Why did the US Conf of Mayors list Philly metro growth LOW in next 30-yrs projections of New Top Metro Rankings to come? (Philadelphia: crime, taxes)

[DavePa]

Without needing to open a PDF on this US Conference of Mayors chart. In viewing it in a thread at the below link. It shows Philly metro to be passed by many other metros by 2046. With only 3.9% and NYC metro even less at 2.6. Seems the Northeast is not seen to increase growths in % more then today? But Chicago metro at even possibly a lower growth overall then Philly metro .... TODAY? Is projected to out-perform Philly metro to come in 2046 projections? Apparently is seen to increase % it double Philly metro in the future? NYC metro is listed at the ..... LOWEST growth projections.

https://atlanta.curbed.com/2017/6/6/...gest-city-2046

I do believe the North WILL rise again in growth share over the sunbelt in the future. I especially think the Midwest will be ripe for increased growth. But would not have expected lower Northeastern major metros?

So the point to DEBATE OR EXPLAIN? Why is this organization projecting Philly Metro so LOW a % of growth especially if a Chicago is suggested to grow nearly a double the % of Philly Metro in coming decades? As currently Philly is at a higher %.

Chart of above link So a PDF does not need to be opened (unless you choose in the link) listing projected Top metros and populations in 2046. Other info then populations in the PDF also then this like jobs.

Population Growth in the Next 30 Years (US conference of Mayors study)

METRO............................................. ..... 2016 millions.....2046 # Chg...... % change
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA -------- 20,181 ----- 20,705 ------------ 2.6
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ----------- 13,347 ------14,863 ----------- 11.4
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX. ------------------- 7,246 ------11,383 ----------- 57.1
Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, TX ---------- 6,803 ------10,628 ----------- 56.2
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI ----------------- 9,517 ------10,280 ----------- 8.0
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA -----------------5,804 ------- 8,629 ----------- 48.7
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL ------ 6,090 ------- 8,101 ----------- 33.0
Washington-Arlington-Alex, DC-VA-MD-WV --------6,147 ------- 7,851 ----------- 27.7
Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ ----------------------- 4,678 ------- 7,847 ----------- 67.8
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA --------------4,518 --------7,155 ----------- 58.4
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD -- 6,071 ------- 6,309 ----------- 3.9
San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA --------------- 4,692 ------- 5,602 ----------- 19.4
Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH ----------------- 4,799 ------- 5,328 ----------- 11.0
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA ----------------------- 3,804 ------- 4,928 ------------29.5
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI ---------- 3,556 -------4,264 ------------19.9

Taking a broader look, population will grow by over 25% in 127 metro areas, over 50% in 36, and over 70% in 8 over the next 30 years. By 2046, 72 metros will have a population exceeding 1 million, compared to 2016 where only 53 achieved this feat. And by 2046, five metros will have over 10 million people – whereas just 2 were that large 30 years prior.

[1ondoner]

I think some of these projections are overly optimistic. Although the article is not explicit of where the new residents will come from, I think it is fair to say that population growth from immigrants will drastically reduce and therefore most of the growth will come from residents fleeing other cities.

I expect cities on the East coast to lose residents to cities in the South as boomers will move in search of warmer weather and lower COL. Some could argue that the millennials will replace the aging boomers moving South, however, I think the millennials will have lower birth rate.

Without immigrants, the population of most Western nations will decline and the US will not be the exception. I would have liked to see which cities will shrink because these new residents will have to come from somewhere.

Originally Posted by DavePa

METRO............................................. ..... 2016 millions.....2046 # Chg...... % change
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA -------- 20,181 ----- 20,705 ------------ 2.6
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ----------- 13,347 ------14,863 ----------- 11.4
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX. ------------------- 7,246 ------11,383 ----------- 57.1
Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, TX ---------- 6,803 ------10,628 ----------- 56.2
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI ----------------- 9,517 ------10,280 ----------- 8.0
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA -----------------5,804 ------- 8,629 ----------- 48.7
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL ------ 6,090 ------- 8,101 ----------- 33.0
Washington-Arlington-Alex, DC-VA-MD-WV --------6,147 ------- 7,851 ----------- 27.7
Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ ----------------------- 4,678 ------- 7,847 ----------- 67.8
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA --------------4,518 --------7,155 ----------- 58.4
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD -- 6,071 ------- 6,309 ----------- 3.9
San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA --------------- 4,692 ------- 5,602 ----------- 19.4
Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH ----------------- 4,799 ------- 5,328 ----------- 11.0
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA ----------------------- 3,804 ------- 4,928 ------------29.5
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI ---------- 3,556 -------4,264 ------------19.9

