U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Will Houston surpass Chicago as the 3rd largest city by 2020?
Yes 492 41.55%
No 692 58.45%
Voters: 1184. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-09-2010, 05:11 PM
 
Location: ITL (Houston)
9,223 posts, read 13,841,215 times
Reputation: 3545

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by OmShahi View Post
Not to mention some of the other mass benefits of Houston and Texas in general, no state income tax, no problems with "labor unions" since there aren't any, no controversies with businesses monopolizing much.
Some other things that are leading to large growth for Houston is the port, with prices escalating in trade with Europe, the USA looks more to the West Coast and now the Gulf Coast for trade with Asia/Latin America. Putting LA and Houston at a whole new ball game for the first time ever. That same factor helped LA grow tremendously, and it'll help Houston too, to what extent, I do not know.
As far as the port goes, it'll only help further push Houston into the same tier as Chicago. For example, Walmart recently built their largest distribution center in North America in Baytown. Why? The Port of Houston. I think other corporations will be doing the same. Houston is also a leading city for imported coffee, among other things.

Quote:
Yeah, to be honest the job market is quite unpredictable. The reason I didn't want to major in Business or even pursue an MBA degree was because I view Business the same as Philosophy class, things can change completely, studying the terms helps but studying the trends don't. No body knew the Recession was coming, and no body knows what's in it for the future.

So with that having been said, I am now going to sit back, get a Cherry IceE and some nachos and watch Houston in whatever it is planning on doing for the future. I find this a very fun time to be living in Houston! Quite excited for the changes to come.
Actually, there were a lot of economists that predicted the recession, though I see your point.

I'll also grab an ICEE and watch this city grow up some more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-09-2010, 05:13 PM
 
Location: The City
22,339 posts, read 32,182,008 times
Reputation: 7744
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarface713 View Post
A day/weekend trip into the city will be the fix then. There is a limit to how far away people will be to their jobs though.



This is what I thought you were trying to say. I don't think all of those jobs will just go away. There is a lot of construction needed in the city/metro. They'll focus on improving existing infrastructure instead of building new ones.

Well improving existing costs more than developing new - so this will cause increases in taxes and higher cost of living - this is part of what I mean when I say maintaining growth at a larger scale becomes more and more difficult - someone pays for it and those to work - right now this is new and sprawling development - to improve it is the people who already live there and by taxes

And I do agree people will only commute so far - as will corporate headquarters etc. only go so far

And honestly I am not saying it can't be done - but it only gets more difficult and costly from here
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2010, 05:16 PM
 
486 posts, read 915,703 times
Reputation: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarface713 View Post
Philly's metro is almost the same as Chicago's. It's still losing people domestically, but not nearly as much as Chicagoland is.
Wow, this statement is not correct. Philly has about 6 million in the metro and Chicago has about 9.5 million, so the Philly metro only has 63% of the Chicagoland population. Also, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the Chicago area has grown at a 5.3% rate, and Philly at a 5% rate since 2000.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2010, 05:26 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,171 posts, read 12,809,998 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly View Post
Well improving existing costs more than developing new - so this will cause increases in taxes and higher cost of living - this is part of what I mean when I say maintaining growth at a larger scale becomes more and more difficult - someone pays for it and those to work - right now this is new and sprawling development - to improve it is the people who already live there and by taxes

And I do agree people will only commute so far - as will corporate headquarters etc. only go so far

And honestly I am not saying it can't be done - but it only gets more difficult and costly from here
Pretty much summed it up right there, the larger a place gets the more expensive it becomes to live there. Or the smaller the city is, and the larger it's population the more expensive it is. (NYC, DC, Boston)

Houston has vast amount of land, but a growing number of people will cause the real estate prices to escalate.

Simple Supply & Demand 101.

And you're right, all these new transplants that moved into Houston during it's "golden era" (1990's-2010's) will feel a lot happier than those coming in in say the 2020's-2030's.

Haha, I can only hope that Cherry ICEE's exist until 2030 for me to sit back and watch Houston.
God those guys are going to make a lot of money off me from buying nachos and ICEE's.

