# WORLD'S TEN MOST POWERFUL CITIES- Forbes



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

This article was posted by Dr T in the Toronto section:



_World's Most Economically Powerful Cities
Joshua Zumbrun 07.15.08, 12:00 PM ET

What's the world's most economically powerful city?

If you picked New York or Tokyo, you'd be wrong.

But when Forbes.com set out to measure the world's most powerful cities, the lack of useful data was surprising.

For sovereign nations, it's easy to find measures of almost every variable imaginable--gross domestic product (GDP), inflation, money flows and other metrics. After all, the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund all deal with governments at the national level. But for corporations, cities and their economies matter most, since picking the right city will be the key to prosperity in the future.

Corporations, and even individuals, have to weigh the size of a city's economy compared to how it will be in the future and consider the potential growth in the intervening years. For that matter, they have to judge whether it's worth it to settle for a city that has high growth prospects but turns out to be a lousy place to live.

To create our ranking of economic power, we looked at all of these factors to see who's strong across the board.

While Tokyo and New York are far and away the largest economies of today and tomorrow, they are growing much slower than many. Thus it's fast-growing London that tops our list, according to data from MasterCard (nyse: MA - news - people ).

Growth and quality are as important as size in our rankings, so smaller but briskly growing economies like Seoul, South Korea, and Hong Kong also make the list. North America, with relatively lower growth areas, still boasts a number of cities in the current power list, including New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and Toronto, the latter of which squeezes past Madrid, Spain; Philadelphia and Mexico City, Mexico. To see the entire list of the top 10 economically powerful cities, click here. 

Pinning down the data to compare cities isn't as easy as it sounds, but luckily, several corporations have done detailed studies of the economies of global cities.

The auditing giant PricewaterhouseCoopers has compiled estimates of the GDP (as measured by purchasing power parity) of the largest urban economies and how fast those economies are growing from 2005 to 2020.

MasterCard has created an annual "centers of commerce" index, which ranks cities on a host of factors, including legal and political framework, economic stability, the ease of doing business, the financial flow, convenience as a business center, information flow and livability.

UBS (nyse: UBS - news - people ) publishes an estimate of living expenses and earnings in the world's largest cities. This report also includes estimates of how much the earnings of the average worker can actually purchase in the city.

The overarching lesson: Keep looking east. The world's fastest-growing economies, such as Shanghai, China; Beijing, Jakarta, Indonesia; and Mumbai, India, are growing at twice the pace of the Western world.

Cities with enormous populations like Sao Paolo, Brazil, and Mexico City also have economies projected to grow by more than 4% annually. They won't be the size of Tokyo or New York anytime soon, but with business-friendly policies, their economic power can be expected to continue climbing. 
_
The list is: 

1.London
2.Hong Kong
3.New York
4.Tokyo
5.Chicago
6.Seoul, Korea
7.Paris
8.Los Angeles
9.Shanghai, China
10.Toronto


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

Is this cities or metro areas?


----------



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

I have been to 6 of those cities.

Maybe one day we will see a Latin city (besides Paris) or African city on that list.
Why is Africa not developing fast? I'm surprised Sydney or Melbourne did not make the cut.


----------



## lawine (Jul 24, 2006)

Odd. The recent Mastercard survey indicated a different list of the 10 most powerful financial cities of the world, with london also at top, but which included both Frankfurt and Amsterdam in the top 10. Whilst Shangai had only just entered the top 25.


----------



## Xusein (Sep 27, 2005)

philadweller said:


> I have been to 6 of those cities.
> 
> Maybe one day we will see a Latin city (besides Paris) or African city on that list.
> *Why is Africa not developing fast? I'm surprised Sydney or Melbourne did not make the cut.*


It'll probably be decades before we see even one in the top 20.

It's not that Africa isn't developing fast, many countries are (in fact, the continent's GDP growth is actually forecast to be faster this year, a rarity), but the financial sector is _minute _in comparison.


----------



## Skybean (Jun 16, 2004)

I have been to 7.5 of the cities (0.5 of Seoul if you include 3-hour connecting flight). Way to go Hong Kong! 

It's also nice to see Toronto getting some recognition, considering the fact that the Toronto Stock Exchange lists the most mining, oil and gas companies of any world exchange. With increasing commodity prices, it stands to benefit greatly.


----------



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

I'm curious as to what the average work day is for employees in each of those cities.
I know the Europeans like to take long vacations and the US and Canada likes its 9-5 shifts....what about Tokyo and Hong Kong? Are they workaholics or do they make time for leisure, pubs and partying?

Which city in Africa would be the first to make it to the list? Johannesburg? Cairo?


