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 07-12-2017, 12:47 PM
 
Location: Clemson, SC by way of Tyler,TX
4,853 posts, read 2,980,597 times
Reputation: 3399

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanfze55 View Post
Just sharing my opinion, and it may be a bit biased since I am a defender of the Midwest... but I have to believe the Midwest will eventually become a hotspot. Why? The current hotspots are becoming or already are unaffordable for most millennials. We know LA, SF, SD, NY, DC, Boston, and Seattle are too expensive. They work for millennials who don't want families and are well paid or for millennials who have families but have two high incomes. That is NOT most millennials. Like prior generations, most are middle class or lower middle class and want or already have families. Denver, Portland, Miami, and Austin are cheaper than the aforementioned but are getting very expensive. Sun Belt cities are still largely affordable, but are getting more expensive as they become more crowded and desirable. Think Dallas, Las Vegas, Houston, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Atlanta, Nashville, Charlotte, Tampa, and Raleigh. The problem is, even though these cities are becoming more expensive, wages aren't as high as they are in the traditionally expensive cities (with the exception of oil and gas workers in Texas). You will typically make just as much in the Midwest but will find more affordable COL. I believe that people will eventually realize they can't necessarily choose where to live based on weather. To me, cold winters (and STL winters aren't even cold tbh) sounds a lot better than living paycheck to paycheck. People will ultimately move where the job market and housing affordability have the most congruency. I see places like Des Moines, Omaha, Grand Rapids, Madison, Indianapolis, and Columbus continuing to grow and gain more amenities that will make them attractive to a larger crowd of people. Meanwhile, classic inland cities like Pittsburgh, Detroit, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, and the Twin Cities will rebound. Some, like Pittsburgh and the Twin Cities, are already great places to live. People don't flock to them, because they're not "warm and sunny and by the ocean OMG". But once the Sun Belt phase has run its course and it is no longer affordable, people will look for places that have affordable housing, good jobs, and good schools. The Midwest has all of that. Plus, the cities have character, good architecture, history, and all the amenities of coastal cities without the high cost. They don't have warm weather, mountains, or ocean, which is a shame... but we all make sacrifices.
My friend feels the same way. He expects the MW to bounce back. One reason? No drought issues from global warming.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-12-2017, 12:59 PM
 
Location: Saint Louis, MO
138 posts, read 98,699 times
Reputation: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylord_Focker View Post
My friend feels the same way. He expects the MW to bounce back. One reason? No drought issues from global warming.
There is that, too. Having plentiful rivers and lakes helps. I used to hate the Midwest and think it was hideous, but that was when I compared it to Colorado and the Pacific Northwest. We'll never have the same beautiful nature that those areas do, but the Midwest has its treasures. There's the Ozarks in Arkansas and Southern Missouri, and the Northwoods of Minnesota and Wisconsin, and of course the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. There's beauty everywhere if you're willing to look for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2017, 01:00 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
760 posts, read 588,972 times
Reputation: 1482
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanfze55 View Post
Just sharing my opinion, and it may be a bit biased since I am a defender of the Midwest... but I have to believe the Midwest will eventually become a hotspot. Why? The current hotspots are becoming or already are unaffordable for most millennials. We know LA, SF, SD, NY, DC, Boston, and Seattle are too expensive. They work for millennials who don't want families and are well paid or for millennials who have families but have two high incomes. That is NOT most millennials. Like prior generations, most are middle class or lower middle class and want or already have families. Denver, Portland, Miami, and Austin are cheaper than the aforementioned but are getting very expensive. Sun Belt cities are still largely affordable, but are getting more expensive as they become more crowded and desirable. Think Dallas, Las Vegas, Houston, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Atlanta, Nashville, Charlotte, Tampa, and Raleigh. The problem is, even though these cities are becoming more expensive, wages aren't as high as they are in the traditionally expensive cities (with the exception of oil and gas workers in Texas). You will typically make just as much in the Midwest but will find more affordable COL. I believe that people will eventually realize they can't necessarily choose where to live based on weather. To me, cold winters (and STL winters aren't even cold tbh) sounds a lot better than living paycheck to paycheck. People will ultimately move where the job market and housing affordability have the most congruency. I see places like Des Moines, Omaha, Grand Rapids, Madison, Indianapolis, and Columbus continuing to grow and gain more amenities that will make them attractive to a larger crowd of people. Meanwhile, classic inland cities like Pittsburgh, Detroit, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, and the Twin Cities will rebound. Some, like Pittsburgh and the Twin Cities, are already great places to live. People don't flock to them, because they're not "warm and sunny and by the ocean OMG". But once the Sun Belt phase has run its course and it is no longer affordable, people will look for places that have affordable housing, good jobs, and good schools. The Midwest has all of that. Plus, the cities have character, good architecture, history, and all the amenities of coastal cities without the high cost. They don't have warm weather, mountains, or ocean, which is a shame... but we all make sacrifices.
Totally agree, and adds on to what I was trying to explain in my post.

