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 04-04-2016, 06:37 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
2,331 posts, read 3,059,932 times
Reputation: 3925

Advertisements

The limiting factor for Minneapolis is that it is already at full employment so at this point it can only grow as fast as the labor market grows. Wages are starting to rise and they will likely continue to do so until they are high enough that they draw in enough new workers to meet demand. The city proper has seen a ton of development and it is continuing. Minneapolis city population grew by 25,000 in the first five years of decade and metro (msa) population by 175,000 in the same time period (5.25%).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-04-2016, 07:15 PM
 
3,676 posts, read 1,550,232 times
Reputation: 3067
Minneapois/St. Paul has a great growth rate that is healthy but not out of control. The best metro in the midwest, IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2016, 07:18 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
1,380 posts, read 1,199,726 times
Reputation: 2546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minnesota Spring View Post
Minneapolis /St. Paul not as much as they were a decade ago when growth was hot an almost out of control for Midwest standards, but it has leveled off and could hopefully improve a little.
The real boom years in the Twin Cities were actually more like 20-25 years ago, in the 1990s. That's when we saw an explosion in population and the economy turned white hot. Since then, it's been slower, but still steady growth.

The truth is, the bigger a metro area gets, the harder it is for it to maintain the same rate of growth.

If you put it into perspective, the Twin Cities metro has gained more people alone since 2010 than the entire big states of Illinois, Ohio, and Michigan combined! Considering everything we have stacked against us (cold and snowy winters, high taxes, negative and/or nonexistent national image), a growth rate of 5% since 2010 is very respectable, even compared to nationally. Minneapolis alone saw a growth rate of 7.5% since 2010, fueled largely in part to Millennial migration to the city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2016, 07:23 PM
 
6,816 posts, read 6,960,947 times
Reputation: 5486
Quote:
Originally Posted by jennifat View Post
The real boom years in the Twin Cities were actually more like 20-25 years ago, in the 1990s. That's when we saw an explosion in population and the economy turned white hot. Since then, it's been slower, but still steady growth.

The truth is, the bigger a metro area gets, the harder it is for it to maintain the same rate of growth.

If you put it into perspective, the Twin Cities metro has gained more people alone since 2010 than the entire big states of Illinois, Ohio, and Michigan combined! Considering everything we have stacked against us (cold and snowy winters, high taxes, negative and/or nonexistent national image), a growth rate of 5% since 2010 is very respectable, even compared to nationally. Minneapolis alone saw a growth rate of 7.5% since 2010, fueled largely in part to Millennial migration to the city.
Tell that to Dallas and Houston where their growth is bonkers despite being 7.1 and 6.5 million metros respectively.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2016, 07:40 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
1,380 posts, read 1,199,726 times
Reputation: 2546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ant131531 View Post
Tell that to Dallas and Houston where their growth is bonkers despite being 7.1 and 6.5 million metros respectively.
Well, their growth rate has decelerated each decade since 1990. Regardless, with the basic recipe the Texas metros have, of course they'll grow fast.

1. Dirt cheap
2. Sunbelt
3. Oil

Anyway, I don't know how that's relevant to the topic of discussion?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2016, 07:41 PM
 
Location: Colorado Springs
3,085 posts, read 2,130,649 times
Reputation: 3590
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaelectro View Post
Omaha - considered midwest? Idk
Sure. I'd consider Kansas, Nebraska, and the Dakotas mid-west.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2016, 10:13 AM
 
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
2,401 posts, read 3,676,885 times
Reputation: 1434
2016 estimates for census came out recently, and Des Moines metro has grown 9.4% since 2010.

Granted a lot of these lists are subjective, but these are from various third party sources and confirms that Des Moines at least belongs in the discussion:

#7 Hippest Mid-Sized City in America — Gogobot, 2016

#1 Best City for the Middle Class — Business Insider, 2016

#11 Best Place to Live in the U.S. — U.S. News & World Report, 2016

#4 Best Mid-Sized City to Make a Living — MoneyGeek, 2016

Top 10 Best City to Live and Work — Robert Half’s Career City Index, 2016

#4 "10 Most Pro-Business Cities in America" — MarketWatch, 2015

#4 "Best Tech Cities to Start A Career" — ComputerTrainingSchools.com, 2015

#2 "Top 10 U.S. Cities to Land Work" — NBC News, 2015

#5 "America's 10 Best Cities for Retirement" — Bankrate, 2015

#6 "Midsize Metro where College Grads Move for Jobs" — AIER, 2015

#1 Metro with the Most Community Pride — Gallup, 2015

#3 Top City for New College Grads — SmartAsset, 2015

Emerging Startup Cities of 2015 — Investopedia, 2015

#2 Best City for Jobs in 2015 — Forbes, 2015
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2016, 10:18 AM
 
5,556 posts, read 6,994,413 times
Reputation: 2807
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaelectro View Post
Relative to other midwest metro's, I'd say these

Des moines - seems to be an outlier with population growth, compared to the rest
Columbus
Grand Rapids
Minneapolis
Indianapolis
Madison
Omaha - considered midwest? Idk


Grand Rapids is not booming, but is doing good.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2016, 10:44 AM
 
3,968 posts, read 3,503,651 times
Reputation: 6397
Quote:
Originally Posted by ram2 View Post
Grand Rapids is not booming, but is doing good.


It's population growth is a little slower than those other cities. From a construction/development/economic/job growth standpoint I don't see why it shouldn't be a consideration.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2016, 01:09 PM
 
11,179 posts, read 22,400,541 times
Reputation: 10933
Des Moines popped into my head first.

Omaha is also doing quite well I believe.

Other cities that doing well are Madison, Grand Rapids, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Columbus.

Honestly Detroit is doing quite well now, better than it has in over 15 years. It lost jobs at a very steady rate from 2000 all the way through 2010 with no growth that the rest of the country saw.

It turned itself around the past five years though and has gained around 250,000 jobs.
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