----------



## karim aboussir (Dec 4, 2006)

tunis nairoubi lagos maybe marrakech in 20 or 30 years for africa


----------



## Blackpool88 (Nov 15, 2007)

so does this go off metro population or what? are they taking london as 7.5 or 18 million?


----------



## Harkeb (Oct 12, 2004)

No city of the worlds 3rd largest economy (Germany)?


----------



## Blackpool88 (Nov 15, 2007)

Harkeb said:


> No city of the worlds 3rd largest economy (Germany)?


yeah I would have thought financially Frankfurt would have been there but the criteria of the list seems very clouded. Maybe Frankfurts population counts against it, but I'm not sure i this list is financial power or overall power ie politically, culturally, financially etc


----------



## jcarloschile (Jul 12, 2008)

Hong Kong, Chicago and Seoul above Paris???? I don't think so.

Paris by itself has the 4th largest Gross Metropolitan Product in the world, the second city in the world with more 500 Global companies, the most visited city in the world, it is the capital of a country with a permanent seat on the security council, that has nuclear weapons and the third largest military expenditure in the world, and also the 5th largest economy. A former colonial power, it has influence in nearly every corner of the world.


----------



## plcmat (Jan 16, 2008)

I would think Johannesburg would easily be the highest for Africa right now (though maybe Cairo's megacity status would challenge it).

I think Cairo's proximity to the EU and the Middle East would be an advantage.


----------



## Sagasu (Oct 3, 2006)

jcarloschile said:


> Hong Kong, Chicago and Seoul above Paris???? I don't think so.
> 
> Paris by itself has the 4th largest Gross Metropolitan Product in the world, the most visited city in the world, it is the capital of a country with a permanent seat on the security council, that has nuclears weapons and the third largest military expenditure in the world, and also the 5th largest economy. A former colonial power, it has influence in nearly every corner of the world.


You're right that's strange.

Maybe a part of the answer is that a great part of the economical activity of Paris is located outside the limits of the city (in La Défense for instance) so that "falsifies" the figures...


----------



## Looking/Up (Feb 28, 2008)

Another thing that may count against Paris is the slower economic growth when compared to the other cities on the list.


----------



## BrickellResidence (Feb 4, 2008)

im sure mexico city or monterrey,mexico will making it in the near future by its fast growing economy.


----------



## ssiguy2 (Feb 19, 2005)

There are many reasons why Toronto is on the list. Mad/Rome/Syd/Mel didn't as Toronto has the 7th largest stock exchange in the world and is the economic capitol of a G8 nation, the world's most important economic club. Also Canada, unlike what many think, has much more influence in the US than Aus/Ita/Spain will ever have due to NATO, NORAD, NAFTA, and Canada is the USAs largest exporter. We are also a massive energy power which the US relys on.


----------



## 6-6-6 (Jan 14, 2008)

AHH im so happy that im living in a supermegacity, mexico city rocks as usual along with his "syster city": sao paulo:cheers:


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

ssiguy2 said:


> We are also a massive energy power which the US relys on.


Canada is the largest supplier of petroleum to the USA, although very, very few Americans are aware of that fact.


----------



## luv2bebrown (Nov 4, 2004)

this list is not at all surprising.


----------



## Skybean (Jun 16, 2004)

The link to the actual article in which there is a more detailed explanation is here:
http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/15/economic-growth-gdp-biz-cx_jz_0715powercities.html

With regards to Paris, Forbes says:

*
Paris, France*










GDP (2005): $460 billion
GDP (2020): $611 billion
Growth rate: 1.9%
MasterCard ranking: 7
Population (2007): 9,904,000
Purchasing power (NYC=100): 88%

Today the economy of Paris is bigger than London's. But sluggish growth in this old-world capital has it slowly losing ground. By 2020 it will have been passed by London. We'll always have Paris, yes, but_ by 2020 its economy will be little larger than rapidly-growing Mexico City._


----------



## Reverie (Nov 23, 2007)

Why this kind of magazine always needs to ask and answer to the question : "who has the bigger one ?". Quick ! Let's create a ranking ! Just like _Time_ with its "100 world's most influencial people" or the _U.S. News & World Report_ with its college rankings. Just like the Saskia Sassen's global cities. Completely subjective and changing.


----------



## jcarloschile (Jul 12, 2008)

Skybean said:


> The link to the actual article in which there is a more detailed explanation is here:
> http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/15/economic-growth-gdp-biz-cx_jz_0715powercities.html
> 
> With regards to Paris, Forbes says:
> ...


Why all these magazines do their projections starting with the thesis that all the current situations are going to maintaiin unchanged in the future?? Many things can happen, for example, I'm sure Sarkozy's reforms are going to make France's economy to grow at relatively high rates in the long term.