Right now it seems like most people have tunnel vision. Ask any college grad where they want to go, and it will be (Denver, Austin, Portland, SF, LA, NYC). Gentrification and growing urban density has basically ruined what character these cities had. Example: when I think back to Denver before it's current boom, I was in love with a lot of it's older architecture and home styles. I liked the people, the vibe, the mix of old/new downtown. But now, all of that is gone. I still like it here, but now it's because of my job and the proximity to the mountains...which now isn't even a thing with how crowded every has gotten. And I truly believe that most Millennials prefer the old/gritty nature of cities.

Once the current trends die out, people will start to travel and discover other cities. Someone who has lived in the center of gentrified/pretentious Portland or Austin, paying $2000 for a studio, will visit a city like Milwaukee or Detroit, and fall in love with how it isn't a glass box landscape, and remains to have lots of it's original character. The city will fly under the radar for a few years as the creatives and 20 somethings start doing cool things...then the cycle will start all over again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2017, 02:23 PM
 
Location: Kentucky
185 posts, read 163,624 times
Reputation: 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanfze55 View Post
Just sharing my opinion, and it may be a bit biased since I am a defender of the Midwest... but I have to believe the Midwest will eventually become a hotspot. Why? The current hotspots are becoming or already are unaffordable for most millennials. We know LA, SF, SD, NY, DC, Boston, and Seattle are too expensive. They work for millennials who don't want families and are well paid or for millennials who have families but have two high incomes. That is NOT most millennials. Like prior generations, most are middle class or lower middle class and want or already have families. Denver, Portland, Miami, and Austin are cheaper than the aforementioned but are getting very expensive. Sun Belt cities are still largely affordable, but are getting more expensive as they become more crowded and desirable. Think Dallas, Las Vegas, Houston, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Atlanta, Nashville, Charlotte, Tampa, and Raleigh. The problem is, even though these cities are becoming more expensive, wages aren't as high as they are in the traditionally expensive cities (with the exception of oil and gas workers in Texas). You will typically make just as much in the Midwest but will find more affordable COL. I believe that people will eventually realize they can't necessarily choose where to live based on weather. To me, cold winters (and STL winters aren't even cold tbh) sounds a lot better than living paycheck to paycheck. People will ultimately move where the job market and housing affordability have the most congruency. I see places like Des Moines, Omaha, Grand Rapids, Madison, Indianapolis, and Columbus continuing to grow and gain more amenities that will make them attractive to a larger crowd of people. Meanwhile, classic inland cities like Pittsburgh, Detroit, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, and the Twin Cities will rebound. Some, like Pittsburgh and the Twin Cities, are already great places to live. People don't flock to them, because they're not "warm and sunny and by the ocean OMG". But once the Sun Belt phase has run its course and it is no longer affordable, people will look for places that have affordable housing, good jobs, and good schools. The Midwest has all of that. Plus, the cities have character, good architecture, history, and all the amenities of coastal cities without the high cost. They don't have warm weather, mountains, or ocean, which is a shame... but we all make sacrifices.
I can see that trend happening, especially if things like water issues and sea level rise start becoming issues in the coming decades for the desert SW and Gulf Coast/East Coast. Another option I could see in addition to a return back to the Midwest is for large towns/smaller cities in the Sun Belt potentially becoming larger cities because those areas have just enough resources but have a lower COL. I think Birmingham, AL and Chattanooga, TN are potential examples of this. We are starting to already see this in places like Greenville-Spartanburg SC and Huntsville, AL. I could see Bowling Green, KY and Columbia, TN being two areas that are growing and could drastically grow as people seek cheaper options away from Nashville.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2017, 02:37 PM
 
Location: Lakewood OH
21,699 posts, read 23,658,574 times
Reputation: 35449
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Ski View Post
Totally agree, and adds on to what I was trying to explain in my post.

Right now it seems like most people have tunnel vision. Ask any college grad where they want to go, and it will be (Denver, Austin, Portland, SF, LA, NYC). Gentrification and growing urban density has basically ruined what character these cities had. Example: when I think back to Denver before it's current boom, I was in love with a lot of it's older architecture and home styles. I liked the people, the vibe, the mix of old/new downtown. But now, all of that is gone. I still like it here, but now it's because of my job and the proximity to the mountains...which now isn't even a thing with how crowded every has gotten. And I truly believe that most Millennials prefer the old/gritty nature of cities.

Once the current trends die out, people will start to travel and discover other cities. Someone who has lived in the center of gentrified/pretentious Portland or Austin, paying $2000 for a studio, will visit a city like Milwaukee or Detroit, and fall in love with how it isn't a glass box landscape, and remains to have lots of it's original character. The city will fly under the radar for a few years as the creatives and 20 somethings start doing cool things...then the cycle will start all over again.
Pretty much sums up my experience with Portland, OR. I moved there from Chicago in 1978 when I was in my 30's for the adventure of it because it was a "nobody" as in nobody wanted to move there and everybody thought I was nuts.

