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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-05-2013, 12:03 PM
 
Location: New York NY
4,271 posts, read 6,361,890 times
Reputation: 9086

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoking66 View Post
For as many transients as there are, there's a surprisingly high number of native New Yorkers in New York itself. I'd say the same thing for Chicago.
As far as NYC is concerned, I think it's more accurate to find a large number of native New Yorkers outside of Manhattaan, than in the city as a whole. Main reason of course being real estate prices. In Manhattan it's pretty hard for a kid to grow up, get a job, marry, and raise kids in the same neighborhood his parents did 25 years ago, 'cause its unaffordable for most young people. But that's far less so in the Bronx, Queens, Staten Island and Brooklyn, where prices over a generation have certainly risen, but not nearly to the extent they have in Manhattan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-06-2013, 07:49 AM
 
426 posts, read 506,877 times
Reputation: 375
I don't know where to validate this, but I would think 50%+ of the residents of Greensboro, NC (~280,000) are natives, although there is a large presence of college students. Greensboro/The Triad has not seen the influx of transplants (nor the growth rates) the Charlotte and Raleigh areas experienced.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2013, 01:17 PM
 
Location: Albuquerque, NM
1,430 posts, read 2,575,821 times
Reputation: 2546
Birmingham, Alabama (212K city, 1.2 mil. metro). As the largest city in the state, it's a draw for young people from other parts of Alabama, but it's not enough of a regional draw to attract a lot of people from out of state. In Birmingham and its closest suburbs, you'll find a lot of folks living ten miles or less from where they grew up. And this applies regardless of color or economic situation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2013, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Englewood, Near Eastside Indy
8,345 posts, read 14,119,342 times
Reputation: 5964
Quote:
Originally Posted by citylove101 View Post
A staggering number of Detroit and Detroit-area residents have never left that metro. Some transience with higher level auto company people or those connected with higher education, but by and large it's born in Detroit, live in Detroit, die in Detroit. And I am including the suburbs (many of which are quite pleasant) as well as the city itself.
This for the most part makes Detroit like any other metro in America. The only difference is, Metro Detroit is losing people who are moving away and no one is moving in to replace them.

Also, I would say the stat that a "staggering" number of people have never left the metro-Detroit area is completely fabricated, and wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2013, 02:02 PM
 
Location: New York NY
4,271 posts, read 6,361,890 times
Reputation: 9086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toxic Toast View Post
This for the most part makes Detroit like any other metro in America. The only difference is, Metro Detroit is losing people who are moving away and no one is moving in to replace them.

Also, I would say the stat that a "staggering" number of people have never left the metro-Detroit area is completely fabricated, and wrong.
This study is a bit oudtated -- five years -- but I don't think any of the dynamics it represents have changed radically in that time. It looks at who stays in the same state (doesn't go by city) they were born in. What they call the "Stickiest" states are the ones people don't move away from. The top six sticky states, and the share of adults who remained there are:

Texas ................75.8%
North Carolina......71.4%
Georgia...............69.6%
California.............69.0%
Wisconsin............68.6%
Michigan.............67.5%

http://pewsocialtrends.org/files/201...d-12-29-08.pdf


I haven't seen a breakdown like this on a city basis, but I think the dynamic is pretty clear. Michigan is a highly "in-bred" state (and we know for a fact that between 200-2010 the state lost population) and one of the top ones where people born there just don't leave. I don't think its unfair to assume that a lot of those people who stay hail from the most populous region (Detroit metro). And for the state to rank 6th out of 50 for the ones where people never leave, is pretty indicative, whether you want to quibble about calling it "staggering" or not. It defintely is NOT like any most other states and Detroit is presumably not like most other metros.

Last edited by citylove101; 11-06-2013 at 02:58 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2013, 02:14 PM
 
Location: Englewood, Near Eastside Indy
8,345 posts, read 14,119,342 times
Reputation: 5964
Quote:
Originally Posted by citylove101 View Post
This study is a bit oudtated -- five years -- but I don't think any of the dynamics it represents have changed radically in that time. It looks at who stays in the same state (doesn't go by city) as they were born in. What they call the "Stickiest" states are the ones people don't move away from. The top six sticky states, and the share of adults who remained there are:

Texas ................75.8%
North Carolina......71.4%
Georgia...............69.6%
California.............69.0%
Wisconsin............68.6%
Michigan.............67.5%

http://pewsocialtrends.org/files/201...d-12-29-08.pdf


I haven't seen a breakdown like this on a city basis, but I think the dynamic is pretty clear. Michigan is a highly "in-bred" state (and we know for a fact that between 200-2010 the state lost population) and one of the top ones where people born there just don't leave. I don't think its unfair to assume that a lot of those people who stay hail from the most populous region (Detroit metro). And for the state to rank 6th out of 50 for the ones where people never leave, is pretty indicative, whether you want to quibble about calling it "staggering" or not. It defintely is NOT like any most other states and Detroit is presumably not like most other metros.
Considering 56% of US born adults have never lived outside their birth state (per the study you linked), I don't think the jump to 67% in Michigan is that significant. Thus, Metro Detroit is (probably) not really that much different from most places. 25 states (that's half) are within 10 percentage points of Michigan.
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.
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