----------



## globill (Dec 4, 2005)

Seoul, South Korea
GDP (2005): $218 billion
GDP (2020): $349 billion
Growth rate: 3.2% 
MasterCard ranking: 9
Population (2007): 9,796,000
Purchasing power (NYC=100): 56%

Similar to Hong Kong, Seoul benefits from a growing Asia and Western-oriented markets. 

PricewaterhouseCoopers projects that by 2020, Seoul will surpass Atlanta, San Francisco, Houston and Miami in GDP.


Seoul's city population is over 10 million , with over 23 million in the metro. This survey underestimates the metro's GDP by more than half.


----------



## jcarloschile (Jul 12, 2008)

Seoul has half of Paris GDP and it's more powerful?


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

Harkeb said:


> No city of the worlds 3rd largest economy (Germany)?


The difference is, that we aren't a centralized nation. We have 6 cities that share the functions which are all provided by e.g. Paris, London or Mexico. Frankfurt is our financial capital, Berlin is the political, Hamburg is the export hub no.1, Munich is the capital for research (sharing with Stuttgart) and Media, Stuttgart the capital of modern industries and research (sharing with Munich) whereas Rhein-Ruhr is the industrial and population center of Germany. 

These 6 metro areas are followed by other major areas like Hannover, Bremen, Nürnberg, Rhein-Neckar, Saar, Dresden and Leipzig which also play a great role in Germany.


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

Sagasu said:


> You're right that's strange.
> 
> Maybe a part of the answer is that a great part of the economical activity of Paris is located outside the limits of the city (in La Défense for instance) so that "falsifies" the figures...


Metro area is included, as the population figures tell. Paris has just 2.1 million inhabitans, but there in the list it says 9.7 million or so.


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

globill said:


> Seoul, South Korea
> GDP (2005): $218 billion
> GDP (2020): $349 billion
> Growth rate: 3.2%
> ...


Forbes is comparing apples with oranges! Otherwise Seoul would rank much higher, when it's metro area would be compared to the others'. It's like the UN. Berlin just 3.4 million and seoul just 10, but New York is ranked with 20 million.


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

GDP doesn't measure city-originated economic activity. A small big major financial capital may influence plenty of other production elsewhere in the country, and internationally, but the definition of GDP will not include it. Hence, it's incorrect to equate size with power in this sort of ranking.


----------



## Intoxication (Jul 24, 2005)

Taller said:


> What's the world's most economically powerful city?
> 
> The list is:
> 
> ...


My sig is correct! London does rock! :rock:



philadweller said:


> I'm curious as to what the average work day is for employees in each of those cities.
> I know the Europeans like to take long vacations and the US and Canada likes its 9-5 shifts....what about Tokyo and Hong Kong? Are they workaholics or do they make time for leisure, pubs and partying?


As far as I know, Tokyonians are even worse than North Americans. They are what you call "workaholics"! Work very long hours. Only see their family, once a week, like on Saturday. Thats what I saw in a documentary.


----------



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

"As far as I know, Tokyo is even worse than North Americans cities. They are what you called "workaholics"! Work very long hours. Only see their family, once a week like on Saturday. Thats what I saw in a documentary."

That is sad.


----------



## Tombs (Sep 9, 2007)

ROCK ON, LONDON! :cheers::cheers::cheers:


----------



## sogod (Jul 12, 2004)

Most Japanese people in Tokyo enjoy a 1-2 hour commute via an unimaginably crowded train, work for 9-12 hours (tending towards the later), then return home via a similarly bad commute. Believe me when I say the commute is so bad it makes you wish you were parked in gridlock and forced to listen to an unending array of commercials more retarded than email spam. 

To top things off they also have to take their vacations at company approved times, which are usually the same throughout the entire country. The end result being everything is more expensive and more crowded at the same time, all the time.


----------



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

Tokyo seems like a great place to visit but that's about it. We only have one life and should not be that serious.


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

Amount of vacation time is only one indicator of quality of life. Cost of living is another... how much does it cost to buy food or necessities? No question London is a powerful city, but it is also a very expensive city, by anyone's standards.


----------



## Koen Acacia (Apr 17, 2007)

Taller said:


> Amount of vacation time is only one indicator of quality of life. Cost of living is another... how much does it cost to buy food or necessities? No question London is a powerful city, but it is also a very expensive city, by anyone's standards.


Depends on how you look at it. Outside the London City proper, prices are really a lot more reasonable.
(That's also a tip if you ever need to do London on a budget btw, just look for an apartment somewhere in Hatfield or St Albans or so, do your shopping/eating/sleeping there, and just commute for the touristy bits. It's not that far, really.)

