U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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)
 
Old 12-04-2012, 03:18 PM
 
Location: Indianapolis
3,895 posts, read 4,572,690 times
Reputation: 957

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment View Post
That's because Cleveland used to be a LOT larger than it currently is.
Funny we mention that.
Indy's economy is just about ready to pass Clevelands economy in size.
Ironically Indy has 300,000 less people than Cleveland in the metro area and the CSA is even smaller than Clevelands.
If Cleveland didnt have lake Erie then Indy would already probably be bigger than it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-04-2012, 03:44 PM
 
10,558 posts, read 13,130,219 times
Reputation: 6361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broadrippleguy View Post
Funny we mention that.
Indy's economy is just about ready to pass Clevelands economy in size.
Ironically Indy has 300,000 less people than Cleveland in the metro area and the CSA is even smaller than Clevelands.
If Cleveland didnt have lake Erie then Indy would already probably be bigger than it.
Huh? Doesn't the existence of a large body of water prohibit growth on a large border of Cleveland's metro area?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 03:59 PM
 
Location: Mishawaka, Indiana
6,514 posts, read 9,066,311 times
Reputation: 5009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broadrippleguy View Post
Funny we mention that.
Indy's economy is just about ready to pass Clevelands economy in size.
Ironically Indy has 300,000 less people than Cleveland in the metro area and the CSA is even smaller than Clevelands.
If Cleveland didnt have lake Erie then Indy would already probably be bigger than it.
Indy is kind of unique in that it has no major water source or major river near it like many other major cities do. Memphis, St. Louis, Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland. Of course Indy is not the only city, but its size for not being near water is still interesting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 05:49 PM
 
3,326 posts, read 7,754,092 times
Reputation: 1973
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
Madison has plenty of appeal with the best job growth of ANY COUNTY in the state of Wisconsin over the last 10-15 years. It has a rapidly growing tech, medical, sector growth based on its size and offers a great blend of city, town, and country within a short distance that is preferable to what I look for. That, and the outdoor recreation w/trails and LAKES, not reservoirs like you find it in the South make it the best small metro in the Midwest.
Yeah, but it's still a matter of preference. On paper, Madison looks okay, but personally, I'm not fond of college towns, capitol towns, or towns where a large percentage of the population lives and breaths politics 24/7.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 09:03 PM
 
1,911 posts, read 3,242,196 times
Reputation: 910
Quote:
Originally Posted by northbound74 View Post
Yeah, but it's still a matter of preference. On paper, Madison looks okay, but personally, I'm not fond of college towns, capitol towns, or towns where a large percentage of the population lives and breaths politics 24/7.
Des Moines is similar, arguably even more political without the collegiate presence. You get the impression everyone should be involved in local politics, or "civic organization" and aspire to run for mayor or city council.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 09:50 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
2,331 posts, read 3,057,613 times
Reputation: 3925
Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
They both matter.

The fact is that Austin, TX may be growing by 30%+ per decade right now, but once it starts to reach a critical mass that percentage will surely fall, but the total number of incoming residents will still be very notable. So if a city like Los Angeles is adding over a million people to its metro each decade, but Amarillo, TX is growing 50% from 200,000 people, which of those two do you think is a better representation of where Americans are moving?

It's not a simple answer.....and I THINK that's Drewcifer's point.
That was exactly my point but I have been too busy today to post further. Both numbers are useful as far as they go but can't just look at percent growth and think it gives you the whole picture. Chicago is still the biggest people magnet in the midwest, it is where a lot of young people from the broader region move to, to start their lives. This is not reflected in the percentage growth numbers but the numbers for absolute growth certainly bear that out. That was what I was trying to express.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 09:57 PM
 
Location: Indianapolis
3,895 posts, read 4,572,690 times
Reputation: 957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewcifer View Post
That was exactly my point but I have been too busy today to post further. Both numbers are useful as far as they go but can't just look at percent growth and think it gives you the whole picture. Chicago is still the biggest people magnet in the midwest, it is where a lot of young people from the broader region move to, to start their lives. This is not reflected in the percentage growth numbers but the numbers for absolute growth certainly bear that out. That was what I was trying to express.
The midwest is not full of young people.
Actually its home to more families and older people.
so even if Chicago is the magnet for youngsters which its not the only one.
Indianapolis/Minneapolis/Cincy etc also bring in young professionals
Chicago is still bleeding its middle class and established family population. You always want to have that demographic in your city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 10:15 PM
 
Location: IN
20,853 posts, read 35,976,422 times
Reputation: 13304
Quote:
Originally Posted by northbound74 View Post
Yeah, but it's still a matter of preference. On paper, Madison looks okay, but personally, I'm not fond of college towns, capitol towns, or towns where a large percentage of the population lives and breaths politics 24/7.
Dane county has nearly 500,000 people so definitely not exclusively a college town at all, even though Madison is the state capitol obviously. And, it is a magnet for attracting and retaining a good deal of talent and job creaters who want to live here. Why is it that Waukesha county is not growing at all while Dane county is growing at nearly 2% a year? Waukesha county is certainly wealthy, but people aren't moving there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 10:17 PM
 
Location: IN
20,853 posts, read 35,976,422 times
Reputation: 13304
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieJonez View Post
Des Moines is similar, arguably even more political without the collegiate presence. You get the impression everyone should be involved in local politics, or "civic organization" and aspire to run for mayor or city council.
As mentioned before, Des Moines should compete with Madison. Right now, Madison still has the edge overall. If you took out the Dallas county growth in Des Moines on the west side Madison would be overwhelmingly the winner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2012, 11:33 PM
 
3,326 posts, read 7,754,092 times
Reputation: 1973
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
Dane county has nearly 500,000 people so definitely not exclusively a college town at all, even though Madison is the state capitol obviously. And, it is a magnet for attracting and retaining a good deal of talent and job creaters who want to live here. Why is it that Waukesha county is not growing at all while Dane county is growing at nearly 2% a year? Waukesha county is certainly wealthy, but people aren't moving there.
I don't know much about Waukesha county. It vaguely reminds me of Johnson county ks without those issues we are familiar with. From what I understand, any growth there comes from Milwaukee county people looking to lower their property taxes. The Milwaukee metro holds steady, but growth does seem almost nonexistent.

Jobs and growth are important factors, but there has to be more to it for me. I can understand the appeal of Madison to some, but the vibe I get when I go there.... I'm certain I wouldn't like it.
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.
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

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