[rainrock]

All the cities projected for big population increases are huge magnets for Hispanics and Asians which are the fastest growing races in the USA. By far. And Asians + Hispanics are projected to even have higher population growth in the coming decades.

Most of those cities are in the South(Texas especially ) + West Coast .

At arms length from the historically black + white Northeast.

Truth be told it would be crime to see beautiful Bucks County,Chester County etc etc be lost due to overpopulation. We're good.

Some metroes are naturals for huge population growth.Thats not us.

I see these signs all over the place out by Wawa which is in Middltown Township. Their motto for the Mariner Pipeline is Shut It Down in Middltown. But that slogan can be used for any type of growth. They just dont want any type of change.

[rainrock]

Originally Posted by 1ondoner

I expect cities on the East coast to lose residents to cities in the South as boomers will move in search of warmer weather and lower COL. Some could argue that the millennials will replace the aging boomers moving South, however, I think the millennials will have lower birth rate.

Agree with everything here. Alot of my friends,families, associates who have made their lives here are retiring to the Carolinas along the coast.

The winters take their toll.

[Scarlet Witch]

The east coast may lose residents cause of high cost of living. Gentrificiation though good also kills neighbhorhoods with higher property values. Most young people don't want the same job for five years, msot of them move. Also, these cities are too democratic run. Higher taxes makes living there not livable. The East Coast is expensive and taxes higher then states in the south and mid west.

[kyb01]

Originally Posted by 1ondoner

I think some of these projections are overly optimistic. Although the article is not explicit of where the new residents will come from, I think it is fair to say that population growth from immigrants will drastically reduce and therefore most of the growth will come from residents fleeing other cities.

I expect cities on the East coast to lose residents to cities in the South as boomers will move in search of warmer weather and lower COL. Some could argue that the millennials will replace the aging boomers moving South, however, I think the millennials will have lower birth rate.

Without immigrants, the population of most Western nations will decline and the US will not be the exception. I would have liked to see which cities will shrink because these new residents will have to come from somewhere.

Yes, one could say that many millennials will replace Boomers and GenXers(most of whom will dead by 2046)moving South. But millennials seem to be a lot more liberal than my generation proved to be. Would they actually follow this path? And climate change may dictate some of what happens wrt how people migrate and where.

[southbound_295]

Eh. . .this is based on the assumption that certain things change & other things don't.

Take Atlanta. . .the city population isn't that big. The giant metro is based on a lack of other cities able to form their own metro. Chances are that at least one or two smaller metros form in the next 30 years. This is also based on a theory that the big metros in the Carolinas don't get denser. That's changing now. It's also going on an assumption that not much of anything happens in Philadelphia & the metro.

[AJNEOA]

Originally Posted by rainrock

Agree with everything here. Alot of my friends,families, associates who have made their lives here are retiring to the Carolinas along the coast.

The winters take their toll.

The winters are pretty mild compared to years before. Not saying people won't migrate south.

Ultimately, a 30 year projection is based on all sorts of far-reaching assumptions. I guess water wasn't one of them...

[roma258]

These projections strike me as....kind of nuts. 67% increase in Phoenix metro? 50% in Dallas and Houston? It's as if climate change and water scarcity aren't a thing. Whatever, honestly we don't need massive growth here, let the other places overwhelm their infrastructure...

[gwillyfromphilly]

Estimates can be way off, especially when trying to predict a city's population growth 30+ years in the future. It wouldn't surprise me if there were many people from the 1940's that predicted Chicago would have a population close to 4 million by the 21st century but we all know unforeseen events and circumstances can change that.