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.
Bright, talented youth will always flock to the coastal states because that's where they'll have the greatest propensity to not only utilize, but maximize their education, skills, and talents. The East and West Coasts are and will continue to be bastions of intellectualism, humanism, and culture. The world-renowned higher educational institutions, prohibitively expensive COL's, and economies with a strong tertiary sector orientation of most Northeastern and West Coast states plus a few Midwestern states will continue to primarily attract students and early careerists, from within and "flyover" states alike, for the foreseeable future -- I don't see that ever changing.
The "less popular" states in the Midwest and especially the South will still serve a purpose well into the future, too. The retirees, uneducated/unskilled workers, and "homegrown riffraff" from the more expensive coastal states will flee to low-tax, low-cost states with largely undiversified economies and legislators/tax-bases that have little concern with investing in big business, public education, and public transportation such as Arizona, Florida, and Tennessee to name a few. In the US, these states are where the bulk of manufacturing and low-wage service sector jobs will be found because these states offer low-wage, low-skill workers a better shot at the "American Dream" than states like California, New York, or Washington. However, in lots of those low-cost, low-tax states, most individuals will have limited opportunity with regard to career advancement or quality higher education, but at least you can buy a 3-bed/2-bath 3,000-sqft. home for $149,000.
No place will get deserted, people will always live in different places. Unlike a century ago, most Americans live west of the Mississippi River. That does not mean east of is deserted. All states will have large populations. I have no data, but I bet there are some cities and states besides California, Texas, Arizona, that are experiencing population growth.
Bright, talented youth will always flock to the coastal states because that's where they'll have the greatest propensity to not only utilize, but maximize their education, skills, and talents. The East and West Coasts are and will continue to be bastions of intellectualism, humanism, and culture. The world-renowned higher educational institutions, prohibitively expensive COL's, and economies with a strong tertiary sector orientation of most Northeastern and West Coast states plus a few Midwestern states will continue to primarily attract students and early careerists, from within and "flyover" states alike, for the foreseeable future -- I don't see that ever changing.
The "less popular" states in the Midwest and especially the South will still serve a purpose well into the future, too. The retirees, uneducated/unskilled workers, and "homegrown riffraff" from the more expensive coastal states will flee to low-tax, low-cost states with largely undiversified economies and legislators/tax-bases that have little concern with investing in big business, public education, and public transportation such as Arizona, Florida, and Tennessee to name a few. In the US, these states are where the bulk of manufacturing and low-wage service sector jobs will be found because these states offer low-wage, low-skill workers a better shot at the "American Dream" than states like California, New York, or Washington. However, in lots of those low-cost, low-tax states, most individuals will have limited opportunity with regard to career advancement or quality higher education, but at least you can buy a 3-bed/2-bath 3,000-sqft. home for $149,000.
That's my prediction.
I see you're still trying to smear your agenda all over these forums.
in 50 years from now LA will stretch from Bakersfield to San Diego and NYC from New Haven to Philly.
Well, I wouls say that all coast of California from San Francisco up to San Diego would be one, the second in nation, megalopolis. A to N.Y.C...
I think the now Bos-Wash will became true and expand, having the most populated megalopolis from Greater Boston to Baltimore-Washington,Northern Vriginia, Richmon and Hampton Roads metros included. And after 2050 it coul even merge with Piedmont megaregion and from Hamprton Roads reach North Carolina Triangle, some more developed metros of S. Carolina, that are about to thrive and Chattanogga, Tenn. and Atlanta, Geor. or even merge completely, with then (years after 2050) one city-peninsula-state of Florida.
Look what was population grow from 1914 - 1950 and multiplify it by something like 0.5 to adjust historical grow. And look for result with little seroiousness.
No place will get deserted, people will always live in different places. Unlike a century ago, most Americans live west of the Mississippi River. That does not mean east of is deserted. All states will have large populations. I have no data, but I bet there are some cities and states besides California, Texas, Arizona, that are experiencing population growth.
Point is no place will be deserted.
That is not accurate. 60% of the US population lives east of the Mississippi River; and that does not include the portions of the states of Minnesota and Louisiana that are east of the river.
Chances are that will remain true; the majority of Americans will live East of the Mississippi river and in 50 years chances are the long-time trend of the population center of the US stretching to the west will reverse. There simply isn't the natural resources out there to support a population density that the east can support.
Well, I wouls say that all coast of California from San Francisco up to San Diego would be one, the second in nation, megalopolis. A to N.Y.C...
I think the now Bos-Wash will became true and expand, having the most populated megalopolis from Greater Boston to Baltimore-Washington,Northern Vriginia, Richmon and Hampton Roads metros included. And after 2050 it coul even merge with Piedmont megaregion and from Hamprton Roads reach North Carolina Triangle, some more developed metros of S. Carolina, that are about to thrive and Chattanogga, Tenn. and Atlanta, Geor. or even merge completely, with then (years after 2050) one city-peninsula-state of Florida.
Look what was population grow from 1914 - 1950 and multiplify it by something like 0.5 to adjust historical grow. And look for result with little seroiousness.
If you said Ventura County (Santa Barbara) down to San Diego was one metropolis, that'd be one thing. But SF Bay down to San Diego is certainly not. The coastline of Central CA doesn't have an urban feel to it whatsoever, and is more often than not small towns or rural areas. SF Bay Area is one distinct metropolis, and SoCal is another.
Lots of different predictions. I feel like what would be interesting is to get data points and do some data analysis on it.
I wonder if there is a list out there, like no. of jobs created in the past X years, no. of white/black/etc people, net migration of people, patents filed, water quality trend, bmw/audi drivers per sq mile etc.
This could almost be like a huge project
If I had to personally predict, or choose a place to live 50 years from now (i.e. my retirement), or rather 30 years from now. I'd pick North Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa as my top Midwestern states. It does happen to be that I've lived in all 3 and so know about the people, etc. But I generally also feel like these are the "best of the Midwest".
In addition, I feel like Utah is also a potential place to move to. I think however, it's already pretty expensive.
Within 50 years all of the Midwestern cities will be old in the way eastern cities are now. The central city built environment will be full of neighborhoods of 150 to 200 year old buildings. Beyond that these cities will take on the culturally layered texture of old cities. By that point they will have existed in several eras with multiple identities. They are on the cusp of that now but another 50 years will take them through to the other side. Also, another 5 decades of infill will heal most of the damage done to their urban fabric in the second half of the 20th century (at least in most of them, Detroit or Cleveland may take a bit longer).
To put it in perspective, the early 20th century built environment that dominates Midwestern cities will seem as old to someone born in 2045 as the French Quarter does to the Baby Boomers. It is likely that they will be considered to be much more compelling places than they are now.
Last edited by Drewcifer; 12-16-2014 at 01:27 AM..
The South is the nation's fastest growing region right now. I think Miami, Jacksonville, Tampa, New Orleans, Houston, Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, Atlanta, and Richmond are in for huge population booms. Probably we'll see some smaller towns/cities emerge as larger ones.
Because? It's fine if you believe this but what makes you so certain? I'm guessing it's the weather, but if the thread title indicates anything, it's suggesting that some of these places may be TOO HOT 50 years from now, if anything.
As more immigration happens, and more people want to stay on the coasts, what will happen to the rest of America?
I don't understand this line of thinking......as more immigration happens, more people will move to the coasts? Why? To be closer to immigrants? To be further away? What does immigration have to do with population trends, aside from the growth of the immigrant population itself? Why would the interior of the nation flee to the coasts?
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.