Now nearly forty years later it's one of the way over priced "somebody" cities where everybody wants to live. So three years ago I moved back to the Midwest area to a "nobody" city to where people aren't exactly flocking. But if that ever does happen I'm okay with it. I figure I'm 70 years old so if in another forty years it ever does go from a "nobody" to a "somebody" city I'll be dead so I won't have to worry about moving again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2017, 02:38 PM
 
Location: Saint Louis, MO
138 posts, read 98,699 times
Reputation: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Ski View Post
Totally agree, and adds on to what I was trying to explain in my post.

Right now it seems like most people have tunnel vision. Ask any college grad where they want to go, and it will be (Denver, Austin, Portland, SF, LA, NYC). Gentrification and growing urban density has basically ruined what character these cities had. Example: when I think back to Denver before it's current boom, I was in love with a lot of it's older architecture and home styles. I liked the people, the vibe, the mix of old/new downtown. But now, all of that is gone. I still like it here, but now it's because of my job and the proximity to the mountains...which now isn't even a thing with how crowded every has gotten. And I truly believe that most Millennials prefer the old/gritty nature of cities.

Once the current trends die out, people will start to travel and discover other cities. Someone who has lived in the center of gentrified/pretentious Portland or Austin, paying $2000 for a studio, will visit a city like Milwaukee or Detroit, and fall in love with how it isn't a glass box landscape, and remains to have lots of it's original character. The city will fly under the radar for a few years as the creatives and 20 somethings start doing cool things...then the cycle will start all over again.
I disagree somewhat, as I believe SF and NY are the two best cities in the country and still have plenty of character. Their expense is outrageous but somewhat justified. If you're wealthy, they're the best places to be. I've never been to LA so cannot comment. Denver and Portland have very much lost a lot of their "artsy" character, but I never found them to be appealing as cities. Their value lies in their proximity to natural beauty and adventures. Austin and many other Sun Belt cities have no character, largely because they are still so new. In 100 years that may change. However, they'll never have the rustic charm of the Northeast and Midwest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2017, 08:00 PM
 
Location: Clovis Strong, NM
3,376 posts, read 4,822,336 times
Reputation: 1982
H'mm. With all this continuing talk of the popular, non-Midwest cities losing their gusto after environmental consequences like drought and temperature loss take their toll, I guess I know where to move to when/if the crowds finally move on. The young eventually become the old and if the young of today keep their same habits like they do now, perhaps they too will make "moving on" a trend that rolls over to the next generation and keeps the gypsy-spirit alive and well.
In the end, all I'm really concerned with will be making a living for as long as I could physically keep myself doing so and avoiding living within all these potential, popular zones.
As I said, they're nice to visit and to get away to. But in the end, I feel it's better to retain that sense of being "the guy that's just passing through and admiring the craziness of the urban scope".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2017, 11:06 PM
 
Location: Seattle
409 posts, read 245,794 times
Reputation: 995
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Ski View Post
Totally agree, and adds on to what I was trying to explain in my post.

Example: when I think back to Denver before it's current boom, I was in love with a lot of it's older architecture and home styles. I liked the people, the vibe, the mix of old/new downtown. But now, all of that is gone. I still like it here, but now it's because of my job and the proximity to the mountains...which now isn't even a thing with how crowded every has gotten. And I truly believe that most Millennials prefer the old/gritty nature of cities.
I feel the same way about Seattle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2017, 11:14 PM
 
4,484 posts, read 2,666,302 times
Reputation: 4090
As Midwestern cities develop some density they'll be more interesting to some of us. Chicago is dense but otherwise really only Minneapolis and Milwaukee are even remotely dense in their peak tracts. Some metros have very low peak densities.

This has started to change as most cities have areas of significant infill. As that continues, these cities could have an upward spiral of residents who like dense cities choosing to live there. The first thousands beget the next thousands or tens of thousands.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2017, 06:38 AM
 
3,961 posts, read 3,490,733 times
Reputation: 6361
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays25 View Post
As Midwestern cities develop some density they'll be more interesting to some of us. Chicago is dense but otherwise really only Minneapolis and Milwaukee are even remotely dense in their peak tracts. Some metros have very low peak densities.

This has started to change as most cities have areas of significant infill. As that continues, these cities could have an upward spiral of residents who like dense cities choosing to live there. The first thousands beget the next thousands or tens of thousands.
I Guess I'd have to understand your perception of density in Midwestern cities. Outside of a handful of examples (Seattle, Portland, San Fran, Miami, you get the idea) Most Midwestern cities are noticeably more dense than a lot of Southern and Mountain West cities.
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