EDIT: Something else: I've always thought that a high cost of living was one of the most important aspects of a city's power. A truly powerful city simply should not feel like a bargain basement. If it's powerful, it has to be expensive, it _has_ to feel like "Hi, you're welcome here, but we'll really get by without the backpackers, want another ten-dollar drink? "


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

^^ But that is true in any country. The further you get away from the core of the biggest city, the cheaper things become (Hoboken and Toledo are cheaper than Manhattan). By anyone's standards though, London is a very expensive city to live in for the average Joe. I was referring to quality of life, not perceived "power", as people were discussing amount of vacation time in various countries.


----------



## Koen Acacia (Apr 17, 2007)

Taller said:


> ^^ But that is true in any country. The further you get away from the core of the biggest city, the cheaper things become (Hoboken and Toledo are cheaper than Manhattan). By anyone's standards though, London is a very expensive city to live in for the average Joe. I was referring to quality of life, not perceived "power", as people were discussing amount of vacation time in various countries.


Still, I'm not sure how widespread living in Hoboken or Toledo is among those who work in New York. Mind, I don't have *any* data at all on this (and I'm way too lazy to look it up for the sake of this argument ), but I do have the idea that, for Londoners, commuting is way more normal (and easy) than it is in other places.


----------



## jefferson2 (May 31, 2008)

karim aboussir said:


> tunis nairoubi lagos maybe marrakech in 20 or 30 years for africa


marakech is a nice city, is it a major mediterranean or african centre?

other african frontrunners would have to be johannesburg, cape town, and lagos... but nigeria has other important centres? i think the government is in abuja, and oil in port harcourt, so that would have to decrease the importance of lagos

khartoum is growing.. luanda as well. addis maybe. i think a few companies moved their african headquarters to nairobi recently


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

Koen Acacia said:


> Still, I'm not sure how widespread living in Hoboken or Toledo is among those who work in New York. Mind, I don't have *any* data at all on this (and I'm way too lazy to look it up for the sake of this argument ), but I do have the idea that, for Londoners, commuting is way more normal (and easy) than it is in other places.


Hoboken yes; Toledo no. Many people live in New Jersey and work in Manhattan. Commuting is a normal fact of life for those who work in Manhattan, because it is so expensive to live there. My point was whenever you get away from the downtown core of a big city, life becomes less expensive, whether that is in London or New York or anywhere else in the world.


----------



## LMCA1990 (Jun 18, 2005)

I don't agree with the order of the list but the right cities are there IMO :yes:


----------



## Veinticinco (Sep 13, 2005)

philadweller said:


> I have been to 6 of those cities.
> 
> Maybe one day we will see a Latin city (besides Paris) or African city on that list.


It's not like Spain has never been powerful, they used to have one of the most powerful empires along with Britain and France, somewhere along the line it must have lost it's status? Egypt too, an African nation which was very very powerful. Is Rome latin?


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

twiz said:


> It's not like Spain has never been powerful, they used to have one of the most powerful empires along with Britain and France, somewhere along the line it must have lost it's status? Egypt too, an African nation which was very very powerful. Is Rome latin?


I expect that Philadweller is referring to modern times, as this list composed by Forbes is not based on the economies of hundreds or thousands of years ago.


----------



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

Technically, I would consider any country that speaks a "romance" language to be Latin so yes that would include France, Italy, Portugal, Spain and Romania along with Mexico, Central and South American countries.

I was referring more to Mexico City, Sao Paulo or Buenos Aires when I said Latin.


----------



## Xusein (Sep 27, 2005)

Taller said:


> Hoboken yes; Toledo no. Many people live in New Jersey and work in Manhattan. Commuting is a normal fact of life for those who work in Manhattan, because it is so expensive to live there. My point was whenever you get away from the downtown core of a big city, life becomes less expensive, whether that is in London or New York or anywhere else in the world.


Indeed. I guess some don't know how much crazy commuting has gotten in the Tri-state (NYC area). 

I know a guy who commutes 2 hours a day to New York, from *Pennsylvania*. That's one hellish commuter there.


----------



## philadweller (Oct 30, 2003)

"I know a guy who commutes 2 hours a day to New York, from Pennsylvania. That's one hellish commuter there."

You can live in Philly and commute to Manhattan and take the Acela which is only 1 hour and 10 minutes. Cost of living is relatively cheaper in Philly and the salries are big in Manhattan.

Suburban New York is very pricey. North Jersey is rich!


