Pittsburgh again rated "Most Livable" (Philadelphia, York: school, income)

[guylocke]

And that is because this survey is based on a number of faulty premises

yeah yeah, that's the same for every bit of research, data, ranking, or article ever published on creation.

The people who didn't make the cut will bash it as complete rubbish and yet if they had made the cut the ranking would be completely accurate. Not surprising in the least.

PS. Nobody had claimed it was a perfect survey nor did it even stir that much reaction on this forum. It was just a nice little suprise, I don't think it really means near enough to start breaking down the survey into an analysis on its accuracy, validity, or cancer-curing capabilities.

[claremarie]

The survey was self-published this year. Evidently the major publishing houses weren't particularly impressed with it either.

[guylocke]

The survey was self-published this year. Evidently the major publishing houses weren't particularly impressed with it either

You're grasping for straws now, luv. lol.

[Drover]

I've been accused on a number of occasions of being a Pittsburgh cheerleader. I like Pittsburgh. I have a soft spot for it. Who knows -- I might return some day. I've even gotten on clairemarie's case once or twice about her negativity with regards to Pittsburgh. But she does have one thing right: people vote with their feet. I did too. I left, even though I tried hard not to. She's also right on about the subjectivity of this survey. Great, Pittsburgh is liveable. But liveable in what sense, and by whose definition of liveable? It's a valid question. And that question can be answered a hundred different ways using a hundred different metrics. But the only reasonably objective metric is migration patterns. And in this sense, clairemarie is right. In the last 50 years, the Pittsburgh metro area's population as a percentage of the national population has shrunk by one-third. There is nothing to suggest that this trend is going to reverse any time soon.

Indeed, if Pittsburgh were objectively the most liveable city in America, its relative loss of population would reverse. Someone give me a call when that actually happens.

[Evergrey]

The major misconception is that there is a mass exodus of Pittsburghers "voting with their feet" by leaving... while that was the case 20-25 years ago in the wake of the steel collapse... it is no longer true.

Metro Pittsburgh has one of the lowest domestic out-migration rates of any major metro... the problem is that few people are voting with their feet to move here... our domestic in-migration rate is even lower... combine that with a paucity of international migrants... and an unusual phenomenon of death rate exceeding birth rate caused by the economic trauma of the 80s steel collapse... and voila... shrinking population... the region did a remarkable job of creating new jobs in new industries in the late 80s and 90s in the wake of crisis... our labor force population hit an all-time high in 2001 despite shrinking population because much of the new labor force was composed of women... who had traditionally very low rates of participation in our once manufacturing-dominated regional economy... the 9/11 recession lingered here a little bit longer than most of the country... with USAir's retrenchment being a primary job destroyer... but as the Cleveland Federal Reserve noted in their latest analysis... "Pittsburgh MSA has turned a corner"... we are well-positioned for future economic growth... especially in health care, science & engineering and tech...

two of the main problems inhibiting growth in Metro Pittsburgh are Pennsylvania issues that the state government refuses to address: 1) highest corporate income taxes 2) extreme municipal fragmentation

The entire state is suffering due to the backwards state government... even the Philly Metro region WITHIN Pennsylvania only gained 35k people since 2000... the majority of their growth was in NJ and DE... the only regions booming in the state are the newly exurban outposts of NYC and Baltimore/DC...

And regarding the population loss... it must be stressed that these are only estimates... which have been proven to be inaccurate many times... St. Louis and Cincinnati challenged census estimates last year and won... not sure why Pittsburgh doesn't do this... we will have to wait until the Census 2010 results to see where Pittsburgh truly ranks. For example, the munbers for international migration to the region are extrapolated based on 2000 trends... just from anecdotal observation... I believe the estimates are most likely on the conservative side.

As for our demographic trends... the region does have a large percentage of Over 65 residents... but unlike the rest of the country... that cohort is now shrinking and our young adult population is beginning to increase... which reminds me of a quote from National Geographic's 1991 article on us (Stronger Than Steel): "Pittsburgh became obsolete first, and is now overcoming obsolescence first."

Several population analysts, including the Southwestern Pennsylvania Corporation (our Metropolitan Planning Organization) and the University of Pittsburgh's Center for Urban & Social Research... as well as a couple private firms... have models that indicate the region should be reaching its population nadir... right about now...

Also... despite the population decline and sluggish total job growth... the region has had a growth rate of Per Capita Personal Income greater than the national rate of growth for the past 10 years... and Per Capita Income for the metro is about 106% of the national average... the economic sluggishness comes from employment declines in "population-dependent sectors"... which creates a viscious cycle... while the rest of the country had 1/3rd of their job growth created in the public sector... Pittsburgh actually lost public sector jobs from 1999-2005... retail, transportation and warehousing have taken hits as well...

[guylocke]

God in heaven THANK YOU Evergrey. What a great post on facts and acknowledgement of problems. BTW, I love your posts on skyscraperpage and the fact that you used the word nadir. lol. And anyone who wants to refute Evergrey, don't bother, I've seen his veracity on several other forums and he knows his ****, and not just about Pittsburgh.

[Katiana]

No matter how you spin it, the area is losing population. Time alone will tell if this will change.

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by pittnurse70

No matter how you spin it, the area is losing population. Time alone will tell if this will change.

This is not spin. The information I presented is a sober analysis of the roots of population decline, the current components of population decline, recent economic performance and future projections. There is no sense in running aorund with a "sky is falling" mentality, which merely muddles the issue and doesn't address the problem.

[guylocke]

There is no sense in running aorund with a "sky is falling" mentality, which merely muddles the issue and doesn't address the problem.

Funny, a lot of people on this forum think it's the fact Pittsburgher's are overly prideful that muddles the issue and clouds their thinking in addressing the problem.

[Katiana]

I do not think the sky is falling. I think Pittsburgh's population is shrinking, regardless of the reasons.

we are well-positioned for future economic growth

is speculation. As is:

just from anecdotal observation... I believe the estimates are most likely on the conservative side.

and

and Several population analysts, including the Southwestern Pennsylvania Corporation (our Metropolitan Planning Organization) and the University of Pittsburgh's Center for Urban & Social Research... as well as a couple private firms... have models that indicate the region should be reaching its population nadir... right about now...

I will believe it when I see it.