Notice any metros "dropping off the radar"?

[Handro]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

SF and Miami are definitely not on the same plane as Denver, Austin, and Portland. Miami is one of the most visited places in the world.

I was unaware the critieria was strictly tourism numbers?

If that's the case, we can put Orlando ahead San Francisco.

[park123]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

I’m not talking about tourism but about the huge increase in their numbers. In other words, Japan became much more appealing in the past years.

Moreover, GDP tells only part of history. Japan and the US, GDP per capita (PPP) wise, are on the same place today than they were in 1996. Back then Japan currency was inflated as their real estate market. For people daily lives, nothing changed compared to other developed countries.

If you want to buy anything from overseas, the current exchange rates matter. PPP is basically a poor man's adjustment. Japanese used to buy about 40% of the world's luxury brand clothing. Like not that long ago, in the 90s. I knew people who would buy at retail in Beverly Hills brand shops, ship the items back to Japan, and sell in Tokyo. Every store used to have Japanese-speaking attendants. This wasn't some super long time ago. 2001.

Japanese used to utterly dominate Hawaii. But they can't afford to go there as much because the yen is so much weaker than before. They used to be the most sought-after customers on 5th Avenue in NY. Now they are an after-thought. Same thing in Asia. Japan used to more or less dominate East & Southeast Asia economically. Again, not very long ago

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by park123

Did anyone notice that Boston for example is less of a big deal than perhaps 20 years ago? It's still a wealthy, large metro with amazing institutional assets, and has maybe the most polished urban core its size outside of Europe. But I don't know if it's just me, but I don't hear about Boston very much anymore. In the broader culture (outside of sports of course), and for that matter on this forum, where you would guess it would be pretty popular.

What changed? Any other metros like this? Casually looking back, I get the sense that Montreal was a lot more culturally prominent before the 2008 recession than after. Chicago also seems like it kind of went into a funk after 2008. I wonder why?

I just spent a week with a Bostonian for work and he kept referring to it as a "small city" which blew my mind.

As for Chicago i disagree I feel like Chicago has become more prominent in recent years. Millennials seem to universally love it.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Handro

I was unaware the critieria was strictly tourism numbers?

If that's the case, we can put Orlando ahead San Francisco.

Even if we're measuring tourism, which is a really good measure of this, people don't to go Orlando, they go to Disney or Universal. Nobody is wandering aimlessly around Orlando to absorb the local scene. There isn't much in the way of a local culture in Orlando.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by The North One

This topic is kind of a mess, there's no way to possibly quantify this so it's just a feeling.

I guess my nomination is Dubai. It felt like Dubai was pushed everywhere from 2005-2009. Now it's relevance seems to be non-existent other than being a tourist stop, I guess it was all manufactured hype in the first place and was never going to last long. There was no substance to it all.

With the change of oil supplies due to shale and fracking technology in North America the geopolitical importance of the Persian Gulf to the west began to vanish around 2015.

The implications of this over the next 20 years are massive in a way I dont think people comprehend.

In 2005 if Iranians shot up Saudi Oil fields and Oil Tankers like they did in 2019 oil would have been 6$ a gallon and the USA would be invading. Now in 2019 we shrugged it off as a tense but ultimately minor international incident oil markets hardly even budged.

That alone should tell you how much that region's role in the world has changed since 2009

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by park123

If you want to buy anything from overseas, the current exchange rates matter. PPP is basically a poor man's adjustment. Japanese used to buy about 40% of the world's luxury brand clothing. Like not that long ago, in the 90s. I knew people who would buy at retail in Beverly Hills brand shops, ship the items back to Japan, and sell in Tokyo. Every store used to have Japanese-speaking attendants. This wasn't some super long time ago. 2001.

Japanese used to utterly dominate Hawaii. But they can't afford to go there as much because the yen is so much weaker than before. They used to be the most sought-after customers on 5th Avenue in NY. Now they are an after-thought. Same thing in Asia. Japan used to more or less dominate East & Southeast Asia economically. Again, not very long ago

That's the opposite of what we are discussing here. Nobody used to go to Tokyo in the 1990's and now the city is regarded as the coolest thing, with all the Instagram hype, bars/clubs across the world mimicking their aesthetics, art exhibits across the world, etc.

