Why? State population is irrelevant to anyone actually making a decision. It's not "fair", but that doesn't really matter. Though state-level statistics also aren't great for decision making IMO, it should probably be computed by metro area.
I moved to NYC from the bay area, and I don't necessarily regret it, but you can see that there is a real gap in the depth of tech between the two, so if you want to work on cutting edge tech, the bay area is probably still the best place to be, though you may have to make quality of life sacrifices for that.
> real gap in the depth of tech
Do you mean it's harder to hire top tech talent? Are the companies technologically less advanced? Something else?
More companies doing innovative tech work, rather than just deploying known tech. Lots of top tech talent drawn to that work, hiring is not necessarily easier (lots of competition), but as a person moving to SF you get more interaction with those people.
NYC isn't bad on these metrics, but the bay area is just noticeably better.
I think they're asking due to this effect.
Though I suspect your qualitative contrast between the Bay area and NY is correct.
Or a transient analysis to get a sense of trends, particularly in light of recent articles talking about "Peak Valley" [0].
[0] https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/08/30/why-startups-ar...
Oh! Or compared to available housing or housing prices!