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.
I could've guessed that people would be quick to assume a Texas downturn after a single year comes in negative. It will be decades before alternative modes of energy put significant stress on the traditional fossil fuels. And by that point, the US will have diversified its energy portfolio. Companies like ExxonMobil and Valero are still huge companies in the F500, even with the downturn of oil this past year. And why are we expecting oil & gas to remain low, have we learned nothing from the past?
Well this particular industry has done this before and each time, it has rebounded. One example is the 1980s.
That was 30+ years ago, but I see your point. I think we live in a VERY different world today where it's not at all unfeasible that oil prices continue to fall or remain stagnant. This may be an unpopular opinion with some Houstonians and other oil-producing areas, but I personally think we should drastically reduce our consumption of oil (and other heavy pollutants)...even if it hurts some sectors of our economy in the short term. Climate Change is very real and we're already seeing the adverse consequences of unabated fossil fuel consumption.
Fuel efficiency improvements, alternative modes of energy, and a growing preference for transit don't bode well for oil-based economies. Throw in low prices and large quantities shipped from the ME and I don't see oil being the commodity it once was. I could very well be wrong though - by no means an expert in the subject.
The big four metro areas that run the state have diverse economies. Houston's econony continues to get diverse. Texas will have a hand in all of those things you named. Like you said this isnt the thirty years ago. Texas is a lot healthier and has withstood a energy bust pretty well. If this was 30 years ago, the unemployment in Houston wouldn't be less than 5% right now.
Pretty much. That's where the term 'Boom and Bust' comes from.
That being said, I think it's more important to look at GDP growth over time rather than take a state's temperature quarter-by-quarter. That way you weed out anomalies based on the wild fluctuations in a single industry such as fossil fuels.
Mind you, there's a million ways to slice and dice this. Texas, as one example, has had huge population growth. Meanwhile, New York has only added 1,500,000 in population over the past 45 years.
Now compare to population:
You also have to keep in mind that a lot of that could be attributed to people in the NYC area just moving to suburbs/exurbs in NJ, CT and PA, while still contributing to that city's/metro's economy.
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.
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.
