this issue closed.

New York metro GDP: $984.7 billion (2003)
New York, NY: $488.8 billion
Nassau-Suffolk, NY: $122.9 billion
Newark, NJ: $105.1 billion
New Haven, CT: $85.4
Middlesex-Somerset-Hunterdon, NJ: $65.7 billion
Bergen-Passaic, NJ: $63.0 billion
Jersey City, NJ: $31.3 billion
Trenton, NJ: $22.5 billion

source (http://www.usmayors.org/metroeconomies/1004/metroeconomiestables_1004.xls)

What about Westchester? It's one of the wealthiest counties in the NY metro, has 1M residents and is home to several Fortune 100 companies like IBM and Pepsico.

I think you mean "Some european cities/ regions gdp nominal/ppp in millions of €"

And Ile de France is roughly Paris Metro and is a region.

Can you give us the source please?

Edit: So Paris metro (IDF, around 11 millions inh.) is around 525 billion dollars and Paris inner city (2.2 millions inh.) is around 183 billion dollars in nominal, using nowdays change rates.

source is eurostat (http://epp.eurostat.cec.eu.int/portal/page?_pageid=0,1136162,0_45572076&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL)

Philippines has GDP (Purchasing Power Parity) of $390.7 billion.

Metro Manila contributes 1/3 of the total GDP so that would make Metro Manila's GDP as $130.23 billion.

Source: CIA Factbook

What about Westchester? It's one of the wealthiest counties in the NY metro, has 1M residents and is home to several Fortune 100 companies like IBM and Pepsico.

Westchester County is included in the New York,NY PMSA of $488.8billion.

New York, NY PMSA:
-NYC
-Westchester County
-Rockland County
-Putnam County

usa's gdp is about 12 trillion, aus's is around 700billion, not 21x !
resources r of a more value, demand than finance dealrs, anyway australian popultion is 20.4 atm and last time i checked NYC's was 21. something ...
dont get me upset and try tell me a city in usa can subside whole of aus. just dont!

:| sounds like someone has an intense inferiority complex. how old are you, 7?

sorry, but NYC is far more important to the global stage than Oz. for all the reasons shawn stated.

doesn't mean Oz isn't cool, though. :banana2:

madrid has a GDP over 100 billion$

Madrid's GDP in million of dollars (PPP)

179.609,5 $

Madrid's GDP in million of dollars (Nominal)

196.054,6 $

this is not true


http://epp.eurostat.cec.eu.int/portal/page?_pageid=0,1136162,0_45572076&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

according to the Eurostat, Madrid GDP in 2002 was of 121.664 billions of euros
(nominal) and 141.407 in PPS.


http://epp.eurostat.cec.eu.int/extraction/retrieve/en/theme1/regio/econ-r/esa95/gdp95/e3gdp95?OutputDir=EJOutputDir_156&user=unknown&clientsessionid=22E3F9088AD6ECB906A0587BCA021058.extraction-worker-1&OutputFile=e3gdp95.htm&OutputMode=U&NumberOfCells=42&Language=en&OutputMime=text%2Fhtml&

i suppose this is for all the province, isn't it?
yeah, it's the region

Warsaw - 1.7 million ppl 32 billion $nominal / 58 billion $ ppp
Warsaw metro area - 3 million ppl 40 billion $ nominal / 73 billion $ ppp

this is not true


http://epp.eurostat.cec.eu.int/portal/page?_pageid=0,1136162,0_45572076&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

according to the Eurostat, Madrid GDP in 2002 was of 121.664 billions of euros
(nominal) and 141.407 in PPS.


http://epp.eurostat.cec.eu.int/extraction/retrieve/en/theme1/regio/econ-r/esa95/gdp95/e3gdp95?OutputDir=EJOutputDir_156&user=unknown&clientsessionid=22E3F9088AD6ECB906A0587BCA021058.extraction-worker-1&OutputFile=e3gdp95.htm&OutputMode=U&NumberOfCells=42&Language=en&OutputMime=text%2Fhtml&


well, the eurostat has their own calculations. my own is this. madrid's gdp represents 17,5% of spanish GDP (do you want links?¿?¿) and spanish GDP in 2005 is 1.026.340 million of dollars in PPP and 1.120.312 million of euros in Nominal.

17,5 % of that numbers are the datas i gave

For Zurich: it's 37'000 USD/capita
- The metro has 1.7 mio inhabitants, so that means: 62.9 billion USD
- Greater Zurich Area (GZA, Wirtschaftsraum) has 3.2 mio pop and ca. 115 billion USD.

think, people.

that list is for PMSA, which are fractions of real metros. why would people separate oakland from SF? or long island from NYC? or orange county from LA?