About the Japan's PPP, be it today, be it in the 1990's, Japanese will spend 99% of their time and money in Japan itself, and therefore GDP per capita PPP matters in this context. Japanese people didn't got poorer compared to the international peers over those years. The only thing that happened was the end of their real estate bubble, which is a very good thing for the average person.

Originally Posted by Obadno

I just spent a week with a Bostonian for work and he kept referring to it as a "small city" which blew my mind.

As for Chicago i disagree I feel like Chicago has become more prominent in recent years. Millennials seem to universally love it.

I noticed that about Chicago. The decline seemed to have stopped 4-5 years ago and the city's label is once again rising.

[park123]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

That’s what I’m talking about it. Mere 10 years ago, nobody had even a mental image of Tokyo. Today, it seems everybody wants to travel there.

I’d say only Berlin grew more than Tokyo in this area on the past 10 years.

I think Tokyo is much more on the young Westerner tourism circuit than it was 10 years ago. Chinese tourism (up until this Corona outbreak) has absolutely boomed in the past decade, and Japan was one of the main beneficiaries.

Part of this is because Japan is much more affordable than it used to be. Conversely, foreign countries are much more expensive for Japanese travelers than they used to be.

Also, there are just trends for travel. Bali is also trendy for a certain kind of NYer or European. But I wouldn't say Bali is important or culturally influential.

Japanese pop culture boomed in Asia in the 1990s. Since then it's been supplanted almost completely by S Korean culture. You still have the shadow of past Japanese achievement keeping up their reputation, especially in the West. But the country has been on an almost unprecedented relative decline from around 1990. First an economic decline, and then a cultural decline. Cultural influence almost always lags economic influence.

[park123]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

Japanese people didn't got poorer compared to the international peers over those years. The only thing that happened was the end of their real estate bubble, which is a very good thing for the average person..

Japan is a group of small islands with a hollowed-out industrial base. Certainly compared to the days of Made in Japan in the 1980s. Almost all consumer items are imported these days. Often under Japanese brands, but the items are no longer made in Japan. So the fact that Japanese nominal salaries are half of what they were 20 years ago compared to their peers in the USA, makes a difference.

And real estate prices have nothing to do with GDP. GDP is annual production, it's a flow variable. Real estate values are a stock variable. Japanese real estate was already in deep deep recession when their relative GDP peaked in the mid 90s.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by park123

Japan is a group of small islands with a hollowed-out industrial base. Certainly compared to the days of Made in Japan in the 1980s. Almost all consumer items are imported these days. Often under Japanese brands, but the items are no longer made in Japan. So the fact that Japanese nominal salaries are half of what they were 20 years ago compared to their peers in the USA, makes a difference.

You definitely notice it when traveling there, Not counting Tokyo rent prices (yikes) but food and lodging are very affordable from an American perspective traveling too Japan.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by park123

I think Tokyo is much more on the young Westerner tourism circuit than it was 10 years ago. Chinese tourism (up until this Corona outbreak) has absolutely boomed in the past decade, and Japan was one of the main beneficiaries.

Part of this is because Japan is much more affordable than it used to be. Conversely, foreign countries are much more expensive for Japanese travelers than they used to be.

Also, there are just trends for travel. Bali is also trendy for a certain kind of NYer or European. But I wouldn't say Bali is important or culturally influential.

Japanese pop culture boomed in Asia in the 1990s. Since then it's been supplanted almost completely by S Korean culture. You still have the shadow of past Japanese achievement keeping up their reputation, especially in the West. But the country has been on an almost unprecedented relative decline from around 1990. First an economic decline, and then a cultural decline. Cultural influence almost always lags economic influence.

I guess it's a matter of perspective. You are talking about an Eastern Asian one. From other parts of the world, Tokyo's prestige definitely grew over this time, despite Japan smaller role on the international economy. It also cannot be compared to Bali, with it's pretty much "beach tourism" with some exotic flavour while Tokyo is all about its urban appeal.