----------



## Tombs (Sep 9, 2007)

Expenses in London all depend on how well you budget and where you live. The problem is that all the obvious choices for buying food and necessities in London are expensive, but most little markets and local shops will sell good value food for far less. The international community is well-schooled in the art of getting by in London. Public transport is broad and far-reaching to the point where driving becomes more or less completely unnecessary. Things like car tax and road insurance are disgustingly expensive. If you live somewhere nice and swanky, then you'll find that your monthly Council Tax bill will burn a gigantic hole in your pocket too. Water rates are also ridiculously high. Within Inner London (Zones 1, 2 and 3), rents are so high they barely leave anything left to survive on, but as soon as you start getting into the suburbs/outer districts (most of which are very well-connected to the center of town), things generally start to drop quite a bit.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

No surprises on this list other than I had expected to see Toronto just out of the top 10. It's a great accomplishment for Toronto considering its small population relative to the other 9 cities. Hopefully, Toronto's standing can be maintained going forward. It's not growing as fast as some of those booming cities in Asia and Latin America, but is one of the fastest rising cities in the 'Western' world. Toronto continues to gain on traditional western cities like Paris and Chicago, but the lead over cities like Mexico City and Beijing is diminishing. We shall see. 



Harkeb said:


> No city of the worlds 3rd largest economy (Germany)?


German economic power and influence is spread out amongst a number of cities: Frankfurt, Berlin, Munich, Essen, etc. If there was more concentration in one dominant German city, as is the case in France or the UK, a German city would surely have made the top 10.


----------



## Zenith (Oct 23, 2003)

6-6-6 said:


> AHH im so happy that im living in a supermegacity, mexico city rocks as usual along with his "syster city": sao paulo:cheers:


Supermegacity? Hmmm By population only. It is nothing compared to the likes of London.....or Paris, New York and Tokyo. I should know, I lived there.


----------



## Zenith (Oct 23, 2003)

twiz said:


> It's not like Spain has never been powerful, they used to have one of the most powerful empires along with Britain and France, somewhere along the line it must have lost it's status? Egypt too, an African nation which was very very powerful. Is Rome latin?


Britain had the largest and most powerful empire the world has ever seen, but yes Spain was once more powerful. I really want to visit Spain again actually, beautiful, and I love the girls.


----------



## skyboi (Mar 30, 2008)

^That's surprises me all the time as I understand the spanish speaking nations of the world has taken like one third of the globe livable land and they don't have some kind of union to promote or to stand with each other for ecomomic benefit or political united front when needed , it seems they all go separate way just like the arab nations , that's why there isn't a really Powerful core City among themself , right ? ( or maybe I am wrong )


----------



## Blackpool88 (Nov 15, 2007)

I know it's a boring argument but how is New york city ranked at 19 million and London 9 million, surely they aren't taking all of London's metro population here?


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

Blackpool88 said:


> I know it's a boring argument but how is New york city ranked at 19 million and London 9 million, surely they aren't taking all of London's metro population here?


Higher GDP-growth. 

But that doesn't mean that I do understand the ranking.:lol:


----------



## Homer J. Simpson (Dec 2, 2003)

^The ranking is partly based on where the origin of economic activities takes place. London was the world hub long before New York was super prominent.


----------



## Guest (Jul 31, 2008)

ssiguy2 said:


> There are many reasons why Toronto is on the list. Mad/Rome/Syd/Mel didn't as Toronto has the 7th largest stock exchange in the world *and is the economic capitol of a G8 nation*, the world's most important economic club. Also Canada, unlike what many think, has much more influence in the US than Aus/Ita/Spain will ever have due to NATO, NORAD, NAFTA, and Canada is the USAs largest exporter. We are also a massive energy power which the US relys on.


Canada belongs to G-8 but actually, Spain overpassed Canada two years ago in total GDP.

I don't know about Canada, but Spain is the most influencial country (along with USA, as first/second investor) in South American and Centre America.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

^^If we want to be precise, Canada is actually a G7 country. The G8 refers to the G7 countries + Russia. The G7 was a grouping of the world's 7 most powerful industrial economies. Spain may have recently passed Canada in GDP, but what does that have to do with Canadian membership in this group? Nothing. China isn't a member either.


----------



## Duranguense17 (Jul 30, 2008)

i think that it shuld be mexico city in the list because is the powerful city in latin america


----------



## Phriggin' Ogre (Aug 3, 2003)

Isn't Mexico city's GDP like the 7th or 8th largest in the world? And its growing fast. Its going to overpass Osaka sooner or later. Its certainly higher than a lot of cities mentioned on the list... and growing faster than most of them.


----------



## El Mariachi (Nov 1, 2007)

philadweller said:


> what about Tokyo and Hong Kong? Are they workaholics or do they make time for leisure, pubs and partying?
> ?


The Japanese are insane when it comes to work. People have died overworking. I guess things are changing now though, as their kids are becoming spoiled brats--much like the West.


