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 11-07-2019, 07:45 PM
 
Location: Cleveland
660 posts, read 364,106 times
Reputation: 940

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by masssachoicetts View Post
Massachusetts has so much potential to grow with its satellite cities of Lowell, Providence, Lynn, Nashua NH, Worcester, Brockton, Fall River, Framingham, New Bedford and Haverhill/Lawrence. The jobs in the state are crazy high tech and the QOL is absurdly high, nearly European. Greater Boston is gifted with these bones and right now they are significantly underutilized. If thy pass this 30 Billion dollar transformation to electrify the rail, Massachusetts has the potential to gain nearly 75,000 people per year. I know that it is highly subjective, but it really does....

If MA does electrify, I could see it following this trajectory:
HIGH PREDICTION
2020: 6.93 Million
2030: 7.40 Million
2040: 8.22 Million
2050: 9.00 Million
Yeah, but snow. That's the problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-07-2019, 08:59 PM
 
Location: WA Desert, Seattle native
6,179 posts, read 4,105,888 times
Reputation: 4644
The writing is on the wall for California. Growth has been slowing for the past decade, and projections are for continued slowing. Notice, I said "slowing", not reducing population. The State continues to add population, but the point here is it is simply not happening as fast as previous decades.

Texas, Florida, Washington, Arizona I think will be the biggest gainers by 2040. I think both Arizona and Washington may surpass Michigan by 2040.

Last edited by pnwguy2; 11-07-2019 at 09:15 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2019, 09:17 PM
 
Location: Boston Metrowest (via the Philly area)
4,582 posts, read 7,677,868 times
Reputation: 4509
I think declining birthrates are going to be a much bigger factor here than most folks realize.

We're just not growing like we used to as a country, and I don't really see that changing any time soon; in fact, I expect to see a growing number of states losing significant population within the next couple decades, not shockingly starting in the Northeast and Midwest.

And with birth rates dropping worldwide, that will begin to affect immigration, too.

Will be interesting to follow nonetheless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2019, 10:21 PM
Status: "Bostonian in Baltimore" (set 16 days ago)
 
Location: Baltimore
3,139 posts, read 1,678,020 times
Reputation: 2734
Quote:
Originally Posted by masssachoicetts View Post
Massachusetts has so much potential to grow with its satellite cities of Lowell, Providence, Lynn, Nashua NH, Worcester, Brockton, Fall River, Framingham, New Bedford and Haverhill/Lawrence. The jobs in the state are crazy high tech and the QOL is absurdly high, nearly European. Greater Boston is gifted with these bones and right now they are significantly underutilized. If thy pass this 30 Billion dollar transformation to electrify the rail, Massachusetts has the potential to gain nearly 75,000 people per year. I know that it is highly subjective, but it really does....

If MA does electrify, I could see it following this trajectory:
HIGH PREDICTION
2020: 6.93 Million
2030: 7.40 Million
2040: 8.22 Million
2050: 9.00 Million

If MA does not electrify, I could see it following this trajectory:
2010: 6.93 Million
2020: 7.25 Million
2030: 7.47 Million
2040: 7.60 Million
2050: 7.72 Million

Lets hope Mass doesn't just it back and watch the state plummet to garbage again.
The QOL is only high if you make an absurd income, otherwise the housing is poor, infrastructure is poor, weather is poor, entertainment is mediocre inequality is high, urban poverty is high (especially given COL) and costs are sky high. That’s a fact. Good public school are nice but are bad districts are still quite bad as the most NAEP assessment reminded us. if the state continues to rely o ln Boston for everything we could see large parts of MA going the route of CT or upstate NY

Furthermore the birth rate in MA is too low to grow that fast-even our increasing immigration won’t produce those numbers. I think we’ll be able to accommodate more immigrants and out of staters after 2040. The north rate here is perpetually in the bottom 5 and affordability is a major issue-much like California.

I think MA residents ove estimate the state’s and Boston’sgrowth simply because were so used to very slow growth. There’s so many places growing faster especially as MA slows down. There just not that many people getting those high paying jobs when compared to the total aggregate population. This is why median income in the state hasn’t shot up any faster than other successful states.

Its pretty clear to me that even more similar to New Jersey over the next 20 years
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2019, 11:25 PM
 
557 posts, read 195,003 times
Reputation: 816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duderino View Post
I think declining birthrates are going to be a much bigger factor here than most folks realize.

We're just not growing like we used to as a country, and I don't really see that changing any time soon; in fact, I expect to see a growing number of states losing significant population within the next couple decades, not shockingly starting in the Northeast and Midwest.

And with birth rates dropping worldwide, that will begin to affect immigration, too.
Connecticut, Illinois, and West Virginia are already losing population since 2010. Vermont, Rhode Island, Mississippi, New York, Pennsylvania, and Maine have grown less than 1%.

As usual, the doom and gloom of California in terms of population growth is overstated. Between 2010 and 2018, the state grew by 6.2%, which is above the national average (impressive considering its already huge population). It is the 19th fastest growing by growth percentage and third-fastest growing by absolute numbers (right behind Florida and far head of #4 North Carolina).