Lol, anyways Houston's ups/downs will be interesting to watch to say the least.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2010, 05:32 PM
 
Location: ITL (Houston)
9,223 posts, read 13,841,215 times
Reputation: 3545
Quote:
Originally Posted by muman View Post
Wow, this statement is not correct. Philly has about 6 million in the metro and Chicago has about 9.5 million, so the Philly metro only has 63% of the Chicagoland population. Also, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the Chicago area has grown at a 5.3% rate, and Philly at a 5% rate since 2000.
What are you talking about? Philly's metro is the same as Chicago's in that they are both losing people domestically. The only reason why they're growing is from international migration and natural increase. Chicago is actually losing more people domestically, than it is adding in international migration. Philly is close.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly View Post
Well improving existing costs more than developing new - so this will cause increases in taxes and higher cost of living - this is part of what I mean when I say maintaining growth at a larger scale becomes more and more difficult - someone pays for it and those to work - right now this is new and sprawling development - to improve it is the people who already live there and by taxes
But this is where Houston should be praised for annexing so much land. Houston annexed a lot of large commercial areas for this reason. The city actually annexes the strip centers along major roadways, but doesn't annex the residential neighborhoods behind the shopping centers.

Quote:
And I do agree people will only commute so far - as will corporate headquarters etc. only go so far
Yep, so people will be where their job is. Not all jobs are in Downtown.

Quote:
And honestly I am not saying it can't be done - but it only gets more difficult and costly from here
It does only get costly, but the cost increases here should only be minimal and not through the roof, like in the Northeast and West Coast.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2010, 06:34 PM
 
Location: Chicago
721 posts, read 1,574,038 times
Reputation: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarface713 View Post
What are you talking about? Philly's metro is the same as Chicago's in that they are both losing people domestically. The only reason why they're growing is from international migration and natural increase. Chicago is actually losing more people domestically, than it is adding in international migration. Philly is close.
The domestic migration topic was answered by a previous poster. I don't remember who it was exactly, but they said something along the lines of immigrants come into the country through gateways. Two huge ones being New York and Los Angeles. These cities have been huge losers for domestic migration for years. Cities like Chicago and Philadelphia would also qualify in these categories.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarface713 View Post
But this is where Houston should be praised for annexing so much land. Houston annexed a lot of large commercial areas for this reason. The city actually annexes the strip centers along major roadways, but doesn't annex the residential neighborhoods behind the shopping centers.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarface713 View Post
Yep, so people will be where their job is. Not all jobs are in Downtown.
The majority of jobs aren't downtown. Most employment opportunities are based in the suburbs, although this is beginning to change in some cities across the country.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarface713 View Post
It does only get costly, but the cost increases here should only be minimal and not through the roof, like in the Northeast and West Coast.
If Houston continues to be magnet for people across the country, it will drive up the prices. There's a reason certain cities are more expensive than others. Demand. Houston cant continue to develop quite suburban communities 50+ miles away from its core. At some point, the city will have to build up. There's no other alternative.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2010, 08:01 PM
 
Location: Tower of Heaven
4,023 posts, read 6,439,807 times
Reputation: 1440
I think Houston must attract more international immigrants to improve its population growth in the future.Houston has a high reliance on domestic migrants, and maybe it's a problem.
It made good step, it attracts the same number of international migrants than San Francisco, and almost like Chicago.But it can be more...NYC and LA lose many domestic migrants but international migrants compensate for that.

I think Houston metro and Dallas metro should merge to become an unique metro area This area would have the same size than LA metro
You think it's possible ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2010, 08:06 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
18,643 posts, read 27,082,820 times
Reputation: 9580
Quote:
Originally Posted by RenaudFR View Post

I think Houston metro and Dallas metro should merge to become an unique metro area This area would have the same size than LA metro
You think it's possible ?
no.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2010, 08:11 PM
 
324 posts, read 569,392 times
Reputation: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by RenaudFR View Post
I think Houston must attract more international immigrants to improve its population growth in the future.Houston has a high reliance on domestic migrants, and maybe it's a problem.
It made good step, it attracts the same number of international migrants than San Francisco, and almost like Chicago.But it can be more...NYC and LA lose many domestic migrants but international migrants compensate for that.

I think Houston metro and Dallas metro should merge to become an unique metro area This area would have the same size than LA metro
You think it's possible ?
No that's not going to happen.. Anyway why is it a big deal to people if they loose domestically.. And gain internationally.. How can I city be declining if there still gaining residents from another country.. NYC has been loosing domestically for years but those that leave get replaced by people from other countries.... I don't even get this people throwing this up about Chicago but never throw that up about LA or NYC is there some kinda exception
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2010, 08:33 PM
 
Location: Chicago
721 posts, read 1,574,038 times
Reputation: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blkspice23 View Post
No that's not going to happen.. Anyway why is it a big deal to people if they loose domestically.. And gain internationally.. How can I city be declining if there still gaining residents from another country.. NYC has been loosing domestically for years but those that leave get replaced by people from other countries.... I don't even get this people throwing this up about Chicago but never throw that up about LA or NYC is there some kinda exception
This is City-Data. We selectively choose the "facts" we present and deny the counterargument to the tooth and nail.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:32 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top