That makes since because when i saw that i was wondering if they left Ft Worth from Dallas. Looks like they did.

How come Madrid's PPP is lower than it's Nominal?

because of Euro currency

The GDP per capita of Frankfurt is huge!!! far over the German average!!
In Latin America I think that the only cities that will pass the 100 billion$ PP is Sao Pablo, Mexico City and Buenos Aires. Santiago has one of 80,000 billion$ and
Lima of 60 billion$ Ithink Bogota, Caracas, Belo Horizonte and Monterrey have similar figures..


by the way i have this information at nominal prices:

http://www.prodigyweb.net.mx/kardrak/GMPlatino.jpg

:| sounds like someone has an intense inferiority complex. how old are you, 7?

sorry, but NYC is far more important to the global stage than Oz. for all the reasons shawn stated.

doesn't mean Oz isn't cool, though. :banana2:

actully in reality, resources are more important than finincial managment, china doesnt need NYC as much as it needs australia's huge amounts of resources for its economic boom. China just an example.

Philippines has GDP (Purchasing Power Parity) of $390.7 billion.

Metro Manila contributes 1/3 of the total GDP so that would make Metro Manila's GDP as $130.233 billion.

Source: CIA Factbook
I reviewed the stats in the CIA Factbook for 2004 figures>>

Philippine GDP (PPP) = $430.6 billion (2004 est.)
Contribution of Metro Manila (National Capital Region) to GDP = 31.29%

GDP of MM = $134.7B

I reviewed the stats in the CIA Factbook for 2004 figures>>

Philippine GDP (PPP) = $430.6 billion (2004 est.)
Contribution of Metro Manila (National Capital Region) to GDP = 31.29%

GDP of MM = $134.7B
Wow!

GDP @ PPP for South Africa is $440b.

Johannesburg is 25% of this = $110b
Gauteng conurburation is 40% GDP = $176b

Considering the Randstad in Netherlands with 7,1 millions inhabitants (nearly the half of dutch population) and a national GDP (2004 nominal) of 577,260 ... The Randstad is surely above 250 billions.

^ 1 trillion i dont belive, cant be more than whole of australia.. (bout same population)

Why not? Average GDP/capita is much higher in the US.

Barcelona

Region GDP: 124,213 USD
Nominal PPP: 144,370 USD

;)

Compaq


where are you now??

^ He's BANNED actually! Took them long enough.

Tokyo's GDP (That's for the entire Kanto Urban Region) is at least $1.2 trillion in nominal GDP. That even bigger than New York's!!! :eek2: :dance: :carrot: :cheers1: :master: :master: :master: :pepper: :omg: :shocked:

Greater paris metro has GDP greater than russia and Brazil.

United Kingdom — GDP: $ 2,382,000,000,000

London's one should be good

my bad, i forgot it was about cities! still good though

United Kingdom — GDP: $ 1,782,000,000,000


Your about 8 years out of date with that figure ffs...try and post correct figures

it now stands at $2.3 Trillion.

Im'a tryin'

I'd jus like to clear some things up. New Yorks GDP is probably higher than that of Australias due to many factors. Firsty, it is the home to many of the large corporations of the US. It has also got the rest of the united states as a trade partner which is another 270 million people now Australia's economy soley relies on its self to grow. New York is one city in a nation of 290million people so you really can't compare New York to Australia. It is like comparing Sydney with New Zealand. Sydney's GDP is far more larger than that of New Zealand, 4 times to be exact and the population difference is somewhat 400thousand in Sydneys favour. But you must remember, Sydney is the corporal Headqaurters for many of Australias largest companies plus with another 16million people in the nation, it will always have a larger GDP. Besides New York can't grow forever and Australia has plenty room to grow and give it a few years and Australia will take over New York, and i asure you on that. Theres a boom currently happening in Asia and the south east and Australia is riding on it. Remember this that Australia is resource rich and huge compared to lil ol New York City and countries in asia such as India and China have 2.5billion people and are in need of Australias resources and not New Yorks banks.

According to my calculations. the London city proper has a gdp of $404.6 billion. Assuming the GDP per head was the same for the whole London greater metro area. it's GDP would be about $971.04 billion.

double post:sorry

"The London economy contributes around 17 percent of the UK's total GDP and is comparable in size to that of Sweden, Belgium and Russia. Each of London's distinct regions - North, South, East, West and Central - is individually larger than many major cities elsewhere in Europe. The sheer size and diversity of London presents a wide variety of potential locations, so much so that most investors will find a region to meet their needs."

And that's just for the city proper. The greater metro area is 2.4 times as big.

People, stop using ppp,we r comparing with gdp norminal