----------



## jcarloschile (Jul 12, 2008)

Phriggin' Ogre said:


> Isn't Mexico city's GDP like the 7th or 8th largest in the world? And its growing fast. Its going to overpass Osaka sooner or later. Its certainly higher than a lot of cities mentioned on the list... and growing faster than most of them.


It's the 14th, and no, it's not growing fast.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

^^Perhaps, he is talking about himself and wants his own account closed on his behalf.


----------



## tigerboy (Jun 7, 2006)

The list is reasonable but defies common sense is one or two areas.

NYC is unarguably more powerful than hong Kong. Unarguably this is so.

Paris is unarguably more powerful than Seoul and Chicago.

Indeed the difficult to measure but still vital to power and prestige cultural patrimony both cities enjoy seems underweighted.


----------



## jcarloschile (Jul 12, 2008)

Of course measuring GDP in the same currency is important. Or do you think the cost of living is what determinates the economic power of a city???


----------



## 3521usa (Dec 23, 2007)

edit


----------



## 3521usa (Dec 23, 2007)

isaidso said:


> New York is home to North America's biggest and second biggest stock exchanges: the NYSE and NASDAQ. The 3rd largest exchange in North America and 7th largest in the world is the Toronto Stock Exchange. The Chicago Stock Exchange isn't even 4th in North America. I believe the one in Mexico City is. The Chicago Stock Exchange is the largest in the USA outside of New York City. Big difference!
> 
> Chicago may be a bigger city with a larger economy than Toronto, but Chicago was also rated higher, so I don't see what the problem is. Toronto was ranked 10th and that's probably where it deserves to be. It's a huge accomplishment for a relatively small city from a relatively small country. If people are hyping Toronto, perhaps because it's been growing like gangbusters for 40 years. Can Chicago say that? Chicago's used to being #1 on the Great Lakes. Getting a little worried about the competition coming from the east perhaps? Maybe you should be. Toronto will pass Chicago one of these days. It's just a matter of when.
> 
> ...





"Toronto will pass Chicago one of these days. It's just a matter of when" Let me guess...because usaidso? :nuts:


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

3521usa said:


> "Toronto will pass Chicago one of these days. It's just a matter of when" Let me guess...because usaidso? :nuts:


Lol I don't know why so much people have to praise Toronto as a super megacity. Hello? It only got 5 million inhabitants in it's metro area. These metro areas in the first world are bigger than Toronto:

Tokyo-Yokohama
Seoul
New York
Los Angeles
Moscow
Osaka
London
Paris
Rhein-Ruhr
Madrid
San Francisco Bay Area
Dallas - Fort Worth
Houston
Atlanta
Miami
Chicago
Detroit
Boston
Philadelphia
Washington - Baltimore
Milan
Nagoya
Taipeh
Hong Kong


----------



## Booyashako (Sep 11, 2002)

^^ "Greater Golden Horseshoe"...look it up.


----------



## kentan8 (Oct 7, 2004)

Hong Kong is actually instrumental in promoting the tremendous growth behind many Chinese cities. For one, just look at how many mainland IPOs were launched in Hong Kong in the past 5 years. Many mainland ports are either partly owned or wholly owned by Hutchison Whampao, a Hong Kong company. Even though many factories in Guangzhou have closed down recently, but at one time, tens of thousands of them were owned by Hong Kong companies.


bayviews said:


> Many different publications & think tanks put out many lists of the top ten business or power centers. This is just one of many.
> 
> Some of the cities on this list are similar to those on other lists, while some cities that are on other lists are missing from this. I don't see Hong Kong, which seems to have lost ground to other Chinese cities in significance since 1997, as ranking above NYC, which is usually tied with or above London at the top.
> 
> Of course if the US & UK economies continue to burst then yes, those two global centers will both take a slide.


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

Leka said:


> Why are we using US dollars? Paris does not use US dollars, and therefore using US dollars to calculate its GDP gives no meaning to actual output.
> 
> The Pricewaters chart used PPP for a reason; to cancel out these currency distortions. If this were 2001, when the euro was weak, you wouldn't be using the exchange rate b/c it would make Paris look much smaller than it really is. Today, it's the reverse.


You want to use PPP? Fine.

In 2006, according to the World Bank, the PPP value of the euro in France was 1.09363 US dollars. The GDP of the Paris Region in 2006 was 500.8391 billion euros, which means it was 547.7 billion US dollars at PPP value. That same year the GDP of the Chicago-Naperville-Joliet (IL-IN-WI) metropolitan area was 486.0 billion US dollars according to the US Conference of Mayors' report. So even at PPP, the GDP of the Paris Region was 12.7% larger than GDP of the Chicago metro area in 2006.