Places like Berlin, Tokyo, Lima, Nashville (in the US context) definitely managed to rebrand themselves in a very sucessful way, not necessarily linked with economic or even demographic growth.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by park123

Japan is a group of small islands with a hollowed-out industrial base. Certainly compared to the days of Made in Japan in the 1980s. Almost all consumer items are imported these days. Often under Japanese brands, but the items are no longer made in Japan. So the fact that Japanese nominal salaries are half of what they were 20 years ago compared to their peers in the USA, makes a difference.

Japan sounds a lot like the U.K. That doesn't necessarily mean that London (or Tokyo) are dropping off the radar.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by park123

Japan is a group of small islands with a hollowed-out industrial base. Certainly compared to the days of Made in Japan in the 1980s. Almost all consumer items are imported these days. Often under Japanese brands, but the items are no longer made in Japan. So the fact that Japanese nominal salaries are half of what they were 20 years ago compared to their peers in the USA, makes a difference.

And real estate prices have nothing to do with GDP. GDP is annual production, it's a flow variable. Real estate values are a stock variable. Japanese real estate was already in deep deep recession when their relative GDP peaked in the mid 90s.

That's definitely not the case. Look at GDP per capita growth (World Bank). Japan vs US: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator...ocations=JP-US

As I said, they are pretty much on the same pace for the past 30 years.

[park123]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

That's definitely not the case. Look at GDP per capita growth (World Bank). Japan vs US: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator...ocations=JP-US

As I said, they are pretty much on the same pace for the past 30 years.

Somehow the per capita growth rates don't add up between countries over time. I think it's because of the way they are calculated with inflation adjustment. Nominal per capita growth rates would look different.

Here is Japan's share of global GDP

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Japan/gdp_share/

Peaked at 18% in 1995, now it's at 7%. In 25 years.

Here's American current total GDP compared to Japanese total GDP

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/compare-countries/

Japan was at 50% in 2000 and is now at 25% of American levels. (you have to click on current US dollars for the nominal - not PPP - comparison)

[park123]

Actually this same website is interesting.

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/compare-countries/

if you click on GDP per capita, current dollars, (basically nominal GDP per capita), Japan was way higher than the USA in the mid 90s, and now is way lower than the USA.

In fact Japan today is still lower than its peak current dollar per capita income in 1995. Meanwhile America's per capita current dollar income has more than doubled.


Japan
1995: US$43.4k
2018: US$39.3k

USA
1995: US$28.7k
2018: US$62.8k

Quite a large reversal!

[Tom In Chicago]

I'm not sure what the parameters are for this topic, but I thought this might help?

https://trends.google.com/trends/exp...e=all&q=Boston

https://trends.google.com/trends/exp...=all&q=Chicago

I dunno. . . maybe not. . .

. . .

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago

I'm not sure what the parameters are for this topic, but I thought this might help?

https://trends.google.com/trends/exp...e=all&q=Boston

https://trends.google.com/trends/exp...=all&q=Chicago

I dunno. . . maybe not. . .

. . .

If you add New York City it shows the same general decline over the timeframe.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by park123

Did anyone notice that Boston for example is less of a big deal than perhaps 20 years ago? It's still a wealthy, large metro with amazing institutional assets, and has maybe the most polished urban core its size outside of Europe. But I don't know if it's just me, but I don't hear about Boston very much anymore. In the broader culture (outside of sports of course), and for that matter on this forum, where you would guess it would be pretty popular.

What changed? Any other metros like this? Casually looking back, I get the sense that Montreal was a lot more culturally prominent before the 2008 recession than after. Chicago also seems like it kind of went into a funk after 2008. I wonder why?

I think that cities can also drop on some radars while at the same time ascend on others.

For example, if I go by the age group you are in (based on other posts) the Montreal prominence you are referring to pre-2008 is probably related to the rise of indie rock bands like Arcade Fire around that time.

I live in Quebec so Montreal will never fall off the radar for me, and I am aware of Arcade Fire and the scene due to proximity, but that alone wouldn't put another city further afield on my radar.

