Metro Gross Product

[egrguy]

Michigan's 2004 GMP was 315.83B

Detroit at 175.98B made up over 47% of the state's gross product.

Grand Rapids-Wyoming at 33B was just over 9%

Lansing at 18.02B was at 4.8%.

I knew metro detroit held a ton of economic power within the state but I didn't realize it was that great in terms of the rest of the state with nearly 50/50 split between Detroit and the rest of the entire state.

Even throwing in Muskegon/Holland to the GR numbers only bring it to only 15%.

Anyway, no real point to the post, just thought the #s were interesting.

The full report which goes in greater detail on a number of other economic figures is linked below.

http://www.usmayors.org/74thWinterMeeting/...January2006.pdf

[hudkina]

Maybe you should post this next time West Michiganders beotch about Lansing sending money to Southeast Michigan...

[Ka3kab]

What I find more interesting is that the growth between 2001 and 2004. Detroit, 3.1% Grand Rapids, 4.1%. Not much of a difference there. And poor Flint rounds out the list at 361 with only 1.8%.

[GRDadof3]

Maybe you should post this next time West Michiganders beotch about Lansing sending money to Southeast Michigan...

I don't think anyone argues that West Michigan should get equal funding, but EQUITABLE funding. In other words, the rating says we're 9% of GMP, but our funding share might be 5% (as an illustration). At least, those are the arguments I've heard in the past.

Detroit Metro should be that much larger, since the population is 7 - 8x more.

Interesting that 2004 was a bad year for a lot of Michigan cities in GMP growth:

Grand Rapids/Wyoming - 1.2%

Kalamazoo - 1.6%

Detroit Warren Livonia - 1.6%

Ann Arbor - 1.1%

It looks like for 2006, they've all moved back up to around 3% so far this year.

I don't know that I agree with the "Return to Peak Employment" estimates in the report. It's stating that Holland and GR will return to peak employment (Dec. 1999) by 2014? GR only needs to have employment grow by 2.2% to reach our previous peak employment, and Holland needs 5.5%. And since GR's employment has grown 10% since 2003, then it would make sense that if it continues it will reach our previous peak by around 1st Qtr of 2007.

Keep in mind that this "Return to Peak" for most Metros was during the roaring 90's, so it would be a return to those lofty numbers in employment.

Anyone else find anything interesting in this?

[mgman]

I don't know that I agree with the "Return to Peak Employment" estimates in the report. It's stating that Holland and GR will return to peak employment (Dec. 1999) by 2014? GR only needs to have employment grow by 2.2% to reach our previous peak employment, and Holland needs 5.5%. And since GR's employment has grown 10% since 2003, then it would make sense that if it continues it will reach our previous peak by around 1st Qtr of 2007.

Let us hope that the peak employment projections are wrong. Most of the Metros for Michigan then won't be at peak employment levels by 2015 if the report is accurate. I cannot believe that to be true. Plus how can you accurately predict employment levels ten years from now.

[Grand Rapidian]

What is the GMP in Detroit without the auto industry? Anyone know?

[GRDadof3]

Let us hope that the peak employment projections are wrong. Most of the Metros for Michigan then won't be at peak employment levels by 2015 if the report is accurate. I cannot believe that to be true. Plus how can you accurately predict employment levels ten years from now.

The report is dated January 2006, and it looks like a lot of the data ends in 2005. How can they legitimately have 2006 data on this report? I just found another chink in this report's armor (under Economic Outlook):

"The worst is over for oil prices..."

Useless toilet reading. I just re-read the intro and they're proclaiming that Metro areas contribute to 86% of the country's economy. Duh. Where else would it come from?

What is the GMP in Detroit without the auto industry? Anyone know?

I don't know if there is ANY possible way to compute that.