For 2007 we don't have Paris Region figures yet, but these past years the GDP of the Paris Region accounted for between 27.9% and 28.6% of the total GDP of France. In 2007 the PPP GDP of France was 2053.695 billion US dollars according to the World Bank, which means that the GDP of the Paris Region was probably somewhere between 573 and 587 US dollars at PPP value. In 2007 the GDP of the Chicago-Naperville-Joliet (IL-IN-WI) metropolitan area was 506.1 billion US dollars according to the US Conference of Mayors' report. So in 2007 the GDP of the Paris Region was 13% to 16% larger than the GDP of the Chicago metro area at PPP value.

Are there still some naysayers around?


----------



## Bori427 (Jan 6, 2007)

skyboi said:


> ^That's surprises me all the time as I understand the spanish speaking nations of the world has taken like one third of the globe livable land and they don't have some kind of union to promote or to stand with each other for ecomomic benefit or political united front when needed , it seems they all go separate way just like the arab nations , that's why there isn't a really Powerful core City among themself , right ? ( or maybe I am wrong )



^^There would be so much corruption that it really shouldn't happen,ever.


----------



## jcarloschile (Jul 12, 2008)

brisavoine said:


> You want to use PPP? Fine.
> 
> In 2006, according to the World Bank, the PPP value of the euro in France was 1.09363 US dollars. The GDP of the Paris Region in 2006 was 500.8391 billion euros, which means it was 547.7 billion US dollars at PPP value. That same year the GDP of the Chicago-Naperville-Joliet (IL-IN-WI) metropolitan area was 486.0 billion US dollars according to the US Conference of Mayors' report. So even at PPP, the GDP of the Paris Region was 12.7% larger than GDP of the Chicago metro area in 2006.
> 
> ...


And Paris is growing faster than Chicago. France is going to be the second country in economic growth among the G-7 nations this year.


----------



## CrazyMac (Apr 23, 2006)

brisavoine said:


> From what I understand, this magazine's ranking is just a compilation of other magazines and organizations' rankings. It's a bit "light" scientifically speaking, to say the least, but then I suppose it's destined to Forbes readers, not to an academic audience.
> 
> They base their growth rates predictions on the PricewaterhouseCoopers study from 2005, which was itself quite flawed since it extrapolated from the growth rates observed in the years prior to the study. For example they predicted that by 2020 London's GDP would pass Paris, which is based on the few years prior to the study, but which is far from certain given how cyclical is the economy (the London economy will not always grow at the exceptionally high pace observed in the late 1990s).
> 
> ...





brisavoine said:


> Not really. The GDP of Illinois (141,000 km²; 12.8 million inh.), which is a state much larger than the Chicago metropolitan area, was 589.6 billion US dollars in 2006. The GDP of the Paris Region (12,000 km²; 11.6 million inh.), which is a region approximately equal to the Paris metropolitan area, was 628.9 billion US dollars in 2006. With the appreciation of the Euro vs the US dollar, the GDP of the Paris Region is now more in the range of 800-810 billion US dollars, which is about 30% more than the GDP of the entire state of Illinois.





brisavoine said:


> Like I said, the PricewaterhouseCoopers study used by Forbes has its flaws. They didn't calculate GDPs for metropolitan areas, they calculated GDPs for urban areas, and it seems their definition of the Paris urban area was quite narrow, whereas their definition of the Chicago urban area was quite generous, which is the only way you could come to a similar GDP in both urban areas. The GDP figures for the Paris Region and for the State of Illinois that I gave are quite telling. Even if we assumed that the Chicago metropolitan area engulfs the entire State of Illinois, the GDP of the Paris Region is still significantly higher than the entire State of Illinois (about 30% higher with the current exchange rates).
> 
> From the French statistical office: http://www.insee.fr/fr/ppp/bases-de-donnees/donnees-detaillees/cnat-region/pib_reg.xls
> 
> And from the Bureau of Economic Analysis in the US Deparment of Commerce: http://www.bea.gov/regional/gsp/





brisavoine said:


> I'm not surprised that Chicago is high up in the list. It's the third largest metropolitan area in North America. It has the second biggest stock exchange in North America. It dwarfs the much hyped Toronto. But here I was purely factual in pointing out that the GDP of Paris is larger than the GDP of Chicago, which can hardly be denied, whatever figures you look at.
> 
> The Paris Region is just the Île-de-France and nothing else. It's usually called the Paris Region in English. It's also called Greater Paris. Don't forget that the values in the spreadsheet are in euros and not in dollars.
> 
> ...





brisavoine said:


> That's the list by city proper, i.e. municipalities within their administrative limits, which is a bit artificial because suburbs are not counted. Here is the list by metropolitan areas which I painstakingly compiled by adding up the Fortune Global 500 companies for each metropolitan area. Only metropolitan areas with 10 or more Fortune Global 500 companies are listed.
> 
> ```
> [B]Metropolitan   Number of     Total revenues in 2007
> ...





brisavoine said:


> You want to use PPP? Fine.
> 
> In 2006, according to the World Bank, the PPP value of the euro in France was 1.09363 US dollars. The GDP of the Paris Region in 2006 was 500.8391 billion euros, which means it was 547.7 billion US dollars at PPP value. That same year the GDP of the Chicago-Naperville-Joliet (IL-IN-WI) metropolitan area was 486.0 billion US dollars according to the US Conference of Mayors' report. So even at PPP, the GDP of the Paris Region was 12.7% larger than GDP of the Chicago metro area in 2006.
> 
> ...


You talk such a load of horsehit, constantly posting lists that suit you argument and ignore everything else....hno:

The London GDP figure in this Forbes list is for the inner urban area ONLY, its full Metropolitan GDP figure (12-14million population) is now over $700 Billion, dwarfing that of Paris's Metro GDP.


----------



## Cyril (Sep 11, 2002)

@Brisavoine: we've kept telling you for years...that taking into account the inner urban area for Paris is OK because there's simply no economic activity beyond say the A104 outer ring motorway. But as for London, there IS enonomic activity and massive commuting beyond the M25. THAT makes the difference that CrazyMac argued about.
So OK Paris inner urban area figures beat London's but that's not a faithful account of London's powerful economy. Not that I want to trigger some further city vs. city but London is a 12-14 milllion people metro area when Paris has "only" 11-12 million people. Now back to the thread. -Cyril "Paris lover"


----------



## El Mariachi (Nov 1, 2007)

why is this thread even open still? Its a dick measuring contest, nothing more.


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

Cyril said:


> @Brisavoine: we've kept telling you for years...that taking into account the inner urban area for Paris is OK because there's simply no economic activity beyond say the A104 outer ring motorway. But as for London, there IS enonomic activity and massive commuting beyond the M25. THAT makes the difference that CrazyMac argued about.


CrazyMac is a known trouble maker who has already wreaked havoc in the European forum and was banned by Matthieu I believe. So careful with the people you choose to defend.

Concerning London, the Fortune Global 500 list that I posted above, compiled by metropolitan areas, does not include only the Fortune Global 500 companies that are located inside the M25, it includes all the Fortune Global 500 companies located in the metro area of London, i.e. the entire southeastern corner of England, including places as far away as West Berkshire. In the entire southeastern corner of England there are 29 Fortune Global 500 companies.


Leka said:


> What area of Chicago and Paris are being used? Thanks.


In the figures that I gave, the Paris Region is the Île-de-France which covers 12,000 km² like I said. For Chicago it is the Chicago-Naperville-Joliet metropolitan area which covers 18,679 km². In detail: counties of Cook (IL), DeKalb (IL), DuPage (IL), Grundy (IL), Kane (IL), Kendall (IL), McHenry (IL), Will (IL), Jasper (IN), Lake (IN), Newton (IN), Porter (IN), Lake (IL), and Kenosha (WI).


----------



## CrazyMac (Apr 23, 2006)

brisavoine said:


> CrazyMac is a known trouble maker who has already wreaked havoc in the European forum and was banned by Matthieu I believe. So careful with the people you choose to defend.
> 
> Concerning London, the Fortune Global 500 list that I posted above, compiled by metropolitan areas, does not include only the Fortune Global 500 companies that are located inside the M25, it includes all the Fortune Global 500 companies located in the metro area of London, i.e. the entire southeastern corner of England, including places as far away as West Berkshire. In the entire southeastern corner of England there are 29 Fortune Global 500 companies.
> 
> In the figures that I gave, the Paris Region is the Île-de-France which covers 12,000 km² like I said. For Chicago it is the Chicago-Naperville-Joliet metropolitan area which covers 18,679 km². In detail: counties of Cook (IL), DeKalb (IL), DuPage (IL), Grundy (IL), Kane (IL), Kendall (IL), McHenry (IL), Will (IL), Jasper (IN), Lake (IN), Newton (IN), Porter (IN), Lake (IL), and Kenosha (WI).


Same old paranoid crap....and its the easiest thing in the world to become a Fortune 500 company when like alot of French companies they are a bloated protected state monopoly, unable to be taken over on French soil whilst taking advantage of much more open markets like the UK and USA.

If they were subjected to the same competition as others are, alot of them wouldnt last 6mths.


----------



## wjfox (Nov 1, 2002)

@Taller, Better - what were you thinking, starting this thread?


----------