OTOH I am a sports fan and I know lots of people are as well, and I think Montreal losing the Expos resulted in the city losing a bit of prominence in the U.S. While at the same time Toronto got a boost as they not only kept the Blue Jays but also got the Raptors. Someone mentioned Hartford and the Whalers. That city basically ceased to exist in my mind when their NHL team left.

While the scene has not completely dried up, Montreal was also historically a much more important cultural city for English Canada and also for the Anglosphere in general, with people like Mordecai Richler, Leonard Cohen and William Shatner hailing from the city.

But at the same time, Montreal has been meteorically ascendant as a major city of the French-speaking world. While it was once a mere afterthought if even thought of all, it's now on the cusp (if not already there) of being the number 2 francophone city in the developed western world (after Paris of course) in terms of demographics and migration, education, business and culture.

As they say, you win some and you lose some.

[park123]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think that cities can also drop on some radars while at the same time ascend on others.

For example, if I go by the age group you are in (based on other posts) the Montreal prominence you are referring to pre-2008 is probably related to the rise of indie rock bands like Arcade Fire around that time.

I live in Quebec so Montreal will never fall off the radar for me, and I am aware of Arcade Fire and the scene due to proximity, but that alone wouldn't put another city further afield on my radar.

OTOH I am a sports fan and I know lots of people are as well, and I think Montreal losing the Expos resulted in the city losing a bit of prominence in the U.S. While at the same time Toronto got a boost as they not only kept the Blue Jays but also got the Raptors. Someone mentioned Hartford and the Whalers. That city basically ceased to exist in my mind when their NHL team left.

While the scene has not completely dried up, Montreal was also historically a much more important cultural city for English Canada and also for the Anglosphere in general, with people like Mordecai Richler, Leonard Cohen and William Shatner hailing from the city.

But at the same time, Montreal has been meteorically ascendant as a major city of the French-speaking world. While it was once a mere afterthought if even thought of all, it's now on the cusp (if not already there) of being the number 2 francophone city in the developed western world (after Paris of course) in terms of demographics and migration, education, business and culture.

As they say, you win some and you lose some.

That's fair. Isn't Montreal the 2nd largest metro (by a long shot) in the developed French speaking world? I mean not counting Kinshasa or something. 10-15 million people in the Paris area, 5 million in Montreal. I'm thinking by American standards, because I'm American.

So you would guess that Montreal would be 2nd in the French speaking world. What other competition does it have? My image of Lyon is that it's quite small. Marseille is both small and depressed. Geneva is not much bigger than Quebec City, although certainly very prominent internationally. Oh yeah, Brussels too.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by park123

Somehow the per capita growth rates don't add up between countries over time. I think it's because of the way they are calculated with inflation adjustment. Nominal per capita growth rates would look different.

Here is Japan's share of global GDP

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Japan/gdp_share/

Peaked at 18% in 1995, now it's at 7%. In 25 years.

Here's American current total GDP compared to Japanese total GDP

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/compare-countries/

Japan was at 50% in 2000 and is now at 25% of American levels. (you have to click on current US dollars for the nominal - not PPP - comparison)

Again, the average Japanese pay 99.9% of their bills with Yens, not Dollars. The fact is: Japanese didn't get poorer over this period and the purchase power shows exactly this. The only thing that happened was there's no longer a bubble.

That's why, vis-à-vis to Americans and western Europeans, Japanese standard of life had any decrease all over this period.

[park123]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

Again, the average Japanese pay 99.9% of their bills with Yens, not Dollars. The fact is: Japanese didn't get poorer over this period and the purchase power shows exactly this. The only thing that happened was there's no longer a bubble.

That's why, vis-à-vis to Americans and western Europeans, Japanese standard of life had any decrease all over this period.

The fact that Japanese made 50% more than Americans in 1995 and now make 50% less than Americans makes a difference. Of course for travel. But also for expenditure on any item not made in Japan.

If you want to buy ramen or rent an apartment, PPP is fine. If you want to travel or to buy something imported from overseas, like an iPhone or an article of clothing or toy for your child or non-Japanese car, nominal exchange rates are what matter.