Locally here in San Diego, growth is still pretty robust. I'm not sure how the remaining two years of the decade will pan out, but San Diego is currently on target to gain ~150,000 new residents during this decade. That is the highest absolute increase for San Diego since the '80s and the third highest absolute increase for a decade in San Diego's history.

There is a ton of medium-density infill development throughout the county, notably 4-5 story stick-built multi-family.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2019, 11:29 PM
 
557 posts, read 195,003 times
Reputation: 816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutiny77 View Post
His point concerning NC, TN, FL, UT, etc. had to do with insufficient infrastructure, not density. Not saying I necessarily agree with his predictions about the ones he calls "suburban-minded states," but in some states the suburban road networks, transit systems, etc. are better than in others and that will make a difference with regard to future growth rates.

But as far as the positive relationship between suburbia and affordability goes, that's because 1) the federal government has historically massively subsidized suburbia at the expense of central cities and 2) a lack of housing supply will drive costs up regardless of location, and much of that is attributed to local zoning regulations. While a lot of people tend to think of San Francisco when it comes to the housing crisis in California, the fact of the matter is that a resistance to homebuilding in the suburbs is driving that crisis in a major way.
Post of the year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2019, 06:24 AM
 
9,811 posts, read 9,894,828 times
Reputation: 6165
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade View Post
The QOL is only high if you make an absurd income, otherwise the housing is poor, infrastructure is poor, weather is poor, entertainment is mediocre inequality is high, urban poverty is high (especially given COL) and costs are sky high. That’s a fact. Good public school are nice but are bad districts are still quite bad as the most NAEP assessment reminded us. if the state continues to rely o ln Boston for everything we could see large parts of MA going the route of CT or upstate NY

Furthermore the birth rate in MA is too low to grow that fast-even our increasing immigration won’t produce those numbers. I think we’ll be able to accommodate more immigrants and out of staters after 2040. The north rate here is perpetually in the bottom 5 and affordability is a major issue-much like California.

I think MA residents ove estimate the state’s and Boston’sgrowth simply because were so used to very slow growth. There’s so many places growing faster especially as MA slows down. There just not that many people getting those high paying jobs when compared to the total aggregate population. This is why median income in the state hasn’t shot up any faster than other successful states.

Its pretty clear to me that even more similar to New Jersey over the next 20 years
That bottom number seams pretty reasonable. 7.72 million is a slight decrease from the 2010-2020 average which is probably what’s going to happen.

9+ million is pretty absurd.

I would disagree weather is bad from May-Oct Massachusetts has the best weather in the country and it has far from the worst winter. Boston hardly gets any snow until mid December. (Worcester Hills are slightly more snowy earlier)

But there is an overall migration to the city from rural areas. This is very underrated. It’s basucaly why Metro Buffalo has stabilized for example. People move from Dunkirk,NY or Elmira to Buffalo replace people moving from Buffalo out of region. Since Massachusetts is largely Metro Boston and the associated rural areas are out of state (NH/ME) that could boost population without really helping the region.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2019, 08:11 AM
 
Location: Downtown Lynchburg, The Hill City
150 posts, read 77,163 times
Reputation: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duderino View Post
I think declining birthrates are going to be a much bigger factor here than most folks realize.

We're just not growing like we used to as a country, and I don't really see that changing any time soon; in fact, I expect to see a growing number of states losing significant population within the next couple decades, not shockingly starting in the Northeast and Midwest.

And with birth rates dropping worldwide, that will begin to affect immigration, too.

Will be interesting to follow nonetheless.
Yep the fertility rate in the US has dropped from 2.12 in 2007 to 1.728 in 2018 and looks set to drop below 1.7 in 2019.

Compounding this issue, the only other source of growth (immigration) has dropped sharply in the US to a mere 200,000 last year which is half what Germany got in the same period. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/26/u...migration.html

The truth is that the US is not quite the shining beacon for huge immigrant attraction as it was in the past. Yes there is a Trump effect here, but I don't see the US maintaining 1 million immigrants a year from here on out as it has in previous years. I would say 300,000 - 500,000 is more likely. Many countries like Germany, Sweden, Canada, Australia, Japan (yep Japan. It attracted a record 200,000 immigrants last year), Singapore, France, Norway, Switzerland, and Austria are really becoming just as competitive and appealing places to migrate to as the US and the US will have to compete that much harder to attract skilled immigrants here than it has in the past.

I honestly don't see the US population ever reaching 400 million at this point as previous predictions have assumed it would by the year 2060. On another note, cities and urban areas will continue to grow for the most part at the expense of a very steep decline in rural and exurban areas I foresee. Japan for example has shrunk by 2 million people since 2010, but its largest cities have all grown in population since then.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2019, 08:25 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
25,161 posts, read 18,661,858 times
Reputation: 29652
Some of these states may have wildly different growth rates depending on the impact of climate change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2019, 09:38 AM
 
Location: Houston, Tx
1,065 posts, read 2,641,093 times
Reputation: 991
Default California is GROWING!!!

Hello... California is growing quickly. I dont know where people get the impression that California is shrinking due to people leaving. Hey, did you know that most of those people leaving are retirees? Yes, it is not true that there is an Exodus from Californoa due to the cost of living and political environment. Dont believe everything the media tells you.
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

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